Changing Driving Habits ..Implications for Rail Service

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Attempting to translate Mr. Suburban Station's immediate "A Google a day" message that was likely posted using some electronic plaything.

It appears he was delayed traveling on the Pennsylvania Turnpike at Mile 124, which is between Sommerset and Bedford, by a collision incident. He would have preferred to take The Pennsylvanian but with a fare in the $100 range and a 7hr 40min trip from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia, he chose to use private auto.

Will Dennis Miller be offering me a prize?

two thumbs up, electronic device and coffee jitters. a quick google of mp 124 finds that the incident isn't isolated. it's just after a tunnel where there's no shoulder, the road descends the mountain, and curves. I would love to have a reasonably priced, reasonably fast, and reasonable number of frequencies (3 a day, 5.5 hours, $43)

Mod note: This is the Amtrak thread, not the the "misc" thread. Please post your thoughts here related to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation. This is not a place for miscellaneous rail-travel related tangential thoughts.

Unreal how borderline militaristic it is in the Amtrak forum..........

Topic is fine to discuss here, have at it.

Charlie

Could be, Charlie, but remembering what a flame-fest the place could be "back in the day", it's remarkable to see the civility now displayed, and we owe our thanks to a number of people who "kept the peace". Younger and/or newer participants, please take note.

And to return to the issue first raised, I guess my central point was that while the rail industry those of us born before (roughly) 1960 knew was geared to serve all comers, increasing diversity in both the population (for passenger traffic) and what's being shipped (for freight) have changed it into something closer to a "niche" market. It's the truckers who have to be adaptable to handling anything ---- most "high-and-wides" now move on rubber tires (sometimes a lot of them) ---- but the coming of permannent petroleum scarcity is quickly eroding that advantage for longer dstances.

It seems likely to get a bit more interesting down at trackside in the not-too-distant future, and that could cause a demand for increased capacity .... possibly the revival of a few lines better-suited to passengers as an alternative.

pebbleworm wrote:Despite John Waynes (usual) negative statements, Smart cars have one major advantage - they are easy to find a place to park them. As a refugee from Redneckistan I have standing to say "Anywhere worth living, it's hard to find a parking place". I'm looking for a new car, and find myself pacing off the length of anything I like.

at the same time, it have one MAJOR disadvantage - it can become pancake in nanosecond! I had seen a photo showing Smart car squashed into INCHES between 2 trucks! BTW, the trucks dont look like that they have heavy damages.. so it didn't take much an effort to squash one. If you want instant coffin or sardine can, be my guest...

these smart cars should be banned from any expressway..or any roads that see 45 mph or higher... it shouldn't be called "Smart", but should be called "Sucide"

theres a good chance the smart car is actually safer than an old tank car . its not so much strenght but protecting the occuopants against traumatic shock . same principle used in european lightweight high speed trains .

You can take your chances in a little plastic and aluminum vehicle protected by air bags. I'll stick to my 5,000 lb. Detroit (Wixom, actually) dinosaur.

You can't overcome the laws of physics. I suspect the results of a high speed European train wreck would be similar to that of an aircraft crash.

Those big ole Detroit monsters are still with us, only now they are called "SUV's".

Les

A few random trends to consider:

I recently saw an expert speak about the future of passenger autos. They are not predicted to get smaller, so much as lighter, in order to enhance fuel efficiency.

The US is increasingly urban-oriented. Trips are shorter, reliance on autos is less, and space matters. Hence the demand for small, cheap cars and auto-sharing programs.

Truckload carrier average mileage per load is in long-term decline - this due to reduced US manufacturing, increasing intermodal use and regional distribution centers.

Average truckload shipment weights may be trending up, given "densification" (less "air" in packages to reduce packaging costs), and "compaction" (one can get more flat screen TVs in a truck than the older style TVs).

Shippers (more than truckers!) are fighting HARD to INCREASE truck weights (from 80K to 97K gross). (Fox News quotes a congressman on this subject. His comments are so absurd, I had to copy it here: "With the Panama Canal being deepened, these larger cargo ships coming in are going to be carrying containers that weigh 97,000 pounds," said Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA). "If we continue to have our weight limit at 80,000 pounds, then we would have to take the containers, unload them, repack them, put them on trucks and use more trucks to do that." A complete lack of understanding AND he gets his facts wrong.)

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11 ... z1fb6s4biU

I think we are way of track now ............................................

On the contrary, Mr. Railnut, I'd suggest that the trends are moving, albeit very slowly, in the directions cited in my earlier posts. And they are driven not so much by statist edict, as by the individual choices of millions of people.

The diminishing supply of petroleum, and the fact that what's left will be increasingly expensive to recover, are a guarantee that the auto-centric lifestye has to be reformed, though not eliminated. A possible economic collapse in Europe and China might force the oil sheiks to temporarily increase production and/or lower prices. but the people who have refined the art of "supply chain management" are wise enough to know that this would be just a temporary breather.

And while there is a segment of the market who will sacrifice other options to keep their SUV's and pickups (let's not forget that a lot of the cost of the latter can sometimes be passed on as a business expense) the rest of us will, either voluntarily or of necessity, continue to downsize -- the (literal !!) squeeze will continue and intensify.

Whether this will translate into a safety issue remains to be seen. But the likely proponents are the same security-obsessed segment of the population who brought us the MADD campaign, and there's aways the possibility that some single event might focus opinion in one direction.

But regardless, the freight roads have, as yet, not shown any concentrated effort to regain a lot of the traffic that began to drift away after the rise of intercity trucking in the 1920's. Even East Coast-Chicago has not been considered a rail haul for most goods for many years. Liquified natural gas (LNG) would address the problem of technical sustainability of trucking for a long time, but it's also possible that the understatement of the wear and tear on the hghways by large vehicles might finally be recognized.

"Whether this will translate into a safety issue remains to be seen. But the likely proponents are the same security-obsessed segment of the population who brought us the MADD campaign, and there's aways the possibility that some single event might focus opinion in one direction."

Op, safety was cited by the auto industry prognosticator as the primary reason that vehicles will not shrink in size significantly. His view went out to 2025. I'd add that despite people's outrage at gasoline prices, eventually you get used to 'em. Before long, $3-4/gallon will be completely unremarkable, particularly if your vehicle gets 40 mpg.

"But regardless, the freight roads have, as yet, not shown any concentrated effort to regain a lot of the traffic that began to drift away after the rise of intercity trucking in the 1920's. Even East Coast-Chicago has not been considered a rail haul for most goods for many years."

I have to respectfully disagree on this. The eastern roads in particular have made enormous infrastructure investments to improve intermodal efficiency and gain share from over-the-road haulers on 500+ mile moves.