I find it quite fascinating, that when you are free-lancing a model railroad what you are essentialy doing is creating an alternate history, though usually on a smaller scale than what one normaly thinks of (however, without violating forum policies, even the ever-popular Hitler Wins scenario contains some interesting railroad speculation in itself with its three-meter gauge system as proposed by Hitler, which seems to prove something about his character).
At that, my hope for this thread is to set up discussion about alternate railway histories, such as the hypothetical circumstances in which steam could have remained in opreation into the present day U.S. and what would have happened had Amtrak never formed.
My Layout Photos- http://s1293.photobucket.com/user/ajwarshal/library/
On the passenger rail side, If Seaboad Coast Line had retained it's NY to Florida passenger service instead of signing it over to Amtrak (SCL was one of the few railroads still making a small profit on long distance service). Years back I remember reading that if it had not been for the big wreck of 1968, involving two SCL streamliners at Winter Haven, Florida..... SCL may have continued in the passenger market, just as the Southern Railway did.
What could have been!
"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"
What would have happen if the C&O/B&O mergered with the N&W/NKP/Wabash before the B&O took control of WM?
Or perhaps a Southern/SCL merger instead of the formation of the unmerged Family Lines(SCL,L&N,CRR)?
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
A lot of alternative RR industries speculate on which specific roads might have combined in different formation than they did.
I tend to prefer more generalized alternatives. What if Ike hadn't decided to push the idea of the Interstate highway? That could have resulted in all kinds of effects, mostly positive, on the railroads. I don't rely on that with my layout so much as resistance to local expenditures to improve roads along with a lack of federal funding. Thus, up in the mountains, with their 3 month tourist season, there's little need seen to pave or otherwise improve roads, for instance, resulting in much healthier business for the narrowgauge.
Another useful exercise is to imagine a political climate in this country to support passenger rail and mass transit, as exists in the rest of the world. Amtrak, maybe, if not lots of private railroads, would cater to the demand for safe, reliable transportation by passengers, mail and express (take that UPS and FedEx) across a thick system of main and branchline service.
Or climate change could get so bad that railroads become a big part of policy aimed at reducing the carbon footprint of transportation by taking back much of the cargo that now moves by air and truck.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
My club's railroad has an "alternate history" based on real events. Historically, there was a real person in the late 1800's named A. A. MacLeod who was president of the Philadelhia & Reading Co., and they owned vast deposits of anthracite coal. To expand their market, and through various means, the P&R grabbed control of the L&HR, the Central New England, the New York & New England, and the B&M under the name Philadelphia, Reading & New England. He was reaching for the Old Colony RR to complete his domination of RR's to Boston when J. P. Morgan (who controlled the expanding New Haven RR and wanted the OCRR for his own route to Boston) caused MacLeod's house of cards to collapse just 16 months after it started.
Our "What If...?" is based on the idea that A. A. MacLeod's PR&NE railroad somehow survived as a continuous company and had been reorganized under a new name.
All of this is because we wanted to model both Boston's South Station and a steel mill.
Paul A. Cutler III
The Interstate Highway system is never built.
From the beginning, railroads are allowed to create and own trucking companies.
These 2 will make long distance trucking less feasible and rail/truck combination shipping more the norm from the early days.
Enjoy
Paul
What if... the PRR & Union Pacific had merged systems?
Tom
Pittsburgh, PA
IRONROOSTER The Interstate Highway system is never built. From the beginning, railroads are allowed to create and own trucking companies. These 2 will make long distance trucking less feasible and rail/truck combination shipping more the norm from the early days. Enjoy Paul
With or without the Interstate Highway System the early deregulation of rail and truck freight rates and trucking territory restrictions would have caused piggyback to explode at ten times the rate it developed.
Nobody would be in the long distance highway trucking business today had the government got out of the way in 1952 or so.
Had the railroads been allowed to do both - be in the trucking business, and carry anybodies trailer anywhere, economy of tonnage, and economy of scale once the infrastructure was built, would have made long distance trucking obsolete before it ever became popular.
As it is, there is now a steady shift toward intermodal rail for long distance freight, and a steady decline in rubber tire long distance ton miles thanks to deregulation.
Here on the ATLANTIC CENTRAL we model piggyback as if the government has just "seen the light" and is getting out of the way - circa 1954.
Sheldon
ATLANTIC CENTRAL IRONROOSTER The Interstate Highway system is never built. From the beginning, railroads are allowed to create and own trucking companies. These 2 will make long distance trucking less feasible and rail/truck combination shipping more the norm from the early days. Enjoy Paul With or without the Interstate Highway System the early deregulation of rail and truck freight rates and trucking territory restrictions would have caused piggyback to explode at ten times the rate it developed. Nobody would be in the long distance highway trucking business today had the government got out of the way in 1952 or so. Had the railroads been allowed to do both - be in the trucking business, and carry anybodies trailer anywhere, economy of tonnage, and economy of scale once the infrastructure was built, would have made long distance trucking obsolete before it ever became popular. As it is, there is now a steady shift toward intermodal rail for long distance freight, and a steady decline in rubber tire long distance ton miles thanks to deregulation. Here on the ATLANTIC CENTRAL we model piggyback as if the government has just "seen the light" and is getting out of the way - circa 1954. Sheldon
So now, imagine the benefits:
A 50% to 70% reduction in #2 diesel consumption for moving freight over the last 60 years. The inviro-wacos woud be really happy (not really, they are never happy).
Lower freight rates which may have kept US manufactured goods more competitive both domesticly and globaly.
A stronger argument could have been made to keep trucks smaller and lighter, making the highways more safe. A few facts - trucks are involved in 80% of the fatal collisions on the Interstates - BUT in less than 20% of those cases is the trucker at fault.
Smaller lighter trucks would be safer among the "stupid human tricks" of the car drivers. In 1950 a tractor trailer with a loaded 35' trailer weighed 45-50,000 lbs, today's 53 footers weight over 80,000 lbs - and the cars still only weigh 3-4,000.
Obviously fewer trucks driving fewer miles would be a big plus too.
Many small branchlines might have remained profitable for the railroads to operate........
Railroads could have stayed with 75' and shorter cars.
But of course mother government always knows best..........
Railroads got started in this country in the 1830's. The British were a few years ahead of us, but only a few. Railroads remained the best way to move passengers and freight overland up until automobiles, trucks, and airlines came on the scene. Although the business histories ( who bought out who) can plausibly vary widely I don't find that all that compelling. Given the private enterprise economy of the 19th century US, the railroads laid track to where investors thought there was money to be made. This resulted in very decent rail service all over the country and to every minor town. The federal government did subsidize the transcontinental railroad with land grants, but until the Grangers caused the ICC to be created, the railroads were pure private enterprise. They employed the latest technology, electric lighting, Westinghouse air brakes, electric signals, train phone, and others. The advantages of diesels, when they became available after WWII, were so compelling that I cannot imagine the dieselization of the 1950's being delayed by much. If Amtrak hadn't been voted in, passenger service would have simply disappeared back in the 1970's.
The only things that might have been done in the 1970's, was to give the railroads the same deal the truckers got. Government maintains the track, and the railroad companies operate trains over government maintained roadbed. That might have given better service at lower cost than Amtrak.
David Starr www.newsnorthwoods.blogspot.com
IRONROOSTER The Interstate Highway system is never built.
Its existence was inevitable. It might have lived under a different name, but it was going to happen. The 1907 ruling in Wilson v. Shaw held that Congress could appropriate funds for interstate highways. World War I sidelined the Federal Aid Road Act of 1916, which would have given us a nascent interstate system (probably something like the US Routes). The Phipps Act in 1921 does start an interstate highway system. That act directly triggers the Pershing Map, that will later inform the Interstate plans. By the 30s, they realize that superhighways (like the ones they got over in Germany) are the future and by 1938 corridors are selected for the first superhighways. The Pennsylvania Turnpike is already well under construction. In 1939, the first formal description of what we'd call an interstate highway system comes out of the Bureau of Public Roads. The Pennsylvania Turnpike, the Granddaddy of Them All, opens in 1940 and functionally becomes the prototype superhighway. There's another road in New York and Connecticut, whose name escapes me, that also opens around this time built to Autobahn-like standards).
