RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: Care to explain why it's in any way challenging? see later post. My take on no equivalent is that the other tests should include it, and that it really ought not to be a known point; the better test is a surprise obstacle appearing at a set distance. That already exists in the test. An examiner stands in front of the rider and signals them to make an emergency stop. or a pedestrian who's dropped his badger in the road. That is a very different type of test, only suitable for highly experienced riders accompanied by banjo players. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: Could end up as the closest thing to perpetual motion we have seen: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8067672.stm Good Lord, if you can't do that, you shouldn't be on a bike. The whole point of motorcycle training here is to inculcate anticipation in the rider. Ideally, you shouldn't be in the situation where you have to swerve. Vehicle control is taught in a test needed before you can actually ride on the road. Many things cannot be anticipated; the truck in front starting to shed its load of topsoil, for example. [...] Here's the new bicycle test: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8066461.stm Don't think I would have seen that coming. Me neither. Imagine if it had actually hit Boris - it might have knocked some sense into him. Looks like it would have probably hit the other end, in which case it would only have induced a profound sense of pleasure. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
From: P. J. Alling A road is anything the government designates it as. You've obviously never stood with a map in your hands vainly trying to find the plainly marked improved road, only to be informed that you're standing in the middle of it. For the rest you have some points, but most apply to Brittan and few other places. Often you make my point for me. Your government owns the trains, which are an expense, so maintenance is minimal. In the US road taxes, in the form of gasoline taxes not only pay for road repair but also subsidize various rail systems, which cannot pay for themselves out operating revenue. No, by law, gasoline taxes cannot be used for rail systems. They must go to the highway trust fund. And of all the U.S. railroads, only Amtrak fails to make a profit; mainly because it's deliberately crippled. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
From: Adam Maas knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:14 PM, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: snip In the US road taxes, in the form of gasoline taxes not only pay for road repair but also subsidize various rail systems, which cannot pay for themselves out operating revenue. That rather rankles me. Gas taxes don't go into some special fund which is only used to pay for the upkeep of roads and pay for money-losing railways. Like all other taxes, gas taxes go into the general coffers of the government and are used to pay for all government expenditures. You make it sound like motorists pay their own way (ie: ?they alone are paying for road repairs) as well as subsidize railways, when in fact ~all~ tax payers (motorists or not) contribute for the upkeep of roads and railways. cheers, frank Depends on the jurisdiction, in some gas taxes go into a transportation fund (which typically ends up paying for roads, bridges, airports and rail), in others its general fund. The tendency has been to move to the latter so that politicians can fund social services via lucrative gas taxes. Federal gasoline taxes are all allocated into the Federal Highway Trust Fund - by law. What does get spent from that fund can only be allocated to highway construction or repair. The Federal Government takes in more in fuel taxes than it annually spends on highways, and the surplus is invested ... just like the Social Security surplus is invested. Subsidies to aviation come from the Airports and Airways Trust Fund monies from taxing aviation fuels and passenger tickets, passenger flight segments, international arrivals/departures, cargo waybills, and frequent flyer mile awards from non-airline sources like credit cards. Part of the subsidy comes in the form of differential taxation of Commercial Fuel ($0.043/gal) and General Aviation Fuel ($0.193/gal for Avgas and $0.218/gal for Jet Fuel). Actually, it probably works the same way with highway taxes, since big commercial long-haul truck lines get rebates on their taxes Only about 60% of what is taken by Social Security taxes is paid out to current beneficiaries. The rest is kept in a trust fund so there'll be enough when it comes time to pay benefits to the baby boomers. At least that was the rationale they used when they doubled Social Security taxes in 1984 For 2005 the Federal Budget broke down: 28.7% - Community and regional development (Federal grants to State Local Governments) 15.4% - Foreign affairs - State Department (CIA's budget is mostly hidden in here rather than in Defense) 13.4% - Interest on debt 12.4% - Medicare 11.4% - General government 9.2% - Administration of justice (including War on Drugs) 9.0% - Defense - not including Iraq Afghanistan 8.1% - Transportation (mostly highway spending) 7.0% - Social Security benefits 5.8% - Veterans' benefits 5.7% - Natural resources and environment 4.0% - Science and technology 3.7% - Agriculture 2.9% - Medicaid and other health related 2.0% - Unemployment and welfare 1.3% - Education and training 0.8% - Energy (including nuclear weapons production) Wasn't able to find a breakdown for more recent budgets. For some reason the government has been reticent to tell us how our tax money was spent in 2006 - 2008 Note that if you're merely talking subsidy level, indirect subsidies of the airlines are far higher than anything else per passenger mile. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Graydon o...@uniserve.com wrote: Care to explain why it's in any way challenging? see later post. My take on no equivalent is that the other tests should include it, and that it really ought not to be a known point; the better test is a surprise obstacle appearing at a set distance. That already exists in the test. An examiner stands in front of the rider and signals them to make an emergency stop. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: Could end up as the closest thing to perpetual motion we have seen: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8067672.stm Good Lord, if you can't do that, you shouldn't be on a bike. The whole point of motorcycle training here is to inculcate anticipation in the rider. Ideally, you shouldn't be in the situation where you have to swerve. Vehicle control is taught in a test needed before you can actually ride on the road. Many things cannot be anticipated; the truck in front starting to shed its load of topsoil, for example. [...] Here's the new bicycle test: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8066461.stm Don't think I would have seen that coming. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com wrote: ...the weight of the train is slowly, but quickly, pressed upon it... Mark! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Joseph McAllister wrote: On May 26, 2009, at 20:29 , Bob Sullivan wrote: There can be 6 inches of slack per car in a train. This can help you start a train rolling as you stretch out the accordion one car at a time. Remember the locomotives only weigh so much and the coefficient of friction of steel wheels on steel rail is only .03 or so (even if you're sanding the rail). Getting going can be tough. And being in the 100th car back can give you a bad case of whiplash as the momentum of 99 cars moving at 1/2 mile per hour accelerate you to 1/2 mile per hour instantly! But the slack can also play havoc with the train over the road. Imagine a slight grade, followed by a dip, followed by another grade and a 100 car train of loaded coal hoppers. The engines strain to take you over the first grade and you stretch out all the slack on the way up. But on the way down, you compress the slack out of the train and then play 'crack the whip' on the way up, pulling the slack back out. If you're lucky, you don't break a coupler and make 2 train segments. Regards, Bob S. Probably does not happen much anymore without a defect or a rapidly arising situation, given that the modern engines are controlled digitally, and that control is, among other things, modified by the digital strain gauges that are located throughout the construct. Oh bloody hell... *trains* have gone digital now? Is nothing sacred? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
OK. The word that did not come to my addled brain before my fingers typed was...gradually, but quickly, pressed upon it... :-) my floppedupble... and... Mark's not home. He's at the cabin. On May 27, 2009, at 02:04 , mike wilson wrote: Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com wrote: ...the weight of the train is slowly, but quickly, pressed upon it... Mark! Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com http://gallery.me.com/jomac http://web.me.com/jomac/show.me/Blog/Blog.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Care to explain why it's in any way challenging? see later post. My take on no equivalent is that the other tests should include it, and that it really ought not to be a known point; the better test is a surprise obstacle appearing at a set distance. That already exists in the test. An examiner stands in front of the rider and signals them to make an emergency stop. or a pedestrian who's dropped his badger in the road. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: Could end up as the closest thing to perpetual motion we have seen: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8067672.stm Good Lord, if you can't do that, you shouldn't be on a bike. The whole point of motorcycle training here is to inculcate anticipation in the rider. Ideally, you shouldn't be in the situation where you have to swerve. Vehicle control is taught in a test needed before you can actually ride on the road. Many things cannot be anticipated; the truck in front starting to shed its load of topsoil, for example. [...] Here's the new bicycle test: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8066461.stm Don't think I would have seen that coming. Me neither. Imagine if it had actually hit Boris - it might have knocked some sense into him. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Joseph McAllister wrote: OK. The word that did not come to my addled brain before my fingers typed was...gradually, but quickly, pressed upon it... :-) my floppedupble... and... Mark's not home. He's at the cabin. Consider it unmarked. On May 27, 2009, at 02:04 , mike wilson wrote: Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com wrote: ...the weight of the train is slowly, but quickly, pressed upon it... Mark! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote: FWIW, I'd also like to see really damn difficult driver testing coupled with retesting in certain circumstances - cause an accident, go through the testing process again, etc. Could end up as the closest thing to perpetual motion we have seen: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8067672.stm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
