Ideas on railroad re-building

[LehighValleyman]

Maybe NS could use a part of LVs old main as a back up route, incase of a wreck on theri main to buffalo, or, congested traffic, which ever of the 2







Stay Safe and Long Live the LV...

Sean

[LehighValleyman]

QUOTE: Originally posted by LVJJJ

modelcar, since it sounds like you would not be opposed to re-opening the r/w that you ride on, I am not referring to you. It's true that the rails-to-trails movement has preserved many rr-rights-of-way (during my tenure as a planner, helped preserve railtrails here in NW Washington), however many of those who support the trails will allow re-opening the rails only over their dead bodies (I hope they'll make good ballast). I'm not a casual observer of government regulations & environmental extremists, as I worked for Whatcom County Planning for over 20 years as a zoning and subdivision administrator ('73 to '00). I sadly watched as the art of compromise (regarding planning and zoning) disappeared in a cloud of environmental extremism. The hypocracy of the environmental elite who promote the green agenda while tooling around in their SUV's, drives me nuts, cause I was in the middle of the fight for over 2 decades and I hate dishonesty. Now I am a consultant for the overburdened, tax-paying, land owner who finds his property held hostage because the greenies (i.e. anti-capitalists who are heavily invested in the stock market) have been able to win over the legislatures and courts. Hopefully, since we are both on the Trains website, we are still on the same page. Larry in Blaine.

You can say that again, the rails and trails thing hasn't done a darn thing in my area, on the old Lehigh Valley Naples branch, besides some work near standley and naples, the rest of the line, all crappy and covered with trees and weeds and deterioating bridges.

[tormadel]

Thanks Mud. That article I read was a couple years old. Sad to hear that the founder was forced out, I always hate to hear about that. Just have to stick with the rule of thumb always keep 51% of you're baby's stock.

[nobullchitbids]

Just got back from CT (been away for a week and a half) -- boy, did I have a lot of catch-up reading to do!

I misspoke myself earlier -- obviously, at least one Kanawha was kept or there could not have been one at the zoo, and I am glad to hear from Mr. Boyer that another might even see service again someday. What I meant was that no Kanawhas were kept serviceable -- why the steam special had to use the 759.

I understand something happened to the S-3. Anyone know about this?

As for the invitation to travel north again, unfortunately, it's a long way from Naples, FL, to Indiana (unless you have some UP stuff?). Since I teach U.S. history, maybe I could get some photos or literature or something?

[mudchicken]

QUOTE: Originally posted by tormadel

And the Rock Island between St Louis and Kansas city is still there. I read a CRIP historical society article about it last year. I forget who the owner was but he was sued and won against many local and state agencies in MO that had illegally removed bridges and overpasses, paved over crossings. Also against private citizens who had taken it upon themselves to push rails into the ditch in suburban KC where it ran through they're back yards. The line had never been officially abandoned just not in use for years so they had had no right to do these things. And supposedly these state agencies were being required to replace all these structures and crossings at no cost to the railroad. I don't know if it has been finished of if the shortline had run any trains over the whole length yet.

Um, tormadel, that was my client and he no longer owns the railroad. AMEREN now owns it after they leveraged their way into control (money talks). The rest of it will remain in its present sad state (run under contract by the INRD people) and be used as a bargaining chip by AMEREN for its powerplant at Labadie (UP vs BNSF)...The prevous owner had solid plans, but hurt for financing - he would dearly love to get his project back under his control. I know the line all too well. Mookie thinks highly of that former owner, she got to run an Alco C420 under his guidance.

[tormadel]

Also somewhere I heard Missouri Central had gone under but I haven't heard the story for what happened. Does anyone have the skinny on that?

[tormadel]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates

QUOTE: Originally posted by FJ and G

The Anti Gates

A).. Depends on your definition of "public good." Years, decades, actually a century or more (most likely) when the land was used for the railroad, it was deemed in the public's interest. Most of the original landowners have been dead for a long long time.