Then World War II throws a wrench into the whole thing.
But, by the 1953 Yellow Book issuance, the ball was already rolling. The 1955 act doesn't so much create the Interstate system, but decide how to implement a foregone conclusion. And calls them Interstates. We almost got Interregionals.
dstarr Railroads got started in this country in the 1830's. The British were a few years ahead of us, but only a few. Railroads remained the best way to move passengers and freight overland up until automobiles, trucks, and airlines came on the scene. Although the business histories ( who bought out who) can plausibly vary widely I don't find that all that compelling. Given the private enterprise economy of the 19th century US, the railroads laid track to where investors thought there was money to be made. This resulted in very decent rail service all over the country and to every minor town. The federal government did subsidize the transcontinental railroad with land grants, but until the Grangers caused the ICC to be created, the railroads were pure private enterprise. They employed the latest technology, electric lighting, Westinghouse air brakes, electric signals, train phone, and others. The advantages of diesels, when they became available after WWII, were so compelling that I cannot imagine the dieselization of the 1950's being delayed by much. If Amtrak hadn't been voted in, passenger service would have simply disappeared back in the 1970's. The only things that might have been done in the 1970's, was to give the railroads the same deal the truckers got. Government maintains the track, and the railroad companies operate trains over government maintained roadbed. That might have given better service at lower cost than Amtrak.
Not entirely true, a great majority of the saftey and labor-saving devices were only installed after Government mandates.
Also, how would railroads look like after an apocolypse, such as if there was a nuclear war between the United States and the U.S.S.R.? I see something like Mad Max on rails...
P.S. Don't forsake the earlier discussion topics and get caught up in After The End scenarios, please (I know it's tempting, but please restrain yourselves)!
P.P.S. NO ZOMBIES!! That just is so, so...
P.P.P.S. No delving too deeply into the politics, let's keep model railroading the opiate of this thread!
So let's go out way on a limb. There is a copy of a letter that pops up occasionally, purporting to be from NY Governor Martin VanBuren, to President Andrew Jackson. In it the Governor rails against the newfangled invention of the railway, and the threat it poses to America's expanding network of canals and watrerways. He tries to convince President Jackson to take action to restrict the railroad industry's development. The document is pretty much assumed to be an historical fraud, but suppose it was not and President Jackson took the govenor's advice. We would all be model canal builders, and I would be working on a 1:140 scale model of the Illinois canal system from Hennipen to the Rock River @ Colona.
I have figured out what is wrong with my brain! On the left side nothing works right, and on the right side there is nothing left!
Trucks pay their fair share in highway use taxes. The government may put up the capital, but the users make the payments on the notes.
In my view, the ones who get the sweet deal are the airlines.....
And they can charge one person $400 and the next person $40 for the same product. If anyone else did that there would be congressional hearings.....
Rail passenger service seldom made money on its own. The post office paid the primary cost of passenger service to carry the mail. If a few passengers bought tickets, that was the cream. Once the RPO service was ended, passenger trains were doomed.
BUT, if freight rates had been deregulated right after WWII, and the railroads allowed to be in the trucking business, they could have built a better "Railway Express" system for LCL freight and the "package" business, long before UPS, FedX, etc.
And once again, long distance package service would have stayed on the rails, maybe the mail as well, passenger service might have survived.
Your government at work - protecting you from yourself........
