23 17 46 11
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
"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
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...
USAF TSgt C-17 Aircraft Maintenance Flying Crew Chief & Flightline Avionics Craftsman
QUOTE: Originally posted by adrianspeeder Whats open access? Adrianspeeder
QUOTE: Originally posted by ValleyX Sometimes, I can't start on a thread because I know that I'll think it so outlandi***hat I'll not be able to read it without some sort of passion rising up. That's sort of where I'd stand with OA, would foresee many potential disasters with it. As for what should be done, when you run out of room in your mattress, there's always going out and buying a brand new shovel to use under cover of darkness to bury your money. Perhaps a supply of flashlight batteries would be in order, too.
QUOTE: Originally posted by tree68 You know, I'm not really for or against OA, although I think I see some merits to the idea. You ask why the Class 1's haven't embraced the idea - I submit that we've covered most of those reasons in our discussions. Biggest of all is that it is one big unknown. It represents such a huge shift from how business is done now that no one wants to consider it.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Mark_W._Hemphill Murph: A short explanation of open access vs. the franchise model vs. government ownership.
QUOTE: Originally posted by RLHainey jeaton: Is that THE SKY IS FALLING or THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
QUOTE: Originally posted by Mark_W._Hemphill Murph: A short explanation of open access vs. the franchise model vs. government ownership, and then I'll make way for the ideologues. The preponderance of privately owned railways worldwide are constructed and operated on the franchise model. This is so because the technology of railways is unique and dissimilar to other transportation modes and militates against open access. In very broad terms, oceans, highways, electrical transmission lines, trunk pipelines, trunk fiber-optic lines, and airways are typically open access; privately owned railways are franchise model; and ports, airports, truck terminals, terminal telecommunication lines, and terminal pipelines vary from open access to closed access to something in the middle. The very largest airports and ports essentially are operating on the franchise model because they're capacity constrained, which means that the open access of the ocean and airways is greatly diminished for carriers that want to go to the most important places. In the very beginning, when railways were invented in England, it was realized by all parties that the technology required a unique enabling and implementation law to obtain a suitable right-of-way at a low enough cost to encourage this industry to construct lines, because this industry had so much potential to increase the general wealth and welfare. Most business enterprises -- farms, factories, stores -- require no special assistance with obtaining property because their properties are compact, bounded, and have very large flexibility of location. These business enterprises could simply go into the market and buy whatever they needed, and whether a dry-goods store was on the left side of the road or the right, or in this block or the next, was immaterial from a technological perspective and reflected true values of the market place (the storekeeper paid for the location with the best foot traffic, the farmer for the most fertile soil). Railways, on the other hand, require a location specified by their technology that is contiguous, narrow, and without excessive grades and curvatures. It can't turn right angles around a high-priced holdout, nor climb up a cliff to avoid a village, nor -- most of all -- be discontiguous. If railways were left to fend for themselves in the free market for land acquisition, it was recognized that some (if not most) property sellers along the proposed railway would advantage themselves of the railway's technical requirements for a right of way and charge such high prices that the railway would never be executed. Thus, Britain passed laws enabling railways to apply for a government franchise to build a line, and, provided that the government agreed that the line held the promise to increase the public wealth and welfare, and the company appeared to have the capital and managerial resources to complete the contemplated line, the franchise was granted. This franchise transferred the power of eminent domain to railways to enable them to purchase the appropriate property for their right-of-way based *not* on the value of the property to the railway (which is essentially infinite for the last inch to complete a line!) but on its pre-existing value as farmland, village housing, etc. Furthermore, the government recognized that the immense capital investment of railways, the capability of even a single line to soak up all of the freight and passenger business offered in a geographic vicinity, and the government's desire to increase the public wealth, militated against the granting of parallel franchises. Usually, a franchise meant exclusive rights. The British government of course recognized that the granting of such a franchise could lead to abuses of rates and service, and originally it imagined that railways could operate like toll roads (which had been granted franchises and eminent domain powers). But the technology of railways made that notion impractical. Whereas the technology and institutional skills to operate a horse and wagon -- and not collide too often with other wagons -- was available to any individual, railway technology was far too sophisticated and demanding for the toll road model to work. Moreover, because a railway is bounded whereas a road is not, railways require a traffic control system to keep trains from colliding with each other and to set rank and order. The British franchise model was emulated in most countries. Later, many countries nationalized their systems, not so much in response to private entreprenuers abuse of the franchise model but because (1) the governments believed such an important element of their economy and national interest should be under their direct control and not businessmen (who might be foreign), and (2) many countries were not sufficiently politically stable for private entrepreneurs to adequately undertake the immense risk of capital necessary to build, equip, and operate railways in the first place. The U.S. never had the latter problem, but instituted regulation of rates and service in order to advance the public interest. Open access essentially means that any service provider with the necessary equipment, qualifications, and capital can enter the transportation medium and provide service, constrained only by the free market. However, the technological requirements that killed the toll-road notion 200 years ago haven't gone away: because railways are bounded and require traffic control to function, some method must be implemented to provide rank and order to the service providers so they don't collide with each other or reach impasses. How to provide that rank and order, to charge service providers for their use of the infrastructure, to ensure that the public welfare and wealth are advanced, and even to transition from the current model to the new model remain complex problems. The technology available to humans at any given time rarely matches up perfectly with the desires of humans.
QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton Ed Since CSX opted for CSX instead of the name originally proposed by then CEO Hays Watkins, First American Railroad Transportation Service is still available. "We go with the wind." Jay
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.