Re: PC: RE: Re: Why no money?

["Chris Osterhus" <su_carbs@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

>First of all it is bad business operating a class 1 RR with old junk and
>charging a premium for service.

PC neglected repairs on many units. I seem to remember seeing a picture of a 
burnt-out E40 electric. Those units weren't very old, and didn't last very 
long.

I remember hearing stories of passenger cars (roach coaches) being trashed 
inside. Inoperative A/C and heat made cars miserable.

>Newer engines are more efficient and fuel efficient. Look today. When >did 
>you last see a train with 4-5 engines? New engines mean less >engines and 
>fuel per train. Two engines do the work of 3-5 today, >putting them other 
>engines on other trains.

I agree with that one. Maybe if PC could have both purchased newer 
equipment, and retired the older stuff things might have been different?

>It was also harder and more expensive taking care of the older units.

They should have scrapped them.

>Parts were not readily available anymore and had to strip other engines 
> >for parts. This was why some railroads re-engined GP7/9 units with 645 
> >components that became GP8/10 units.

The only reason that was done, is that it cost less than buying a new unit. 
Many of the GP8/10s are still around.

>I don't know of Waynesburg, but I do know as soon as PC took over the >NH, 
>PC invested large sums of money on the Maybrook Line and >Poughkeepie 
>Bridge. The entire line recieved new rail, ballast, ties >and steel grading 
>was being installed on Poughkeepsie Bridge to replace >the old wooden plank 
>walkways. Before PC the Maybrook :Line had many >slow orders due to tracks 
>in some places sunk in mud with no ballast >and cars swayed side to side as 
>you saw on Wayesburg Secondary Track.

Was this right before the bridge burned?
The Waynesburg line ran from the PRR/MGA line north to the B&O.

>Along >with this came the end to jobs for many who worked for NH, PRR >and 
>NYC into PC. CR was the worst railroad ever that it's initials made >it Cut 
>Rail because that is what they were experienced in.

True, but alot of those jobs were duplicated. Why have 3-4 shops when 2 will 
do the job? From that standpoint, it made sense to close redundant shops. In 
order to make a profit, anything not essential was closed, sold, or 
scrapped.

Just my .02

--Chris Osterhus
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com