- Original Message - From: mike wilson Subject: Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder Could end up as the closest thing to perpetual motion we have seen: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8067672.stm Good Lord, if you can't do that, you shouldn't be on a bike. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 03:21:21PM +1000, Anthony Farr scripsit: Try about 100,000-150,000 tons of coal per train. 100-150 cars at 100 tons each, not 100,000 tons each. -- M. Adam Maas 100,000 ton trains are anything but common. I searched about and found this at a number of sources: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bU_3KfdG3fk Weight: 99,732 tonnes (109,935.711 US short tons, 98,156.885 UK long tons) Length: 7.35 km (4.57 miles) The fundamental limits on train size are engine traction and drawbar strength. Remember that when starting the train, at some point the engine to first car drawbar has the entire mass of the train on it; this turns out to be more of an issue than engine traction. Past a certain size, you get an awful ping noise as a drawbar breaks, and then you have *two* trains. -- Graydon -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote: - Original Message - From: mike wilson Subject: Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder Could end up as the closest thing to perpetual motion we have seen: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8067672.stm Good Lord, if you can't do that, you shouldn't be on a bike. The whole point of motorcycle training here is to inculcate anticipation in the rider. Ideally, you shouldn't be in the situation where you have to swerve. Vehicle control is taught in a test needed before you can actually ride on the road. Also, there is no avoidance maneouvre in the (much easier) car test. If a test is causing crashes, for whatever reason, it's a bad test in my book. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 04:10:40PM +0100, mike wilson scripsit: William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote: - Original Message - From: mike wilson Could end up as the closest thing to perpetual motion we have seen: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8067672.stm Good Lord, if you can't do that, you shouldn't be on a bike. The whole point of motorcycle training here is to inculcate anticipation in the rider. Ideally, you shouldn't be in the situation where you have to swerve. Vehicle control is taught in a test needed before you can actually ride on the road. Many things cannot be anticipated; the truck in front starting to shed its load of topsoil, for example. Or the boat coming off the trailer. Or the unfortunate soul falling off the overpass. (Guy drove his pickup off an overpass on to the highway beneath a couple-three years back in Toronto. Missing the instantaneous truck was apparently non-trivial, but several folks managed.) Small kids running from between the parked cars. Also, there is no avoidance maneouvre in the (much easier) car test. If a test is causing crashes, for whatever reason, it's a bad test in my book. It sounds like it's causing *falls*. In a sensible world, you train under worse conditions than you expect to actually encounter, and do things more difficult than you expect the task to regularly require. Otherwise you're not going to perform well when something unusually bad happens. I can't believe that the manoeuvre is either inherently difficult (one does that one on a bicycle, too, often; frequently to miss the nasties like storm drains along the edge of the road) or that having to know how to do it in the rain on the Isle of the Mighty is an unreasonable expectation. Also, 50 km/hr is _residential street speed_ around here; the posted maximum for exactly the kind of place where small children suddenly appearing in the road from between parked cars is a real hazard. If you want to argue that some of these people have no business taking the test, or that the driving standards should include an equivalent manoeuvre, sure, I'd go for that. But a lot of the point of this sort of test is to keep people without some minimum standard of competence off the road. -- Graydon -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On 5/26/09, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote: - Original Message - From: mike wilson Subject: Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder Could end up as the closest thing to perpetual motion we have seen: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8067672.stm Good Lord, if you can't do that, you shouldn't be on a bike. I'll agree with that. The whole point of motorcycle training here is to inculcate anticipation in the rider. Ideally, you shouldn't be in the situation where you have to swerve. Vehicle control is taught in a test needed before you can actually ride on the road. Also, there is no avoidance maneouvre in the (much easier) car test. If a test is causing crashes, for whatever reason, it's a bad test in my book. Perhaps the training process is at fault, rather than the test, though. Here in the US most States don't require a motorcycle training program. Tests vary from ridiculous (come to a complete stop without putting your foot down and then go again) to worthless (maneuver your bike around an obstacle course that's too tight for anything other than the smallest street legal dirt bikes) to just silly (accelerate to 15mph and then stop in the box). About 14 or 15 years ago I took a bike trip from central Missouri to San Antonio, TX. Since I wanted to see Dallas I chose to drive straight through. Traffic there was bumper to bumper and rarely exceeded 10mph. Upon arriving in San Antonio I learned that bumper to bumper traffic traveled at about 70mph. Shortly after leaving I-35 for the loop toward Converse the cars in front of me started to bail out of the lane. Once there were no more cars in my lane I saw the ladder laying across. I swerved to the right, missing the ladder by inches and close enough to a car that I could have tapped on the driver's window. I credit off-road riding since age 12 with the ability to do that. Had I relied on a little DOT booklet and a driving course in a parking lot I'd probably still be part of the pavement in San Antonio. Testing needs to be harder and it needs to actually test a driver's ability. Parallel parking should not be the most difficult aspect. -- Scott Loveless Cigarette-free since December 14th, 2008 http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
I agree too. I took the Basic Motorcycle Safety Course before taking the license test back in 86 or 87. I had a bike for awhile from 89-91. If I ever got back on a motorcycle, I'd take the basic (again) the advanced course (which I never took) even though I'm still licensed for a motorcycle--you can imagine how rusty my skills are since I haven't driven since 91. Actually, yesterday while out with my husband, I playfully suggested I get a motorbike with a side-car. I highly recommend the course; here's MSF web page if anyone is interested. You can easily find courses in your state. http://www.msf-usa.org/ Cheers, Christine From: Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com Perhaps the training process is at fault, rather than the test, though. Here in the US most States don't require a motorcycle training program. Tests vary from ridiculous (come to a complete stop without putting your foot down and then go again) to worthless (maneuver your bike around an obstacle course that's too tight for anything other than the smallest street legal dirt bikes) to just silly (accelerate to 15mph and then stop in the box). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Been there, done that leaving a mine in Sesser, Illinois with 103 cars of metallurgical grade coal. Regards, Bob S. On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 9:18 AM, Graydon o...@uniserve.com wrote: On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 03:21:21PM +1000, Anthony Farr scripsit: Try about 100,000-150,000 tons of coal per train. 100-150 cars at 100 tons each, not 100,000 tons each. -- M. Adam Maas 100,000 ton trains are anything but common. I searched about and found this at a number of sources: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bU_3KfdG3fk Weight: 99,732 tonnes (109,935.711 US short tons, 98,156.885 UK long tons) Length: 7.35 km (4.57 miles) The fundamental limits on train size are engine traction and drawbar strength. Remember that when starting the train, at some point the engine to first car drawbar has the entire mass of the train on it; this turns out to be more of an issue than engine traction. Past a certain size, you get an awful ping noise as a drawbar breaks, and then you have *two* trains. -- Graydon -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Graydon wrote: On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 04:10:40PM +0100, mike wilson scripsit: William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote: - Original Message - From: mike wilson Could end up as the closest thing to perpetual motion we have seen: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8067672.stm Good Lord, if you can't do that, you shouldn't be on a bike. The whole point of motorcycle training here is to inculcate anticipation in the rider. Ideally, you shouldn't be in the situation where you have to swerve. Vehicle control is taught in a test needed before you can actually ride on the road. Many things cannot be anticipated; the truck in front starting to shed its load of topsoil, for example. Or the boat coming off the trailer. Or the unfortunate soul falling off the overpass. (Guy drove his pickup off an overpass on to the highway beneath a couple-three years back in Toronto. Missing the instantaneous truck was apparently non-trivial, but several folks managed.) Small kids running from between the parked cars. After a few years of motorcycle use, you would be suprised how much of that you _would_ pick up on. Kids running from between cars becomes automatic avoidance. I have avoided loose loads, a disconnected trailer and people throwing concrete blocks off an overpass. My best one was turning across traffic one foggy day I suddenly decided to stop, for no reason I could decide. Out of the fog, exceeding the limit, came a grey car with no lights on. More than once, my wife has asked why I was stopping - and then realised. Also, there is no avoidance maneouvre in the (much easier) car test. If a test is causing crashes, for whatever reason, it's a bad test in my book. It sounds like it's causing *falls*. In a sensible world, you train under worse conditions than you expect to actually encounter, and do things more difficult than you expect the task to regularly require. Otherwise you're not going to perform well when something unusually bad happens. I can't believe that the manoeuvre is either inherently difficult (one does that one on a bicycle, too, often; frequently to miss the nasties like storm drains along the edge of the road) or that having to know how to do it in the rain on the Isle of the Mighty is an unreasonable expectation. Also, 50 km/hr is _residential street speed_ around here; the posted maximum for exactly the kind of place where small children suddenly appearing in the road from between parked cars is a real hazard. If you want to argue that some of these people have no business taking the test, or that the driving standards should include an equivalent manoeuvre, sure, I'd go for that. But a lot of the point of this sort of test is to keep people without some minimum standard of competence off the road. The point is that the test, up to now, and therefore the training for it, has been to avoid this situation. To now drop it in is less than sensible. Undoubtedly training for, and taking, this test of skill is going to cause people to fall off and damage machinery. It could easily render a machine legally unroadworthy during the test. There is no equivalent in other vehicular tests. My conclusion is that it is solely designed to reduce the number of motorcyclists. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Scott Loveless wrote: Perhaps the training process is at fault, rather than the test, though. Here in the US most States don't require a motorcycle training program. Tests vary from ridiculous (come to a complete stop without putting your foot down and then go again) to worthless (maneuver your bike around an obstacle course that's too tight for anything other than the smallest street legal dirt bikes) to just silly (accelerate to 15mph and then stop in the box). Motorcycle training in the UK is possibly the toughest in the world. The novice rider has to firstly undertake a five-element session of training (where this new part is introduced and therefore the fuss) on basic machine handling, including a two-hour on-road ride. This allows you onto the road on a limited capapcity and HP machine. Within two years, you have to take the full test, which involves a theory test and a pursued ride over about 20 minutes riding. If you do not take and pass the test within the limit, you forfeit your licence and must begin again. After you take and pass the second phase test, you are limited to a machine within certain power (and power/weight ratio) range for two years. The first test has to be taken under the supervision of an accredited trainer at an approved centre. The second is pretty much impossible to pass without professional training. If you pass your bike test in the UK, you are undoubtedly an excellent rider. Or at least able to demonstrate that you can be. Plus, you are not poor -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 08:18:54PM +0100, mike wilson scripsit: Graydon wrote: [snip] Many things cannot be anticipated; the truck in front starting to shed its load of topsoil, for example. Or the boat coming off the trailer. Or the unfortunate soul falling off the overpass. (Guy drove his pickup off an overpass on to the highway beneath a couple-three years back in Toronto. Missing the instantaneous truck was apparently non-trivial, but several folks managed.) Small kids running from between the parked cars. After a few years of motorcycle use, you would be suprised how much of that you _would_ pick up on. I'm not Frank, but I have been known to bicycle in downtown Toronto. I don't imagine that it's a whole lot different except for not being inherently slow. Kids running from between cars becomes automatic avoidance. I have avoided loose loads, a disconnected trailer and people throwing concrete blocks off an overpass. My best one was turning across traffic one foggy day I suddenly decided to stop, for no reason I could decide. Out of the fog, exceeding the limit, came a grey car with no lights on. More than once, my wife has asked why I was stopping - and then realised. Sure. With long practise, you can get good at something. You're still not a Jedi; you can't spot things before they happen, and sometimes -- rocks on the road can mean interesting things on Hwy 11 up north of Superior, for example -- there's no way to avoid the event. [snip] If you want to argue that some of these people have no business taking the test, or that the driving standards should include an equivalent manoeuvre, sure, I'd go for that. But a lot of the point of this sort of test is to keep people without some minimum standard of competence off the road. The point is that the test, up to now, and therefore the training for it, has been to avoid this situation. But you can't, always, and it's (from the viewpoint of this bicyclist and occasional driver) a dead-simple, basic thing. To now drop it in is less than sensible. Undoubtedly training for, and taking, this test of skill is going to cause people to fall off and damage machinery. Care to explain why it's in any way challenging? It could easily render a machine legally unroadworthy during the test. There is no equivalent in other vehicular tests. My conclusion is that it is solely designed to reduce the number of motorcyclists. Usually this sort of thing gets backing as an attempt to reduce the number of motorcyclists in emergency rooms. (If it was entirely up to emergency room doctors, motorcycles as a class of vehicle would be banned outright.) Without seeing the statistics on UK motorcycle accidents, I have no idea how good their justification is, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's solid. My take on no equivalent is that the other tests should include it, and that it really ought not to be a known point; the better test is a surprise obstacle appearing at a set distance. -- Graydon -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Brian Walters wrote: G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html That's an awesome shot, Brian. -- Christian http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Thanks Christian. Much appreciated. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ On Tue, 26 May 2009 09:37 -0400, Christian christ...@skofteland.net wrote: Brian Walters wrote: G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html That's an awesome shot, Brian. -- Christian http://404mohawknotfound.blogspot.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - IMAP accessible web-mail -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Could end up as the closest thing to perpetual motion we have seen: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8067672.stm Good Lord, if you can't do that, you shouldn't be on a bike. The whole point of motorcycle training here is to inculcate anticipation in the rider. Ideally, you shouldn't be in the situation where you have to swerve. Vehicle control is taught in a test needed before you can actually ride on the road. Many things cannot be anticipated; the truck in front starting to shed its load of topsoil, for example. [...] Here's the new bicycle test: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8066461.stm Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 11:01:32PM +0100, Bob W scripsit: Could end up as the closest thing to perpetual motion we have seen: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8067672.stm Good Lord, if you can't do that, you shouldn't be on a bike. The whole point of motorcycle training here is to inculcate anticipation in the rider. Ideally, you shouldn't be in the situation where you have to swerve. Vehicle control is taught in a test needed before you can actually ride on the road. Many things cannot be anticipated; the truck in front starting to shed its load of topsoil, for example. [...] Here's the new bicycle test: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8066461.stm That's quite the interesting door behaviour on that lorry. Impressive hinges. -- Graydon -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On May 26, 2009, at 07:18 , Graydon wrote: The fundamental limits on train size are engine traction and drawbar strength. Remember that when starting the train, at some point the engine to first car drawbar has the entire mass of the train on it; this turns out to be more of an issue than engine traction. Past a certain size, you get an awful ping noise as a drawbar breaks, and then you have *two* trains. Isn't the drawbar heavily spring loaded, so as to allow the engine to at least get it's wheels turning a tiny bit before the weight of the train is slowly, but quickly, pressed upon it? I'm talking only a few inches of spring compression with a heavy load, but it does change the math a bit. Am unable to find any drawings or descriptions in cursory search, so I may be mistaken, confusing model railroad engines to line engines. Anyone know fer certain? Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com “If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn’t need to lug a camera.” –Lewis Hine -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
2009/5/26 Christian christ...@skofteland.net: Brian Walters wrote: G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html That's an awesome shot, Brian. Wot he said. Very cool photo. DS -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 05:03:10PM -0700, Joseph McAllister scripsit: On May 26, 2009, at 07:18 , Graydon wrote: The fundamental limits on train size are engine traction and drawbar strength. Remember that when starting the train, at some point the engine to first car drawbar has the entire mass of the train on it; this turns out to be more of an issue than engine traction. Past a certain size, you get an awful ping noise as a drawbar breaks, and then you have *two* trains. Isn't the drawbar heavily spring loaded, so as to allow the engine to at least get it's wheels turning a tiny bit before the weight of the train is slowly, but quickly, pressed upon it? I'm talking only a few inches of spring compression with a heavy load, but it does change the math a bit. That effects impulse -- the amount of time involved in applying a force -- but it doesn't change the you're trying to accelerate the whole train part. -- Graydon -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com wrote: On May 26, 2009, at 07:18 , Graydon wrote: The fundamental limits on train size are engine traction and drawbar strength. Remember that when starting the train, at some point the engine to first car drawbar has the entire mass of the train on it; this turns out to be more of an issue than engine traction. Past a certain size, you get an awful ping noise as a drawbar breaks, and then you have *two* trains. Isn't the drawbar heavily spring loaded, so as to allow the engine to at least get it's wheels turning a tiny bit before the weight of the train is slowly, but quickly, pressed upon it? I'm talking only a few inches of spring compression with a heavy load, but it does change the math a bit. Am unable to find any drawings or descriptions in cursory search, so I may be mistaken, confusing model railroad engines to line engines. Anyone know fer certain? Joseph McAllister Yes, and before starting a large train they push it together to take up the slack, which allows the train to get teh front cars moving before the rear cars, reducing the total force required as you only have to overcome one cars coefficient of static friction at a time. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
The fundamental limits on train size are engine traction and drawbar strength. Remember that when starting the train, at some point the engine to first car drawbar has the entire mass of the train on it; this turns out to be more of an issue than engine traction. Past a certain size, you get an awful ping noise as a drawbar breaks, and then you have *two* trains. -- Graydon I bet they carry a spare and a big wrench to fix that on the road. :-) Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com http://gallery.me.com/jomac http://web.me.com/jomac/show.me/Blog/Blog.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
They don't put all the engines at the front. Big coal/ore trains have their engines interspersed in two or three locations along the train. In practice they are several smaller trains hitched together but controlled by a single crew. regards, Anthony Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight (Anon) 2009/5/27 Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com: On May 26, 2009, at 07:18 , Graydon wrote: The fundamental limits on train size are engine traction and drawbar strength. Remember that when starting the train, at some point the engine to first car drawbar has the entire mass of the train on it; this turns out to be more of an issue than engine traction. Past a certain size, you get an awful ping noise as a drawbar breaks, and then you have *two* trains. Isn't the drawbar heavily spring loaded, so as to allow the engine to at least get it's wheels turning a tiny bit before the weight of the train is slowly, but quickly, pressed upon it? I'm talking only a few inches of spring compression with a heavy load, but it does change the math a bit. Am unable to find any drawings or descriptions in cursory search, so I may be mistaken, confusing model railroad engines to line engines. Anyone know fer certain? Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com “If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn’t need to lug a camera.” –Lewis Hine -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
