From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   Stephen Sprunk  wrote:   
   >On 08-Apr-15 23:24, Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >>hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:   
      
   >>>Unfortunately, it seems most modern railroad managements are   
   >>>pre-conditioned to hate passenger trains and will have nothing to   
   >>>do with it, even if reasonable negotiations could result in Amtrak   
   >>>picking up much of the tab for track improvements.   
      
   >>Are you insane? Congress doesn't appropriate monies for Amtrak   
   >>service for significant track improvement. Clearly this should be   
   >>done, but it's not.   
      
   >>Passenger trains should be slotted like UPS or intermodal service,   
   >>which are essentially scheduled freight trains. So this can be done   
   >>on modern freight railroads.   
      
   >That may be how some freight RRs run, but not all of them.  On UP, for   
   >instance, trains leave yards/sidings whenever they're ready (which can   
   >be several hours earlier or later than planned) and it's up to the   
   >dispatchers to sort things out.   
      
   I'm not disagreeing, but intermodals tend to be scheduled, even on UP.   
      
   >BNSF is closer to running on a schedule, but they still don't use fixed   
   >slots.  This becomes glaringly obvious when their trains hit TRE's   
   >tracks, which _do_ have explicit slots for both passenger and freight   
   >trains during the day.  Depending on when freight trains arrive, they   
   >may have to wait an hour before the next slot opens.  OTOH, they do   
   >know--to the minute--when the entry signal will clear and when they'll   
   >exit on the other end.  DGNO also uses TRE's (and DCTA's) tracks but   
   >almost exclusively at night, when slots aren't used.   
      
   Right. There are more disciplined ways to do things. Intercity rail   
   enforced rather a lot of discipline upon railroads and they were   
   better off for it.   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)