WATCO abandoning service on Washington State owned lines! (read: BNSF does it again!)

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

As opposed to a set amout of time irregardless of train type?

So you DON'T know.

How surprising. (OK, where's the sarcastic smilie?)

[Anonymous]

zardoz,

I was only illistrating the "ed" treatment, doing to "ed" basically what he does to me every single time. If such "edishness" offends you, I suggest you contact "ed" and tell him how you feel. I'm just playing the messenger here.

Obviously, you do not know the real "ed".

[zardoz]

I suppose I shouln't be sticking my nose in here, but this argument has been going on for so long, and does not seem to be going anywhere. It seems as though futuremodal and tomdiehl are enjoying this diatribe, copying and pasting such involved postings; however, when you mega-posters get done trying to impress us (and each other) with 'knowledge', perhaps you could actually take the time to read and comprehend what the other is trying to say. In this way, you may actually have a discussion, rather than an insult exchange thread.

And speaking of insults, futuremodal, you have gone too far with your condemnation of Ed's observations. Sure, Ed "merely" operates railroad equipment rather than a calculator at work, and thinks on his feet rather than on his ***, but he is one of the most rational, intelligent, and observant posters we have on this site. Ed is concise and to the point; he does not hide behind a smokescreen of overwhelming factoids. Your diatribe against Ed is tantamount to a derision against every working railroader on this site.

We all have our areas of expertise, and we all have to work together to make things function. And if want anyone to ever take you seriously, I suggest you get off your high horse and realize you are no better (or no worse) than anyone else.

There is a saying: He only listens when he is speaking. Think about it, please.

[Anonymous]

As opposed to a set amout of time irregardless of train type?

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Tom, it's real simple (regarding operations through Cascade Tunnel). An empty heading eastbound through the tunnel (the 1.7% upgrade direction) will not need as much horsepower as a fully loaded double stack, thus the engines are not working as hard, thus there is less emissions to be cleared out, thus the tunnel is ready in much less time for the next train. That's why the Quincy dedicated intermodal train would leave such a small footprinto on current BNSF operations via Stevens Pass.

For the record, most eastbounds are loads (usually double stacks of Asian imports), so if it takes a hour to clear the tunnel after each loaded double stack, adding more eastbound loads will be difficult. But westbounds, regardless of tonnage, are effectively just drifting downgrade, so the tunnel is usually available for the next train shortly thereafter. The only type of eastbound that wouldn't require the usual 40 minutes would be one that's not working so hard going upgrade, e.g. an empty.

So you're claiming to know the rulebook entry on this tunnel.

[Anonymous]

Tom, it's real simple (regarding operations through Cascade Tunnel). An empty heading eastbound through the tunnel (the 1.7% upgrade direction) will not need as much horsepower as a fully loaded double stack, thus the engines are not working as hard, thus there is less emissions to be cleared out, thus the tunnel is ready in much less time for the next train. That's why the Quincy dedicated intermodal train would leave such a small footprinto on current BNSF operations via Stevens Pass.

For the record, most eastbounds are loads (usually double stacks of Asian imports), so if it takes a hour to clear the tunnel after each loaded double stack, adding more eastbound loads will be difficult. But westbounds, regardless of tonnage, are effectively just drifting downgrade, so the tunnel is usually available for the next train shortly thereafter. The only type of eastbound that wouldn't require the usual 40 minutes would be one that's not working so hard going upgrade, e.g. an empty.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by AMTK200

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

- Foss Maritime, one of the four competing barge lines that use the Columbia-Snake River waterway system, is in favor of more rail to barge transloading, since capacity on the river is nowhere near the congestion point, while rail capacity in the Gorge is at the breaking point for both UP and BNSF.

"Rail capacity near the breaking point for both UP and BNSF," sounds like something I suggested earlier.

I feel if the Government would be willing to pay for the USA Rail Improvments.

The same way they're planning on paying for the NEC improvements?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

- Foss Maritime, one of the four competing barge lines that use the Columbia-Snake River waterway system, is in favor of more rail to barge transloading, since capacity on the river is nowhere near the congestion point, while rail capacity in the Gorge is at the breaking point for both UP and BNSF.

