Interesting Articles in BBC and NY Times

Today's BBC contains an interesting article on Britain's ongoing experiement with privatization. . hope Mr. Mineta is keeping up with his reading

Check it out:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3894791.stm

Meanwhile, the following discussion continues to take place at the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/13/business/13road.html

Interesting undercurrents in that article.

Good reading! Here's another link, also from the UK edition, that puts the issue in a Scottish perspective.

Check the very last sentence, a quote from the chairman of a government body called the Commission for Integrated Transport:

"I still think it makes a lot of sense to bring track and trains back together in a vertically integrated structure."

We remember, of course, that the UK experiment is often cited as "proof" for the notion of breaking Amtrak into 2 companies: "operating" and "infrastructure."

Apparently, I missed that column, Mr. Rhinecliff - probably because I was concentrated on an article appearing on the page opposite where the Sharkey column was placed (or at least in the Times' Chicago Edition).

I think we should point out, the article is not all negative, and in fact an inset appearing in the print editions (but not the web) states "One Amtrak Bright Spot; The Acela Line in the Northeast".

Business Travel columnist, Joe Sharkey, has consistently been "pro Corridor' as hardly surprisingly has been The Times as a whole. I have found, over the years, they are not really pro-LD, and I simply wish Executive Editor Bill Keller would "connect the dots" and realize, like it or not, that the LD's are the catylist for Federal level funding of the Corridor. Hopefully, their editorial position could reflect that.

It's been a while since I;ve said it around here; but "No Yuma, no Moolah'.

i have copied the link to the worldwide forum , should anyone want to discuss the impact on British railways there .
As far as Amtrak / USA goes , its difficult to see any benefit in creating a seperate entity to manage the track . Has there been any call from the commuter railroads that use the NEC for such an entity . IF theyre happy with how Amtrak runs the Nec , then why change ?

The New York Times is not exactly correct here:

"Meanwhile, on our one existing relatively high-speed train line, passenger traffic is expected to break records this year, as air travel in the Northeast becomes ever more vexing. That's Amtrak's Acela line (top speed about 125 miles an hour on a few stretches of track) on the Northeast Corridor between Boston and Washington."


As most here know, the top speed is 150 mph on 18 miles of track, 135 mph on approximately 60 additional miles of track, and 125 mph on many stretches of track.

More disucssion in today's NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/18/travel/18rep.html