Since some of us can't seem to eat together without starting a food fight, how 'bout we just pick up our happy meals at the drive-thru and move on...
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
schlimm As usual, this thread has degenerated into the silly season. A balanced, neutral posting of two rail-friendly articles has led to same old song, how wonderful everything is right now and leave well enough alone, no need to change, blah, blah along with the usual personal attacks. Is it any wonder the "college types" (students) you so easily scorn, generally regard having a career with a railroad as a not-very-funny joke or insult or else they consider the person suggesting they might want to consider it as deranged? I guess I can see why they did when I made such suggestions to advisees.
As usual, this thread has degenerated into the silly season. A balanced, neutral posting of two rail-friendly articles has led to same old song, how wonderful everything is right now and leave well enough alone, no need to change, blah, blah along with the usual personal attacks. Is it any wonder the "college types" (students) you so easily scorn, generally regard having a career with a railroad as a not-very-funny joke or insult or else they consider the person suggesting they might want to consider it as deranged? I guess I can see why they did when I made such suggestions to advisees.
I don't remember anyone saying there was no need for change. Change is constant and ongoing. Adapting is crucial.
Now you take that back!
I was not refering at all to students. Students eventually get real jobs in the real world.
Such misplaced hysterical emotion for someone who more than likely is tenured.
Railroads go where the business is. 40 years ago, who envisioned that the Powder River Basin of Wyoming would have multiple track main lines to service the coal business that originates there today. Will the Powder River Basin still be producing coal at today's level in 40 years?
You can plan for the known....the unknown will bite you in the posterior.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm And Murphy, could you show me anything to substantiate your notion that what I say is "rubbish?" You haven't so far. And if you can reason, you would realize that Ward's statement about public perception changing for the better is an indication of the fact that perception has been negative.
And Murphy, could you show me anything to substantiate your notion that what I say is "rubbish?" You haven't so far. And if you can reason, you would realize that Ward's statement about public perception changing for the better is an indication of the fact that perception has been negative.
Schlimm, I challenge you to successfully and convincingly prove to myself (and others here) that "most Americans have a rather negative opinion of railroads ".
You are up to this little task...no?
Maybe yes, maybe no. But it does happen to contain 37 million people, 12% of the population, so I guess that says quite a bit, certainly more significant than Iowa, for example.
Murray: If you had read the posts more carefully, you could have figured out that my post on the Cal HSR was in answer to RKFarms' statement.
schlimm A July, 2010 scientific poll of 1203 Californians by Opinion Research Associates showed that 76% favor that state's HSR. I guess opinions on HSR depend on where you live?
A July, 2010 scientific poll of 1203 Californians by Opinion Research Associates showed that 76% favor that state's HSR. I guess opinions on HSR depend on where you live?
California is NOT representative of the rest of the U.S. by any stretch of the imagination.
And Murray, could you show me anything to substantiate your notion that what I say is "rubbish?" You haven't so far. And if you can reason, you would realize that Ward's statement about public perception changing for the better is an indication of the fact that perception has been negative.
A majority of Californians also support legalization of Marijuana.
So??????????
[quote user="henry6"]I am not in charge of history, of the present, nor for planning for the future of transportation in general, railroads in particular. I have, however, been of the opinion for over 50 years that in the face of there being no cohesive, comprehensive transportation system that such planning has to be done; and the longer it takes to do that planning the more complicated and expensive it will be whether by government or private enterprise.
But we all know that tomorrow is going to be different.
Do we? In what exact way? The CEO of a few Railroad companies would like to have advance notice.
If I have a fantasy, as suggested by one of you, then it is that planners from all levels of governement will work with managers from all levels of all transportation modes, including suppliers and other interested or supporting parties, to devise a system that will work.
Why? It is a private enterprise, and private property. If someone else wants to change it all, let them come up with the cash. Otherwise, go pound sand. I could not be more clear!