"Rail capacity near the breaking point for both UP and BNSF," sounds like something I suggested earlier.

I feel if the Government would be willing to pay for the USA Rail Improvments.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by bobwilcox

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

- Foss Maritime, one of the four competing barge lines that use the Columbia-Snake River waterway system, is in favor of more rail to barge transloading, since capacity on the river is nowhere near the congestion point, while rail capacity in the Gorge is at the breaking point for both UP and BNSF.

"Rail capacity near the breaking point for both UP and BNSF," sounds like something I suggested earlier.

Gee the evil BNSF is at capacity so they want to reduce volume. I am shocked!

Again, to clarify, for all rail operations, only the Gorge route is at the breaking point in terms of congestion. 2.2% grades over Stampede and Stevens preclude heavy trainsets. Stampede has ample capacity, but clearances through that tunnel do not allow double stacks, autoracks, or high cube boxcars. Stevens Pass isn't congested per se, but it takes so long to clear the exhaust out of the tunnel after a loaded eastbound goes through that it limits the daily number of trains to 25 or 30. They could run a dedicated shorthaul intermodal shuttle (e.g. the Quincy-Puget Sound idea that BNSF dissed) through Stevens without too much difficulty, because the eastbound leg of such a shuttle would be running mostly empty, so it wouldn't take much time at all to clear the exhaust out of the tunnel for the next train.

Got that straight, Tom?

Yes, I do have it straight. You have an obvious habit of contradicting yourself. The original quote above is from your post.

And also you're of the opinion that you know how to run the railroad better than the people running it now.

Example:

"They could run a dedicated shorthaul intermodal shuttle (e.g. the Quincy-Puget Sound idea that BNSF dissed) through Stevens without too much difficulty, because the eastbound leg of such a shuttle would be running mostly empty, so it wouldn't take much time at all to clear the exhaust out of the tunnel for the next train."

Suddenly, the operation rules have been suspended for clearing exhaust from this tunnel?

[bobwilcox]

Gee, maybee they have a place to make more money with their equipment or shouldn't the evil BNSF be interested in making more money. I notice you have had a lot of jobs. How often do you change jobs?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bobwilcox

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

- Foss Maritime, one of the four competing barge lines that use the Columbia-Snake River waterway system, is in favor of more rail to barge transloading, since capacity on the river is nowhere near the congestion point, while rail capacity in the Gorge is at the breaking point for both UP and BNSF.

"Rail capacity near the breaking point for both UP and BNSF," sounds like something I suggested earlier.

Gee the evil BNSF is at capacity so they want to reduce volume. I am shocked!

No, Bob, BNSF wants to force grain to be trucked to Ritzville, not to reduce volume. If BNSF wantd to reduce volume through the gorge, they should start trasnloading some export grain to barge at Pasco or Wallula, and thus take those long slow grain trains out of the gorge to free up capacity. As I explained earier, to do so would for the most part make the Ritzville facility superflous, and the only question then is if BNSF is willing to abandon their agreement with Templin LLC and leave them in the lurch the way they did the Whitman County GG's Fallon facility.

There is ample capacity available over the Stampede Pass line, and the only limiting factor over Stevens Pass is that albatross of a tunnel. But they'd be fighting long 2.2% westbound grades, and with grain trains that operating nightmare would virtually shut down the Stevens Pass route, while sending a grain train over Stampede might take two days. If the traffic is bound for the lower Columbia ports, that's another day or so, and now the cycle has increased in time costs.

Again, to clarify, for all rail operations, only the Gorge route is at the breaking point in terms of congestion. 2.2% grades over Stampede and Stevens preclude heavy trainsets. Stampede has ample capacity, but clearances through that tunnel do not allow double stacks, autoracks, or high cube boxcars. Stevens Pass isn't congested per se, but it takes so long to clear the exhaust out of the tunnel after a loaded eastbound goes through that it limits the daily number of trains to 25 or 30. They could run a dedicated shorthaul intermodal shuttle (e.g. the Quincy-Puget Sound idea that BNSF dissed) through Stevens without too much difficulty, because the eastbound leg of such a shuttle would be running mostly empty, so it wouldn't take much time at all to clear the exhaust out of the tunnel for the next train.

