747400sp
Topic Author
Posts: 3833
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Wed Jan 25, 2012 11:32 pm

I read, that a large amount of the US cargo, such as containers and coal, is shipped by trains. Giant container ships, that are loaded with containers, make calls at US ports, and most of these containers are transferred to stack trains, and moved coast to coast and north to south. Now in the US, there is only four large national rail roads, UP, BNSF NS and CSX. These four RR, are making money, and it seems like a decent ideal, for a new company, to lay new tracks and take advantage of the growth of cargo in the US, so why nobody else is trying to start a national rail road?
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3174
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Wed Jan 25, 2012 11:57 pm

The Florida East Coast Railway (FEC) handles the overwhelming majority of cargo and goods railed through South Florida versus CSX, and it will only get better for them when the current projects resurrecting direct rail service to the Port of Miami, and a closer intermodal terminal inside Port Everglades (Fort Lauderdale), are completed in the next few years.

This is to coincide with the completion of the expansion of the Panama Canal.
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
redflyer
Posts: 3881
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 12:27 am

I'm no expert, but it would appear that "laying new track" would be an extremely expensive proposition. Laying the track itself wouldn't necessarily be cost-prohibitive, but purchasing easements/rights-of-way on land that the tracks would have to pass through would be too costly. And I don't think a railroad could invoke imminent domain the way land developers do in cahoots with local governments to take over property for an alternative use.

But I don't think laying new track would be necessary as I believe RR's use each other's tracks regularly and just pay a user fee, or something like that.
My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
 
flymia
Posts: 6806
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 12:57 am

There are some others like Florida East Coast.

Quoting redflyer (Reply 2):


As redflyer posted railroads sure are expensive to build. All the land rights which would need to be purchased for the risk of maybe being able to do better than the other companies already there. Honestly 4 large competing companies in a rail system which you really had to get yours hands on by the 1950s is not too bad. At least there are four large companies.

I just think starting a railroad would be very very expensive to start. May not be worth the risk. It would also be very difficult to start with getting cities, towns and states to OK the projects.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7795
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 1:30 am

Quoting 747400sp (Thread starter):
Now in the US, there is only four large national rail roads, UP, BNSF NS and CSX.

Define a 'National' Railroad....??? UP and BNSF have no rail east of the Mississippi. CSX and NS have no rail west of the Mississippi. That hardly makes them national.

Quoting 747400sp (Thread starter):
and it seems like a decent ideal, for a new company, to lay new tracks and take advantage of the growth of cargo in the US

The upstart would cost trillions of dollars to buy the land and right aways to lay new track.

[Edited 2012-01-25 17:31:59]
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4044
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 2:13 am

Quoting 747400sp (Thread starter):
Now in the US, there is only four large national rail roads

That is still, what, 3 more than in pretty much every other country in the world?
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7867
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 2:21 am

According to someone I met from NS, laying down tracks costs about $2 million a mile.

Other than that, the network is mostly built, so there is little need to lay more tracks. All four main companies (and the smaller ones) operate on each other's tracks through agreements and even swap tracks between themselves.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
flymia
Posts: 6806
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 2:49 am

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 6):
According to someone I met from NS, laying down tracks costs about $2 million a mile.

Wow, if that number is true just 500 miles of track which would be nothing for a large railroad carrying frieght cost
$1,000,000,000. So One billion dollars. That pretty much sums it up, not many people/companies want to spend billions on a brand new business.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
 
A346Dude
Posts: 1161
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 11:23 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 2:51 am

Canadian Pacific and Canadian National are also big players in the US. Then there are tons of regionals and short lines.
You know the gear is up and locked when it takes full throttle to taxi to the terminal.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7867
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:10 am

Quoting flymia (Reply 7):

It's doable if it makes sense. But most of the lines are already built, so why sink in another bil. . .

Quoting A346Dude (Reply 8):
Canadian Pacific and Canadian National are also big players in the US. Then there are tons of regionals and short lines.

I've seen them in the Atlanta area.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
Airstud
Posts: 3071
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2000 11:57 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:45 am

I can often see the TC&W from my window. (Well, only in the winter, when the leaves are off the trees...)
Pancakes are delicious.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5550
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:36 am

Quoting 747400sp (Thread starter):
most of these containers are transferred to stack trains, and moved coast to coast and north to south.

Most containers don't move extremely long distances. They move a few hundred miles.

Quoting redflyer (Reply 2):
Laying the track itself wouldn't necessarily be cost-prohibitive, but purchasing easements/rights-of-way on land that the tracks would have to pass through would be too costly.
Quoting flymia (Reply 7):
Quoting PPVRA (Reply 6):According to someone I met from NS, laying down tracks costs about $2 million a mile.

Wow, if that number is true just 500 miles of track which would be nothing for a large railroad carrying frieght cost
$1,000,000,000. So One billion dollars. That

That $2 million per mile is laying new track on existing right of way the railroad already owns. It can cost 2 or 3 times that to lay new track, from right of way purchase to sub-roadbed work, etc.

Think of this also.

There are only a very few rail bridges across the Mississippi River south of St Louis

2 in St Louis - Terminal Rail Road Company of St Louis

1 at Thebes, Ill - UP

2 at Memphis (3 tracks - 2 UP, 1 BNSF)

1 at Vicksburg, MS - KCS

1 at Baton Rouge - KCS

1 at New Orleans - New Orleans Public Belt Railroad

The latest of these completed was in Baton Rouge in 1940

Several like the bridge in New Orleans also carries road traffic. Completed in 1935, a modernization of the vehicle lanes is underway at a budgeted cost of $1.2 billion.

Building a new Mississippi River bridge could easily exceed $2 billion.

Unlike airlines, railroads have to build their own infrastructure.

If airlines had to build their own airports, we would see a lot fewer startup airlines.
 
Arrow
Posts: 2325
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 7:44 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 6:07 am

Quoting A346Dude (Reply 8):
Canadian Pacific and Canadian National are also big players in the US. Then there are tons of regionals and short lines.

CN's US presence is almost as big as its Canadian presence. They are slowly growing what will eventually be a huge container flow that starts at a new (and rapidly expanding) container port at Prince Rupert and carries Asian cargo to Chicago and down to Memphis. Prince Rupert is three days sailing closer to Shanghai than LA/Long Beach and has no congestion at all.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
 
PanHAM
Posts: 8531
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 6:37 am

There's another class 1 RR - kansas City Southern whoich owns also a large Mexican operation as well as a RR in Panama.

The existing carriers upgrade their mainlines to double tracking, new sidings, or even triple track like UP in nebraska. Or NS has enlarged tunnels so that stack trains can operate on more routes in their network.
powered by Eierlikör
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:21 pm

The infrastructure present supports the business available. When more is required, and the risk of building more/spending more outweighs the risk of not doing so then more will be built. After the massive consolidations of the last 30 years of the 20th century for rail I'm surprised that we still have 5 class 1 railroads. The room for growth in this industry is in regional companies that will have to lease space on trackage owned by the big companies.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
NoWorries
Posts: 493
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:55 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:31 pm

The other thing to keep in mind is that there used to be quite a few large regional railroads, but the number has dropped due to mergers. Old classics like B&O or Pennsylvania no longer exist as separate roads -- they are part of larger systems now.

There are places where existing track is close to capacity -- for example, the mid-Atlantic region -- where new capacity would be welcome. Acquiring the land is the problem. In the early days of railroad, the government gave away huge tracts of land as an incentive to build -- not really an option now.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5550
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:30 pm

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 13):
Kansas City Southern

The house I grew up in was just 500 feet from the original Louisiana & Arkansas route, which was KCS by then. I used to see the Shreveporter and Hustler daily. My dad made sure we made a short trip on the Shreveporter just a few days before that ended.

I still remember all the red, yellow and dark green paint schemes.

Today, I live about five miles from the KCS Wylie Yard and it makes me so happy to see the new engines painted in the historic colors.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7867
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:57 pm

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 11):
That $2 million per mile is laying new track on existing right of way the railroad already owns. It can cost 2 or 3 times that to lay new track, from right of way purchase to sub-roadbed work, etc.