B)...To make use of the RR now for the linear space reasons I listed, would, of course depend on how one values the land for the public's good.

A) well, many farms are family businesses, so you are actually pitting the interests of the Farm business which exists now, versus the interest of some short line that may or may not ever materialize. Seems like a "bird in the hand" type consideration to me.

B) "public's good"...ha ha , you are a funny man. If such an operation were to materialize, it would probably be privately held, expect huge taxpayer subsidies and property tax abatement, and benefir only a couple weathy line side business operators (grain elevators etc) with the taxpayer helping to get that rich dude's corn to market cheaply. with some hollow promise that (ahem) "Someday this line might attract industry and create jobs" (/ahem)

"Preservation" has become quite the racket for some con artists.

Hey, I'm not saying I am "anti biketrails".....nor am I "anti railbank".....both strategies have their place.

But I don't think that a farmer reclaiming land that is going to waste automatically makes him the bad guy, either. After all the STB must have not seen any serious "greater common good" issues when deciding to allow the abandonment in the first place, or they would have had to reckon with it then,....right.

What I can say is that if I were such a farmer (as mentioned above) and had a buncha big dreaming nostalgists trying to block my real use of said land citing "greater common good" pipe dreams... only 2 words come to mind that describe how I would feel... TARGET PRACTICE... [:D]

There are still private family farmers? For years I've heard how life is hell for the small farmer. Not enough market share, astronomical costs etc etc. Now I don't profess to be an expert but I was given to believe that the corperate farms were what was surviving. And for years I've heard about over production. The US produces (or did) far more field crops then we can use. So corperate minded large farms would more likely take say a rented easement with money they can count on then crops that may rot for lack of a buyer.

[Anonymous]

The Sheldon to Rapid City line would provide an alternate route for PRB coal from the Dm&E extention to Chicago and the Mississippi River. You would have to rebuild the Sheldon to Canton SD row and rails. then use tracage rights on BNSF to Mitchel SD. Then buy the Dakota Southern from Mitchel, west to Kadoka. Then rebuild the track west to the DM&Es new line southwest to Wyoming.

The coal traffic would pay for and extention to Rapid City, Then, you build From Colony northwest into Montana to the MRL. Use trackage rights on MRL,BNSF to set up a Pacific Northwest-Chicago intomodal lane that Bypasses all major cities. Four Billion dollars later you would have a great railroad line.

I'm 34yrs old and remember Cabooses on the ends of trains. I grew up along the MILW in northewst Iowa, on the Mason city to Sheldon line.

Go IC&E/DM&E.

[Anonymous]

What may be lost in all this is that some of those abandoned railroad ROW's (or at least sections of them) may not have in this day and age the necessary alignment/placement to optimize thier usefulness. The alignment of railroads built back in the days of 40 ton freight cars and slogging Mallets may not be suited to mile long 10,000+ tons being moved by DPU's, 20'2 height autoracks, or time sensitive TOFC consists.

Take the oft-mentioned Milwaukee PCE since that is the one abandoned ROW I am most familiar with. It is true that much of the alignment has wide sweeping curvatures and minimal grades with tunnel clearances suited for doublestacks and autoracks, but as has also been pointed out by Milwaukee detractors there are areas of grades reaching 2.2% with reverse curves, and when templated with current MRL/BNSF lines would actually result in unnecessary mileage if contemplated as a stand-alone rebuild. There may be long sections with deep cuts and tunnels that prevent the effective use of remote control technology for DPU's. Then of course there are the sections that have been built over with development, where bridges and trestles have been taken out, etc.

What you need to envision when considering a ROW rebuild is how that left over alignment fits into the dual need for (1) easy grades and reduced superelevation for HAL consists and (2) more direct higher speed corridors (which can probably handle steeper grades up to 3% but which would need more generous arc of the curvature with more superelevation).

Then, are you going to run your own closed access railroad, lease out your line to a current operator as sole operator, or open your line to all comers aka TTX/open access?