Got that straight, Tom?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by kenneo

* It is the State that forced the $870 surcharge, because the money is delayed for a few years, and WATCO needs it right now.

Explain this. What is going on here??

I think the WATCO rep was just doing a little lobbying for an expedient cash outlay from the State. To blame the State for the surcharge is borderline ridiculous. Remember though, WATCO is a relatively small company without the benefit of deep pockets. They claim to be losing money on these lines even as they now are relieved of certain debt payments and property tax liabilities. It would have been nice if he could have admitted that the lack of car supply from BNSF was the cause of the twice as high variable cost result of P & L traffic, and he did later acknowledge the difficulties of getting car supply, but he did not (or was not willing) to connect the obvious dots.

The more ominous statement was his hint that they would need long term contractual commitments from shippers if they wanted WATCO's business, which is another way of saying "Don't you dare truck your grain down to the river". Of course, no one in their right mind would make such contractual commitments as long as BNSF won't supply cars, and there is no reason to ever think BNSF will start supplying cars as needed. Also, it was pointed out that the average truck haul from the Palouse to Ritzville is twice as long as the average truck haul from the Palouse to the river. The whole point of the State taking over these lines is to "keep trucks off State and County roads" as much as possible, and the Ritzville facility is counterintuitive to that end.

QUOTE:
* Everyone at the meeting pretty much agreed that BNSF has no business incentive to supply grain cars to the area shortlines since such could detract from the Ritzville facility.

This is a surprise?

No, but it was nice that the railroad folk at least acknowledge this fact.

QUOTE: ***For the record, a four barge tow on the Columbia-Snake river system carries 14,400 tons, basically a unit train equivolence, and they can run the cycle from Pasco to Kalama and back in under 72 hours if need be, whereas the railroads often take a week or more to recycle the Ritzville shuttle.

What was it -- about page 1 or 2 of this thread this very point was expounded upon? The simple example of what is happening here is that the barge line can do with "100 cars" what the railroad can not do with even "300 cars". That's 200 cars that could go to another shipper such as the PCC.

But..........oh never mind. I was going to say that BNSF gets all the revenue from the Ritzville shuttle cycle, but then again most people at the meeting think BNSF is (or was) actually losing money on that operation, because in order to compete with the barge rates they have to charge a rate that may not cover the variable costs of the shuttle itself, and the Templin LLC oufit is scrambling to make their debt payments on that expensive new facility. At least elevators on the PCC are all paid for, except the Fallon 26 car facility, which is still trying to pay off their debt from 20 years ago.

It is ironic that BNSF might be better off transloading at Pasco, which would make the Ritzville shuttle turn one of the shortest corridors in the world, around 75 miles. Then again, they are only competing with truck rates on this segment, and could concievably up their rate on the rail portion and still offer a lower overall rate by the rail/barge combo. But they could never accumulate enough business at Ritzville via shorthaul (local) grain deliveries to justify the over capacity of the facilty, e.g. if they stop at Pasco and up rates to match truck rates, they lose business outside a 25 mile radius of Ritzville, because those guys would then probably truck directly to Pasco.

In the end, the Ritzville facility may end up being a big waste of money, not because the concept isn't sound, but the realities of the economies of barging, combined with the growing (and apparently unforeseen when the facililty was planned) rail congestion in the Columbia gorge. It should also be noted that with the dredging of the Snake and Columbia rivers finally occuring, the barge lines may be able to lower rates on grain shipments, which could concievably put the Templins out of business.

Nah, on second thought, as long as BNSF is willing to subsidize the rate out of Ritzville with their earnings from Montana grain shippers, the facility will probably stick.

[bobwilcox]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

- Foss Maritime, one of the four competing barge lines that use the Columbia-Snake River waterway system, is in favor of more rail to barge transloading, since capacity on the river is nowhere near the congestion point, while rail capacity in the Gorge is at the breaking point for both UP and BNSF.

"Rail capacity near the breaking point for both UP and BNSF," sounds like something I suggested earlier.

Gee the evil BNSF is at capacity so they want to reduce volume. I am shocked!

