Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Train tracks: (was # 232)

Subject: [OM] Re: Train tracks: (was # 232)
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 10:36:17 -0700
Bill Pearce wrote:
>> "Fairly extensive" is pretty vague.
>>     
> What we have is a moderately extensive of long haul routes. For years, they 
> were considered adequate, but as we have discovered the economic "advanages" 
> of having consumer goods made in Asia, they are now becomming overburdened. 
> Those of you who live in the Los Angeles area know well how the constant 
> stream of trains out of the ports of Long Beach and LA never seems to end.
>   
Yeah, same thing with Oakland. An article in the paper the other day 
said rail traffic in Calif. is at an all time high, and increasing.
> The major rail lines made a decision to concentrate on long haul freight, 
> grain, coal, and container and piggyback trains. A large amount of branch 
> lines were either sold off to shortline operators who were mostly 
> underfunded, or abandoned them entirely.
>   
I'm not sure they had a lot of choice. Although the rational for the 
Interstate Highway system leaned heavily on national defense, a very 
real part was to make long haul trucking a bigger player. I assume the 
truck and tire makers were lobbying up a storm. The flexibility of 
trucking for smaller businesses in a rapidly changing economy simply 
made the spurs and short haul lines uncompetitive.

I have no idea whether the fees and taxes on trucking pay for their road 
usage nowadays, but the original creating of the system must have 
subsidized them at first. If somebody smart hadn't thought of piggyback, 
I wonder how many rail miles we would still have.
> Any thought of passenger rail, at any speed, must be on the current 
> mainlines of the major lines. Most of the branch lines are only good for 
> 25mph. Countries with successful passenger trains generally have dedicated 
> tracks that are entirely grade separated. The possibilities of new rail 
> lines in the US are slim indeed, due to the difficulty of obtaining ground 
> for them. The costs would be prohibitive.
>   
There are geographic and associated eco-political difficulties as well. 
This is the UP mainline through Calif. to the East. 
http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/MPhotos/Calif/Shasta/slides/_MG_2124cr.html
A single line at this point, and there's not room to double it up 
without major impact on the upper Sacramento River. I just don't think 
that is politically possible. In fact, given the derailments in the 
area, including one that killed life in and along the banks of the river 
not long ago, nearly wiping out the huge Shasta reservoir and severely 
impacting drinking and agricultural water, I don't think UP would even 
want to bring up that stretch in public. And things get no better across 
the Sierra Nevada, with single lines on steep river canyon slopes and 
lots of tunnels. Probably much the same in the Rockies.

Another factor in the US West is that, like OZ, things are very spread 
out, with huge amounts of mostly uninhabited open spaces between the 
concentrations of population. So adding capacity means adding lots of 
miles. New capacity would be REALLY expensive in the West.
> No one more than I would like a vibrant system of passenger rail in the US, 
> but I realize the economic and political realities preclude it. There are 
> areas of high population density that are trying very hard. Most interesting 
> is the State of New Mexico purchasing a stretch of Santa FE mainline for 
> commuter service. The possibility for passenger rail to extend from 
> Albuquerque to Denver is real, if distant.
>   
By European standards, that is very low density country. We don't really 
have the densities to support extensive passenger rail, even in theory, 
except in a few, rather small areas of the country.

Moose

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz