QUOTE: Originally posted by CSXrules4eva Originally posted by Allen Jenkins Gee. Grr. Or GE? It' cool, wondering, what is done wrong, when no one considers the HUGE lobby, about single ridership automobiles. What killed the railroads passenger service? Not the roads built aside the tracks, it was the automotive industry, along with the airlines. If traffic is reduced, then capital expenditures are disciplined. For example, build a six-axle 3000 hp engine, put it on sub-standard mainline, watch it turn-over, and blame the builder. So...who said the road, stripped of the responsibility of passenger service, can afford to provide a cost overload service, with quality in mind? No one said, freight should take any priority over passenger, it's just that a no-return advantage, arostocracy at it's finest, took over mass transit. An example, is to promote to intra, or interstate transport, and kill the E-Series, and city bus. Too bad that corporate schemes, have complicated the future of our children. A plague upon our ignorance. acj. This is sad [V] I really wish passanger rail was the way it was long ago. The quaility, service, and people were great!!! pewheI missthe good old "ALL ABORD" calling at stations. Many railroaders in passanger service were friendlier than the people today. But anyway, the automobile certainlity changed the life of railroads entirely. I was born in a time n many people my age are in love w/ cars. Though I like cars myself I would prefer seeing a 5,000hp SD80MAC than seeing a 256hp Honda Accord. [/quote ] Thanks Allen. I agree that the people working on the train years ago were certainly friendlier. During my on travels on the UP City of Los Angeles, the guys who worked in the kitchen would look after me. I was a young lad at the time(around 12 years old) and between meal service the guys would sit down with me and tell me stories that would have me in stiches. I will never forget the kindness they showed toward me. Joe Sapwater Reply CSXrules4eva Member sinceAugust 2004 From: Louisville, KY 1,345 posts Posted by CSXrules4eva on Saturday, October 30, 2004 11:17 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Allen Jenkins Gee. Grr. Or GE? It' cool, wondering, what is done wrong, when no one considers the HUGE lobby, about single ridership automobiles. What killed the railroads passenger service? Not the roads built aside the tracks, it was the automotive industry, along with the airlines. If traffic is reduced, then capital expenditures are disciplined. For example, build a six-axle 3000 hp engine, put it on sub-standard mainline, watch it turn-over, and blame the builder. So...who said the road, stripped of the responsibility of passenger service, can afford to provide a cost overload service, with quality in mind? No one said, freight should take any priority over passenger, it's just that a no-return advantage, arostocracy at it's finest, took over mass transit. An example, is to promote to intra, or interstate transport, and kill the E-Series, and city bus. Too bad that corporate schemes, have complicated the future of our children. A plague upon our ignorance. acj. This is sad [V] I really wish passanger rail was the way it was long ago. The quaility, service, and people were great!!! I missthe good old "ALL ABORD" calling at stations. Many railroaders in passanger service were friendlier than the people today. But anyway, the automobile certainlity changed the life of railroads entirely. I was born in a time when many people my age are in love w/ cars. Though I like cars myself I would prefer seeing a 5,000hp SD80MAC than seeing a 256hp Honda Accord. LORD HELP US ALL TO BE ORIGINAL AND NOT CRISPY!!! please? Sarah J.M. Warner conductor CSX Reply joesap1 Member sinceNovember 2003 From: Tulsa, OK 140 posts Posted by joesap1 on Saturday, October 30, 2004 10:39 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by WearyErie Interesting writeups. FWIW, back in the 1960's when I was first learning to spike ties in the Croxton Yards, I happened to break a hammer handle. My foreman gave me his insight into railroad maintenance economics. Coupled with a lot of blue language, I learned that the $2 spent to buy a new handle came directly out of the shareholders pockets. He told me that I should have much more respect for the shareholders. Be that as it may, I am to this day amazed at his ability to level track by eye and layout switches with a piece of chalk. He has my deep respect. [] I am always impressed by someone who uses their God-given talents and creates a masterpiece of their work. I can't even draw a straight line. Joe Sapwater Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, October 30, 2004 5:56 PM Interesting writeups. FWIW, back in the 1960's when I was first learning to spike ties in the Croxton Yards, I happened to break a hammer handle. My foreman gave me his insight into railroad maintenance economics. Coupled with a lot of blue language, I learned that the $2 spent to buy a new handle came directly out of the shareholders pockets. He told me that I should have much more respect for the shareholders. Be that as it may, I am to this day amazed at his ability to level track by eye and layout switches with a piece of chalk. He has my deep respect. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, October 30, 2004 4:34 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill No. They increased spending. Here's some numbers (AAR): Capital investment in roadway and structures in millions of dollars: 1985 3.5, 1990 2.6, 1995 3.7, 2001 4.4 (accounting rules were changed in 1985 so numbers from before that date are not strictly comparable). And some results (AAR): Train accidents per million train-miles: 1980 11.43; 1990 4.73; 2001 4.22 Injuries and illnesses per 100 full-time employees: 1980 11.1, 1990 7.6, 2001 3.3 Are these numbers strictly comparable? No, they never are. Lines and services extant in 1980 aren't extant now, and many of those lines and services of the past were patently less safe or more prone to accident or derailment. The monetary figures aren't adjusted for inflation, productivity increases, or where it's being spent. I'm curious. Mark states the capital expenditures in terms of total expenditure per year for 1985, 1990,1995, and 2001, but states accidents as accidents per million train-miles. What is the figure for capital expenditures on a per million train mile basis? Reply Edit Allen Jenkins Member sinceOctober 2003 From: United States of America, Tennessee, Cookeville 408 posts Posted by Allen Jenkins on Saturday, October 30, 2004 3:02 PM Gee. Grr. Or GE? It' cool, wondering, what is done wrong, when no one considers the HUGE lobby, about single ridership automobiles. What killed the railroads passenger service? Not the roads built aside the tracks, it was the automotive industry, along with the airlines. If traffic is reduced, then capital expenditures are disciplined. For example, build a six-axle 3000 hp engine, put it on sub-standard mainline, watch it turn-over, and blame the builder. So...who said the road, stripped of the responsibility of passenger service, can afford to provide a cost overload service, with quality in mind? No one said, freight should take any priority over passenger, it's just that a no-return advantage, arostocracy at it's finest, took over mass transit. An example, is to promote to intra, or interstate transport, and kill the E-Series, and city bus. Too bad that corporate schemes, have complicated the future of our children. A plague upon our ignorance. acj. Allen/Backyard Reply joesap1 Member sinceNovember 2003 From: Tulsa, OK 140 posts Posted by joesap1 on Thursday, October 28, 2004 10:29 PM It seems we have strayed from the original discussion of the raltionship of the roadbeds to derailing accidents. Does this mean we have sufficiently expounded on this subject? I have learned that although the Amtrak ride is anything but smooth, the condition of the roadbeds is not a primary cause of derailments. There are many other factors which have been previously discussed. Does any one care to add some words in summation? Joe Sapwater Reply SALfan Member sinceApril 2002 From: Northern Florida 1,429 posts Posted by SALfan on Thursday, October 28, 2004 11:03 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe F_N_B, If you read this, I really hope you continue to respond to articles. It is people like you that keep me checking this forum despite certain "pawns" that detract from its value. Gabe AMEN!! We need more people who can give us the benefit of their experience. Reply SALfan Member sinceApril 2002 From: Northern Florida 1,429 posts Posted by SALfan on Thursday, October 28, 2004 10:59 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill Then you'll be leaving? We should be so lucky. This guy is too ignorant to realize his ignorance. Reply dehusman Member sinceSeptember 2003 From: Omaha, NE 10,621 posts Posted by dehusman on Thursday, October 28, 2004 8:51 AM Chessking : You might not realize it, but statements like your comment : "Remember kids, our lives are as ants to the railroad upitys." might be found personally insulting to people who actually work for a railroad, are concerned, dedicated managers and don't particularly like being being called "upitys". When you said that, YOU fired the first shot across the bow. Why are you supprised when somebody returned fire? Dave H. Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com Reply gabe Member sinceMarch 2004 From: Indianapolis, Indiana 2,434 posts Posted by gabe on Thursday, October 28, 2004 8:46 AM F_N_B, If you read this, I really hope you continue to respond to articles. It is people like you that keep me checking this forum despite certain "pawns" that detract from its value. Gabe Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, October 28, 2004 12:54 AM PNWRNM, I understand where you're coming from, however, the term "railroad" is infact a road with rails. Have all the living, breathing people you can imagine, but if you have no ties, rails, tie plates, spikes, etc, come together, all you have are the people. If you use the word "railroad" to include more than just the inamimate object iteslf is to generalize the term. People who work for the railroad are not known as "railroads", rather "railroad employees". By the way, isn't Amtrak always in the sink hole when it comes to annual revenue? There is a shortline here in upstate NY attempting to get privatized passenger service to run from Rochester to Niagara Falls. No Amtrak, Yay! But the major problem is getting 12.7 miles of track put back in to once again connect the shortline with Rochester. That's a lot of money ... plus inspection of bridges, reinstalling grade crossings, crossbuck signals, you name it. But there are a few proposals in the works with GVT and Monroe County Transportation Authority. Reply Edit PNWRMNM Member sinceMay 2003 From: US 2,593 posts Posted by PNWRMNM on Thursday, October 28, 2004 12:38 AM Chess The railroad is NOT an inanimate object. It is about 200,000 thinking, living, breathing people. I for one am happy you won't ride. Spread the word! Getting rid of Amtrak would be a great blessing. Mac Reply joesap1 Member sinceNovember 2003 From: Tulsa, OK 140 posts Posted by joesap1 on Thursday, October 28, 2004 12:23 AM Well!! Thank you very much Mark Hemphill, Mudchicken, Ed, etc for your infromative and stimulating responses. My question about the roadbeds , ties, and rails brought much discussion. I learned a whole lot. I never really questioned the railroads desire to make money. It must or or it will die. God forbid! I really enjoyed the comments from the anonymous ex-engineering person. He was very good at putting it into perspective. The report that railroads are safer today and that derailing accidents are decreasing is good news. I just hate reading about derailments on the TRAINS newswire every week. As an ex-safety engineer I know that all accidents are made up of a series of circumstances that come together at the wrong time. Therefore, we can not eliminate derailments with any magical formula. This forum is fun, educational, and the experiences shared by all involved are priceless. So keep those cards and letters cooming. My real name is Bruce, by the way. I am just a sap at heart. Joe Sapwater Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, October 28, 2004 12:21 AM M.W. I'm on the same side of the street with you on this, all except for trying to 'encourage them' as you so stated. I will not kiss their *** to get information (not saying you are so don't take this the wrong way) and although I'm willing to accept their views, railroad facts, etc ... what's unacceptable are any personal attacks upon me. I will never ever feel humbled and actually couldn't care less if the likes of FNB or jeaton ever replied to any of my questions. There are plenty of others here who could answer any questions I have. I'm here eager to learn and provide any input, however good, bad, or indifferent, just like the next railroad enthusiast. I'm not here to be someone's punching bag. Reply Edit shrek623 Member sinceJune 2004 From: North central Illinois 120 posts Posted by shrek623 on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 11:52 PM Chessking, I think what was being disagreed with regarding your comments was the generally simplistic way you generalized the railroads as a whole. Yes railroads are inanimate and made with steel, wood, etc.., but there are thousands of people who work on and or maintain those inanimate objects also. That is in where I think you are wrong. The men and women working on ALL of the railroads try their darndest to avoid derailments. Derailments do not help ANYONE!!! Railroads and their employees are not intentionally avoiding maintenance because they don't think it is needed. The railroads spend what they can afford on maintenance and still be able to run a viable business. The most important thing to remember is businesses are ultimatly run by the SHAREHOLDERS, and NO trains will run if everything goes into maintaining and nothing else. I think your comments were berating not just the railroads but the employees also. I'm not trying to pick a fight on this subject, and by no means am I trying to insult you, I'm just expressing my opinion after reading the post. If I'm wrong, so be it. Shrek Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 11:44 PM No M.W. You have too much that I want to learn. I actually consider you to be one of the better members here. I could learn a lot from you and I never signed up so I could come here to fight. That wasn't my objective. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 11:18 PM Ok, kid gloves off. No more worrying about rocking the boat for this guy. There is a real problem with people who attack me personally when I never attacked them personally. I said something about an inaminate object (a railroad) where big machinery runs on top of rails, back and fourth, and back and fourth ... you get the idea. Now comes along FNB (AKA Mr. Wonderful), because I attacked his precious inaminate object of wood and steel (oh and lots of stones), big trains and upitys up high and he must be in with the likes of mob mentality to be defending them so dearly. He defends the railroad and powers that be and treats it as if it were his wife. That's sick!!! What's the deal dude?? It gets to be that nobody can submit their opinions and feelings without having to be ok'd by the railroad intellects here. "Gotta stick to the "truth" and only the truth, and if you don't know the truth, well then you're just simply inferior to all us great railroaders! Whaaah" Well no wonder the number of members is so low. Then there's the thing with tag teaming (like jeaton). All jeaton wants to do is tag team with his buddy here and stir up more contentious remarks. Oh man! I thought only AOL and Yahoo forums did that stuff. So let me get this all summed up: We have a forum with retirees, good, bad, and a few cantankerous railroad employees (some here), wannabe employees, college and high school level students, and it's all wrapped up tightly in a little locomotive chuggin' along "TOOT TOOT" at pre-school speed. I thought the forum here was going to be a good one. I was mistaken. Reply Edit jeaton Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: Rockton, IL 4,821 posts Posted by jeaton on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 10:45 PM Wow. That is soooo profound. "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 10:38 PM Moving on. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 10:34 PM Responses like Mr. Chessking's are precisely why I don't post to this forum. While it's true that, in a capitalist society, money is important, I don't think that's grounds for the vitriolic rhetoric he has employed. Based on my experience in railroad engineering, as one of the folks Chessking derides, I can provide a great deal of evidence to refute his claim about the "upitys" [sic]; but he provides only anecdotal evidence to support his claim. And, I don't trust the source of his anecdotes. I will say that there appear to be many well-informed individuals here. You know who you are. There also appear to be quite a few people intersted in actually learning something. Maybe I'll try again in a while. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 9:30 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by chessking QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill Now it's possible that CSX started from farther behind, but the claim is that the railroad was getting worse. I couldn't see the statistics supporting that claim. No evidence, no story. CSX and NS inherited well maintained Conrail trackage. I haven't heard of many incidents occurring during Conrail's heydays. Now if you could, verse their statistics with CSX and NS (to date). Whatever happened afterwards with the degradation of these lines was the result of the corporations. Ok, I will no longer blame the small numbers of track crews, signal men, etc, any longer. Does it need to be in caps for you to see?? I don't get it. First of all, what is it that we don't see that needs to be in caps? Gabe I'm so glad you asked gabe. Here it is: CAPTIALISM RULES! Remember kids, our lives are as pissants to the railroad upitys. I refuse to ride as passenger on their stupid tracks! I wouldn't even hobo it. Reply Edit jchnhtfd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: US 1,537 posts Posted by jchnhtfd on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 11:23 AM Thanks, mudchicken, F_N_B, Mark, dd... I just spent a few moments going through the NTSB (and previous equivalents) and Canadian Transportation Safety Board stats and reports for years gone by. It makes interesting, if somewhat repetitive, reading. There is no question when you do that that reportable accidents/incidents attributable to track conditions are declining. No question at all. Yes, the old section gangs are gone -- but in their place there are a number of newer or improved technologies which, while not perfect, are pretty good. And there are a lot of dedicated railroaders out there -- from the top down, for most companies -- who still believe, and still work that safety comes first. dd also has a good point -- there are some places you just can't fix under present condtions. I would add, though, a comment on ride quality (which is part of where this all started!): this is a very qualitative thing. However, it is dependent on a lot more than visible track conditions. As Mudchicken notes, surfacing makes a terrific difference, particularly at certain speeds. Another factor, however, is the nature of what you are riding in: in the bad old days, you were, if you were on a first class train, riding in a Pullman or equivalent streamline or heavyweight car. Note that the older streamline cars were 'lightweight' in name only -- these were big, heavy puppys, make no mistake! And they rode on four or six axle trucks with remarkably long spring travel and a variety of dampers. Since the car itself was very heavy (try 80 tons and up) and the live load was so small (say 50 people), the trucks and springing could be really optimised -- and one could get a lovely smooth ride over some pretty g_d awful track. Not so today: a Superliner is big, but it isn't heavy, and its centre of gravity is high; there is no way it will ride as well. Viewliners and all are much lighter than their predecessors. This has to be taken into account when assessing ride quality. As to jointed vs. CW rail -- there is no particular reason why you can't run as fast on one as on the other. If they are equally well surfaced and built, the only difference from the ride standpoint is the clickety clack. From the maintenance standpoint there is a big difference, which is one reason why CWR is so popular. Jamie Reply dldance Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Near Promentory UT 1,590 posts Posted by dldance on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 10:38 AM One observation from an innocent bystander: The roadbed work that most Class 1's I watch is far superior to that which it is replacing. The railroads are investing in reducing future maintenance costs as well as eliminating operational problems - thus we should see lower costs but better operational performance. I think that Mark's numbers are pointing this out. Second - as the Class 1's upgrade, used ribbon rail is now becoming available. Earlier this fall, I hiked into the site of a spring derailment on an unnamed Class 2 in Texas. Most of the ties were kindling wood, but the rail had been relaid with used ribbon rail and reballested with crushed granite. New ties can be worked into that site later. This was an impressive rebuild job for a Class 2. Third, there are specific locations on all railroads that are almost impossible to improve over present conditions. The (compass) eastbound approach to the Colorado River bridge in Columbus TX is a good example. Right in the middle of the main line between Houston and San Antonio is a 100 foot section of track that shows strong evidence of pumping. However, there are residences within 50 feet on each side (North and South), a city street crossing to the West and a cliff to the East. Short of buying out the residences, closing a street grade crossing and putting in proper drainage -- all the UP can do is throw ballast and slow orders at the problem. dd Reply gabe Member sinceMarch 2004 From: Indianapolis, Indiana 2,434 posts Posted by gabe on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 10:22 AM I don't want to change the overall trend in this conversation, but this got me wondering. Is there any difference between the ability to run trains at high speed on ribon rail as opposed to jointed rail? I remember reading a post in a string referring to the fact that Germans run their freight trains at 90mph. Someone said something to the effect that jointed rail changed the equation, something about the small amount of give in each rail being helpful. I meant to ask about this earlier, but never got around to it. Gabe Reply mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,820 posts Posted by mudchicken on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 9:58 AM Mark: Thanks for trying. (Sometimes you teach and they actually listen. Other times emotion gets in the way and ruins a good lesson...)They may never "get it" or understand the difference between FRA Class 4 and Class 5 track in 49CFR213. The comment about running a maximum of 55 mph is flawed (Fuel conservation maybe, track condition most likely not) If that was still SP instead of UP, there would be slow orders deluxe because SP was broke. UP has thrown bucketloads of cash at the problems on the former SP and will continue to do so just to get their heads above water for years of deferred maintenance by SP).... The comment about MetroLink is an uninformed one. If freight railroads had the maintenance budget they have had lately, things would be different. [ If the current regime at MetroLink/SCRRA was not there including a well known TRAINS contributor (and ex SP Division Engineer, a really good one), the freight railroaders would be tagging them with their old nickname which was "MetroJoke"...] It isn't only ties and rail, ever understand the concept of surfacing? Somebody needs to understand also what rail corrugation is and what increased heavy tonnage does to the rail, ties and roadbed. Track modulus anyone? BNSF still runs AMTRAK at 90 mph on 132# jointed rail (until the ATS inductors go away) here in Southern Colorado (saw this yesterday at Coolidge, KS/Holly, CO)... Joesap1 and railman might want to try learning instead of making baseless comments. (or go back into the corner and look at the pretty pictures) Mudchicken (One annoyed/ dismayed trackman) [banghead][banghead][banghead] Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,018 posts Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 9:48 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Mark ,I see your point, but years ago didn't the RR's cut back on funds on Maintence to cut back on spending? Can't dispute Mark's numbers, but IIRC, that is absolutely true - although you have to go back 40-50 years to see it. I suspect we are still paying for that, however. Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 9:10 AM Mark ,I see your point, but years ago didn't the RR's cut back on funds on Maintence to cut back on spending? Reply Edit 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by Allen Jenkins Gee. Grr. Or GE? It' cool, wondering, what is done wrong, when no one considers the HUGE lobby, about single ridership automobiles. What killed the railroads passenger service? Not the roads built aside the tracks, it was the automotive industry, along with the airlines. If traffic is reduced, then capital expenditures are disciplined. For example, build a six-axle 3000 hp engine, put it on sub-standard mainline, watch it turn-over, and blame the builder. So...who said the road, stripped of the responsibility of passenger service, can afford to provide a cost overload service, with quality in mind? No one said, freight should take any priority over passenger, it's just that a no-return advantage, arostocracy at it's finest, took over mass transit. An example, is to promote to intra, or interstate transport, and kill the E-Series, and city bus. Too bad that corporate schemes, have complicated the future of our children. A plague upon our ignorance. acj.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Allen Jenkins Gee. Grr. Or GE? It' cool, wondering, what is done wrong, when no one considers the HUGE lobby, about single ridership automobiles. What killed the railroads passenger service? Not the roads built aside the tracks, it was the automotive industry, along with the airlines. If traffic is reduced, then capital expenditures are disciplined. For example, build a six-axle 3000 hp engine, put it on sub-standard mainline, watch it turn-over, and blame the builder. So...who said the road, stripped of the responsibility of passenger service, can afford to provide a cost overload service, with quality in mind? No one said, freight should take any priority over passenger, it's just that a no-return advantage, arostocracy at it's finest, took over mass transit. An example, is to promote to intra, or interstate transport, and kill the E-Series, and city bus. Too bad that corporate schemes, have complicated the future of our children. A plague upon our ignorance. acj.
QUOTE: Originally posted by WearyErie Interesting writeups. FWIW, back in the 1960's when I was first learning to spike ties in the Croxton Yards, I happened to break a hammer handle. My foreman gave me his insight into railroad maintenance economics. Coupled with a lot of blue language, I learned that the $2 spent to buy a new handle came directly out of the shareholders pockets. He told me that I should have much more respect for the shareholders. Be that as it may, I am to this day amazed at his ability to level track by eye and layout switches with a piece of chalk. He has my deep respect. [] I am always impressed by someone who uses their God-given talents and creates a masterpiece of their work. I can't even draw a straight line. Joe Sapwater Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, October 30, 2004 5:56 PM Interesting writeups. FWIW, back in the 1960's when I was first learning to spike ties in the Croxton Yards, I happened to break a hammer handle. My foreman gave me his insight into railroad maintenance economics. Coupled with a lot of blue language, I learned that the $2 spent to buy a new handle came directly out of the shareholders pockets. He told me that I should have much more respect for the shareholders. Be that as it may, I am to this day amazed at his ability to level track by eye and layout switches with a piece of chalk. He has my deep respect. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, October 30, 2004 4:34 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill No. They increased spending. Here's some numbers (AAR): Capital investment in roadway and structures in millions of dollars: 1985 3.5, 1990 2.6, 1995 3.7, 2001 4.4 (accounting rules were changed in 1985 so numbers from before that date are not strictly comparable). And some results (AAR): Train accidents per million train-miles: 1980 11.43; 1990 4.73; 2001 4.22 Injuries and illnesses per 100 full-time employees: 1980 11.1, 1990 7.6, 2001 3.3 Are these numbers strictly comparable? No, they never are. Lines and services extant in 1980 aren't extant now, and many of those lines and services of the past were patently less safe or more prone to accident or derailment. The monetary figures aren't adjusted for inflation, productivity increases, or where it's being spent. I'm curious. Mark states the capital expenditures in terms of total expenditure per year for 1985, 1990,1995, and 2001, but states accidents as accidents per million train-miles. What is the figure for capital expenditures on a per million train mile basis? Reply Edit Allen Jenkins Member sinceOctober 2003 From: United States of America, Tennessee, Cookeville 408 posts Posted by Allen Jenkins on Saturday, October 30, 2004 3:02 PM Gee. Grr. Or GE? It' cool, wondering, what is done wrong, when no one considers the HUGE lobby, about single ridership automobiles. What killed the railroads passenger service? Not the roads built aside the tracks, it was the automotive industry, along with the airlines. If traffic is reduced, then capital expenditures are disciplined. For example, build a six-axle 3000 hp engine, put it on sub-standard mainline, watch it turn-over, and blame the builder. So...who said the road, stripped of the responsibility of passenger service, can afford to provide a cost overload service, with quality in mind? No one said, freight should take any priority over passenger, it's just that a no-return advantage, arostocracy at it's finest, took over mass transit. An example, is to promote to intra, or interstate transport, and kill the E-Series, and city bus. Too bad that corporate schemes, have complicated the future of our children. A plague upon our ignorance. acj. Allen/Backyard Reply joesap1 Member sinceNovember 2003 From: Tulsa, OK 140 posts Posted by joesap1 on Thursday, October 28, 2004 10:29 PM It seems we have strayed from the original discussion of the raltionship of the roadbeds to derailing accidents. Does this mean we have sufficiently expounded on this subject? I have learned that although the Amtrak ride is anything but smooth, the condition of the roadbeds is not a primary cause of derailments. There are many other factors which have been previously discussed. Does any one care to add some words in summation? Joe Sapwater Reply SALfan Member sinceApril 2002 From: Northern Florida 1,429 posts Posted by SALfan on Thursday, October 28, 2004 11:03 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe F_N_B, If you read this, I really hope you continue to respond to articles. It is people like you that keep me checking this forum despite certain "pawns" that detract from its value. Gabe AMEN!! We need more people who can give us the benefit of their experience. Reply SALfan Member sinceApril 2002 From: Northern Florida 1,429 posts Posted by SALfan on Thursday, October 28, 2004 10:59 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill Then you'll be leaving? We should be so lucky. This guy is too ignorant to realize his ignorance. Reply dehusman Member sinceSeptember 2003 From: Omaha, NE 10,621 posts Posted by dehusman on Thursday, October 28, 2004 8:51 AM Chessking : You might not realize it, but statements like your comment : "Remember kids, our lives are as ants to the railroad upitys." might be found personally insulting to people who actually work for a railroad, are concerned, dedicated managers and don't particularly like being being called "upitys". When you said that, YOU fired the first shot across the bow. Why are you supprised when somebody returned fire? Dave H. Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com Reply gabe Member sinceMarch 2004 From: Indianapolis, Indiana 2,434 posts Posted by gabe on Thursday, October 28, 2004 8:46 AM F_N_B, If you read this, I really hope you continue to respond to articles. It is people like you that keep me checking this forum despite certain "pawns" that detract from its value. Gabe Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, October 28, 2004 12:54 AM PNWRNM, I understand where you're coming from, however, the term "railroad" is infact a road with rails. Have all the living, breathing people you can imagine, but if you have no ties, rails, tie plates, spikes, etc, come together, all you have are the people. If you use the word "railroad" to include more than just the inamimate object iteslf is to generalize the term. People who work for the railroad are not known as "railroads", rather "railroad employees". By the way, isn't Amtrak always in the sink hole when it comes to annual revenue? There is a shortline here in upstate NY attempting to get privatized passenger service to run from Rochester to Niagara Falls. No Amtrak, Yay! But the major problem is getting 12.7 miles of track put back in to once again connect the shortline with Rochester. That's a lot of money ... plus inspection of bridges, reinstalling grade crossings, crossbuck signals, you name it. But there are a few proposals in the works with GVT and Monroe County Transportation Authority. Reply Edit PNWRMNM Member sinceMay 2003 From: US 2,593 posts Posted by PNWRMNM on Thursday, October 28, 2004 12:38 AM Chess The railroad is NOT an inanimate object. It is about 200,000 thinking, living, breathing people. I for one am happy you won't ride. Spread the word! Getting rid of Amtrak would be a great blessing. Mac Reply joesap1 Member sinceNovember 2003 From: Tulsa, OK 140 posts Posted by joesap1 on Thursday, October 28, 2004 12:23 AM Well!! Thank you very much Mark Hemphill, Mudchicken, Ed, etc for your infromative and stimulating responses. My question about the roadbeds , ties, and rails brought much discussion. I learned a whole lot. I never really questioned the railroads desire to make money. It must or or it will die. God forbid! I really enjoyed the comments from the anonymous ex-engineering person. He was very good at putting it into perspective. The report that railroads are safer today and that derailing accidents are decreasing is good news. I just hate reading about derailments on the TRAINS newswire every week. As an ex-safety engineer I know that all accidents are made up of a series of circumstances that come together at the wrong time. Therefore, we can not eliminate derailments with any magical formula. This forum is fun, educational, and the experiences shared by all involved are priceless. So keep those cards and letters cooming. My real name is Bruce, by the way. I am just a sap at heart. Joe Sapwater Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, October 28, 2004 12:21 AM M.W. I'm on the same side of the street with you on this, all except for trying to 'encourage them' as you so stated. I will not kiss their *** to get information (not saying you are so don't take this the wrong way) and although I'm willing to accept their views, railroad facts, etc ... what's unacceptable are any personal attacks upon me. I will never ever feel humbled and actually couldn't care less if the likes of FNB or jeaton ever replied to any of my questions. There are plenty of others here who could answer any questions I have. I'm here eager to learn and provide any input, however good, bad, or indifferent, just like the next railroad enthusiast. I'm not here to be someone's punching bag. Reply Edit shrek623 Member sinceJune 2004 From: North central Illinois 120 posts Posted by shrek623 on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 11:52 PM Chessking, I think what was being disagreed with regarding your comments was the generally simplistic way you generalized the railroads as a whole. Yes railroads are inanimate and made with steel, wood, etc.., but there are thousands of people who work on and or maintain those inanimate objects also. That is in where I think you are wrong. The men and women working on ALL of the railroads try their darndest to avoid derailments. Derailments do not help ANYONE!!! Railroads and their employees are not intentionally avoiding maintenance because they don't think it is needed. The railroads spend what they can afford on maintenance and still be able to run a viable business. The most important thing to remember is businesses are ultimatly run by the SHAREHOLDERS, and NO trains will run if everything goes into maintaining and nothing else. I think your comments were berating not just the railroads but the employees also. I'm not trying to pick a fight on this subject, and by no means am I trying to insult you, I'm just expressing my opinion after reading the post. If I'm wrong, so be it. Shrek Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 11:44 PM No M.W. You have too much that I want to learn. I actually consider you to be one of the better members here. I could learn a lot from you and I never signed up so I could come here to fight. That wasn't my objective. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 11:18 PM Ok, kid gloves off. No more worrying about rocking the boat for this guy. There is a real problem with people who attack me personally when I never attacked them personally. I said something about an inaminate object (a railroad) where big machinery runs on top of rails, back and fourth, and back and fourth ... you get the idea. Now comes along FNB (AKA Mr. Wonderful), because I attacked his precious inaminate object of wood and steel (oh and lots of stones), big trains and upitys up high and he must be in with the likes of mob mentality to be defending them so dearly. He defends the railroad and powers that be and treats it as if it were his wife. That's sick!!! What's the deal dude?? It gets to be that nobody can submit their opinions and feelings without having to be ok'd by the railroad intellects here. "Gotta stick to the "truth" and only the truth, and if you don't know the truth, well then you're just simply inferior to all us great railroaders! Whaaah" Well no wonder the number of members is so low. Then there's the thing with tag teaming (like jeaton). All jeaton wants to do is tag team with his buddy here and stir up more contentious remarks. Oh man! I thought only AOL and Yahoo forums did that stuff. So let me get this all summed up: We have a forum with retirees, good, bad, and a few cantankerous railroad employees (some here), wannabe employees, college and high school level students, and it's all wrapped up tightly in a little locomotive chuggin' along "TOOT TOOT" at pre-school speed. I thought the forum here was going to be a good one. I was mistaken. Reply Edit jeaton Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: Rockton, IL 4,821 posts Posted by jeaton on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 10:45 PM Wow. That is soooo profound. "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 10:38 PM Moving on. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 10:34 PM Responses like Mr. Chessking's are precisely why I don't post to this forum. While it's true that, in a capitalist society, money is important, I don't think that's grounds for the vitriolic rhetoric he has employed. Based on my experience in railroad engineering, as one of the folks Chessking derides, I can provide a great deal of evidence to refute his claim about the "upitys" [sic]; but he provides only anecdotal evidence to support his claim. And, I don't trust the source of his anecdotes. I will say that there appear to be many well-informed individuals here. You know who you are. There also appear to be quite a few people intersted in actually learning something. Maybe I'll try again in a while. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 9:30 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by chessking QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill Now it's possible that CSX started from farther behind, but the claim is that the railroad was getting worse. I couldn't see the statistics supporting that claim. No evidence, no story. CSX and NS inherited well maintained Conrail trackage. I haven't heard of many incidents occurring during Conrail's heydays. Now if you could, verse their statistics with CSX and NS (to date). Whatever happened afterwards with the degradation of these lines was the result of the corporations. Ok, I will no longer blame the small numbers of track crews, signal men, etc, any longer. Does it need to be in caps for you to see?? I don't get it. First of all, what is it that we don't see that needs to be in caps? Gabe I'm so glad you asked gabe. Here it is: CAPTIALISM RULES! Remember kids, our lives are as pissants to the railroad upitys. I refuse to ride as passenger on their stupid tracks! I wouldn't even hobo it. Reply Edit jchnhtfd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: US 1,537 posts Posted by jchnhtfd on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 11:23 AM Thanks, mudchicken, F_N_B, Mark, dd... I just spent a few moments going through the NTSB (and previous equivalents) and Canadian Transportation Safety Board stats and reports for years gone by. It makes interesting, if somewhat repetitive, reading. There is no question when you do that that reportable accidents/incidents attributable to track conditions are declining. No question at all. Yes, the old section gangs are gone -- but in their place there are a number of newer or improved technologies which, while not perfect, are pretty good. And there are a lot of dedicated railroaders out there -- from the top down, for most companies -- who still believe, and still work that safety comes first. dd also has a good point -- there are some places you just can't fix under present condtions. I would add, though, a comment on ride quality (which is part of where this all started!): this is a very qualitative thing. However, it is dependent on a lot more than visible track conditions. As Mudchicken notes, surfacing makes a terrific difference, particularly at certain speeds. Another factor, however, is the nature of what you are riding in: in the bad old days, you were, if you were on a first class train, riding in a Pullman or equivalent streamline or heavyweight car. Note that the older streamline cars were 'lightweight' in name only -- these were big, heavy puppys, make no mistake! And they rode on four or six axle trucks with remarkably long spring travel and a variety of dampers. Since the car itself was very heavy (try 80 tons and up) and the live load was so small (say 50 people), the trucks and springing could be really optimised -- and one could get a lovely smooth ride over some pretty g_d awful track. Not so today: a Superliner is big, but it isn't heavy, and its centre of gravity is high; there is no way it will ride as well. Viewliners and all are much lighter than their predecessors. This has to be taken into account when assessing ride quality. As to jointed vs. CW rail -- there is no particular reason why you can't run as fast on one as on the other. If they are equally well surfaced and built, the only difference from the ride standpoint is the clickety clack. From the maintenance standpoint there is a big difference, which is one reason why CWR is so popular. Jamie Reply dldance Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Near Promentory UT 1,590 posts Posted by dldance on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 10:38 AM One observation from an innocent bystander: The roadbed work that most Class 1's I watch is far superior to that which it is replacing. The railroads are investing in reducing future maintenance costs as well as eliminating operational problems - thus we should see lower costs but better operational performance. I think that Mark's numbers are pointing this out. Second - as the Class 1's upgrade, used ribbon rail is now becoming available. Earlier this fall, I hiked into the site of a spring derailment on an unnamed Class 2 in Texas. Most of the ties were kindling wood, but the rail had been relaid with used ribbon rail and reballested with crushed granite. New ties can be worked into that site later. This was an impressive rebuild job for a Class 2. Third, there are specific locations on all railroads that are almost impossible to improve over present conditions. The (compass) eastbound approach to the Colorado River bridge in Columbus TX is a good example. Right in the middle of the main line between Houston and San Antonio is a 100 foot section of track that shows strong evidence of pumping. However, there are residences within 50 feet on each side (North and South), a city street crossing to the West and a cliff to the East. Short of buying out the residences, closing a street grade crossing and putting in proper drainage -- all the UP can do is throw ballast and slow orders at the problem. dd Reply gabe Member sinceMarch 2004 From: Indianapolis, Indiana 2,434 posts Posted by gabe on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 10:22 AM I don't want to change the overall trend in this conversation, but this got me wondering. Is there any difference between the ability