Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
BNSF boss says transport system nearing crisis

Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
nanaimo, The 1970's was an era of homogenous politics. It really didn't matter who was in control of the beauracracy, Democrats or Republicans, the effects were essentially identical. Thanks to Nixon, we got the EPA, the 55 mph speed limit, et al. Ford didn't change anything one way or the other being basically impotent as President, and Carter basically topped the irrational policy sundae with the culmination of Staggers, yes to Conrail but no to Milwaukee, et al. Ed - On that map, how does the Milwaukee, CNW, WP, D&RGW, SP, and RI lines appear? I do not have that copy of TRAINS, so please enlighten me. Is the PCE deemed "excess"? If so, knowing what we know today do you think that was a rational, educated, even sensical designation? Let's face some facts here. The policy during the 1970's was that energy was scarce, hence the 55 mph speed limit, et al. Yet instead of applying that philosophy to the US railroad infrastructure (e.g. save national energy consumption by shifting as much freight as possible from trucks to rails), we did just the opposite, encouraging the loss of rail infrastructure. Don't you think that is a classic case of counterintuitive policy application? How many lines show up as being excess capacity just because of the temporary downturn in rail business during the two decades of self-inflicted collapse? How was it self-inflicted? We all discussed this before - 1. defered maintenance to sex up stock prices for potential mergers, 2. The introduction of the 100 ton car, 3. The lack of labor rationalization to keep up with modern times. Are you going to sit there and tell us that the PCE, CNW, RI et al were all legitimate candidates for excessive existence just because the culture of the federal beauracracy at the time was imbided with a lack of foresight and common sense? Or will you take a look at that map and discern some obvious and gratuitous errors of judgement on the part of DOT? You and I would look at that same map and see two different things. You see it and unthinkingly agree with the premise because it was put out by the federales. I see it and think things like "why can't they add capacity to those branch lines to connect them into potential A mains? Instead of taking out the Cowboy Line, why don't we encourage CNW to finish what they started 100 years ago and punch that line to the West Coast? Why not aid Milwaukee in streamlining the PCE into a modern day high capacity corridor?" Stuff like that. Because during this same time period our nation was in the midst of nearing completion of the Interstate Highway System and the Columbia/Snake River Waterway system. What's good for one mode (federal aid) is good for the others, right? What I will venture without having seen that map is this: Yes, most of those "excess" lines were lines which were not being (or allowed to be) marketed to take advantage of the inherent efficiencies of railroad technology.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag