Roanoke District double track

[nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org]

Can we end the Double track Bickering! and get back to the main info I 
asked about which were Dates and Locations, Please.

Nathan

Nathan Simmons
trainman51 at gmail.com



nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org wrote:

>> Robb,

>>     The problem is you are trying to use traffic figures to justify

>> something that caused operational problems. If they were so hell bent

>> on reducing the amount of track why didn't they leave the part where

>> trains could pull over both sides of the mountain before they had to 

>> stop?

>>     I thereby stand by my first reply!!! Good night!

>> Jimmy Lisle

>

>

> Jimmy,

> Using traffic figures to justify infrastructure has been going on for 

> quite a few decades.  Show me some train sheets that have the daily 

> northbounds on the line during the 60s ,70s, 80s and 90s and there's 

> all the justification needed.  Any trackwork reduction will cause 

> operational problems, but at some point it has to be done.  Would you 

> rather have a job or lose a few miles of double track, regardless of 

> the headaches it causes?  As for operational problems... N&W probably 

> figured they had competent engineers who ould and could do the job 

> they were paid to do, and that these outstanding employess would be a 

> solution to the problem.

>

> Rob Fisher

>

>

> ________________________________________

> NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org

> To change your subscription go to

> http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/attachments/20061004/ff225032/attachment-0001.html