SovietP36 dstarr Railroads got started in this country in the 1830's. The British were a few years ahead of us, but only a few. Railroads remained the best way to move passengers and freight overland up until automobiles, trucks, and airlines came on the scene. Although the business histories ( who bought out who) can plausibly vary widely I don't find that all that compelling. Given the private enterprise economy of the 19th century US, the railroads laid track to where investors thought there was money to be made. This resulted in very decent rail service all over the country and to every minor town. The federal government did subsidize the transcontinental railroad with land grants, but until the Grangers caused the ICC to be created, the railroads were pure private enterprise. They employed the latest technology, electric lighting, Westinghouse air brakes, electric signals, train phone, and others. The advantages of diesels, when they became available after WWII, were so compelling that I cannot imagine the dieselization of the 1950's being delayed by much. If Amtrak hadn't been voted in, passenger service would have simply disappeared back in the 1970's. The only things that might have been done in the 1970's, was to give the railroads the same deal the truckers got. Government maintains the track, and the railroad companies operate trains over government maintained roadbed. That might have given better service at lower cost than Amtrak. Not entirely true, a great majority of the saftey and labor-saving devices were only installed after Government mandates. Also, how would railroads look like after an apocolypse, such as if there was a nuclear war between the United States and the U.S.S.R.? I see something like Mad Max on rails... P.S. Don't forsake the earlier discussion topics and get caught up in After The End scenarios, please (I know it's tempting, but please restrain yourselves)! P.P.S. NO ZOMBIES!! That just is so, so... P.P.P.S. No delving too deeply into the politics, let's keep model railroading the opiate of this thread!
Some balance is in order here. Crashes were bad for business in lots of ways, North American Railroads were seldom against improved safety.
The Westinghouse air brake was adopted as quickly as was practical for the most part, as were automatic couplers, standard time and signaling.
Unions actually had as much or more influence as the government - automatic stokers, crew sizes, and other safety equipment - demanded by labor, and sometimes mandated by government, but generally accepted by management as necessary and good.
Few union presidents or government bureacrats ever actually ran a business to understand the logistics of implimenting masive infrastructure changes in industry. Magic wands have always been in short supply.
And just because someone invents some piece of equipment, does not always mean it will solve the problems - look at modern garden tractors, you need four hands to put one in reverse, and fifth one to keep the blade going in reverse, but people still back over their kids? Maybe that is why they still back over kids? They are too busy operating all the "safety" handles?
Sure, every industry sometimes needs a little nudge to upgrade equipent not yet amoritized, but overall railroading advanced pretty quickly from 1875 to 1920, in both performance and safety.
And it is still dangerous, hard, dirty work today.
ATLANTIC CENTRALRail passenger service seldom made money on its own. The post office paid the primary cost of passenger service to carry the mail. If a few passengers bought tickets, that was the cream. Once the RPO service was ended, passenger trains were doomed. BUT, if freight rates had been deregulated right after WWII, and the railroads allowed to be in the trucking business, they could have built a better "Railway Express" system for LCL freight and the "package" business, long before UPS, FedX, etc. And once again, long distance package service would have stayed on the rails, maybe the mail as well, passenger service might have survived.
What Sheldon describes is one of the alternate scenarios that model railroaders seem to do a lot. I had also thought of doing this type of, what if scenario myself for a fifties layout. But I decided on a 1990's, era. Though, this could be done for any era once the premise of "if freight rates had been deregulated right after WWII, and the railroads allowed to be in the trucking business" was excepted.
Ken G Price My N-Scale Layout
Digitrax Super Empire Builder Radio System. South Valley Texas Railroad. SVTRR
N-Scale out west. 1996-1998 or so! UP, SP, Missouri Pacific, C&NW.
What if the Pennsy didn't "bleed profits" after WW2 and was able to stand on its own Thus preventing PEnn central?
(My Model Railroad, My Rules)
These are the opinions of an under 35 , from the east end of, and modeling, the same section of the Wheeling and Lake Erie railway. As well as a freelanced road (Austinville and Dynamite City railroad).
