Milwaukee Road history - Wikipedia version

[MichaelSol]

 

Interesting that Wikipedia's history of CMStP&P mirrors much of what Michael Sol has stated regarding some of the misconceptions of the PCE's worth as well as the value of the electrification!  The consensus is clear that the PCE made money while the granger lines lost money, and the PCE retrenchment in favor of a regionalized "Milwaukee II" was a huge blunder.

 

Not really.  If you look at the references, Wikipedia says that it used Todd Jones artical, which in turn thanks Michael Sol for his help in the Jones artical.  So one might say it is Sol's opinion's  recylced a couple of times.

Bert

Until now, I've never seen the Wikipedia entry; looks to cover much more ground than Todd Jones' article in CTC Board. My assistance to Todd Jones was to provide him with the documentary background material from the particular era he was interested in, which I recall was 1974-1977. It was a compilation of about 400 contemporary references from the period, including ICC Reports, Hearing Examiner reports, news articles, financial magazine articles, scholarly studies, and my notes on an electrification study I participated in. I also provided him with some photos of the electrification I had taken for the study.

Todd was an engineer for the Canadian Pacific on the former Milwaukee mainline near Portage. I assume his views were shaped by daily contact and conversation with the former Milwaukee engineers and conductors with whom he worked. I doubt they needed to recycle opinions from anyone. I have never spoken with him in person, and did not see the article prior to publication. In it, however, he appears as a careful writer and a careful observer.

 

[n012944]

 

Interesting that Wikipedia's history of CMStP&P mirrors much of what Michael Sol has stated regarding some of the misconceptions of the PCE's worth as well as the value of the electrification!  The consensus is clear that the PCE made money while the granger lines lost money, and the PCE retrenchment in favor of a regionalized "Milwaukee II" was a huge blunder.

 

Not really.  If you look at the references, Wikipedia says that it used Todd Jones artical, which in turn thanks Michael Sol for his help in the Jones artical.  So one might say it is Sol's opinion's  recylced a couple of times.

 

Bert

[Anonymous]

Well you can always use a Wikipedia entry to back up your argument, no matter what it is, since you can just go and write the entry yourself!!

Are you suggesting Mr. Sol wrote the Milwaukee piece?

What the Wikipedia entry shows is that someone else shares Michael's observations.

[wjstix]

Well you can always use a Wikipedia entry to back up your argument, no matter what it is, since you can just go and write the entry yourself!!

[MP173]

Are we ready for another MILW discussion?

What I really find interesting in the Wikipedia article and the Todd Jones article is the feeling that the CNW merger would have saved the companies by "the consolidation of routes and facilities in many markets they both serviced with ICC estimating savings of $36 million dollars annually..."  Northwestern's study showed $54 million of savings.

With our discussion of the failure of mergers on other threads, it seems a case would be made that the merger would have failed to generate the savings. 

ed

[Datafever]

I never thought about using Wikipedia as the ultimate arbiter of disputes, but I guess we might as well use something referenceable.  Of course, I will expect that if Wikipedia contradicts one of your favorite arguments, then you will also graciously concede defeat, right? 

[billbtrain]

'Oh No! Not Again'-Rod Stewart

Yeah,Bring back the Milwaukee as a Chicago to Tacoma transcon with some of the western(Dakotas to Washington)branchlines(get rid of the midwest lines instead).And go back in time and make BN GN instead(with some changes of maintenance of physical plant and equipment).Sorry,I couldn't help myself.It is all interesting tho.

And what is your first name,futuremodal.I dislike refering to someone by their handle.Seems impersonal to me(no disrespect).

Have a good one.

Bill B

[Anonymous]

 

Hey folks!  Ready for another Milwaukee thread? 

Don't know why I never tried this before, but I finally accessed Wikipedia for it's version of the Milwaukee Road......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago,_Milwaukee,_St._Paul_and_Pacific_Railroad

Interesting that Wikipedia's history of CMStP&P mirrors much of what Michael Sol has stated regarding some of the misconceptions of the PCE's worth as well as the value of the electrification!  The consensus is clear that the PCE made money while the granger lines lost money, and the PCE retrenchment in favor of a regionalized "Milwaukee II" was a huge blunder.

Other points of interest to me -

1. A mention of some historians' distain for Milwaukee's chosen PCE routing, e.g. it avoided most population centers along the Northern Tier, a view with which I partly concur.
2. The comparison of the ICC's acceptance of the BN merger when it had rejected the Milwaukee/CNW merger one year prior, which of course fuels the suspicions of political shenanigans being responsible for the ultimate creation of the BN monopoly through the Northern Tier.
3. The fact that the estimated cost of continuing and expanding the electrification ($39 million) ended up being the less costly option than the ensuing de-electrification (Michael Sol 2; detractors 0).
4. The ultimately disasterous method of sexing up the balance sheet short term by selling off railcars and then leasing them back from financial institutions.  What were they thinking?