Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman Assuming that the BNSF had a better route and open access allowed the UP to use it at a rate that matched the costs of the UP operating on their own line, what incentive would the UP have to maintain or even retain their route. If they can run on the BNSF for the same cost, abandon their line and just use the BNSF. Besides what will you do with the NS and KCS trains operating over that corridor? Dave H. [/quote] The example we are discussing involves taking some of UP's Puget Sound trains off the heavily traveled UP mainline through the Columbia Gorge in Oregon and transferring them onto BNSF's underutilized Stampede Pass line. UP is not going to abandon the water-level Columbia Gorge for rights over Stampede Pass! What we are trying to point out is that heavily used e.g. congested mainlines of one railroad often are parallel to some degree to underutilized lines owned by another railroad. Obviously, taking empties back over the underutilized line makes sense and frees up capacity on the overused line. But because of the owner-operator makeup of the U.S. railroad industry, that aspect of common sense goes wanting. That in and of itself makes a strong case for open access.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag