On Saturday, April 13, 2019 at 10:19:22 PM UTC-4, Phil Kane wrote:   
   > On Thu, 11 Apr 2019 15:00:01 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:   
   >   
   > >One thing I do believe is that the brick wall we now have between   
   > >passenger and freight ought to be removed.  It's ludicrous to have   
   > >two side-by-side tracks, one dedicated to psgr, one to freight,   
   > >with tie-ups on both, when a double track line would be more fluid.   
   > >(I saw this personally with a once two track line converted to   
   > >two single-tracks--many more delays).   
   > >   
   > >Anyway, freight service would benefit would new lines built with   
   > >modern skills that were lower and straighter.  Geez, NS is still   
   > >using the ancient Pennsy route across Penna.   
   >   
   > You do realize that  Amtrak was the last-ditch effort by the Federal   
   > government to keep passenger service alive when the freight railroads   
   > were dumping the service in the 1960s.  Amtrak Long Distance uses the   
   > host freight rail network only because the government forces them to   
   > do so, not because they have warm places in their hearts for passenger   
   > service, especially operated by "others".   
      
   Some of the freight lines are idiots.  Heck, even in the old   
   days, certain CEO's hated passenger trains even when they added   
   millions in _profits_ to the railroad.  Today, there could be   
   win-win arrangements, such as building extra track to expedite   
   an Amtrak train but also expedite freights over an overcrowded   
   route.  Some freight lines refuse to even consider or discuss   
   such arrangements.   
      
      
      
   > This subject has been kicked around for years on the RailfanLegal   
   > Yahoo group where I spend lots of electrons.   
      
   Would you have a link?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)