Therefore, if I was going to rebuild as much of the PCE as possible:

1. If predicated for HAL (grain trains, coal trains, etc), I would need to realign around the steeper westbound grades such as the Saddle Mountain crossing and Homestake Pass (with thier 2.2% and 1.9% westbound grades respectively), and probably go with a new lower elevation tunnel via the original survey through the Bitterroots to eliminate the 1.7% westbound, e.g. keep all westbound grades around 1%. The 1.4% near Martinsdale and the 1.7% from St Maries to Plummer I could live with. The expensive reaquisition of ROW to the Ports of Seattle and Tacoma could be a problem, but more pressing is how to connect with the Lower Columbia River ports since that is where most export grain is headed. Remember, Milwaukee was granted trackage rights over BN to Portland, now that would be nearly impossible to revive. One way around that is to find rail access to one of the Columbia/Snake River barge ports in the eastern part of the PNW.

2. If predicated on higher speed COFC/TOFC, then the grades up the Saddle Mountains and Continental Divide are not that paramount, but the need for curvature to keep the grades around 2% back then may be superfluous. Therefore, I could then consider a more direct shorter steeper grade up those hills and reduce some mileage in the process. Ideally, it would make sense to work with MRL/BNSF on a trackage rights deal over Mullan Pass, with a new 3% fly by betweeen the East Portal and Helena (as opposed to MRL's current 2.2% with reverse curves). The same could be done for St. Paul Pass, e.g. keeping the current tunnel for re-use as a rail tunnel (sorry, mountain bikers!), but then head straight down to Avery via a 3% rather than re-utilizing the entire 1.7% original grade with it's horseshoe curve 5 miles to the east.

3. If wanting to handle all types of trains to maximize usage, then I may have to encompass both strategies, e.g. build longer reduced grade tracks for HAL consists and also build new steeper grade fly by's for TOFC. In this instance, I'm not using the original 2.2%/1/9%/1/7% westbound grades at all, instead going with dual 1%/3% redundant trackage over these portions.

Well, that's just one example of what would need to be considered for a re-build of an abandoned railroad corridor. Some of that Eastern US trackage may not have that type of a dilema e.g. mile long heavy tonnage trains vs higher speed trains, because the relative lack of mountainous territory and subsequent lower grades and easier curves would allow more dual participation of diametrically opposed operating philosophy's.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by wrwatkins

For NKPgator.
I disagree with you that light rail is like cussing. Having spent 7 years on the board of directors of a large transit agency I have an insight to light rail vs heavy (freight and conventional passenger) rail. The railroads will not give up their ROW just because a transit agency wants to tear it up for light rail. After all the BNSF, UP, and others are in business to move freight and need their tracks to operate. What we bought was under utilized or out of service lines going to the center of a town. The metrics of rail service has changed in the last 100 years. No longer is there a rail line up every alley in metropolitan areas to serve warehouses, factories, etc. These have moved to the suburbs and most of the terminal railways have greatly diminished in size (length, not width). What remains is the lines of several independant rail lines that went to down town areas. These remain from before the merger craze in the last 25 years. Thanks to mergers much of this track is redundant as the merged lines are using the best line to get through the town. At one time there were 7 class 1s in Dallas. Now there are two. (There is a third, KCS, however it terminates here and does not cross the town) We managed to purchase the redundant lines for future conversion to light rail. By definition light rail typically only goes 10-15 miles from the center of town. Anything longer would call for commuter (heavy) rail. A transit agency is wise to buy these redundant lines when they are available. Even if your current plans do not call for light rail on a given corridor buy it anyway. Who knows how the transit patterns will change in 10-20 years. You NEVER will get it any cheaper and after it is built on forget reverting it back to rail service. Disused corridors typically go for 1/2 to 1 million per mile and typically are 100 feet wide. This is the optimum width to run a two track light rail system and still have room for a third line to handle any freight that a shortline may develop. Think of the cost to buy a 100 foor strip through any town. NOBODY's treasury is big enough to do this. So do not curse light rail. It is still 4' 8 1/2" wide and employs pobably more sophisticated signalling than a heavy rail line. Yes, the cars do not look like a Harriman coach but a train ride is a train ride.

As to cost to lay a track on an existing ROW figure on 1 million per mile. Forget rehabbing the old line. By this time the ties are rotton and the rail is usually too light to be useful in todays service. Call the junk man and hope he will remove it for tha salvage value. This investment is for a good high speed rail line without any signalling. Figure the same investment per mile for signalling and catenary if you electrify. Our total investment including ROW, trackwork, signalling, catenary, yards and cars averages 45 million per mile. Railroading is not for the faint at heart.

To wrwatkins
I feel the need to clearify my position on this topic of using light rail. As I said in the first post I am a traditional locomotive in front caboose in back railfan!! No offence to light rail at all. The only reason I mentioned it was in my dreaming of doing a back to the future thing with an old rail line, light rail fit the bill perfect in a lot of ways. I've heard the obstical of bridges mentioned and above all its were light rail and light weight trolly cars are Ideal.
A lot of these bridges are 100 years old or in some cases more. They will not support the weight of full size trains, so the idea of moving frieght is out!!! Unless of course you have the money to do very expensive rebuilds. Were a bridge might not handle 100ton rolling stock, they could perhaps in many cases pass an inspecton to run things much lighter. The idea that you could get a lot of rolling stock second hand and cheap if you went full weight rail is tempting. But I know from even what you wrote, its an expensive proposition in any weight. I learned its a lot about the geography and real estate, the actual running of a train is near a side effect of getting all land and right of way constructed. Still for me the entire idea is a dream. Folks who think that it could not be a cash cow could stand to add up the cost of having, not the first, but the second automobile in the garage. I'm sure with todays gas and insurance costs folks are very much seeking a way to save money any way they can and eliminating that second all around expense would have many NIMBY"S rethinking their position

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rhburn3

Congestion getting through Chicago seems to be a major problem. Crew costs may make junctioning at places like Streator expensive, but the old NYC line (Now NS) does get to Elkhart with less congestion.

The old Milwaukee Road and NYC used to interchange at Ladd, IL. That route could be used a rebuild for the UP to by pass Chicago. Actually, the UP already has a line to Troy Grove, IL which could be extended to Ladd and around to Granville, IL.

That would be a mighty expensive little piece of railroad to rebuild. I would say 90% of the infrastructure is gone. A lot of bridges, some big-uns, would need to be built from scratch.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by FJ and G

The Anti Gates

A).. Depends on your definition of "public good." Years, decades, actually a century or more (most likely) when the land was used for the railroad, it was deemed in the public's interest. Most of the original landowners have been dead for a long long time.

B)...To make use of the RR now for the linear space reasons I listed, would, of course depend on how one values the land for the public's good.

A) well, many farms are family businesses, so you are actually pitting the interests of the Farm business which exists now, versus the interest of some short line that may or may not ever materialize. Seems like a "bird in the hand" type consideration to me.

B) "public's good"...ha ha , you are a funny man. If such an operation were to materialize, it would probably be privately held, expect huge taxpayer subsidies and property tax abatement, and benefir only a couple weathy line side business operators (grain elevators etc) with the taxpayer helping to get that rich dude's corn to market cheaply. with some hollow promise that (ahem) "Someday this line might attract industry and create jobs" (/ahem)

"Preservation" has become quite the racket for some con artists.

Hey, I'm not saying I am "anti biketrails".....nor am I "anti railbank".....both strategies have their place.

But I don't think that a farmer reclaiming land that is going to waste automatically makes him the bad guy, either. After all the STB must have not seen any serious "greater common good" issues when deciding to allow the abandonment in the first place, or they would have had to reckon with it then,....right.

What I can say is that if I were such a farmer (as mentioned above) and had a buncha big dreaming nostalgists trying to block my real use of said land citing "greater common good" pipe dreams... only 2 words come to mind that describe how I would feel... TARGET PRACTICE... [:D]

[Anonymous]

Congestion getting through Chicago seems to be a major problem. Crew costs may make junctioning at places like Streator expensive, but the old NYC line (Now NS) does get to Elkhart with less congestion.