to run trains at high speed on ribon rail as opposed to jointed rail? I remember reading a post in a string referring to the fact that Germans run their freight trains at 90mph. Someone said something to the effect that jointed rail changed the equation, something about the small amount of give in each rail being helpful. I meant to ask about this earlier, but never got around to it. Gabe Reply mudchicken Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Denver / La Junta 10,820 posts Posted by mudchicken on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 9:58 AM Mark: Thanks for trying. (Sometimes you teach and they actually listen. Other times emotion gets in the way and ruins a good lesson...)They may never "get it" or understand the difference between FRA Class 4 and Class 5 track in 49CFR213. The comment about running a maximum of 55 mph is flawed (Fuel conservation maybe, track condition most likely not) If that was still SP instead of UP, there would be slow orders deluxe because SP was broke. UP has thrown bucketloads of cash at the problems on the former SP and will continue to do so just to get their heads above water for years of deferred maintenance by SP).... The comment about MetroLink is an uninformed one. If freight railroads had the maintenance budget they have had lately, things would be different. [ If the current regime at MetroLink/SCRRA was not there including a well known TRAINS contributor (and ex SP Division Engineer, a really good one), the freight railroaders would be tagging them with their old nickname which was "MetroJoke"...] It isn't only ties and rail, ever understand the concept of surfacing? Somebody needs to understand also what rail corrugation is and what increased heavy tonnage does to the rail, ties and roadbed. Track modulus anyone? BNSF still runs AMTRAK at 90 mph on 132# jointed rail (until the ATS inductors go away) here in Southern Colorado (saw this yesterday at Coolidge, KS/Holly, CO)... Joesap1 and railman might want to try learning instead of making baseless comments. (or go back into the corner and look at the pretty pictures) Mudchicken (One annoyed/ dismayed trackman) [banghead][banghead][banghead] Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west Reply tree68 Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Northern New York 25,018 posts Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 9:48 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Mark ,I see your point, but years ago didn't the RR's cut back on funds on Maintence to cut back on spending? Can't dispute Mark's numbers, but IIRC, that is absolutely true - although you have to go back 40-50 years to see it. I suspect we are still paying for that, however. Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it... Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 9:10 AM Mark ,I see your point, but years ago didn't the RR's cut back on funds on Maintence to cut back on spending? Reply Edit 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Be that as it may, I am to this day amazed at his ability to level track by eye and layout switches with a piece of chalk. He has my deep respect.
QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill No. They increased spending. Here's some numbers (AAR): Capital investment in roadway and structures in millions of dollars: 1985 3.5, 1990 2.6, 1995 3.7, 2001 4.4 (accounting rules were changed in 1985 so numbers from before that date are not strictly comparable). And some results (AAR): Train accidents per million train-miles: 1980 11.43; 1990 4.73; 2001 4.22 Injuries and illnesses per 100 full-time employees: 1980 11.1, 1990 7.6, 2001 3.3 Are these numbers strictly comparable? No, they never are. Lines and services extant in 1980 aren't extant now, and many of those lines and services of the past were patently less safe or more prone to accident or derailment. The monetary figures aren't adjusted for inflation, productivity increases, or where it's being spent.
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe F_N_B, If you read this, I really hope you continue to respond to articles. It is people like you that keep me checking this forum despite certain "pawns" that detract from its value. Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill Then you'll be leaving?
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by chessking QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill Now it's possible that CSX started from farther behind, but the claim is that the railroad was getting worse. I couldn't see the statistics supporting that claim. No evidence, no story. CSX and NS inherited well maintained Conrail trackage. I haven't heard of many incidents occurring during Conrail's heydays. Now if you could, verse their statistics with CSX and NS (to date). Whatever happened afterwards with the degradation of these lines was the result of the corporations. Ok, I will no longer blame the small numbers of track crews, signal men, etc, any longer. Does it need to be in caps for you to see?? I don't get it. First of all, what is it that we don't see that needs to be in caps? Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by chessking QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill Now it's possible that CSX started from farther behind, but the claim is that the railroad was getting worse. I couldn't see the statistics supporting that claim. No evidence, no story. CSX and NS inherited well maintained Conrail trackage. I haven't heard of many incidents occurring during Conrail's heydays. Now if you could, verse their statistics with CSX and NS (to date). Whatever happened afterwards with the degradation of these lines was the result of the corporations. Ok, I will no longer blame the small numbers of track crews, signal men, etc, any longer. Does it need to be in caps for you to see??
QUOTE: Originally posted by M.W. Hemphill Now it's possible that CSX started from farther behind, but the claim is that the railroad was getting worse. I couldn't see the statistics supporting that claim. No evidence, no story.
QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Mark ,I see your point, but years ago didn't the RR's cut back on funds on Maintence to cut back on spending?
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.