That's nifty, I guess. Maybe he's trying to make Ayn Rand relevant?

If only they were commuter lines.

It's probably just cheaper to run a train than semis. And it'll be a whole lot easier to electrify.

That's pretty cool. There are two lines around here that have potential (Mexico to Fulton MO and a line owned by Ameren through south central MO), but no one seems to be able to open them and guarantee traffic. It's too bad, since they'll just sit there being unused, though they'd make great rail-trails if the people had any vision for that kind of thing.

Traded for Reading, Pennsylvania and B&O, so now you're getting $200 each time I land on Short Line? Just wait until I get hotels on St. Charles, States and Virginia, then we'll see who's so smug about Short Line making a comeback.

StingerJ: Traded for Reading, Pennsylvania and B&O, so now you're getting $200 each time I land on Short Line? Just wait until I get hotels on St. Charles, States and Virginia, then we'll see who's so smug about Short Line making a comeback.

Came for the Monopoly reference, leaving satisfied.

Is this the train equivalent of the short bus?

Why not just replace them with short range amphibious airships? At least airships don't hold up my commute nor do they cause my taxes to go up because infrastructure spending on building a short rail line is rather expensive.

Yeah right. No chance this gets off the ground. Every single property owner, and every environmental group will sue. The Army Corps of Engineers will complain because somewhere along the route is a puddle that is now a wetlands.

Mark my words, this doesn't go anywhere.

BiffDangler: Yeah right. No chance this gets off the ground. Every single property owner, and every environmental group will sue. The Army Corps of Engineers will complain because somewhere along the route is a puddle that is now a wetlands.

Mark my words, this doesn't go anywhere.


Sue? On what grounds? It's an out-of-service railroad bed. It's not like they're building a new line.

Also: farking railroad rights of way: How do they work?

i've lived in several towns that decided to bury natural gas pipe lines under the land that was formally used by the railroads. rules out laying track again i guess.

If you look at older auto factories (Milford spring to mind) there is a short line setup. Something that just feeds into a major line. A few times a week they hook up some old engine and have it haul 30 cars or so worth of autos over to the main line. Once or twice a week, parts are hauled in from the main line as well.

At the newer factories it's semis both ways. Solely because the roads are already there, whereas to install rails you'd have to deal with a lot of property owners and obstacles. When we set up a factory if there is a clear path for rails they get laid, if not so be it.

Lots of potential for them though.

/the other limited factor is railroads don't want to deal with you unless you are moving a lot of goods. They have no interest in moving one or two cars in most cases

Ditching railroads was the dumbest thing this country ever did. The cost to rebuild them won't be cheap.

This happened a few months back in my hometown. A local scrapyard decided to do a once-a-week scrap haul on unused existing tracks in a revival district. Several shop owners had been using the tracks as a de facto alley and parking there. Some complained about how it would effect traffic and loss of their illegal parking, but for the most part they got over it.

train speeds will not exceed 10 mph because there are 10 road crossings along the four miles.

Just what everyone in the area wants, a quarter mile long freight train rolling along at a whopping 10MPH. Someone's gonna be real popular and not in a good way. It's one thing to move next to an airport and biatch about the noise (or move next to a farm and biatch about the smell) it's a totally different thing to move near a non-functional railroad easement (that hasn't even had track for decades) and then complain.

Annoyance: That's nifty, I guess. Maybe he's trying to make Ayn Rand relevant?

What.

It's a problem that is about to face some of the citizens on the West Side of Los Angeles who live south of Wilshire Blvd and north of Interstate 10. They're trying to prevent Metro Rail from constructing the extension of a light rail line to Santa Monica via a federal lawsuit and how Metro Rail must do another Environmental Assessment Report that calls for the increase of car usage over the next few decades whereas Metro Rail sees a decline of automobile usage at Westwood Blvd.

I'm laughing since the city of Los Angeles and the cities of Santa Monica and Culver City wants this to happen. It's unfortunate that the residents living nearby live close to a railroad right a way. Having a light rail line there is its only usefulness now as Southern Pacific abandoned it and sold it to Metro Rail years ago.

It's amazing how Los Angeles is rediscovering these railroad right a ways once used by Pacific Electric 50-60 years ago and reusing them for light rail or rapid bus transit once again. Some of the lines have been converted to subways.

Ed Willy

Several shop owners had been using the tracks as a de facto alley and parking there.

Ho hum.

... but for the most part they got over it.

MrEricSir: Ditching railroads was the dumbest thing this country ever did. The cost to rebuild them won't be cheap.

Nah, electing any of the current nitwits in office was dumber. Abandoning the railroads was a mere whoopsie compared to that.

darkscout: It's probably just cheaper to run a train than semis.

A lot cheaper, except of course most businesses don't have their own rail spur anymore. So trucks are still needed for the last mile of the trip.

Oh Doctor Beeching!

MrEricSir: Ditching railroads was the dumbest thing this country ever did. The cost to rebuild them won't be cheap.

But it helped Detroit become the powerhouse it is today