The old Milwaukee Road and NYC used to interchange at Ladd, IL. That route could be used a rebuild for the UP to by pass Chicago. Actually, the UP already has a line to Troy Grove, IL which could be extended to Ladd and around to Granville, IL.

[Anonymous]

I would like to see the entire main of the North Pennsylvania rebuilt and the electrification extended from Lansdale to Bethlehem.

[Modelcar]

...My thoughts on reserving the ROW's touches on another thought...Perhaps it would be prudent to "save" a route that has a well engineered route and would be difficult or next to impossible to dublicate later when other constructions have obliterated the original route.

[FJ and G]

The Anti Gates

Depends on your definition of "public good." Years, decades, actually a century or more (most likely) when the land was used for the railroad, it was deemed in the public's interest. Most of the original landowners have been dead for a long long time.

To make use of the RR now for the linear space reasons I listed, would, of course depend on how one values the land for the public's good.

I believe a few states (Okla., NH, etc), have acquired rights b/c they believe it to be in the public good. Others have chosen not to.

[DaveBr]

Has anyone thought about changing the time for 12 hours? for the train schedule.Whereas the people that ride the train could see different sceanery.
Would that take a lot or little work? Davebr. Thats on all the long
distance trips.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by FJ and G

I am a firm believer that all railroad ROWs should be preserved, if not for the RR then at least for a linear park or bike trail (but preferrably a railroad). Once linear space like that is gone, it reverts back to original owners and ensuing development will effectually kill any chance of that space ever opening up again.

Chances are, the railroad was built when there were a lot more wide-open spaces in this country. With each abandonment, that linear open space disappears.

A real shame.

Anyone with a future need for that land can always negotiate a fair price with the reverted landowner, just like the railroad originally had to.

Of course, market conditions won't make that cheap, but that is just business.

Keeping that land vacant with no one paying property tax year after year just because someone MIGHT want to build a rail road some day, seems a little foolish as well. Especially when there is a farmer or other entity involved, who can put the land to good use, after re-aquiring.

Contemplate if you will, a large wheat farmer who sold an easement across his field, bisecting it in two because the RR wanted it that way..

After many years the line is abandoned, a scrapper buys the rail, and the land just sits.

Why SHOULDN'T the farmer make his farm whole again?

[Zwingle]

Of course it all depends on who owned the land to begin with. Out west, much of the land was granted to the railroads outright. However, in many other cases the ROW is merely an easement for the sole purposes of railroad use. Once the railroad is done with the land, the easement vanishes and thereafter the landowner can do with his own property as he wishes. That is why the state of MO is having to pay the owners of the Katy ROW that was improperly taken for use as a nature trail. As more and more landowners are realizing their rights, the Katy Trail is going to wind up costing the state a fortune indeed.

As much as I love seeing old ROWs preserved, I also understand the problem with private land being taken for public use. However, a lot of rare grasses and prairie flowers live exclusively along old ROWs. Conservation groups may have better luck as preserving old ROWs than the trail-makers.

[FJ and G]

I am a firm believer that all railroad ROWs should be preserved, if not for the RR then at least for a linear park or bike trail (but preferrably a railroad). Once linear space like that is gone, it reverts back to original owners and ensuing development will effectually kill any chance of that space ever opening up again.

Chances are, the railroad was built when there were a lot more wide-open spaces in this country. With each abandonment, that linear open space disappears.

A real shame.

[Zwingle]

Did some Googling...
If this is correct, the former Rock Island's St. Louis subdivision is now owned by the Missouri Central Railroad. However, the following page was last updated in 2000. Have no idea the current status, although the history of the line is very interesting:
http://members.tripod.com/mo_central_rail/history.html

[Kevin C. Smith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by tormadel
Problem here is for some reason commuter trains are unprofitable (and I'm not the person that knows why). You would think thousands of people going back and fourth everyday would be a cash cow but it isn't.