That could be.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 11):
If airlines had to build their own airports, we would see a lot fewer startup airlines.

On the positive side, perhaps they would be as financially stable as the railroads today. Also, my understanding is that people who work at these railroads are very happy employees.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
Northwest727
Posts: 379
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 10:38 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 8:12 pm

I think you mean Class I railroads, although there are more than 8 that exist (including the 4 you mentioned).

The number one reason why there are only eight Class I railroads left, is that the interstate highway system, personal cars, trucking and airlines have ended the railroads as a choice for transportation in the USA. That's it.

The former all offer on demand, near-on demand, or faster travel vs. the railroads, which are now viewed as irrelevant dinosaurs of a bygone era (despite their efficiency and promises). Just look at how much controversy is generated over high speed rail.

Just like the airlines today, whoever remained merged in order to stay profitable, and in the case of PC and the NH, the US government had to step in and form Conrail in order to save the industry (on the east coast at least).

On an interesting note, between the 1930s and 1980s, when the railroad was in a deep decline, the USA lost 2/3 of its trackage through abandonments.

[Edited 2012-01-26 12:17:02]
 
redflyer
Posts: 3881
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:05 pm

Quoting Northwest727 (Reply 18):
The former all offer on demand, near-on demand, or faster travel vs. the railroads, which are now viewed as irrelevant dinosaurs of a bygone era (despite their efficiency and promises).

I think the comment regarding cars, trucks, and airplanes being faster or on-demand is true. However, railroads are not irrelevant or dinosaurs in their current iteration. They are used to move bulk wholesale goods. They can do it more efficiently than any other means of transportation. But as you point out, it's not going to be on-demand and it will only be between large distribution centers. We will never again see the railroads of the past, but the current system serves a very valuable purpose in the economy. (I'm talking freight...forget the B.S. about passenger service as it can't survive as a stand alone without external subsidies.)
My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4299
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Fri Jan 27, 2012 2:26 am

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 4):
UP and BNSF have no rail east of the Mississippi

Duluth, Milwaukee and Chicago (to name 3) are west of the Mississippi?

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
seattle
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 3:26 pm

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:27 am

Well technically in the U.S. there are no "national' carriers. Amtrak is the only railroad that serves coast to coast and north and south in the United States. But of all the major players in the U.S. that i can think of off hand: Union Pacific, Burlington Northern Santa Fe, Norfolk and Southern, CSX, Kansas City Southern - Kansas City Southern de Mexico, Florida East Coast, Ferromex, Canadian National, and Canadian Pacific not to mention the huge amount of shortlines that mostly are owend by a few larger companies the probability of starting a whole new coast to coast land bridge container hauling railroad within the states and have it turn a profit would be next to impossible.
 
PanHAM
Posts: 8531
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:54 am

...especially not with the new Panama canal widening to accomodate larger ships.

Still, there''s plenty of untapped market potential from truckers and UPS/FEDEX intermodal business but not enough to justify an all new carrier. The existing class ones can add additonal rails if market grows. BNSF has just completed the transcon line by double tracking the final miles in New Mexico's Abo canyon. UP is going ahead with double tracking the sunset route. That adds capacity to the speedways.
powered by Eierlikör
 
747400sp
Topic Author
Posts: 3833
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Fri Jan 27, 2012 2:23 pm

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 22):
UP is going ahead with double tracking the sunset route.






If the sunset route is the tracks that the Sunset Linted runs on, then I am shocked that it was not double tracked by now.
 
PanHAM
Posts: 8531
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:26 pm

Los Angeles to El paso which will upgraded to couble track all the way, same the continuation to chicago on the former SP / CRI&P. This will basically a strong competition to the BNSF transcon. .

The Sunset Limited continues to San Antonio on UP , no info on hand right now how far that is double trcked or if they have sidings only.
powered by Eierlikör
 
Flighty
Posts: 7651
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Fri Jan 27, 2012 6:29 pm

The competition situation in rail is pretty dismal now. I think they are just charging near-trucking prices and keeping the monopoly rent for themselves. So, yes they can make good money on a permanent basis. Long ago, this was a bigger problem when trucking was less able to compete, and railroads could dominate the economy.
 