There can be 6 inches of slack per car in a train. This can help you start a train rolling as you stretch out the accordion one car at a time. Remember the locomotives only weigh so much and the coefficient of friction of steel wheels on steel rail is only .03 or so (even if you're sanding the rail). Getting going can be tough. And being in the 100th car back can give you a bad case of whiplash as the momentum of 99 cars moving at 1/2 mile per hour accelerate you to 1/2 mile per hour instantly! But the slack can also play havoc with the train over the road. Imagine a slight grade, followed by a dip, followed by another grade and a 100 car train of loaded coal hoppers. The engines strain to take you over the first grade and you stretch out all the slack on the way up. But on the way down, you compress the slack out of the train and then play 'crack the whip' on the way up, pulling the slack back out. If you're lucky, you don't break a coupler and make 2 train segments. Regards, Bob S. On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Adam Maas a...@mawz.ca wrote: On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com wrote: On May 26, 2009, at 07:18 , Graydon wrote: The fundamental limits on train size are engine traction and drawbar strength. Remember that when starting the train, at some point the engine to first car drawbar has the entire mass of the train on it; this turns out to be more of an issue than engine traction. Past a certain size, you get an awful ping noise as a drawbar breaks, and then you have *two* trains. Isn't the drawbar heavily spring loaded, so as to allow the engine to at least get it's wheels turning a tiny bit before the weight of the train is slowly, but quickly, pressed upon it? I'm talking only a few inches of spring compression with a heavy load, but it does change the math a bit. Am unable to find any drawings or descriptions in cursory search, so I may be mistaken, confusing model railroad engines to line engines. Anyone know fer certain? Joseph McAllister Yes, and before starting a large train they push it together to take up the slack, which allows the train to get teh front cars moving before the rear cars, reducing the total force required as you only have to overcome one cars coefficient of static friction at a time. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
I certainly hear that almost every day. The park I take my dogs to is above and parallel to a double siding where one or two freights pass either very slowly or stop to allow the passenger train, or a third freight, pass on the main line. If they misjudge the a bit, the train(s) on the siding have to stop, and I get the stereo effect of the compressing couplings boo boo boo boo boo boo boom. Some minutes later, the opposite direction of stereo phasing greets me as the freight re-starts. Cheers Joe On May 26, 2009, at 20:29 , Bob Sullivan wrote: There can be 6 inches of slack per car in a train. This can help you start a train rolling as you stretch out the accordion one car at a time. Remember the locomotives only weigh so much and the coefficient of friction of steel wheels on steel rail is only .03 or so (even if you're sanding the rail). Getting going can be tough. And being in the 100th car back can give you a bad case of whiplash as the momentum of 99 cars moving at 1/2 mile per hour accelerate you to 1/2 mile per hour instantly! But the slack can also play havoc with the train over the road. Imagine a slight grade, followed by a dip, followed by another grade and a 100 car train of loaded coal hoppers. The engines strain to take you over the first grade and you stretch out all the slack on the way up. But on the way down, you compress the slack out of the train and then play 'crack the whip' on the way up, pulling the slack back out. If you're lucky, you don't break a coupler and make 2 train segments. Regards, Bob S. On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Adam Maas a...@mawz.ca wrote: On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com wrote: On May 26, 2009, at 07:18 , Graydon wrote: The fundamental limits on train size are engine traction and drawbar strength. Remember that when starting the train, at some point the engine to first car drawbar has the entire mass of the train on it; this turns out to be more of an issue than engine traction. Past a certain size, you get an awful ping noise as a drawbar breaks, and then you have *two* trains. Isn't the drawbar heavily spring loaded, so as to allow the engine to at least get it's wheels turning a tiny bit before the weight of the train is slowly, but quickly, pressed upon it? I'm talking only a few inches of spring compression with a heavy load, but it does change the math a bit. Am unable to find any drawings or descriptions in cursory search, so I may be mistaken, confusing model railroad engines to line engines. Anyone know fer certain? Joseph McAllister Yes, and before starting a large train they push it together to take up the slack, which allows the train to get teh front cars moving before the rear cars, reducing the total force required as you only have to overcome one cars coefficient of static friction at a time. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com http://gallery.me.com/jomac http://web.me.com/jomac/show.me/Blog/Blog.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On May 26, 2009, at 20:29 , Bob Sullivan wrote: There can be 6 inches of slack per car in a train. This can help you start a train rolling as you stretch out the accordion one car at a time. Remember the locomotives only weigh so much and the coefficient of friction of steel wheels on steel rail is only .03 or so (even if you're sanding the rail). Getting going can be tough. And being in the 100th car back can give you a bad case of whiplash as the momentum of 99 cars moving at 1/2 mile per hour accelerate you to 1/2 mile per hour instantly! But the slack can also play havoc with the train over the road. Imagine a slight grade, followed by a dip, followed by another grade and a 100 car train of loaded coal hoppers. The engines strain to take you over the first grade and you stretch out all the slack on the way up. But on the way down, you compress the slack out of the train and then play 'crack the whip' on the way up, pulling the slack back out. If you're lucky, you don't break a coupler and make 2 train segments. Regards, Bob S. Probably does not happen much anymore without a defect or a rapidly arising situation, given that the modern engines are controlled digitally, and that control is, among other things, modified by the digital strain gauges that are located throughout the construct. Joseph McAllister Pentaxian http://gallery.me.com/jomac http://web.me.com/jomac/show.me/Blog/Blog.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
John, The arguement breaks down on the cost to build rail service to every small town in order to feed the big towns. Regards, Bob S. In the mid 60s here there was a wholesale and much-lamented closure of small, unprofitable railway lines that linked tiny communities. Many of them were turned into walking and cycling tracks through beautiful and fairly remote country (but no train to take you there!). My schoolmates and I helped with the building of one in Derbyshire called the Tissington Trail. The railway station in the town where we boarded was pulled down and redeveloped as a swimming pool, which was a great improvement over the awful unheated outdoor pool we had previously had to use. If you read literature of the early 20th century you notice that these small lines were quite embedded into the social fabric of the day, even if they were unprofitable. Some of the stations were built solely to serve the local big house, and in PG Wodehouse's books you see Wooster and Jeeves and the like making extensive use of them for weekend country house parties. It's considered to be an inevitable tragedy that so many were closed, because of the impact on rural communities, and it's quite possible that many of them could have been made payable, or subsidised to keep them open for social reasons. The distribution of support for different transport schemes has been unfairly loaded in favour of roads for decades. Most of the lines were probably never profitable even when they were built. The early railway boom in this country turned into a bubble rather like the dot.com boom. The railway lines were built as vanity or speculative projects off the back of inflated share prices. When the bubble burst a lot of people lost a lot of money and we were left with a wonderful infrastructure that could rarely pay for itself and which was dealt the death blow after WW1 when road transport came into its own. I'm still convinced that if the government spent as much money on the railways and had the level of commitment to them that they have now to the road lobby we would all be a lot better off, and so would the environment. Bob On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 2:08 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Bob Sullivan It's the distance between cities that kills rail here. Except on the east coast, travel times between big cities require an overnight ride. Planes are so much faster for anything over 200 miles. Been that way since 1947... Regards, Bob S. There are a couple of flaws I find with that argument ... Who says service has to be only between big cities? Seems to me local services are what makes rail transportation viable. Feed from the small towns into the big cities and back again; and take the high speed expresses between big cities. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
2009/5/25 Bob W p...@web-options.com: In the mid 60s here there was a wholesale and much-lamented closure of small, unprofitable railway lines that linked tiny communities. Many of them were turned into walking and cycling tracks through beautiful and fairly remote country (but no train to take you there!). We never had that much railroad infrastructure, but it's been happening here too. Another stupid thing that a Norwegian government did was to privatise the national rail services. Not so stupid in itself, maybe, but they retained ownership for the track infrastructure. Subsequent governments consequently refused to allocate money to maintenance of the infrastructure. This has gone on for three decades, and now we have new, excellent trains that stand still, or worse collide, because signalling systems, power supplies, etc. is coming apart. I believe that whatever the country, there are serious faults to how railroads are managed. :-( Jostein -- http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ http://alunfoto.blogspot.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Bob, That's an interesting thought on railroads - creating a tech bubble in the 1800's?! And seeing some maps of England's canal boat system make me wonder about rail. Perhaps the need was less than I imagined. One advantage of railroads is they are cheaper to build than digging canals, and you could burn cheap fuel (wood or coal) and get great mechanical advantage. Carrying the freight wasn't via horse power, it was by steam power! The opening of the N.American prairies to farming led to an explosion in railroads for the US. At one time not long ago, no point in the state of Iowa (300 miles by 400 miles) was more than 1/2 mile from a rail line. Rail was the only way to get the grain to market. (This caused great havoc with the railroads later when they tried to abandon lines and met with serious government opposition/NO's.) US transportation was different in the 1920's when Major Dwight D. Eisenhower led a road trip across the country with the vehicles that had helped win 'The Great War'. It took him a year to cross the country and he lamented the conditions of the roads. Roads were paved in the cities, but not so much between cities! Regards, Bob S. On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 2:16 AM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: John, The arguement breaks down on the cost to build rail service to every small town in order to feed the big towns. Regards, Bob S. In the mid 60s here there was a wholesale and much-lamented closure of small, unprofitable railway lines that linked tiny communities. Many of them were turned into walking and cycling tracks through beautiful and fairly remote country (but no train to take you there!). My schoolmates and I helped with the building of one in Derbyshire called the Tissington Trail. The railway station in the town where we boarded was pulled down and redeveloped as a swimming pool, which was a great improvement over the awful unheated outdoor pool we had previously had to use. If you read literature of the early 20th century you notice that these small lines were quite embedded into the social fabric of the day, even if they were unprofitable. Some of the stations were built solely to serve the local big house, and in PG Wodehouse's books you see Wooster and Jeeves and the like making extensive use of them for weekend country house parties. It's considered to be an inevitable tragedy that so many were closed, because of the impact on rural communities, and it's quite possible that many of them could have been made payable, or subsidised to keep them open for social reasons. The distribution of support for different transport schemes has been unfairly loaded in favour of roads for decades. Most of the lines were probably never profitable even when they were built. The early railway boom in this country turned into a bubble rather like the dot.com boom. The railway lines were built as vanity or speculative projects off the back of inflated share prices. When the bubble burst a lot of people lost a lot of money and we were left with a wonderful infrastructure that could rarely pay for itself and which was dealt the death blow after WW1 when road transport came into its own. I'm still convinced that if the government spent as much money on the railways and had the level of commitment to them that they have now to the road lobby we would all be a lot better off, and so would the environment. Bob On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 2:08 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Bob Sullivan It's the distance between cities that kills rail here. Except on the east coast, travel times between big cities require an overnight ride. Planes are so much faster for anything over 200 miles. Been that way since 1947... Regards, Bob S. There are a couple of flaws I find with that argument ... Who says service has to be only between big cities? Seems to me local services are what makes rail transportation viable. Feed from the small towns into the big cities and back again; and take the high speed expresses between big cities. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
It wasn't just canals that suffered from the impact of the railways - although a lot of railway lines are built on the paths of old canals - it was also the stagecoaches. The trains killed the stagecoach trade very dead very quickly. Despite their faults the railways were much faster at moving freight as well as passengers around the country. The London newspapers could be in Birmingham by the early afternoon of the same day they were printed. The stagecoaches just couldn't compete. From the death of the stagecoach in about the 1840s to the rise of the motor car after WW1 the roads were crumbling and left to the horses, walkers and cyclists to enjoy. It must have been a blissful time in many ways for many people. Bob -Original Message- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Bob Sullivan Sent: 25 May 2009 14:12 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder Bob, That's an interesting thought on railroads - creating a tech bubble in the 1800's?! And seeing some maps of England's canal boat system make me wonder about rail. Perhaps the need was less than I imagined. One advantage of railroads is they are cheaper to build than digging canals, and you could burn cheap fuel (wood or coal) and get great mechanical advantage. Carrying the freight wasn't via horse power, it was by steam power! The opening of the N.American prairies to farming led to an explosion in railroads for the US. At one time not long ago, no point in the state of Iowa (300 miles by 400 miles) was more than 1/2 mile from a rail line. Rail was the only way to get the grain to market. (This caused great havoc with the railroads later when they tried to abandon lines and met with serious government opposition/NO's.) US transportation was different in the 1920's when Major Dwight D. Eisenhower led a road trip across the country with the vehicles that had helped win 'The Great War'. It took him a year to cross the country and he lamented the conditions of the roads. Roads were paved in the cities, but not so much between cities! Regards, Bob S. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 7:43 AM, Brian Walters supera1...@fastmail.fm wrote: G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html That's a terrific train shot! cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Roads are cheaper and easier to maintain than railways, starting with the fact that the minimum standard for a road is a dirt track, the minimum standard for a railway is damn near the maximum standard for a railway. The people who use the roads usually own their own means of transport. Unless a large corporation owns the trains then the government owns the trains. Anything the government owns is an operating expense, anything the individuals own is a source or revenue, (it can be taxed and the government doesn't have to pay for it's maintenance). Need we go into the fact that Large corporations can buy legislatures to get preferential tax treatment, something much harder for individuals to do? You don't need a road lobby, an enlightened government will pick roads over rails any time they do a reasonable analysis. Then there's the fact that reasonably well off people seem to prefer to travel in their own cars, they like privacy, they like to control their own schedules, they don't want to sit next to this guy http://www.spock.com/i/H01ljdNSw/The-Scary-Guy.jpg Bob W wrote: John, The arguement breaks down on the cost to build rail service to every small town in order to feed the big towns. Regards, Bob S. In the mid 60s here there was a wholesale and much-lamented closure of small, unprofitable railway lines that linked tiny communities. Many of them were turned into walking and cycling tracks through beautiful and fairly remote country (but no train to take you there!). My schoolmates and I helped with the building of one in Derbyshire called the Tissington Trail. The railway station in the town where we boarded was pulled down and redeveloped as a swimming pool, which was a great improvement over the awful unheated outdoor pool we had previously had to use. If you read literature of the early 20th century you notice that these small lines were quite embedded into the social fabric of the day, even if they were unprofitable. Some of the stations were built solely to serve the local big house, and in PG Wodehouse's books you see Wooster and Jeeves and the like making extensive use of them for weekend country house parties. It's considered to be an inevitable tragedy that so many were closed, because of the impact on rural communities, and it's quite possible that many of them could have been made payable, or subsidised to keep them open for social reasons. The distribution of support for different transport schemes has been unfairly loaded in favour of roads for decades. Most of the lines were probably never profitable even when they were built. The early railway boom in this country turned into a bubble rather like the dot.com boom. The railway lines were built as vanity or speculative projects off the back of inflated share prices. When the bubble burst a lot of people lost a lot of money and we were left with a wonderful infrastructure that could rarely pay for itself and which was dealt the death blow after WW1 when road transport came into its own. I'm still convinced that if the government spent as much money on the railways and had the level of commitment to them that they have now to the road lobby we would all be a lot better off, and so would the environment. Bob On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 2:08 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Bob Sullivan It's the distance between cities that kills rail here. Except on the east coast, travel times between big cities require an overnight ride. Planes are so much faster for anything over 200 miles. Been that way since 1947... Regards, Bob S. There are a couple of flaws I find with that argument ... Who says service has to be only between big cities? Seems to me local services are what makes rail transportation viable. Feed from the small towns into the big cities and back again; and take the high speed expresses between big cities. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -- The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog. --G. K. Chesterton -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Bob Sullivan wrote: At one time not long ago, no point in the state of Iowa (300 miles by 400 miles) was more than 1/2 mile from a rail line. That's a facinating stat. Where does it come from? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: Roads are cheaper and easier to maintain than railways, starting with the fact that the minimum standard for a road is a dirt track, the minimum standard for a railway is damn near the maximum standard for a railway. A dirt track is a dirt track, not a road. Outside of Europe, it's a road. Not every road is paved, or even gravel. Anybody who drives outside of Europe will see some dirt roads or double track at some point in their lives. A lot of us have even lived at the end of one. Europe being small and heavily populated has paved most everything that takes wheeled vehicles. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Fact from somewhere in my past, probably related to me by Harry Meisland (sp) when I worked for the Illinois Central Railroad. We were working on line abandonments and Harry related some of the history of the 'Granger' railroads in the US - Chicago Northwestern - Chicago, Burlington Quincy - Chicago, Rock Island Pacific - Chicago, Milwaukee St.Paul. They were established to bring produce to market. As we looked to abandon low usage branch lines (often less than 1-2 carloads per year), we found that the land was 'government granted' to the railroad and would revert to the adjacent property owners. These tracks were done early in the settlement of the region. Regards, Bob S. On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 11:00 AM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Bob Sullivan wrote: At one time not long ago, no point in the state of Iowa (300 miles by 400 miles) was more than 1/2 mile from a rail line. That's a facinating stat. Where does it come from? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Roads are cheaper and easier to maintain than railways, starting with the fact that the minimum standard for a road is a dirt track, the minimum standard for a railway is damn near the maximum standard for a railway. A dirt track is a dirt track, not a road. The people who use the roads usually own their own means of transport. Unless a large corporation owns the trains then the government owns the trains. In Britain large corporations own the trains and the tracks, and have done for most of the history of the railways. They were nationalised for about 45 years after WW2 but were consistently starved of funds as a matter of policy by transport ministers who answered only to the road lobby. The fact that they survived at all is little short of a miracle. Anything the government owns is an operating expense, anything the individuals own is a source or revenue, (it can be taxed and the government doesn't have to pay for it's maintenance). In Britain the government owns the roads and pays for their maintenance. The government also subsidises the road haulage industry by not making them pay taxes commensurate with the amount of damage they inflict on the roads and the rest of the environment. Need we go into the fact that Large corporations can buy legislatures to get preferential tax treatment, something much harder for individuals to do? In Britain that's what the road lobby - the hauliers, petrol companies and road builders - do. That's why the country is covered with tarmac. You don't need a road lobby, an enlightened government will pick roads over rails any time they do a reasonable analysis. In Britain the government has never done a reasonable analysis of anything, least of all transport. The office of the transport minister has a revolving door. Governments are too focused on the short term economic and electoral cycles to want to do anything to sort out transport properly. Then there's the fact that reasonably well off people seem to prefer to travel in their own cars, they like privacy, they like to control their own schedules, In Britain nobody controls their own transport schedule except pedestrians and cyclists. Drivers least of all. they don't want to sit next to this guy http://www.spock.com/i/H01ljdNSw/The-Scary-Guy.jpg In Britain we make our own privacy by refusing to acknowledge