The main problem isn't the volume (that's good) but the wildly uneven flow of it. If you have 100,000 commuters a day spread out evenly over 24 hours you can make full use of your track, equipment, stations and staff. But given the usual rush hours (say, 8:00-9:30am inbound and 4:30-6:00pm outbound) you have to have enough locomotives and cars, tracks on which to run them, cleaning & storage yards to keep them, stations (with parking!) with platforms long enough to load/unload them and conductors, ticket sellers, dispatchers, signals, etc. to handle all the business offered during those times-and virtually unused the rest of the day (and weekends and holidays). Your facilities have to be that much bigger to fit everything into them in two huge events and instead of earning money 24 hours a day they have only 3 hours to earn it (to pay for the extra large installation). Since commuters travel so often, even minor fare increases make a large impact on their budget (a $100.00 increase on my annual Amtrak trip on the CZ is a minor inconvenience; a $2.00 increase on a 5 day a week, 50 weeks a year commute is a bite!), so ticket prices have to be kept low. With so little to pay for such a costly fixed plant, the whole financial operation collapses under it's own weight.

[tormadel]

And the Rock Island between St Louis and Kansas city is still there. I read a CRIP historical society article about it last year. I forget who the owner was but he was sued and won against many local and state agencies in MO that had illegally removed bridges and overpasses, paved over crossings. Also against private citizens who had taken it upon themselves to push rails into the ditch in suburban KC where it ran through they're back yards. The line had never been officially abandoned just not in use for years so they had had no right to do these things. And supposedly these state agencies were being required to replace all these structures and crossings at no cost to the railroad. I don't know if it has been finished of if the shortline had run any trains over the whole length yet.

[tormadel]

QUOTE: Originally posted by NKPgator

Finally I see a topic as far fetched as I like to dream. I've heard arguments and even done some curious digging on how one might try to open up an old rail line. I came up with a figure of roughly 1,000,000 dollars a mile no matter if the line was preexsisting or not. although when you want to try and pull a dream into reality ,being able to show it once was real helps. Me I was looking at the former LS&MS {NYC} that ran through my town. I researched and found this line's only real problem was Vanderbuilt underestimated the NKP and then diverted way too much funding away from the line until it basicly collapsed from lack of upkeep. Don't get me wrong, I am a locomotive in front ,caboose in back ,romantic railfan. But finding out this line was electrified and ran steeple cabs and trolly cars was an interesting fact to uncover, as well as the fact that the line did not survive on freight traffic, but passenger traffic!!!! And what is one of the biggest complaints of potentual rail passengers??? Trains don't really go anywere!!!
Lets not forget that most of the lines in question were not built for freight customers!! When these lines came into being was in an age before automoblies and super highways. Passengers were a big reason one town was connected to another by rail 100 years ago. I am one for seeing these lines returned..not for freight but passengers as they were originally intended for. Of course I have been a student of history enough to realize that when the freight railroads gave up their passenger business they lost a lot of public favor. I think they gave up too soon and why they are afraid to resume a potentually profitable business is beyond me....perhaps costs are a bit high to risk it.
Anyway, I believe that if some of these segments were relaid in light rail {why does that sound like cussing to me??} and the railroad actually does go were people commute to everyday then you have a good reason to restore any old right of way. I can see it happening....maybe not in my life time but one day there won't be any oil left at all anywere. and the wisdom of our for fathers cutting these paths to everywere will come back to light

Problem here is for some reason commuter trains are unprofitable (and I'm not the person that knows why). You would think thousands of people going back and fourth everyday would be a cash cow but it isn't.

[Anonymous]

Hey everybody, the Rock Island line across Missouri between K.C. and St.Louis was
the only line NOT flooded out in the Flood of '93. As far as the ROW, US 65 at the Ionia turnoff,
all of that dirt fill is gone as US 65 is now a divided four-lane highway at that point. A new
longer bridge along with dirt fill would have to go back in place. Something to think about.

[Anonymous]

Here's a light rail idea. When the old CA & E quit, the CTA had to stop it's trains at Forest Park. With all the congestion on the Eisenhower expressway, it seems a natural to extend tracks back to at least LaGrange Road. There is the matter of the cemetery and the court house parking lots, but a modern 'elevated' structure could carry the tracks over all of that, the river, and First Avenue too. Even a pedestrian bridge over the river, from the Forest Park station to the court complex, would be helpful.

[CMSTPP]

You forgot the most important part of the milwaukee road. I would like to rebuild the the Milwaukees line from Butte, Montana to Harlatton, Montana. The reason i'm going to rebuild this line is for the scenery. Not many people are able to see things that are high in the mountains.. The milwaukee road ran at 4450 above the ground in the mountains. I don't remember how high Butte is above sea level but as the line came over the mountains the town could be seen from high above. I do have a video of the line as a little joe and three SD40-2s came over decending into the valley.
Harlatton is 4000 feet above sea level with the same kind of view as the milwaukee trains came over the mountains. This stretch I believe is about 200 some miles long and I would love to build a passenger line from these to towns. Then I would get permission to tie in with one of the larger railroads that comes through and run to Minneapolis and possibly Duluth.

It's a dream but I plan to make it real![;)][swg]

James

[JanekKoz]

Four comments.

First, Hodde is correct in assuming that CSX wished it had not abandoned the B&O Parkersburg line, so say several top CSX officials. A quick look at the C&O line to the south, Sandpatch to the north, what CSX is hauling today AND what CSX would like to haul and one can understand why.

Second, when talking of following money and making decisions on returns on investment, most of the talk has centerd on today's railroads doing the funding / work. Yes, some of that is and will happen. However, the future for rail expansion is tied to public involvement and that involvement is begining to happen too. RRs, in particular the Class Is, were vey reluctant to participate in any public infrastructure projects, or accept any public money, for fear that it could pave the way to open access on their lines. However, the RRs, in particular NS, have warmed to public money and are actually pursuing it. And where there is public money and desire, many things are possible. Evidence the states clearing routes for double stack service. Most recently, Congress appropriated $90 million to increase COFC capacity on NS from VA's Tidewater to Ohio. And how about the new Hudson River tunnels to Penn Station? What private RR could afford that? But for NJ, NY and the Feds its possible and well under way to fruition. Oh, and let's not forget the freight tunnel fom NJ to Brooklyn. Yes, its still in the discussion stage, but it presently has a greater than 50-50 chance of coming to fruition - because NYC wants it badly.

Third, where the public is involved, non-financial factors are also treated differently. The DM&E expansion to the Powder River Basin is primarily a RR initiaitive. Ergo, it has faced a multitude of hurdles, to include NIMBYs. However, in NJ, when Union County decided to resurrect a long abandoned line (Rahway Valley) and the NIMBYs came out in force, the county and judges told the NIMBYs to pound sand. The rails are now going back in.

Fourth, new ROW is a very difficult and thorny proposition. Many transportation folks would like to have new allignments for old ROWs, or completely new routes. This is still quite possible in the mid and far west. But in high-density metro areas, such as the northeast corridor, that may be a bridge too far, even for the politicians. Evidence the Acela Express use of tilt technology to overcome the curves in New England because Amtrak and al of the many state governments involved could not swing a deal to straighten out the line. There is a lot of talk of building a parallel Interstate highway to I-95, but it is just talk becasue no one can figure out how to aquire the ROW. So the discussion devolves to widening the present I-95 - bet even that is facing problems in aquiring the requisite land along the existing ROW in many places. So the talk shifts to an increasing role for rail, but again, when more infrastructure is needed, the space is hard to come by.

[SALfan]

I'd like to see the old RI Choctaw Route from Memphis to Oklahoma City reopened. Always wished Santa Fe had bought it when the Rock quit. Guess it isn't needed now because BNSF has other ways to get to Memphis, but as long as we're dreaming . . . .