I could put down some WA fantasy scheme here...but what purpose would it serve? It would only be that. It might be food for thought to some or just an old man's rant to others. All I am suggesting is that the powers that be must get together now and start real planning from the future. I am saying that the future doesn't necessarily be the same as the past or the present, but could or might be something entierely different than what we have or know; and that that might not be a bad thing. I have eluded to a few ideas about what I thought might be discussed but they seem to be ignored or misunderstood because they don't fit today's railroad mold. I just encourage all to think deep and wide, not just accept what is because it is and believe it has to be forever. HSR or regular passenger trains, freight trains, 5 feet 4 and one half inches between rails as exists from coast to coast and between the borders, is the only thing I have heard about from most here. Mag Lev and monorail has been mentioned by one. Displacing and changing freight tonnage in terms of todays trains and trucks is another thoguth brought forth...but again it all is within the framework of what is today. I am encouraging that transportation thinking encompass all modes of transportation, include all parties currently involved in transportation, and those from outside the industry, too, look at the needs of the future and develop a system that will serve those needs. If it means different technologies, if it means different financial alignments, different corporate alignments and structure, whatever has to be done, should be discussed, planned and implimented. I don't know how I can make my position any more clear.
I don't know how I can make my position any more clear.
Instead, you have put down nothing but theory. Theory is fine for college types who have never had to earn a living, and are not accountable to anyone. But in the real world theory means nothing. Show us a proven model. Something we can put our hands on, something that will sell. Something affordable, realistic, and profitable. Otherwise, try selling your theory on some street corner. See how far that gets ya.
schlimmIt is hardly rubbish. Else why would the chair of CSX have said this in March concerning more advertising? "What does make sense is that public perception of railroads is changing for the better. “People are realizing the important role we play in the economy,” says Ward. “We’ve been doing some advertising here at CSX, and it’s resonated really well because people are starting to understand the role we play relieving highway congestion and moving freight, and our environmental friendliness. There is a lot of potential for passenger service in various corridors. We just need to make sure that there’s a sound public policy in place to allow us to capitalize on what we provide.” I'll quote a NYT article glowing in praise for the about to be taken over Conrail. I doubt if the public opinion is dramatically better now. "The biggest problem for the railroads may be overcoming their reputation for indifference, even arrogance, in dealing with many customers. Until deregulation, they paid little attention to selling themselves." Perhaps you can't see the forest for the trees. In the real world, railroads are largely (though totally wrongly) seen as archaic relics.
"What does make sense is that public perception of railroads is changing for the better. “People are realizing the important role we play in the economy,” says Ward. “We’ve been doing some advertising here at CSX, and it’s resonated really well because people are starting to understand the role we play relieving highway congestion and moving freight, and our environmental friendliness. There is a lot of potential for passenger service in various corridors. We just need to make sure that there’s a sound public policy in place to allow us to capitalize on what we provide.”
I'll quote a NYT article glowing in praise for the about to be taken over Conrail. I doubt if the public opinion is dramatically better now.
"The biggest problem for the railroads may be overcoming their reputation for indifference, even arrogance, in dealing with many customers. Until deregulation, they paid little attention to selling themselves."
Perhaps you can't see the forest for the trees. In the real world, railroads are largely (though totally wrongly) seen as archaic relics.
Schlim...there is no substance in the recent quote you cited to prove that "...most Americans have a rather negative opinion of railroads" .
You have yet to successfully support or defend this statement.
It is hardly rubbish. Else why would the chair of CSX have said this in March concerning more advertising?
The upcoming election and fairly obvious political trends will probably make discussion of HSR irrelevant, except in an idealistic sense. There does not seem to be a sense of need for this among most Americans. We can get in our cars and drive, and at 25 mpg and sub $3 gas, it is pretty cheap to do just that. It might be somewhat useful to upgrade corridor routes for higher average speeds, but there will not be demand or perceived need for HSR in new corridors unless something MAJOR occurs to change the minds of the American voting public and their representatives in DC. I would love to see more rail passenger transportation, but that view is NOT shared by many people I know, know about, or know of. It is a nice subject for a hypothetical discussion, but it does not have much to do with US reality today.
Views of a non-RR blue collar taxpayer.