Northwest727
Posts: 379
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 10:38 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Fri Jan 27, 2012 7:57 pm

Quoting redflyer (Reply 19):
I think the comment regarding cars, trucks, and airplanes being faster or on-demand is true. However, railroads are not irrelevant or dinosaurs in their current iteration. They are used to move bulk wholesale goods. They can do it more efficiently than any other means of transportation. But as you point out, it's not going to be on-demand and it will only be between large distribution centers. We will never again see the railroads of the past, but the current system serves a very valuable purpose in the economy. (I'm talking freight...forget the B.S. about passenger service as it can't survive as a stand alone without external subsidies.)

I agree with you, however I am just taking the stance of the general American public (and politicians, in some way). I do wish the freight railroads well, however. Funny thing is, when oil prices go up, while everyone suffers, railroads actually do well (because rail is far more efficient). I remember in the gas price spike in 2008, while the economy was slowly imploding, the freight railroads were actually having a renaissance and were bursting at the seams with traffic, thanks to the sky high oil prices.
 
kingairta
Posts: 454
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:24 pm

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:10 pm

Railroad companies could take a hit if the truck weight limit is raised from 80,000 pounds to 96,000 pounds like congress is thinking of doing.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7867
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:14 pm

Quoting Flighty (Reply 25):
The competition situation in rail is pretty dismal now. I think they are just charging near-trucking prices and keeping the monopoly rent for themselves. So, yes they can make good money on a permanent basis. Long ago, this was a bigger problem when trucking was less able to compete, and railroads could dominate the economy.

According to my dad, who has worked on some projects in the US, shipping heavy machinery by rail is by far the cheapest method. . . but you never know when the machine will arrive, so they almost never do it. These guys stop everywhere in between to pick up freight and change routes all the time.

[Edited 2012-01-27 12:16:45]
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5550
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:40 pm

Quoting KingairTA (Reply 27):
Railroad companies could take a hit if the truck weight limit is raised from 80,000 pounds to 96,000 pounds like congress is thinking of doing.

I hope not. There is enough construction on the Interstates now.
 
johns624
Posts: 1239
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:05 pm

Trucking companies will never be able to get all the drivers that they need. Nobody likes being away from home for 2 or 3 weeks at a time. That's why many are putting their longhauls on flatcars (TOFC) and having most drivers in regional pools, so they get home more often.
 
User avatar
falstaff
Posts: 5565
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 6:17 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Fri Jan 27, 2012 10:11 pm

Quoting gemuser (Reply 20):
Quoting EMBQA (Reply 4):
UP and BNSF have no rail east of the Mississippi

Duluth, Milwaukee and Chicago (to name 3) are west of the Mississippi?

BN had the Frisco line to Pensacola, Florida. I think it lasted to the BNSF era, but they nolonger own that line.

BNSF does have operations in Alabama and Mississippi, both ex-Frisco

Frisco Railroad


UP has a lot of operations in Illinois, mostly ex GM&O, CE&I, CN&W, and MP.

CN&W had operations in the "UP" of Michigan. Did any of those operations make it to the Union Pacific era?
My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
 
johns624
Posts: 1239
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Sat Jan 28, 2012 12:41 am

Quoting falstaff (Reply 31):
CN&W had operations in the "UP" of Michigan. Did any of those operations make it to the Union Pacific era?

For a very short time until they were sold to the Wisconsin Central (now CN).
 
747400sp
Topic Author
Posts: 3833
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:47 am

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 13):
There's another class 1 RR - kansas City Southern whoich owns also a large Mexican operation as well as a RR in Panama.

The existing carriers upgrade their mainlines to double tracking, new sidings, or even triple track like UP in nebraska. Or NS has enlarged tunnels so that stack trains can operate on more routes in their network.




I did not know KCS was that big, I should have known, when I saw that photo of a KCS EMD SD70 ACe in a train magazine.

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 4):
Define a 'National' Railroad....??? UP and BNSF have no rail east of the Mississippi. CSX and NS have no rail west of the Mississippi. That hardly makes them national.





