PRcoal

[MP173]

This is my third attempt to respond to this...funny things happening on my computer this morning, so if I am a little unfocused....

Great responces to this simple question. Thanks to all. Dr. Dre, thanks for the look at coal from a Texas viewpoint. Mark, great insite on the economics of the rail industry from 1950's on. Reduced rates actually saved the industry. We had better keep that to ourselves, we certainly dont want the open access crew hearing that!

I remember reading in Trains back inthe 80's that the PRB coal is changing the entire landscape for railroading in the US. That it would provide the capital necessary (and obviously the routings necessary) to influence the rail maps.

Looking at it in this perspective, it is very obvious while SP was dying on the vine, isnt it?

BTW, it sure would be great if Trains provided an online archive and database of articles. It would sure as hell beat me trying to find the article. I am NOT one of those folks that has leather volumes of their Trains collections lining my study. I file the old fashion way...in a box in the closet, basement, etc. I would consider a yearly fee to access that database.

So, intermodal is now king.

Does it have the ability to provide the capital and funding necessary to expand the rail system? Some would say that King Coal did not "expand" the system, but I would disagree. While the lines on the maps tended to disappear during it's run, those line became much stronger. What was left after King Coal's run was one hell of a rail system, lean, but very well defined.

Since intermodal does not have the built in rate advantages of coal and is very competitive, it will certainly be tricky for the King to provide "expansion" and growth.

Comments? or is this another thread?

ed

[MP173]

Well, the weirdness continues this morning. I meant to post this on the other Powder River thread, but hit the wrong button. It is time to step away from the computer for awhile!

ed