PR
I have denigrated no one, I have not called anyone nasty names, indicated the status of one's birth, the breed of his mother, nor indicated where one stands on the IQ scale. But I have put up with such being the case against me. So be it for now.
I work for no railroad, just like most of those who post here or who have adoped the moniker "railfan" I have opinions and have drawn conclusions based on my railroad experiences spread over 65+ years, my reading, interpetations of facts and fantasies as put forth in magazines, books, and conversations on the subject. No different than most here.
I am not in charge of history, of the present, nor for planning for the future of transportation in general, railroads in particular. I have, however, been of the opinion for over 50 years that in the face of there being no cohesive, comprehensive transportation system that such planning has to be done; and the longer it takes to do that planning the more complicated and expensive it will be whether by government or private enterprise.
What we have is a system that has evolved, has been torn apart, cobbed back together through reaction to circumstances rather than through long term, comprehensive, intellegent planning. I indicated that while starting over is an idea, I would rather see something launched from the present platform. But not piecemeal, not reactive changes; I would rather see real rationalized, well thought, well planned programs that will all segments of our economy and population. What we have today is working for today. But we all know that tomorrow is going to be different. If I have a fantasy, as suggested by one of you, then it is that planners from all levels of governement will work with managers from all levels of all transportation modes, including suppliers and other interested or supporting parties, to devise a system that will work.
I could put down some WA fantasy scheme here...but what purpose would it serve? It would only be that. It might be food for thought to some or just an old man's rant to others. All I am suggesting is that the powers that be must get together now and start real planning from the future. I am saying that the future doesn't necessarily be the same as the past or the present, but could or might be something entierely different than what we have or know; and that that might not be a bad thing. I have eluded to a few ideas about what I thought might be discussed but they seem to be ignored or misunderstood because they don't fit today's railroad mold. I just encourage all to think deep and wide, not just accept what is because it is and believe it has to be forever. HSR or regular passenger trains, freight trains, 5 feet 4 and one half inches between rails as exists from coast to coast and between the borders, is the only thing I have heard about from most here. Mag Lev and monorail has been mentioned by one. Displacing and changing freight tonnage in terms of todays trains and trucks is another thoguth brought forth...but again it all is within the framework of what is today. I am encouraging that transportation thinking encompass all modes of transportation, include all parties currently involved in transportation, and those from outside the industry, too, look at the needs of the future and develop a system that will serve those needs. If it means different technologies, if it means different financial alignments, different corporate alignments and structure, whatever has to be done, should be discussed, planned and implimented.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
Bucyrus So why are the freight railroads so defensive about sharing their corridors with HSR? Is it because they are not thinking outside of the box?
So why are the freight railroads so defensive about sharing their corridors with HSR?
Is it because they are not thinking outside of the box?
Because for the most part, freight carriers don't have the room. CNW's ROW was 100 feet property line to property line. That does not leave much room for expansion. If HSR wants access, let them purchase the additional land next to the ROW. On their dime. If there is a need for HSR, I am sure investors can be found.
schlimm(BTW, most Americans have a rather negative opinion of railroads)
That's absolute rubbish schlimm, and you know it.
Those of us with open minds could say the same thing. You demand concrete answers to pure speculation. I've asked/proposed some non-threatening ideas on the use of underused or nearly abandoned lines between CHI and the east coast, yet none of the professionals seems to be able to offer any concrete answers. Instead of projecting your hostility toward non-railroaders who do have some interest on the rails (BTW, most Americans have a rather negative opinion of railroads), try being less defensive.
Henry,
You keep using the term "status quo" and implying that many posters here choose not to jump on the fantasy bandwagon with "outside the box" thinking, yet you fail to offer any reason not to embrace the status quo beyond the concept of changing for changes sake.
So...
Give me concrete plans, with real numbers and real routes, real locomotives that are affordable and work.
Explain in detail where the financing will come from, who will benefit, (besides the status quo answer of "everyone").
You said we ought to place "line y "here and line X "here" yet you failed to explain who makes such decisions and why such decisions are made, and for what benefit..
So, instead of using this thread as your personal opportunity to toss insults, lets see your solution in writing .