It is an intersting connection between model railroading and science fiction, the "what if" / "alternate universe" idea. I've thought it would be fun to do sort of a "steam punk" layout, where you have Superliners painted in Pullman colors and letters being pulled by streamlined steam engines, with patrons wearing top hats and hoop skirts; and 60' hy-cube boxcars using old-style lettering for 19th c. railroads like the New York Central & Hudson River RR.
My own St.Paul Route railroad is a 'what if' layout, trying to create what might have happened if two real railroads (St.Paul & Duluth, and Port Arthur, Duluth & Western) had merged in 1900 and prospered, instead of each being swallowed up by a larger railroad (NP and CN respectively) that year.
BTW in a 'prequel' version of the 'what if' layout, seems to me back in the 1930's-40's somebody built an outside-third-rail O scale layout called the "Penn Central", because they liked both Pennsylvania and NYC equipment and wanted to run both. Equipment was lettered with custom decals (or rubber stamps...or hand lettered?) for Penn Central.
One possible alternative to the development of the interstate system in the 1950s-1970s may have been a more prolific adoption of Budd's RDCS as an economic means of retaining passenger revenue for short haul and intercity transit, in the face of the loss of long haul declining passenger revenue to the growing air travel sector. I do use the term revenue in full awareness of the realization that many railroads ran their passenger trains at a continual loss, under pressure from adherence to ICC and FRA requirements. Nonetheless, I feel the modern RDCS would have played a far greater role in an alternate time line.
Cedarwoodron
what if the government in the 1800s didn't allow laissez faire development, avoiding redundant railroads especially in the northeast resulting in a more organized and efficient rail system both in terms of routes and use of capital to build the roads?
would there ever have been the need for Conrail or Amtrack (and of course many of the northeast railroads)?
would the rail system have been efficient to delay the interstate highway system or possibly even the automobile?
what would the impact have been on cities and suburbs?
greg - Philadelphia & Reading / Reading
gregc what if the government in the 1800s didn't allow laissez faire development, avoiding redundant railroads especially in the northeast resulting in a more organized and efficient rail system both in terms of routes and use of capital to build the roads? would there ever have been the need for Conrail or Amtrack (and of course many of the northeast railroads)? would the rail system have been efficient to delay the interstate highway system or possibly even the automobile? what would the impact have been on cities and suburbs?
We would be like socialist Europe, poor, over taxed, and crowded in cities - no thank you. Maybe you want to be economicly forced to live in a small house in a city and take the train, I'll keep my big house in the rural suburbs and my cars thank you.
Of course the good thing is our steam loco history would be like Germany - a short list of government designs - so it would be easy for the model manufacturers to make all of them...........
Read my post above about how much better things would have been if the government had gotten out of the way sooner - yet you think having them deeper in it sooner would have made it better - I think not.
America is not Europe, cars were inevitable and suit the needs of the rural nature of America. Passenger trains are only useful in dense population centers. A train could never take me to work in my job as a historic restoration consultant/residential designer/construction project manager/master carpenter. It can't carry my tools, deliver materials, take me to EVERY/ANY address.
Don't get me wrong, I love trains, but the practical side of me understands their limitations from a passenger stand point. I do think good intercity intermediate distance rail could replace a lot of airplane travel. But otherwise, again, it is only useful for those who choose to live in the crowded, dirty cities - no thank you - again.
wjstixBTW in a 'prequel' version of the 'what if' layout, seems to me back in the 1930's-40's somebody built an outside-third-rail O scale layout called the "Penn Central", because they liked both Pennsylvania and NYC equipment and wanted to run both. Equipment was lettered with custom decals (or rubber stamps...or hand lettered?) for Penn Central.
I suppose it didn't run half the time, bled the owner's funds dry and had to be bought out by the feds along with every other major model railroad on the block once it had all gone to where the sun don't shine!
ATLANTIC CENTRALWe would be like socialist Europe, poor, over taxed, and crowded in cities - no thank you. Maybe you want to be economicly forced to live in a small house in a city and take the train, I'll keep my big house in the rural suburbs and my cars thank you.
from what i've read, most railroads required government permission to build, so government involvement did occur. While not ignoring the potential for corruption, I think that if there were fewer railroads in the northeast, there would have been a more efficient and successful system, one that provides greater coverage as a result of better use of capital, instead of multiple routes between high volume destinations.