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

It should also be noted that there is now a rumor that UP wants to have a shuttle facility on it's Washy mainline, which might change their willingness to supply cars to the PCC. So far that's just a rumor, and there were no Class I reps at the meeting, although there were a few other shortline reps there.

So there's also a rumor that we'll soon see a post that "UP does it again."

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

- Foss Maritime, one of the four competing barge lines that use the Columbia-Snake River waterway system, is in favor of more rail to barge transloading, since capacity on the river is nowhere near the congestion point, while rail capacity in the Gorge is at the breaking point for both UP and BNSF.

"Rail capacity near the breaking point for both UP and BNSF," sounds like something I suggested earlier.

[kenneo]

* It is the State that forced the $870 surcharge, because the money is delayed for a few years, and WATCO needs it right now.

Explain this. What is going on here??

* Everyone at the meeting pretty much agreed that BNSF has no business incentive to supply grain cars to the area shortlines since such could detract from the Ritzville facility.

This is a surprise?

***For the record, a four barge tow on the Columbia-Snake river system carries 14,400 tons, basically a unit train equivolence, and they can run the cycle from Pasco to Kalama and back in under 72 hours if need be, whereas the railroads often take a week or more to recycle the Ritzville shuttle.

What was it -- about page 1 or 2 of this thread this very point was expounded upon? The simple example of what is happening here is that the barge line can do with "100 cars" what the railroad can not do with even "300 cars". That's 200 cars that could go to another shipper such as the PCC.

[Anonymous]

Results of WSDOT/WATCO transportation summit:

Not much, since they decided during the meeting that they need to wait for some more study results to come in before they can provide a clearer picture of the situation.

What was discussed relevent to the railroad situation in the State of Washington:

- Truck traffic in the State of Washington has grown at three times the rate of automobile traffic, which suggests a loss or at least a stagnation of the railroads' willingness to move this traffic. Remember, trucks are the default transportation mode after the more efficient modes decline the business.

- Only 50% of Washington grain growers expressed satisfaction with the State's transporation system, including rail, barge, and truck. And only 40% of grain associations are satisfied.

- Of grain shipments in Washington, 51% move by truck/barge combinations, 19% move by truck/rail combinations (bulk rail e.g. multiple carload lots), and 30% are trucked to storage or moved by carload (most of which is pulses and canola). Don't ask me why they combine storage and carload into one catagory, they just do.

- As of now the railroads have completely abandoned the shipping of malting barely domestically from the State.

- The Columbia Basin sends 1400 trucks per day over to the Puget Sound ports. On a related subject, a representative of the Port of Quincy related that they had spent $6 million dollars to prepare for opening an intermodal terminal with BNSF, only to have BNSF pull out of the deal. Obviously, they question why BNSF orally agreed to participate in the deal, only to pull out much later after the Port and others had spent so much money on the deal.

- WATCO stated that their revenues per carload for the ex-BN and ex-UP lines are $424 and $447 respectively, but the variable costs per carload are $530 and $269 respectively. Why such a disparity comes down to their Class I connections. UP is expedient in supplying requested cars, BNSF is slow and unresponsive. The WATCO man theorized that BNSF acted thus to encourage such traffic to be trucked to the Ritzville facility. It should also be noted that there is now a rumor that UP wants to have a shuttle facility on it's Washy mainline, which might change their willingness to supply cars to the PCC. So far that's just a rumor, and there were no Class I reps at the meeting, although there were a few other shortline reps there.

- A rep from the 26 car grain facility at Fallon (just north of Pullman) complained how BN encouraged them to invest in this facility 20 years ago, and now BNSF won't even allow the current owner to utilize the facility in that manner. They are now looking at bankruptcy because of BN's con job. ("Con job" is my wording, not his).

- On a progressive note, Ken Cassavant of WSU took note of the advantages of rail to barge transfer to solve the problems of rail congestion in the Gorge, and that this type of "new technology" (his phrasing, not mine) should be the focus for the State in addressing the freight transportation issues. In other words, it doesn't have to be truck/barge vs truck/rail.

- He also noted that rail rates initially went down when the Ritzville facility was opened, but now the rail rates have risen to the point of being equal with the old carload rates from the early to mid 1900's (inflation adjusted).