Use real numbers, real facts, real solutions to a real problem.
And by the way, if you work for a railroad, I would like to know which one and in what capacity?
Because you seem intent on insulting and degenerating the few real railroaders left on this forum...and instead of listening to what may be close to 2 centuries of experience riding trains, working with the equipment and seeing first hand what has to be done to make it work, and seeing what happens when it doesn't work, you simply resort to the easy dismissal of the accusation of us supporting the status quo, (as if that has to be inherently bad) painting yourself in the light of some savior who has the solution to the problem...but oddly enough, I and many railroaders can't seem to find the problem you are claiming to have the solution to...
So Henry, here is the opportunity to enlighten us...
If you can't, or won't, then I am free to choose that you are here only to argue for arguments sake.
23 17 46 11
Well, a lot of rail passenger service leaves a lot to be desired. Harrisburg - Pittsburgh for example. One slow train a day doesn't cut it. Pittsburgh - Erie. Scranton - NYC. Philly to Allentown (or Bethlehem). York - Baltimore. Harrisburg - York (unfortunately all except harrisburg - pitt have NO current service).
While I don't think we need to completely reinvent the wheel and destroy the very notion of what our country was founded on, I wouldn't mind seeing the railroads given a fair shake. But I'm biased. Plus, it would be nice to have a railroad to retire from someday.
And yes, rail freight is working, but I always want to see it work better. Will HSR accomplish that? I don't know. You don't know. I don't think anyone really knows.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
"I am saying that we must think differently than we thought in the past and are thinking today."
So henry6 says, over and over. (I wish I could simply excerpt this quote, but the system persists in putting the whole post up.)
I wonder why we must "think outside the box" to solve a non-existent rail passenger problem and incidently screw up something that is actually working, rail freight. We have had 10 administrations (counting Reagan, Clinton and George W. twice each) since Amtrak in 1971, and nine of them saw no necessity for HSR.
We're supposed to look for ways to turn the world on its head because the 10th administration is right where the previous nine were wrong? (Pardon me for doubting it.)
I would like somebody to name me one "corridor" outside Boston-Washington and L.A.-San Francisco where what we have already in the way of rail transportation will not suffice, given the long-established highway and airline service. The idea that Cleveland-Cincinnati, for instance, suddenly needs passenger trains after 50 years of living without meaningful service strikes me as ludicrous. (I am an old Buckeye, by the way.)
I would like to ride trains again; in fact, I can think of lots of things from the 1950s I like better than what is available today. But what the Obama administration is proposing amounts to picking the pockets of railroads and their stockholders, asking them to "think outside the box" on behalf of a service that will pay them about as well as Amtrak does to the detriment of its genuinely profitable freight business.
henry6 RRKen defined my postulation of maintaining the status quo with his statement that freight railroads are working fine. It is this thought for today instead of plan for tomorrow approach that brings the topic to the forefront.
RRKen defined my postulation of maintaining the status quo with his statement that freight railroads are working fine. It is this thought for today instead of plan for tomorrow approach that brings the topic to the forefront.
Henry, do you sit in the board rooms of these companies and listen to what they say, what they expect, and what they plan for?
Example, Union Pacific in 2008 and 2009, spent upwards of $2.6 Bilion each year in the middle of what was the worst economy in how long? But they went full steam ahead. Why? Of course I am not going to do all the homework for you, look it up yourself!
You speak as if they have their heads in a hole and have no clue what to expect next year, or in 20 years. I suggest you sit back and listen to Jim Young's testimony before Congress and see what they are thinking. It probably will never change your paradigm.
And Bucyrus's comments concerning HSR are certainly to the point: it is displayed and discussed but not understood in terms of past, present and future, it just feels good to be talking about it. Nobody has a plan today to meet the transportation needs of our country in the future in terms of delivering the transportation that will be demanded by society for both goods and people.
More of the same. If people want HSR, and there is a need, then by all means, find a way to plan it, and pay for it. I guarantee, there will be few investors save Congress funding it with our money. That, is going to be the test, do we the people want or need it?