that other people are on the same train. Bob Bob W wrote: John, The arguement breaks down on the cost to build rail service to every small town in order to feed the big towns. Regards, Bob S. In the mid 60s here there was a wholesale and much-lamented closure of small, unprofitable railway lines that linked tiny communities. Many of them were turned into walking and cycling tracks through beautiful and fairly remote country (but no train to take you there!). My schoolmates and I helped with the building of one in Derbyshire called the Tissington Trail. The railway station in the town where we boarded was pulled down and redeveloped as a swimming pool, which was a great improvement over the awful unheated outdoor pool we had previously had to use. If you read literature of the early 20th century you notice that these small lines were quite embedded into the social fabric of the day, even if they were unprofitable. Some of the stations were built solely to serve the local big house, and in PG Wodehouse's books you see Wooster and Jeeves and the like making extensive use of them for weekend country house parties. It's considered to be an inevitable tragedy that so many were closed, because of the impact on rural communities, and it's quite possible that many of them could have been made payable, or subsidised to keep them open for social reasons. The distribution of support for different transport schemes has been unfairly loaded in favour of roads for decades. Most of the lines were probably never profitable even when they were built. The early railway boom in this country turned into a bubble rather like the dot.com boom. The railway lines were built as vanity or speculative projects off the back of inflated share prices. When the bubble burst a lot of people lost a lot of money and we were left with a wonderful infrastructure that could rarely pay for itself and which was dealt the death blow after WW1 when road transport came into its own. I'm still convinced that if the government spent as much money on the railways and had the level of commitment to them that they have now to the road lobby we would all be a lot better off, and so would the environment. Bob On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 2:08 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Bob Sullivan It's the distance between cities that kills rail here. Except on the east coast, travel times between big cities
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 12:00 PM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Bob Sullivan wrote: At one time not long ago, no point in the state of Iowa (300 miles by 400 miles) was more than 1/2 mile from a rail line. That's a facinating stat. Where does it come from? Iowa? cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
A road is anything the government designates it as. You've obviously never stood with a map in your hands vainly trying to find the plainly marked improved road, only to be informed that you're standing in the middle of it. For the rest you have some points, but most apply to Brittan and few other places. Often you make my point for me. Your government owns the trains, which are an expense, so maintenance is minimal. In the US road taxes, in the form of gasoline taxes not only pay for road repair but also subsidize various rail systems, which cannot pay for themselves out operating revenue. Bob W wrote: Roads are cheaper and easier to maintain than railways, starting with the fact that the minimum standard for a road is a dirt track, the minimum standard for a railway is damn near the maximum standard for a railway. A dirt track is a dirt track, not a road. The people who use the roads usually own their own means of transport. Unless a large corporation owns the trains then the government owns the trains. In Britain large corporations own the trains and the tracks, and have done for most of the history of the railways. They were nationalised for about 45 years after WW2 but were consistently starved of funds as a matter of policy by transport ministers who answered only to the road lobby. The fact that they survived at all is little short of a miracle. Anything the government owns is an operating expense, anything the individuals own is a source or revenue, (it can be taxed and the government doesn't have to pay for it's maintenance). In Britain the government owns the roads and pays for their maintenance. The government also subsidises the road haulage industry by not making them pay taxes commensurate with the amount of damage they inflict on the roads and the rest of the environment. Need we go into the fact that Large corporations can buy legislatures to get preferential tax treatment, something much harder for individuals to do? In Britain that's what the road lobby - the hauliers, petrol companies and road builders - do. That's why the country is covered with tarmac. You don't need a road lobby, an enlightened government will pick roads over rails any time they do a reasonable analysis. In Britain the government has never done a reasonable analysis of anything, least of all transport. The office of the transport minister has a revolving door. Governments are too focused on the short term economic and electoral cycles to want to do anything to sort out transport properly. Then there's the fact that reasonably well off people seem to prefer to travel in their own cars, they like privacy, they like to control their own schedules, In Britain nobody controls their own transport schedule except pedestrians and cyclists. Drivers least of all. they don't want to sit next to this guy http://www.spock.com/i/H01ljdNSw/The-Scary-Guy.jpg In Britain we make our own privacy by refusing to acknowledge that other people are on the same train. Bob Bob W wrote: John, The arguement breaks down on the cost to build rail service to every small town in order to feed the big towns. Regards, Bob S. In the mid 60s here there was a wholesale and much-lamented closure of small, unprofitable railway lines that linked tiny communities. Many of them were turned into walking and cycling tracks through beautiful and fairly remote country (but no train to take you there!). My schoolmates and I helped with the building of one in Derbyshire called the Tissington Trail. The railway station in the town where we boarded was pulled down and redeveloped as a swimming pool, which was a great improvement over the awful unheated outdoor pool we had previously had to use. If you read literature of the early 20th century you notice that these small lines were quite embedded into the social fabric of the day, even if they were unprofitable. Some of the stations were built solely to serve the local big house, and in PG Wodehouse's books you see Wooster and Jeeves and the like making extensive use of them for weekend country house parties. It's considered to be an inevitable tragedy that so many were closed, because of the impact on rural communities, and it's quite possible that many of them could have been made payable, or subsidised to keep them open for social reasons. The distribution of support for different transport schemes has been unfairly loaded in favour of roads for decades. Most of the lines were probably never profitable even when they were built. The early railway boom in this country turned into a bubble rather like the dot.com
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
frank theriault wrote: On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 12:00 PM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Bob Sullivan wrote: At one time not long ago, no point in the state of Iowa (300 miles by 400 miles) was more than 1/2 mile from a rail line. That's a facinating stat. Where does it come from? Iowa? cheers, frank Thank you, Capitan Obvious! -- -- The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog. --G. K. Chesterton -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:14 PM, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: A road is anything the government designates it as. You've obviously never stood with a map in your hands vainly trying to find the plainly marked improved road, only to be informed that you're standing in the middle of it. For the rest you have some points, but most apply to Brittan and few other places. Often you make my point for me. Your government owns the trains, which are an expense, so maintenance is minimal. In the US road taxes, in the form of gasoline taxes not only pay for road repair but also subsidize various rail systems, which cannot pay for themselves out operating revenue. Bob W wrote: Actually, most rail in the US pays for itself. Most rail _PASSENGER_ service does not, despite being both subsidized and also using right of way that is payed for by a 3rd party (the freight railroads) at nominal cost. Only some of the commuter services and Amtrak's high-speed corridor in the East run on dedicated right of way and the Amtrak right of way pays for itself (Amtrak's losses come from the other less-popular routes). -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Adam Maas wrote: On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:14 PM, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: A road is anything the government designates it as. You've obviously never stood with a map in your hands vainly trying to find the plainly marked improved road, only to be informed that you're standing in the middle of it. For the rest you have some points, but most apply to Brittan and few other places. Often you make my point for me. Your government owns the trains, which are an expense, so maintenance is minimal. In the US road taxes, in the form of gasoline taxes not only pay for road repair but also subsidize various rail systems, which cannot pay for themselves out operating revenue. Bob W wrote: Actually, most rail in the US pays for itself. Most rail _PASSENGER_ service does not, despite being both subsidized and also using right of way that is payed for by a 3rd party (the freight railroads) at nominal cost. Only some of the commuter services and Amtrak's high-speed corridor in the East run on dedicated right of way and the Amtrak right of way pays for itself (Amtrak's losses come from the other less-popular routes). I forgot the Passenger Caveat. Yes freight pays passenger service does not, and that's been mostly true for about 100 years, I suspect that the Amtrack High Speed services only show a profit through a certain amount of balance sheet magic. -- -- The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog. --G. K. Chesterton -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:14 PM, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: snip In the US road taxes, in the form of gasoline taxes not only pay for road repair but also subsidize various rail systems, which cannot pay for themselves out operating revenue. That rather rankles me. Gas taxes don't go into some special fund which is only used to pay for the upkeep of roads and pay for money-losing railways. Like all other taxes, gas taxes go into the general coffers of the government and are used to pay for all government expenditures. You make it sound like motorists pay their own way (ie: they alone are paying for road repairs) as well as subsidize railways, when in fact ~all~ tax payers (motorists or not) contribute for the upkeep of roads and railways. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:26 PM, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: Adam Maas wrote: In the US road taxes, in the form of gasoline taxes not only pay for road repair but also subsidize various rail systems, which cannot pay for themselves out operating revenue. Bob W wrote: Actually, most rail in the US pays for itself. Most rail _PASSENGER_ service does not, despite being both subsidized and also using right of way that is payed for by a 3rd party (the freight railroads) at nominal cost. Only some of the commuter services and Amtrak's high-speed corridor in the East run on dedicated right of way and the Amtrak right of way pays for itself (Amtrak's losses come from the other less-popular routes). I forgot the Passenger Caveat. Yes freight pays passenger service does not, and that's been mostly true for about 100 years, I suspect that the Amtrack High Speed services only show a profit through a certain amount of balance sheet magic. -- Passenger service used to show profits when mail service was also supplied by rail. As soon as it moved to air and truck, Passenger service quit being profitable in the main. Mail was what made rail passenger service viable. The Amtrak High Speed service makes a profit by being a short very high usage run. It's notably faster and less hassle than flying or driving. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
