QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe Thanks for the clarification. My limited knowledge coupled with the fact that I am posting this information while doing other stuff causes some errors. Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe I initially didn't give a thorough description of the symposium out of the fear that my relatively limited rail knowledge would preclude me from catching some of the nuisances that make up Mark's position and unintentionally misrepresent Mark's position. But, it was a quality symposium and the forum deserves at least my attempt. So, here are the top 10 things I found most interesting at the symposium: (1) The Rock Island's old Memphis line (Sorry I don't know both ends of the line or the official name of the line) is still intact but getting it to the point it could run trains over it would be very difficult. However, BNSF REALLY wishes it had bought and maintained that line when it had the opportunity and they would not have to sink so much money into it. I found this particularly interesting, because SF bought the TPW in the 80s when they had a chance to get the Rock Island's Memphis line. I wish I had enough money (or confident investors) to start a short line over the old Rock Island Memphis line. It sounds as though BNSF would be interested in buying it if you were able to bring it to a certain point of development. (2) Mark's slides were nothing short of outstanding. They focused primarily on the Rio Grande (which I have always found a very photogenic railway). The night picture of a UP train going over the Salt Lake at night (giving the impression that it was rolling on water due to the subsidence of the ballast) was absolutely breathtaking. (3) Mark discussed a lot of things about Rio Grande's branch lines (sorry hard to sum this up). (4) One of the major thesis of Mark's presentation was that we (railroaders and the nation) are sitting on a legacy--if no railroads existed today, we could not afford to just build them. As this legacy ages and eventually has to be replaced there are going to be some major problems. (5) The other half of Mark's major thesis is that we have to determine what we want our rail system to be: a utility or a profit-making venture. As the rail legacy ages and is in need of replacement, this question will become more important, because we can't have both. (6) A lot of short line railroads exist with the idea that they are not trying to maintain the lines. The short line is just going to run trains on the line until the line breaks down, pulling as much money out of it as they can, and then abandon the line for scrap value. (7) The 186,000lbs car is going to cause a great deal of abandonment in the near future. (8) That the average Trains' reader is 70 years old = Gabe's age x 2.421. (9) A lot of the actual interactive discussion centered on high-speed rail. I am going to post something on this soon. (10) Santa Fe's sidings on double track main lines are being redesigned in a really cool way. Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by mloik QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe (8) That the average Trains' reader is 70 years old Gabe, Thanks for the summary. Wish I could have been there. As for point #8, what is the standard error on that average? I can't imagine that it's a normal distribution. Perhaps Mr. Hemphill will weigh in... Michael
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe (8) That the average Trains' reader is 70 years old
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe At the risk of being labeled "head sycophant," I just thought I would let the rest of you know that the symposium was great and I wish I could have met more of you there. Mark's lecture and slide show really expanded my knowledge--most interestingly with regard to short line railways and the likelihood of the continued existence of the routes they operate. Gabe
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.