Bad train pictures

[Mookie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jhhtrainsplanes

Mookie [:p]

Never say never. [:o)]

You never know, things may change, you just might even change your mind for some reason and try it again.

Jim, I would love to go by Amtrak or any train for that matter. It is just they don't seem to want to have me go - at least not from here! Plus you only travel in the dark if you are going to say Colorado - What's to see in the dark, besides the backs of da Mooks eyelids!

[Mookie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jhhtrainsplanes

Mookie [:p]

Never say never. [:o)]

You never know, things may change, you just might even change your mind for some reason and try it again.

Jim, I would love to go by Amtrak or any train for that matter. It is just they don't seem to want to have me go - at least not from here! Plus you only travel in the dark if you are going to say Colorado - What's to see in the dark, besides the backs of da Mooks eyelids!

[Modelcar]

....Jen, I would rather think it is not that they "don't seem to want to have me go"....The Amtrak organization now headed by Gunn does everything put plead and get down on their knees to find money to run a decent rail transportation system in this county from Congress and this Adminstration...with little success...! I suppose we can expect the same kind of perforance you have described to continue until the powers to be who control the purse strings [and continue to give their share to other types of transport], change the way they think...or that the public 'hollers' loud enough to change it...and I doubt if that will happen....Kinda sad, that we the best and the biggest [for the most part], are running a rail passenger system worthy of a 3rd rate country. I'll retire from my soap box and go and sit down now.......but I mean every word of it. And I'm not afraid to pay my fair share to help run the system correctly.

[Modelcar]

....Jen, I would rather think it is not that they "don't seem to want to have me go"....The Amtrak organization now headed by Gunn does everything put plead and get down on their knees to find money to run a decent rail transportation system in this county from Congress and this Adminstration...with little success...! I suppose we can expect the same kind of perforance you have described to continue until the powers to be who control the purse strings [and continue to give their share to other types of transport], change the way they think...or that the public 'hollers' loud enough to change it...and I doubt if that will happen....Kinda sad, that we the best and the biggest [for the most part], are running a rail passenger system worthy of a 3rd rate country. I'll retire from my soap box and go and sit down now.......but I mean every word of it. And I'm not afraid to pay my fair share to help run the system correctly.

[JoeKoh]

matt mamma and I would take it from bryan to chicago when matt gets older.
stay safe
Joe

[JoeKoh]

matt mamma and I would take it from bryan to chicago when matt gets older.
stay safe
Joe

[Mookie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Modelcar

....Jen, I would rather think it is not that they "don't seem to want to have me go"....The Amtrak organization now headed by Gunn does everything put plead and get down on their knees to find money to run a decent rail transportation system in this county from Congress and this Adminstration...with little success...! I suppose we can expect the same kind of perforance you have described to continue until the powers to be who control the purse strings [and continue to give their share to other types of transport], change the way they think...or that the public 'hollers' loud enough to change it...and I doubt if that will happen....Kinda sad, that we the best and the biggest [for the most part], are running a rail passenger system worthy of a 3rd rate country. I'll retire from my soap box and go and sit down now.......but I mean every word of it. And I'm not afraid to pay my fair share to help run the system correctly.

I agree - and I realize we aren't the biggest population in the US. Probably not that many people ride the train - but I for one would love to do so. I compared the prices and really - for not a lot of difference - I can fly and be there in a couple of hours as compared to Amtrak - many hours. I am sure - as do the airlines - the train serves people in much bigger population areas and tailors the time schedule to serve them. But it would be nice to have just a little more consideration. And at a rate we "little" people can afford. Now, they keep us strapped with paying our health insurance - so no travel allowed! Ah - another soap box to stand on!

Jen

[Mookie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Modelcar

....Jen, I would rather think it is not that they "don't seem to want to have me go"....The Amtrak organization now headed by Gunn does everything put plead and get down on their knees to find money to run a decent rail transportation system in this county from Congress and this Adminstration...with little success...! I suppose we can expect the same kind of perforance you have described to continue until the powers to be who control the purse strings [and continue to give their share to other types of transport], change the way they think...or that the public 'hollers' loud enough to change it...and I doubt if that will happen....Kinda sad, that we the best and the biggest [for the most part], are running a rail passenger system worthy of a 3rd rate country. I'll retire from my soap box and go and sit down now.......but I mean every word of it. And I'm not afraid to pay my fair share to help run the system correctly.