- Foss Maritime, one of the four competing barge lines that use the Columbia-Snake River waterway system, is in favor of more rail to barge transloading, since capacity on the river is nowhere near the congestion point, while rail capacity in the Gorge is at the breaking point for both UP and BNSF. They suggest that instead of the State's taxpayers paying for rail capacity improvements for BNSF, they instead "encourage" more rail to barge transloading. For the record, a four barge tow on the Columbia-Snake river system carries 14,400 tons, basically a unit train equivolence, and they can run the cycle from Pasco to Kalama and back in under 72 hours if need be, whereas the railroads often take a week or more to recycle the Ritzville shuttle.

- Other WATCO talking points include
* It is the State that forced the $870 surcharge, because the money is delayed for a few years, and WATCO needs it right now.
* WATCO is also considering a $250 surcharge on it's ex-UP lines
* They confirm that car supply from UP is starting to show signs of lagging behind orders, while BNSF car supply is now almost non existant
* Everyone at the meeting pretty much agreed that BNSF has no business incentive to supply grain cars to the area shortlines since such could detract from the Ritzville facility.

I'll add my commentary later.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

As if you don't have the brains to read a profile.....

Cheers!

I've read your profile. Pretty devoid of info.

[Anonymous]

Oh boy, more fun analyzing "ed's" latest bile.....

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Get it straight, Dave...
I said you were an office weenie, not an executive...man, talk about self promotion…as if I would ever assume you could manage to do anything but switch hands…

Okay, more useless pointless baseless insults from a useless pointless baseless shred of human debris. Keep going....

QUOTE:
And you are a troll.

And yet you keep trolling my posts, as if your very useless pointless baseless life depends upon it.....

QUOTE:
As for being a foamer...I don’t think you qualify, you actually have to like railroads to be a foamer.

Hmmm, so if one has an appreciation for railroad technology but a disdain for the way US railroads debase the nation's rail shippers, that means I'm not a foamer. Gee, "ed" you're breaking my heart.....

QUOTE:
Scab railroader...I don’t think I would ever elevate you to that position...you wouldn’t know the A end from the B end of a railcar if someone read you the instructions while you looked for the hand brake.

Don't forget the C, D, and E portions, which for some reason lie between the A and B ends in railroad lexicon.

Obviously, this is just more subscab crap from a subscab crap railroader....

QUOTE:
Real names?
You have mine, and my place of employment.
Edward M Blysard,
Port Terminal Railroad Association.
Switchman/engine foreman, job 152, lead switching job morning shift.

.....don't care, useless info.......

QUOTE:
Just type it into Google, you will find me, my dad, my uncle, and one of my fathers cousins...its not like Blysard is a real common name.

Ohhh, one of those one branch family trees the South is so famous for! Now I get it!

QUOTE:
I an Edward M Blysard, III, my uncle is Edward M Blysard, my grandfather is Levi E Blysard, his father was Edward M Blysard…My dad is Fred Guy Blysard,

.....don't care, useless info.....

QUOTE: .... and there was something about his cousin, Fritz too

Hey, they made a movie about that. It was called "Something About Mary" or something like that!

QUOTE: …not to hard to chase us down.

.....don't care, useless info....

QUOTE: Type in PTRA and you also find a lot of info about the railroad where I work.

....don't care, useless info....

QUOTE: As for the others, well, blah blah blah ad nauseum.......

....don't care, useless info......

QUOTE: As if you had the courage to actually tell us who you are…

As if you don't have the brains to read a profile.....

QUOTE: As usual, you managed to say a lot in your last post, without really saying anything at all...and of course, you didn’t answer a single question asked of you.

Baseless pointless insults are not questions, ergo not deserving of an "answer"....

QUOTE: Which lead me to think that you are too afraid…after all, I get the feeling that you toe the line and stick with the status quo at work, to frightened to back up your nonsense by applying it in the real world where such foolishness would most likely get you canned from your job.

Yep, if I don't behave I might have to fire myself!

Reallly, "ed", are you really that much of an idiot?