In some ways, I think this is what happened out west. Government involvement provided incentives so that capital was used more efficiently to establish a coast to coast connection.
the risks of large projects can't always be handle by individual companies. Governments can help facilitate large projects. There are examples of it doing so in aviation, aerospace, genetics and I assume many others.
I think there are many countries suffering from poor or corrupt government intervention.
gregc ATLANTIC CENTRAL We would be like socialist Europe, poor, over taxed, and crowded in cities - no thank you. Maybe you want to be economicly forced to live in a small house in a city and take the train, I'll keep my big house in the rural suburbs and my cars thank you. from what i've read, most railroads required government permission to build, so government involvement did occur. While not ignoring the potential for corruption, I think that if there were fewer railroads in the northeast, there would have been a more efficient and successful system, one that provides greater coverage as a result of better use of capital, instead of multiple routes between high volume destinations. In some ways, I think this is what happened out west. Government involvement provided incentives so that capital was used more efficiently to establish a coast to coast connection. the risks of large projects can't always be handle by individual companies. Governments can help facilitate large projects. There are examples of it doing so in aviation, aerospace, genetics and I assume many others. I think there are many countries suffering from poor or corrupt government intervention.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL We would be like socialist Europe, poor, over taxed, and crowded in cities - no thank you. Maybe you want to be economicly forced to live in a small house in a city and take the train, I'll keep my big house in the rural suburbs and my cars thank you.
The problem is not just corruption, it is incompetence.
There is an old saying that goes - those who can't do things teach, those who can't teach work for the government.....
People who can do things run businesses.
I know, I'm a cold heartless capitalist who has read Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations". "the government that governs least, governs best"
Incompetence kept freight rate regulation for 5 decades past the time it served and good purpose.
While government wastes time and money on a "study", business men build empires, employ the masses, and create wealth - for themselves and others.
Getting back to the topic of alternate histories as they relate to freelance layouts... I imagined an alternate history (and geology) in order to create a layout that combines the subjects and locations I wanted. You can read more about it in the June issue "Imagineering" column of Model Railroad Hobbyist:
http://mrhpub.com/2015-06-jun/port/files/110.html
Possibilities abound, just in my part of the world. For example:
Hurricane Diane doesn't savage the Northeast in 1955. The NKP and DL&W merge in the late '50s, thus creating another trunk line to Chicago. The Erie is left out of the merger (no EL). What's the new system called? What happens to the Erie? To the D&H? Does the N&W buy the new system, or can it stand on its own? Does N&W still absorb the Wabash and AC&Y, or does it become part of the PRR?
In the world of my layout-in-planning, the EL merger takes place, Dereco fails, and the Chessie takeover of the EL goes through. Meantime, the Conrail takeover isn't as extensive as we experienced in our timeline: the Reading and CNJ are included in Chessie, and in exchange for federal bailout money, Penn Central is compelled to sell the Lehigh Valley. N&W buys the Valley, giving it access to New York (and meaning most of the Pennsy's former subsidiaries are now consolidated as a competitor to its successor corporation). Later, CSX and NS are formed. Eventually, NS and CSX divide the never profitable (and still government-subsidized) PC in the late '90s when Congress forces the issue.
Every time I start a new layout or module, the little lady always insists that this time, I NEED to do a Mad Max layout. All desert with rusty hodge-podge equipment covered in spikes. A neat idea, just not my thing. Maybe someday I'll do a module of it for her.
As for me, when I finally get started on my BAR reboot (fingers crossed for this fall), it will be a "what if" layout where the Bangor & Aroostook didn't fall into steep decline in the 80's, but instead the Maine potato and timber industries made a huge comback saving the railroad. More modern equipment, six axle locos and the like. Looking forward to SD40s and GP60s in the BAR red, black and grey livery.