I agree - and I realize we aren't the biggest population in the US. Probably not that many people ride the train - but I for one would love to do so. I compared the prices and really - for not a lot of difference - I can fly and be there in a couple of hours as compared to Amtrak - many hours. I am sure - as do the airlines - the train serves people in much bigger population areas and tailors the time schedule to serve them. But it would be nice to have just a little more consideration. And at a rate we "little" people can afford. Now, they keep us strapped with paying our health insurance - so no travel allowed! Ah - another soap box to stand on!

Jen

[CG9602]

QUOTE:

Took Amtrak in 1969 from LIncoln to Wisconsin - took 22 hours going and 24 to come back. No more Amtrak! [8]

Mookie

A few minor points here, Mookie:
1. Amtrak didn't exist in 1969. It makes no sense to blame an organization that didn't exist before 1970 for something that took place earlier.
2. taking 22 - 24 hours to get someplace is what happens when the service is cut to the bone and then more - The MILW had less than a handful of trains going via WI in 1969 ( only one going to Madison), and so did the CBQ. The CNW had a very small handful of trains remaining in WI, and even they were seasonal only.
3. Amtrak has never had the money to provide really good service. They have had to fight just to get money to run even one train per day across WI. Unlike many other industries, they've never had "money with which to make money."
4. I look at my train trips as an integral part of the vacation - not just as a means to get to a vacation spot.

I have no desire to spark off a flame war here - just pointing out some things.

[CG9602]

QUOTE:

Took Amtrak in 1969 from LIncoln to Wisconsin - took 22 hours going and 24 to come back. No more Amtrak! [8]

Mookie

A few minor points here, Mookie:
1. Amtrak didn't exist in 1969. It makes no sense to blame an organization that didn't exist before 1970 for something that took place earlier.
2. taking 22 - 24 hours to get someplace is what happens when the service is cut to the bone and then more - The MILW had less than a handful of trains going via WI in 1969 ( only one going to Madison), and so did the CBQ. The CNW had a very small handful of trains remaining in WI, and even they were seasonal only.
3. Amtrak has never had the money to provide really good service. They have had to fight just to get money to run even one train per day across WI. Unlike many other industries, they've never had "money with which to make money."
4. I look at my train trips as an integral part of the vacation - not just as a means to get to a vacation spot.

I have no desire to spark off a flame war here - just pointing out some things.

[Modelcar]

....Jen, I don't want to get started on health cost...as then I'll have to be up on the soap box even longer yet...

[Modelcar]

....Jen, I don't want to get started on health cost...as then I'll have to be up on the soap box even longer yet...

[dharmon]

With all the fires and such.....

Do the any of the RRs still have any of the fire train equipment. I've seen pictures and models of modified tank cars and sprayers to fight brush fires along the tracks. Alot of the fires out here have been in fairly remote areas with well water or water brought in by truck to fight.

[dharmon]

With all the fires and such.....

Do the any of the RRs still have any of the fire train equipment. I've seen pictures and models of modified tank cars and sprayers to fight brush fires along the tracks. Alot of the fires out here have been in fairly remote areas with well water or water brought in by truck to fight.

[Anonymous]

Dan [8D]

Glad to see you are back to your normal self. [:)]

I used to be a volunteer fireman myself. I wondered many times about such equipment in my area. Many times the railroad tracks are a good distance from the road and sometimes there is no road. One VERY important thing about fighting a train fire (or any fire) is knowing WHAT is inside that tank car or box car. Firemen have been killed by gases that are heavier than air and have settled in a low spot, then along comes a truck or car and guess what? BOOM. Also fertilizers (some react with water) can also explode. But I think the idea is a good one and have wondered about it too. It might have been useful in your area these past few weeks.

[Anonymous]

Dan [8D]

Glad to see you are back to your normal self. [:)]

I used to be a volunteer fireman myself. I wondered many times about such equipment in my area. Many times the railroad tracks are a good distance from the road and sometimes there is no road. One VERY important thing about fighting a train fire (or any fire) is knowing WHAT is inside that tank car or box car. Firemen have been killed by gases that are heavier than air and have settled in a low spot, then along comes a truck or car and guess what? BOOM. Also fertilizers (some react with water) can also explode. But I think the idea is a good one and have wondered about it too. It might have been useful in your area these past few weeks.

[Mookie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CG9602

QUOTE:

Took Amtrak in 1969 from LIncoln to Wisconsin - took 22 hours going and 24 to come back. No more Amtrak! [8]

Mookie

A few minor points here, Mookie:
1. Amtrak didn't exist in 1969. It makes no sense to blame an organization that didn't exist before 1970 for something that took place earlier.
2. taking 22 - 24 hours to get someplace is what happens when the service is cut to the bone and then more - The MILW had less than a handful of trains going via WI in 1969 ( only one going to Madison), and so did the CBQ. The CNW had a very small handful of trains remaining in WI, and even they were seasonal only.
3. Amtrak has never had the money to provide really good service. They have had to fight just to get money to run even one train per day across WI. Unlike many other industries, they've never had "money with which to make money."
4. I look at my train trips as an integral part of the vacation - not just as a means to get to a vacation spot.

