From: nilknocgeo@earthlink.net   
      
   "Glen Labah"  wrote in message   
   news:gl4317-5D9BA8.22395517052014@mx05.eternal-september.org...   
   > In article ,   
   > "conklin"  wrote:   
   >   
   >> You are irrational once again.  If Metro-North needs to follow X, Y and Z   
   >> for safe transport of passengers, then freight RRs which carry oil need   
   >> to   
   >> have track as good as Metro-North.  Or, are you saying that Metro-North   
   >> needs no new program because you say so?   
   >   
   >   
   > The mainline railroads already are doing these types of track   
   > inspections - or rather the Federal Railroad Administration does the   
   > inspections with its own cars:   
   >   
   > http://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0120   
   >   
   > In some cases the railroad companies have their own track inspection   
   > cars to do track inspection work, or they have other methods of doing   
   > this work.  The FRA is only supposed to verify their methods are working.   
   >   
   > About two years ago I attended a SoundTransit meeting where the expense   
   > of track inspection came up, and one of the contractors said the   
   > cheapest way of doing the regular track inspection was, rather than have   
   > a special track inspection car, to simply put the required equipment on   
   > some of the cars already operating in regular service.  They said they   
   > were already doing this on a few other commuter railroads.   
   >   
   > Therefore, what Metro-North is doing is probably not really required   
   > beyond the regular inspections they are already doing.  Instead, what   
   > has probably happened is that someone pointed out to them that the   
   > regular inspections would be a lot cheaper and somewhat more useful if   
   > it were being done by the cars they already have.   
   >   
   > Because of the sheer number of miles on a class 1 railraod, the main   
   > line railroads already have crews and track inspection cars that do   
   > this.  Union Pacific has a few locomotive hauled passenger cars for   
   > this, or the Canadian National has a rebuilt RDC (their 1501) that does   
   > this.   
   >   
   > The problem here is that a commuter railroad has cars that pass over the   
   > track a number of times a day, so Metro-North or any other commuter   
   > railroad that inspects their track by having inspection equipment on   
   > their cars is inspecting their track far more often than is required.   
   > It isn't necessarily that they are more safety conscious but simply an   
   > effect of doing this inspection with the cheapest method available to   
   > them (that is, using their own passenger equipment).   
   >   
   > For freight railroads, the cheapest thing is going to continue to be   
   > doing the inspections only at the required interval.   
   >   
   > --   
   > Please note this e-mail address is a pit of spam due to e-mail address   
   > harvesters on Usenet. Response time to e-mail sent here is slow.   
      
   Then I guess, according to your comments, even low speed oil trains don't   
   derail because of the excellent track in the USA.  NOT.   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)