QUOTE: Typical coward action…in private, hidden behind a made up name, you run your mouth loud and long…in the real world, your are so afraid you wouldn’t say squat out loud where someone important might hear.

Hey now, don't be dragging LC and ironken into this!

QUOTE: Too afraid to practice your convections in the real world, where you could be held accountable for your words?

Yep, when I attended the WATCO meeting this afternoon I had to wear a disguise so no one would find out my real identity..........

Yep, you really are an idiot.

QUOTE: Good job proving you are just that, a cowardly troll.…

Again, is that the best you can do? You are a coward for hiding behind your keyboard and farting out these subscab insults, and you are a troll for having nothing better to do with your unprecious time.

Cheers!

[TomDiehl]

BTW, did we ever get an answer to what "BNSF did again?"

[techguy57]

Call them immoral, evil or robber-barrons if you like, but this is business, pure and simple. Do you think that McDonalds isn't trying to "siphon" patrons from other restaurants? Businessmen may tell you otherwise but many corporations still live by the Gordon Gecko mantra, "Greed is Good." Need I cite Enron, Halliburton, Arthur Andersen, Tyco or a host of others? Of course, most corporations are not dishonest and not all are greedy but the idea is still for them to turn a profit in a matter that conincides with the company's business plan. That just may not always conincide with how each of us think the company should be run. If they really wanted our opinions we'd be on their boards. Alas, I don't know about you all but I've yet to receive my invitation. I guess they like how they are currently running things!


Mike Vanlandingham,
dam* glad to meet you!

[ALCOC415]

To do a little backtracking here. The amount of fuel used in a locomotive verses a truck is not a good example. with the little 7 miles I operate here I also have to take into account fuel usage along with maintenance on both the engines and the track. in 2004 we hauled 14,000 cars to the BNSF and when the numbers are in for 2005 will be close to 12,000 cars. We still had days when we only moved four cars and that does not even include the cost for our crews. To move 1 car 90 miles by rail is not cheaper than operating 3-4 trucks that distance. I have 1 customer that is on the very end our line. I have to send a crew 1 mile to pickup 1 car and run around it to get it into there train to make the trip back to our yard. We have a special rate for that and the customer is willing to pay that in hopes that they can build up more bussiness and get there rates down. and I will not hide behind any screen names.
David Fredrick
Manager of Operations
Burlington Jct. Railway
Quincy Division

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal
I do have a suggestion for you. If you are so concerned with forum members suspected anonymity, you should first find out the real names and real jobs of members such as ironken, LC, CSSHEGEWISCH, jeaton, Tom Diehl, et al, e.g. those folks who ALWAYS feel a need to **** on everyone else's posts, and then post them on this forum for the sake of your problem. Oh, and don't forget to include your real name and real job, with independent documentation, okay "Ed"? (insert fake coughing sound "scabrailroader")

Wow, glad I kept all that info about me out of my profile. (They'll never guess my REAL name) LOL

As far as knowledge of business, at least I understand that all businesses need to make a profit. And just because they're making one and getting the best utilization from their assets, doesn't make them "evil," just successful.

[edblysard]

Get it straight, Dave...
I said you were an office weenie, not an executive...man, talk about self promotion…as if I would ever assume you could manage to do anything but switch hands…

And you are a troll.

As for being a foamer...I don’t think you qualify, you actually have to like railroads to be a foamer.

Scab railroader...I don’t think I would ever elevate you to that position...you wouldn’t know the A end from the B end of a railcar if someone read you the instructions while you looked for the hand brake.

Real names?
You have mine, and my place of employment.
Edward M Blysard,
Port Terminal Railroad Association.
Switchman/engine foreman, job 152, lead switching job morning shift.

Just type it into Google, you will find me, my dad, my uncle, and one of my fathers cousins...its not like Blysard is a real common name.
I an Edward M Blysard, III, my uncle is Edward M Blysard, my grandfather is Levi E Blysard, his father was Edward M Blysard…My dad is Fred Guy Blysard, and there was something about his cousin, Fritz too…not to hard to chase us down.

Type in PTRA and you also find a lot of info about the railroad where I work.


As for the others, well, two of them do use their real name...although I expected you to use other peoples behavior to justify your own.
As if you had the courage to actually tell us who you are…

As usual, you managed to say a lot in your last post, without really saying anything at all...and of course, you didn’t answer a single question asked of you.

Which lead me to think that you are too afraid…after all, I get the feeling that you toe the line and stick with the status quo at work, to frightened to back up your nonsense by applying it in the real world where such foolishness would most likely get you canned from your job.
Typical coward action…in private, hidden behind a made up name, you run your mouth loud and long…in the real world, your are so afraid you wouldn’t say squat out loud where someone important might hear.

Too afraid to practice your convections in the real world, where you could be held accountable for your words?

Good job proving you are just that, a cowardly troll.…
Ed

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

FM only needs to look at my profile to find the things he wants to know about me. It appears that he does not suffer criticism too well, especially when he steps into an area of somebody else's expertise. Based on his previous posts and point of view, his report on the above-mentioned meeting will lack any objectivity and credibility with me.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Energy consultant, huh…
Is that sorta like claiming to be international sales representive, when what you’re really doing is selling Amway to a friend in Canada?

If it works like that, then I am a switching service consultant and transportation advisor…after all, at least once a day the yardmaster consults with me…he asked me just the other day, “What the *ell did you just do?” and I advised him…I said “If it was to flashy for you to follow, then go get a cup of coffee and don’t watch, I will call you later and explain”.

Seriously, what qualifies you to comment on how we do our job, and how a railroad should be run?

Because it is obvious you never worked for a railroad, at least not in T&E service, although your arrogance and stubbornness, and you ability to make statements that fly in the face of facts and reality, coupled with your refusal to see anything other than what you want to sounds a lot like most of the trainmasters I have met.

Did BN can you?
Because it is obvious you have a grudge against them and most railroads in general, despite your statement to the contrary.

About the only railroad you seem to like, the Milwaukee Road is gone, due in large part to horrible management decisions.

You and your soul mate, Mike, seem to think the Milwaukee was the only railroad that ever did things right, but funny thing is, the Milwaukee is gone, while all these other dumb, evil, self serving railroads, like the BNSF and UP, survive, and some are even flourishing, despite not having you two on their board of directors.

Let you in on something all the other posters, sans one, already know.

BNSF is in the business of making money…nothing else.

If that means hauling container after container of plastic dog crap made in Taiwan from LA to Chicago, and ignoring the five car load of wheat sitting on a siding out in the middle of no where, well, that’s just the way it works, no matter how much you come on this and other forums and whine about it.

Your claim on having two patents is great…I have part ownership in a few myself, for a mandrel system and a lath tool/ end drive bearing system, but that in no way qualifies me to tell other tool manufactures how to run their business.

I would suggest that if you feel your patents are so good, then show us what they are, after all, if the patent office accepted them, they should stand up to the scrutiny of us uneducated slobs here on the forum!

The fact is, you’re not much more that a simple forum troll, granted, a little more educated, and a lot more verbose than most, but a troll none the less.

You hide in anonymity, make, for the most part, subtly off kilter claims, insult those that don’t agree with you, and have yet to post a thread or participate in any topic, unless it is about open access or an anti- BNSF/ UP thread….most of which you seem to start yourself.

You make incredible statements, back them up with misleading or incomplete evidence, and then you insult anyone who calls on you to back up your nonsense with clean, clear facts…
You do present “evidence”, but so heavily edited and of such a cut and paste nature as to be worthless.

If you do attend this meeting, and post any “notes” from it, I, and I suspect many others, would find almost all of what you present as useless and untrustworthy, because you will, after all, omit anything presented there that fails to support your stance and claims, and what you do return with and post will be so heavily edited, biased and slanted as to be worthless.

After all, you have presented no bona fides to qualify yourself as anything other than a troll; you won’t even give us your real name.

Don’t want your boss to know what you’re really thinking?
Who are you afraid of?

Ed

I have to admit, Ed, you do make me laugh more often than not.

If we take all the accuations you've made towards me, and add them up, then I am a.....

(clear throat)

A self-employed Montana power company executive/lineman/cable guy/Montana farmer/elevator manager/former BN employee/forum troll/foamer/scab railroader/et al, et al.