With that thought, neither is there a plan on the table to pay for it. That is the whole point: there is no plan, only bickering, posturing, and perserving one's own$1***$2so to speak. If no plan can be launched from the present platform ( i.e., the existing transportation structure) then the only way to get the job done is to start with a clean sheet of paper. I don't believe the clean sheet of paper is needed, though. I believe a revising of the mindsets of all concerned, a revising of the physical plants (operating and abandoned properties), and a clear understanding and definition of what has to be accomplished (goals) to be met at any given future date can utilize the good and throw away the bad of today's operations, It can't rest on a status quo just because it has served us up to now and will pay a dollar dividend by midnight tonight.
One more example of forward thinking by carriers. Some old branch line mostly good for 10 mph, and some 5 mph, restricted to geeps and SD40-2 types, had not been upgraded or used for anything more than collecting grain. But, they invested in it, and it turned out to become not only a profit center, but a relief valve when Mother Nature unleashes her furry (i.e. flooding, tornado damage, snow). Pretty handy no? Who would have thought 13 years ago, that an Ethanol boom was coming? Who would have thought that natural disasters strike? But customers freight was kept moving.
I go back to A.C. Kalmbach's editorial in the early days, (1940 something). And yes, I have said it in these pages before. There was no firm U.S. transportation plan. There was not a level playing field, and there was too much regulation. And what he, and later DPM predicted, happened. Yet the railroads survived, and some of the impediments to their success were removed in 1980. (Some want to bring it back??????) They are profitable!
So here we are in 2010, and carriers are investing Billions (with a B) to upgrade, expand capacity, and harden lines. Yeah, real backwards thinging. In some cases, the public has contributed as well. But understand, the carriers today are not charity cases. They make money for themselves and others who have invested, like me (twice because I am also an employee, so I gain a paycheck, and return on my investment).
I suggest to those naysayers that dislike the railroads, or thing they are going the way of the steam locomotive, the carriers have been, and will continue to look at what they need to keep making money and expanding their business. Otherwise, why bother?
HSR + freight.
I think it would be fine for the thru freight and trucks, but it does have the potential to leave the on-line customers behind. Let me explain:
Part of the territory I work on includes a line owned by a commuter train outfit, with high speed passenger running. Granted, it does mean a nicer line to run on so we can go 40-50 mph at parts (beats the 10mph local on the branchline), but we are at the whim of the commuter outfit.
Their passenger trains come first. No exceptions. So that means the majority of our locals that serve the on-line industries must be done at night, and within an ever-shrinking window. The more passenger trains that get added, the smaller the window becomes. Pretty soon, in the sake of saving time, induistries get shifted fewer days a week. Not always a problem, but if a company is getting antsy for some cars, it can be.
A high speed line also means more MOW work. It's very common to have to run on track taken out of service by a foreman to do regular trackwork. No biggie, except now you are running at restricted speed, and at the whim of the foreman. And if he needs to work on the track near an industry, that industry may be out of luck. Sorry, but no shift for you guys tonight.
On one hand, it may be beneficial (for us) because eventually you may need another crew to work some of these industries. It may get impossible to do all the assigned work in the allotted time. But on the other hand, RR management does not like to hear the words "new crew".
And if a rail line is redone to really, really high speeds, with frequent trains day and night, what are the chances that the small feed mill will be allowed to keep their switch to get their 4 cars a night? Maybe they can take it somewhere else and transload it into a truck, but I thought the name of the game was more business for railroads, and not for trucks. Maybe it will all work out in the wash, but I don't know.
Note: this just doesn't apply to passenger railroads. It can be hard to get tracktime on busy freight mainlines for serving local customers. So maybe part of the HSR will be to move rail-dependent businesses all together off a branch line/industrial park setting with their own little terminal RR to switch them? That way a freight train need only do a quick interchange and move on...let the terminal RR do the nitty gritty of the railroad work. Although that nitty gritty can sometimes be financially rewarding. Intraplant switching can be big $$$$.
"A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon, you're talking real money".
Everett McKinley Dirksen (1896-1969)
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.