I have no desire to spark off a flame war here - just pointing out some things.

I stand corrected - you are right - I rode on the old CB&Q I believe - my memory isn't as good as it used to be. But we went from Lincoln to Omaha to Chicago (just this side of Chicago) and up to LaCrosse. It was the wait at if I remember correctly - Aurora IL and LaCrosse that about did me in. (Had to take the bus further up north.) Amtrak in my mind isn't a company - it is a train trip in whatever era.

I waited in Lincoln (late) Aurora (late) and to come home in LaCrosse (late). I am not arguing that cuts were the problem - only that an airplane would have taken a lot less time. And right now, would cost about the same.

And when you leave Lincoln - where do you go for vacation? Well, I like California for one - I have 1-2 weeks vacation. You do the math! Or maybe I want to go to Epcot in Florida. I go from point A to point B - and transporation is very important since I would have to travel quite a ways in the dark - so no sightseeing. I am coming from the middle of nowhere and it's a long ways to anything!

But I am realistic enough to understand - no govt or corporation is going to be too concerned about Mookie getting from point A to point B - since she isn't part of the majority of the population. My choice! I live where there aren't that many people.

I really do understand!

Mookie

[Mookie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CG9602

QUOTE:

Took Amtrak in 1969 from LIncoln to Wisconsin - took 22 hours going and 24 to come back. No more Amtrak! [8]

Mookie

A few minor points here, Mookie:
1. Amtrak didn't exist in 1969. It makes no sense to blame an organization that didn't exist before 1970 for something that took place earlier.
2. taking 22 - 24 hours to get someplace is what happens when the service is cut to the bone and then more - The MILW had less than a handful of trains going via WI in 1969 ( only one going to Madison), and so did the CBQ. The CNW had a very small handful of trains remaining in WI, and even they were seasonal only.
3. Amtrak has never had the money to provide really good service. They have had to fight just to get money to run even one train per day across WI. Unlike many other industries, they've never had "money with which to make money."
4. I look at my train trips as an integral part of the vacation - not just as a means to get to a vacation spot.

I have no desire to spark off a flame war here - just pointing out some things.

I stand corrected - you are right - I rode on the old CB&Q I believe - my memory isn't as good as it used to be. But we went from Lincoln to Omaha to Chicago (just this side of Chicago) and up to LaCrosse. It was the wait at if I remember correctly - Aurora IL and LaCrosse that about did me in. (Had to take the bus further up north.) Amtrak in my mind isn't a company - it is a train trip in whatever era.

I waited in Lincoln (late) Aurora (late) and to come home in LaCrosse (late). I am not arguing that cuts were the problem - only that an airplane would have taken a lot less time. And right now, would cost about the same.

And when you leave Lincoln - where do you go for vacation? Well, I like California for one - I have 1-2 weeks vacation. You do the math! Or maybe I want to go to Epcot in Florida. I go from point A to point B - and transporation is very important since I would have to travel quite a ways in the dark - so no sightseeing. I am coming from the middle of nowhere and it's a long ways to anything!

But I am realistic enough to understand - no govt or corporation is going to be too concerned about Mookie getting from point A to point B - since she isn't part of the majority of the population. My choice! I live where there aren't that many people.

I really do understand!

Mookie

[Mookie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Modelcar

....Jen, I don't want to get started on health cost...as then I'll have to be up on the soap box even longer yet...

scoot your chair a little closer....we seem to agree on lots!

Mookie

[Mookie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Modelcar

....Jen, I don't want to get started on health cost...as then I'll have to be up on the soap box even longer yet...

scoot your chair a little closer....we seem to agree on lots!

Mookie

[kwboehm]

One of our fire departments in my county had to deal with a fire along the RR ROW and no roads to get to it. The call came in from BNSF that their train had caught a hot bearing, and had started a fire over what amounted to about 4 miles of ROW. Some spots were right off of roads, while other were no where near roads. BNSF unhooked their 2 SD70MACs and had several local firefighters hop on to access the fire with their water packs. I was the only deputy on at the time, so I couldn't hop on...I was ticked & jealous

[kwboehm]

One of our fire departments in my county had to deal with a fire along the RR ROW and no roads to get to it. The call came in from BNSF that their train had caught a hot bearing, and had started a fire over what amounted to about 4 miles of ROW. Some spots were right off of roads, while other were no where near roads. BNSF unhooked their 2 SD70MACs and had several local firefighters hop on to access the fire with their water packs. I was the only deputy on at the time, so I couldn't hop on...I was ticked & jealous

[techguy57]

Jim was talking about different types of fires and it made me think about an article in our local paper about another railroad problem, hazardous material leaks. So I thought I'd share.

http://www.nwherald.com/spider/NWH/news/278943056271462.html

Its a pretty decent article, and I have to admit that it would be fascinating to plan a drill like this but scary as hell to have to deal with the real thing.