Pre meger UP and ATSF went to Chicago.

Quoting A346Dude (Reply 8):
Canadian Pacific and Canadian National are also big players in the US. Then there are tons of regionals and short lines.



Yes, I was shock at the rate that Canadian Rail Roads have grown in the United States. Well, this a good change to see EMD SD 60F and EMD SD-50Fs here in states.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 11):
Most containers don't move extremely long distances. They move a few hundred miles.



Now I see why NS have been using GP locomotives, on there stack trains into port Norfolk, instead C truck locomotives.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5550
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:55 am

Quoting 747400sp (Reply 33):
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 11):Most containers don't move extremely long distances. They move a few hundred miles.


Now I see why NS have been using GP locomotives, on there stack trains into port Norfolk, instead C truck locomotives.

One of the 'growth' industries is inland container ports. UP runs several trains each day from Houston to just south of Dallas where a huge complex is a distribution point.

KCS has one north of Fort Worth near Alliance Airport (AFW) with traffic coming from the Gulf coast. We see them move through Wylie each day. BNSF also has a container operation in that area.

Lately we've been seeing two UP trains per day of about 130 container stacks coming down the KCS line from Greenville through Wylie and into Garland / Dallas. Those are unusual, most of the UP traffic is on their main tracks south of US 80 in Mesquite - might be some work on the line. That UP track is a very heavily used single track mainline - and it also carries Amtrak.
 
PanHAM
Posts: 8531
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Sat Jan 28, 2012 7:48 am

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 34):
KCS has one north of Fort Worth near Alliance Airport (AFW) with traffic coming from the Gulf coast. We see them move through Wylie each day. BNSF also has a container operation in that area.

I was there about 10 years ago but then it was a BNSF facility. Huge intermodal yard. The BNSF HQ is also at Ft. Worth

Quoting 747400sp (Reply 33):
Pre meger UP and ATSF went to Chicago.

UP on C&NW only which was wholly or partly owned then. BNSF always an Santa fe to Chicago, BN always has had extensive operations in illinois etc.

Quoting falstaff (Reply 31):
BNSF does have operations in Alabama and Mississippi, both ex-Frisco

...and tennessee (Memphis)

to complete, BNSF is in Wisconsin as well, where UP has larger operations.
powered by Eierlikör
 
57AZ
Posts: 2371
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:55 pm

RE: Why Only Four National Rail Roads In The US?

Fri Feb 03, 2012 9:33 pm

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 28):
According to my dad, who has worked on some projects in the US, shipping heavy machinery by rail is by far the cheapest method. . . but you never know when the machine will arrive, so they almost never do it. These guys stop everywhere in between to pick up freight and change routes all the time.

Ummmm. No. Heavy machinery can be shipped very quickly and efficiently as separate trains but it will cost a lot more. Also, there are key railroad companies that are owned by government entities. My hometown of Chattanooga, Tennessee is a terminal for two government owned railroads. The main line operated by Norfolk Southern Railway from Chattanooga to Cincinnati, Ohio is the Cincinatti Southern Railway, which was built by and is owned by the City of Cincinatti, Ohio. It is under long term lease to the Cincinatti, New Orleans and Texas Pacific Railway, a subsidiary of Southern Railway Systems-now Norfolk Southern Railway. It was completed in the 1880s. The other railroad is the Western and Atlantic Railroad of the State of Georgia. It was completed between Chattanooga and Atlanta, Georgia in 1849 and was operated by the State of Georgia until 1870. It was leased to the Western and Atlantic Railroad Company from 1870 to 1890, when it was leased to the Nashville, Chattanooga and St. Louis Railway for a period of 25 years. Under Georgia state law, the lease of the railroad cannot be negotiated at the end of the current lease. It must be awarded by competitive auction to the highest bidder, except when that would permit the winning bidder to create a transportation monopoly in the Atlanta region.

The reason for that is that in the 1960s, the Southern Railway outbid the NC and would have had a stranglehold on rail services in and out of Atlanta. Both railroads are still government owned to this day.
"When a man runs on railroads over half of his lifetime he is fit for nothing else-and at times he don't know that."

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 17 guests