I do have a suggestion for you. If you are so concerned with forum members suspected anonymity, you should first find out the real names and real jobs of members such as ironken, LC, CSSHEGEWISCH, jeaton, Tom Diehl, et al, e.g. those folks who ALWAYS feel a need to **** on everyone else's posts, and then post them on this forum for the sake of your problem. Oh, and don't forget to include your real name and real job, with independent documentation, okay "Ed"? (insert fake coughing sound "scabrailroader")

And then sit back and find out how little everyone on this forum cares about your "real" name and "real" situation. It's "third nipple" information.

In the meantime, I will take your usual negative pus-laden dribble into account when I post the results of this meeting on this forum.

Cheers!

[edblysard]

Energy consultant, huh…
Is that sorta like claiming to be international sales representive, when what you’re really doing is selling Amway to a friend in Canada?

If it works like that, then I am a switching service consultant and transportation advisor…after all, at least once a day the yardmaster consults with me…he asked me just the other day, “What the *ell did you just do?” and I advised him…I said “If it was to flashy for you to follow, then go get a cup of coffee and don’t watch, I will call you later and explain”.

Seriously, what qualifies you to comment on how we do our job, and how a railroad should be run?

Because it is obvious you never worked for a railroad, at least not in T&E service, although your arrogance and stubbornness, and you ability to make statements that fly in the face of facts and reality, coupled with your refusal to see anything other than what you want to sounds a lot like most of the trainmasters I have met.

Did BN can you?
Because it is obvious you have a grudge against them and most railroads in general, despite your statement to the contrary.

About the only railroad you seem to like, the Milwaukee Road is gone, due in large part to horrible management decisions.

You and your soul mate, Mike, seem to think the Milwaukee was the only railroad that ever did things right, but funny thing is, the Milwaukee is gone, while all these other dumb, evil, self serving railroads, like the BNSF and UP, survive, and some are even flourishing, despite not having you two on their board of directors.

Let you in on something all the other posters, sans one, already know.

BNSF is in the business of making money…nothing else.

If that means hauling container after container of plastic dog crap made in Taiwan from LA to Chicago, and ignoring the five car load of wheat sitting on a siding out in the middle of no where, well, that’s just the way it works, no matter how much you come on this and other forums and whine about it.

Your claim on having two patents is great…I have part ownership in a few myself, for a mandrel system and a lath tool/ end drive bearing system, but that in no way qualifies me to tell other tool manufactures how to run their business.

I would suggest that if you feel your patents are so good, then show us what they are, after all, if the patent office accepted them, they should stand up to the scrutiny of us uneducated slobs here on the forum!

The fact is, you’re not much more that a simple forum troll, granted, a little more educated, and a lot more verbose than most, but a troll none the less.

You hide in anonymity, make, for the most part, subtly off kilter claims, insult those that don’t agree with you, and have yet to post a thread or participate in any topic, unless it is about open access or an anti- BNSF/ UP thread….most of which you seem to start yourself.

You make incredible statements, back them up with misleading or incomplete evidence, and then you insult anyone who calls on you to back up your nonsense with clean, clear facts…
You do present “evidence”, but so heavily edited and of such a cut and paste nature as to be worthless.

If you do attend this meeting, and post any “notes” from it, I, and I suspect many others, would find almost all of what you present as useless and untrustworthy, because you will, after all, omit anything presented there that fails to support your stance and claims, and what you do return with and post will be so heavily edited, biased and slanted as to be worthless.

After all, you have presented no bona fides to qualify yourself as anything other than a troll; you won’t even give us your real name.

Don’t want your boss to know what you’re really thinking?
Who are you afraid of?

Ed

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

QUOTE: Originally posted by kenneo

We will be waiting. Hopefully, you will have taken good notes with accurate attributions?

I would be quite surprised if he actually did that.
FM seems to be disappointed to have found out that BNSF is trying to maximize its profits, like any business. He also seems to expect a railroad to provide all sorts of transportation services, even if some of them are no longer profitable due to competition from other modes.

[kenneo]

We will be waiting. Hopefully, you will have taken good notes with accurate attributions?