Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by tree68 If you apply the airline model, you end up with very busy corridors where owner/operators bid for the capacity. If the line needs more capacity, it will be built, or other ways will be found (alternate routing). On the other hand, little used branches would be subject to the same things that little used airports are - we still want our service, but we'll need some help to keep it open. It's such a different paradigm that most people can't wrap their heads around it. I'm not saying it would or wouldn't work, but if it did happen, railroading as we know it would have to go. Not in the steel flanged wheel on rail arena, but in the operations arena. [/quote] Little used branchlines are already on the way out under the current system, so not much would change regarding their collective futures under open access. You are correct that operations would see significant change. No more of this warehousing a car up and down the system until a buyer is found for the cargo, because all moves would be charged a fee, even repostitioning. You may see a return to the shorter/faster model aka D&RGW/Europe, since occupation of slots becomes a premium. Of course, no more 100% rate increases overnight fostered upon captive shippers, since there would be no more captive shippers. With an open market, you would see shippers return to the rails in droves. The subsequent demand for rail services would result in a reversal of the policy of retrenchment that has dominated railroading over the past century. And finally, with open access the incentive for deferring maintenance is eliminated, and the rail serive providers will have to find some other way to sex up the balance sheet.
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