Hope you enjoy!

Mike

[techguy57]

Jim was talking about different types of fires and it made me think about an article in our local paper about another railroad problem, hazardous material leaks. So I thought I'd share.

http://www.nwherald.com/spider/NWH/news/278943056271462.html

Its a pretty decent article, and I have to admit that it would be fascinating to plan a drill like this but scary as hell to have to deal with the real thing.

Hope you enjoy!

Mike

[Nora]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jhhtrainsplanes

I AM surprised by your two. Mookie, better straighten up that tiara, it seems to be a little tilted today. Poor Nora, I think the moving deal is getting to her as she seems not to be her normal sweet self.

Me, sweet? You've definitely got me confused with someone else.

I took Amtrak once, in 1992, from Pittsburgh to Oregon, then to Seattle, then back to Pittsburgh. It wasn't a horrible trip but it did seem sometimes that the train was stopped a lot more often than it was moving, and most of the trains I had to take were at least a couple hours late either leaving or arriving. And the bathrooms on the looooong Chicago-Portland leg were horrible and I refused to use them, and the sleeper car (which I wasn't in) caught fire in North Dakota. I guess that does sound kind of like a horrible trip, but I was 16 and it was my first long trip away from home by myself, and I just thought it was all a big adventure.

I want to take Jay on the train from Akron to Pittsburgh one of these days. It's supposed to leave at 6 AM, so I hope it's really late when I decide to go. [:)]

--Nora

[Nora]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jhhtrainsplanes

I AM surprised by your two. Mookie, better straighten up that tiara, it seems to be a little tilted today. Poor Nora, I think the moving deal is getting to her as she seems not to be her normal sweet self.

Me, sweet? You've definitely got me confused with someone else.

I took Amtrak once, in 1992, from Pittsburgh to Oregon, then to Seattle, then back to Pittsburgh. It wasn't a horrible trip but it did seem sometimes that the train was stopped a lot more often than it was moving, and most of the trains I had to take were at least a couple hours late either leaving or arriving. And the bathrooms on the looooong Chicago-Portland leg were horrible and I refused to use them, and the sleeper car (which I wasn't in) caught fire in North Dakota. I guess that does sound kind of like a horrible trip, but I was 16 and it was my first long trip away from home by myself, and I just thought it was all a big adventure.

I want to take Jay on the train from Akron to Pittsburgh one of these days. It's supposed to leave at 6 AM, so I hope it's really late when I decide to go. [:)]

--Nora

[Nora]

Hey Jen, it's my younger son's first birthday today. Do you know what that means?

It means I have chocolate cake waiting for me at home!

[8D]

Oh, and an update on the moving for anyone who cares -- we are definitely moving in a week to ten days, so I'll then be able to spend more than 15 minutes a week getting caught up here. Finally!

--Nora

[Nora]

Hey Jen, it's my younger son's first birthday today. Do you know what that means?

It means I have chocolate cake waiting for me at home!

[8D]

Oh, and an update on the moving for anyone who cares -- we are definitely moving in a week to ten days, so I'll then be able to spend more than 15 minutes a week getting caught up here. Finally!

--Nora

[Anonymous]

why do european railroad locomotives have operating cabs in BOTH
ends but american ones do not? even the emd, alco, baldwin types
built for european systems had cabs in both ends. was this not done
in american because of the extra expense, or because multiple unit
operation in europe is a rarity, trains are generally much shorter in
length and lighter in tonnage and the freight cars are much shorter?

also, i still see occasions where units are operated rear end leading
--the front engine--on the main line away from yards. it's seldom, tho.
theo sommerkamp

[Anonymous]

why do european railroad locomotives have operating cabs in BOTH
ends but american ones do not? even the emd, alco, baldwin types
built for european systems had cabs in both ends. was this not done
in american because of the extra expense, or because multiple unit
operation in europe is a rarity, trains are generally much shorter in
length and lighter in tonnage and the freight cars are much shorter?

also, i still see occasions where units are operated rear end leading
--the front engine--on the main line away from yards. it's seldom, tho.
theo sommerkamp