PJ, As others have noted, there are roads and there are dirt tracks and ox cart paths. Compared to an ox cart path, a railroad right of way is expensive. It takes 2 steel rails, cross ties set in a gravel roadbed, ditching and a subsoil to support the roadbed and carry the weight. Modern paved roads are even more expensive. They require a wider right of way, the same or better subsoil and ditching preparation, then several layers of materials to distribute the weight back down to the ground, finishing with several inches of concrete. (The US has heavier trucks than Europe and can require 10 inches of concrete.) But it all comes down to cost per ton of traffic handled. A dirt path is fine for 5-10 horses a day but would never do for the 10 million tons of coal that pass me on the railroad track on a daily coal train (100 cars at 100,000+ tons each). Imagine trying to get 10 million tons of coal into Chicago on a dirt path in the rain. Regards, Bob S. On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 10:00 AM, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: Roads are cheaper and easier to maintain than railways, starting with the fact that the minimum standard for a road is a dirt track, the minimum standard for a railway is damn near the maximum standard for a railway. The people who use the roads usually own their own means of transport. Unless a large corporation owns the trains then the government owns the trains. Anything the government owns is an operating expense, anything the individuals own is a source or revenue, (it can be taxed and the government doesn't have to pay for it's maintenance). Need we go into the fact that Large corporations can buy legislatures to get preferential tax treatment, something much harder for individuals to do? You don't need a road lobby, an enlightened government will pick roads over rails any time they do a reasonable analysis. Then there's the fact that reasonably well off people seem to prefer to travel in their own cars, they like privacy, they like to control their own schedules, they don't want to sit next to this guy http://www.spock.com/i/H01ljdNSw/The-Scary-Guy.jpg Bob W wrote: John, The arguement breaks down on the cost to build rail service to every small town in order to feed the big towns. Regards, Bob S. In the mid 60s here there was a wholesale and much-lamented closure of small, unprofitable railway lines that linked tiny communities. Many of them were turned into walking and cycling tracks through beautiful and fairly remote country (but no train to take you there!). My schoolmates and I helped with the building of one in Derbyshire called the Tissington Trail. The railway station in the town where we boarded was pulled down and redeveloped as a swimming pool, which was a great improvement over the awful unheated outdoor pool we had previously had to use. If you read literature of the early 20th century you notice that these small lines were quite embedded into the social fabric of the day, even if they were unprofitable. Some of the stations were built solely to serve the local big house, and in PG Wodehouse's books you see Wooster and Jeeves and the like making extensive use of them for weekend country house parties. It's considered to be an inevitable tragedy that so many were closed, because of the impact on rural communities, and it's quite possible that many of them could have been made payable, or subsidised to keep them open for social reasons. The distribution of support for different transport schemes has been unfairly loaded in favour of roads for decades. Most of the lines were probably never profitable even when they were built. The early railway boom in this country turned into a bubble rather like the dot.com boom. The railway lines were built as vanity or speculative projects off the back of inflated share prices. When the bubble burst a lot of people lost a lot of money and we were left with a wonderful infrastructure that could rarely pay for itself and which was dealt the death blow after WW1 when road transport came into its own. I'm still convinced that if the government spent as much money on the railways and had the level of commitment to them that they have now to the road lobby we would all be a lot better off, and so would the environment. Bob On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 2:08 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Bob Sullivan It's the distance between cities that kills rail here. Except on the east coast, travel times between big cities require an overnight ride. Planes are so much faster for anything over 200 miles. Been that way since 1947... Regards, Bob S. There are a couple of flaws I find with that argument ... Who says service has to be only between big cities? Seems to me local services are what makes rail transportation viable. Feed from the small towns into the big cities and back again; and take the high speed
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:31 PM, frank theriault knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:14 PM, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: snip In the US road taxes, in the form of gasoline taxes not only pay for road repair but also subsidize various rail systems, which cannot pay for themselves out operating revenue. That rather rankles me. Gas taxes don't go into some special fund which is only used to pay for the upkeep of roads and pay for money-losing railways. Like all other taxes, gas taxes go into the general coffers of the government and are used to pay for all government expenditures. You make it sound like motorists pay their own way (ie: they alone are paying for road repairs) as well as subsidize railways, when in fact ~all~ tax payers (motorists or not) contribute for the upkeep of roads and railways. cheers, frank Depends on the jurisdiction, in some gas taxes go into a transportation fund (which typically ends up paying for roads, bridges, airports and rail), in others its general fund. The tendency has been to move to the latter so that politicians can fund social services via lucrative gas taxes. Note that if you're merely talking subsidy level, indirect subsidies of the airlines are far higher than anything else per passenger mile. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com wrote: PJ, As others have noted, there are roads and there are dirt tracks and ox cart paths. Compared to an ox cart path, a railroad right of way is expensive. It takes 2 steel rails, cross ties set in a gravel roadbed, ditching and a subsoil to support the roadbed and carry the weight. Modern paved roads are even more expensive. They require a wider right of way, the same or better subsoil and ditching preparation, then several layers of materials to distribute the weight back down to the ground, finishing with several inches of concrete. (The US has heavier trucks than Europe and can require 10 inches of concrete.) But it all comes down to cost per ton of traffic handled. A dirt path is fine for 5-10 horses a day but would never do for the 10 million tons of coal that pass me on the railroad track on a daily coal train (100 cars at 100,000+ tons each). Imagine trying to get 10 million tons of coal into Chicago on a dirt path in the rain. Regards, Bob S. Bob, Try about 100,000-150,000 tons of coal per train. 100-150 cars at 100 tons each, not 100,000 tons each. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
A road is anything the government designates it as. You've obviously never stood with a map in your hands vainly trying to find the plainly marked improved road, only to be informed that you're standing in the middle of it. I've travelled all over the world. I know what passes for a road in a lot of places. In Britain, which is the only country whose transport system I'm discussing, dirt tracks are not part of the road network. For the rest you have some points, but most apply to Brittan and few other places. I'm only talking about Britain. Often you make my point for me. Your government owns the trains, which are an expense, so maintenance is minimal. You didn't read my post properly. The government does not own the trains. In the US road taxes, in the form of gasoline taxes not only pay for road repair but also subsidize various rail systems, which cannot pay for themselves out operating revenue. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
As others have noted, there are roads and there are dirt tracks and ox cart paths. Compared to an ox cart path, a railroad right of way is expensive. It takes 2 steel rails, cross ties set in a gravel roadbed, ditching and a subsoil to support the roadbed and carry the weight. Modern paved roads are even more expensive. They require a wider right of way, the same or better subsoil and ditching preparation, then several layers of materials to distribute the weight back down to the ground, finishing with several inches of concrete. (The US has heavier trucks than Europe and can require 10 inches of concrete.) But it all comes down to cost per ton of traffic handled. A dirt path is fine for 5-10 horses a day but would never do for the 10 million tons of coal that pass me on the railroad track on a daily coal train (100 cars at 100,000+ tons each). Imagine trying to get 10 million tons of coal into Chicago on a dirt path in the rain. Snow White and the Seven Dwarves could do it. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: Snow White and the Seven Dwarves could do it. Actually, the Dwarves did all the hauling. Ms. White was in charge of domestic engineering. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
frank theriault wrote: On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:14 PM, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: snip In the US road taxes, in the form of gasoline taxes not only pay for road repair but also subsidize various rail systems, which cannot pay for themselves out operating revenue. That rather rankles me. Gas taxes don't go into some special fund which is only used to pay for the upkeep of roads and pay for money-losing railways. Like all other taxes, gas taxes go into the general coffers of the government and are used to pay for all government expenditures. You make it sound like motorists pay their own way (ie: they alone are paying for road repairs) as well as subsidize railways, when in fact ~all~ tax payers (motorists or not) contribute for the upkeep of roads and railways. cheers, frank Actually most US States and the US Federal Government maintain the fiction that there are Highway trust funds funded through fuel/road taxes originally dedicated to road repair and maintenance. In some cases purposes have been broadened in some to transportation trust funds. In those places that have repurposed those trust funds money no longer has to be regularly raided for other other transportation projects, most often these days for capitol expenditures on green light rail, then later when the lines don't pay for themselves, operating funds. Only in a few of the larger cities have the lines ever paid for themselves. It's not even hard to figure out the costs in the States that don't have such trust funds set up. The costs for highway maintenance are published the taxes collected on fuel are published you subtract one from the other and get the surplus. You do the same thing for government operated light/commuter rail and find the deficits. Yes sadly drivers pay for themselves and a lot more. -- -- The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog. --G. K. Chesterton -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Adam Maas wrote: On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:26 PM, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: Adam Maas wrote: In the US road taxes, in the form of gasoline taxes not only pay for road repair but also subsidize various rail systems, which cannot pay for themselves out operating revenue. Bob W wrote: Actually, most rail in the US pays for itself. Most rail _PASSENGER_ service does not, despite being both subsidized and also using right of way that is payed for by a 3rd party (the freight railroads) at nominal cost. Only some of the commuter services and Amtrak's high-speed corridor in the East run on dedicated right of way and the Amtrak right of way pays for itself (Amtrak's losses come from the other less-popular routes). I forgot the Passenger Caveat. Yes freight pays passenger service does not, and that's been mostly true for about 100 years, I suspect that the Amtrack High Speed services only show a profit through a certain amount of balance sheet magic. -- Passenger service used to show profits when mail service was also supplied by rail. As soon as it moved to air and truck, Passenger service quit being profitable in the main. Mail was what made rail passenger service viable. The Amtrak High Speed service makes a profit by being a short very high usage run. It's notably faster and less hassle than flying or driving. The High speed Acella service between Boston and NY shaves maybe 15 minutes off the time of the regular trains, it's not particularly high speed. It doesn't really compete against air travel, more against driving. I live right in that corridor and unless you're going from downtown to downtown driving wins. -- The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog. --G. K. Chesterton -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On 5/25/09, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: frank theriault wrote: On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:14 PM, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: snip In the US road taxes, in the form of gasoline taxes not only pay for road repair but also subsidize various rail systems, which cannot pay for themselves out operating revenue. That rather rankles me. Gas taxes don't go into some special fund which is only used to pay for the upkeep of roads and pay for money-losing railways. Like all other taxes, gas taxes go into the general coffers of the government and are used to pay for all government expenditures. You make it sound like motorists pay their own way (ie: they alone are paying for road repairs) as well as subsidize railways, when in fact ~all~ tax payers (motorists or not) contribute for the upkeep of roads and railways. cheers, frank Actually most US States and the US Federal Government maintain the fiction that there are Highway trust funds funded through fuel/road taxes originally dedicated to road repair and maintenance. In some cases purposes have been broadened in some to transportation trust funds. In those places that have repurposed those trust funds money no longer has to be regularly raided for other other transportation projects, most often these days for capitol expenditures on green light rail, then later when the lines don't pay for themselves, operating funds. Only in a few of the larger cities have the lines ever paid for themselves. It's not even hard to figure out the costs in the States that don't have such trust funds set up. The costs for highway maintenance are published the taxes collected on fuel are published you subtract one from the other and get the surplus. You do the same thing for government operated light/commuter rail and find the deficits. Yes sadly drivers pay for themselves and a lot more. That's simply not true. e.g. Here in PA state fuel taxes provided most, but not all, of PennDOT's funding. Now they're griping because people are driving less and they don't have as much fuel tax money. Jim Struzzi, the District 11 nincompoop, er, spokesman said, Fewer travelers do not mean less roadwork needs to be done. Basically, they're fishing for even more money from the general fund. So those of us who shed a car, drive less, take the bus or a bike, and do significantly less damage to the road are going to be required to pay more than our fair share in increased property, income, sales and other taxes. A few ideas. Make vehicle registration more expensive where a public transportation infrastructure already exists. Basically, discourage people in cities from owning more cars than they need. Use the money to help fund the building-out of light rail and bus systems. Or loan it to zipcar-like start-ups. Etc. Make registration fees proportional to vehicle weight and/or the number of axles. Florida has done something like this for a long time. When I lived in Orlando during the mid-90s annual registration for my motorcycle was about $15. My friend's pick-up truck cost a couple hundred a year. Use the money to fix the damn potholes. Tie registration fees to mileage. Drive a lot, pay a lot. There are lots of ways to make the people who use the roadway pay for the roadway without screwing everyone else. Unfortunately, the bureaucrats can't seem to imagine anything other than yet another tax hike. FWIW, I'd also like to see really damn difficult driver testing coupled with retesting in certain circumstances - cause an accident, go through the testing process again, etc. Back to the subject at hand, I still really like Brian's photo and there should be more steam trains. -- Scott Loveless Cigarette-free since December 14th, 2008 http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
I've never argued that a dirt track could handle regular heavy freight. We were talking about passenger travel. Yes of course if you have heavy freight needs built a track, it's most efficient, but it makes little sense for light duty or medium duty.. A simple oiled sand/gravel road will handle light freight, local automobile traffic and the daily or thrice daily bus. As traffic increases the road can be improved. Once you reach a certain level of commerce then the debate over the correct balance of rails vs roads is appropriate, but most likely you'll get too much of one and not enough of the other especially if a government is involved. Bob Sullivan wrote: PJ, As others have noted, there are roads and there are dirt tracks and ox cart paths. Compared to an ox cart path, a railroad right of way is expensive. It takes 2 steel rails, cross ties set in a gravel roadbed, ditching and a subsoil to support the roadbed and carry the weight. Modern paved roads are even more expensive. They require a wider right of way, the same or better subsoil and ditching preparation, then several layers of materials to distribute the weight back down to the ground, finishing with several inches of concrete. (The US has heavier trucks than Europe and can require 10 inches of concrete.) But it all comes down to cost per ton of traffic handled. A dirt path is fine for 5-10 horses a day but would never do for the 10 million tons of coal that pass me on the railroad track on a daily coal train (100 cars at 100,000+ tons each). Imagine trying to get 10 million tons of coal into Chicago on a dirt path in the rain. Regards, Bob S. On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 10:00 AM, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: Roads are cheaper and easier to maintain than railways, starting with the fact that the minimum standard for a road is a dirt track, the minimum standard for a railway is damn near the maximum standard for a railway. The people who use the roads usually own their own means of transport. Unless a large corporation owns the trains then the government owns the trains. Anything the government owns is an operating expense, anything the individuals own is a source or revenue, (it can be taxed and the government doesn't have to pay for it's maintenance). Need we go into the fact that Large corporations can buy legislatures to get preferential tax treatment, something much harder for individuals to do? You don't need a road lobby, an enlightened government will pick roads over rails any time they do a reasonable analysis. Then there's the fact that reasonably well off people seem to prefer to travel in their own cars, they like privacy, they like to control their own schedules, they don't want to sit next to this guy http://www.spock.com/i/H01ljdNSw/The-Scary-Guy.jpg Bob W wrote: John, The arguement breaks down on the cost to build rail service to every small town in order to feed the big towns. Regards, Bob S. In the mid 60s here there was a wholesale and much-lamented closure of small, unprofitable railway lines that linked tiny communities. Many of them were turned into walking and cycling tracks through beautiful and fairly remote country (but no train to take you there!). My schoolmates and I helped with the building of one in Derbyshire called the Tissington Trail. The railway station in the town where we boarded was pulled down and redeveloped as a swimming pool, which was a great improvement over the awful unheated outdoor pool we had previously had to use. If you read literature of the early 20th century you notice that these small lines were quite embedded into the social fabric of the day, even if they were unprofitable. Some of the stations were built solely to serve the local big house, and in PG Wodehouse's books you see Wooster and Jeeves and the like making extensive use of them for weekend country house parties. It's considered to be an inevitable tragedy that so many were closed, because of the impact on rural communities, and it's quite possible that many of them could have been made payable, or subsidised to keep them open for social reasons. The distribution of support for different transport schemes has been unfairly loaded in favour of roads for decades. Most of the lines were probably never profitable even when they were built. The early railway boom in this country turned into a bubble rather like the dot.com boom. The railway lines were built as vanity or speculative projects off the back of inflated share prices. When the bubble burst a lot of people lost a lot of money and we were left with a wonderful infrastructure that could rarely pay for itself and which was dealt the death blow after WW1 when road transport came into its own. I'm still convinced that if the government spent as much money on the railways and had the level of commitment to them that they have now to the road lobby we would all be a lot better off, and so would the environment. Bob
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote: That's simply not true. e.g. Here in PA state fuel taxes provided most, but not all, of PennDOT's funding. I think they're all lying. I think all taxes go into the same pot and go to wherever the hell the government (in its infinite wisdom) chooses to send them, including in their own pockets. Or to clean their moats. cheers, frank -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On 5/25/09, frank theriault knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote: That's simply not true. e.g. Here in PA state fuel taxes provided most, but not all, of PennDOT's funding. I think they're all lying. I think that's the understatement of the year. -- Scott Loveless Cigarette-free since December 14th, 2008 http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Sorry, mixing my car weight limits... On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Adam Maas a...@mawz.ca wrote: On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com wrote: PJ, As others have noted, there are roads and there are dirt tracks and ox cart paths. Compared to an ox cart path, a railroad right of way is expensive. It takes 2 steel rails, cross ties set in a gravel roadbed, ditching and a subsoil to support the roadbed and carry the weight. Modern paved roads are even more expensive. They require a wider right of way, the same or better subsoil and ditching preparation, then several layers of materials to distribute the weight back down to the ground, finishing with several inches of concrete. (The US has heavier trucks than Europe and can require 10 inches of concrete.) But it all comes down to cost per ton of traffic handled. A dirt path is fine for 5-10 horses a day but would never do for the 10 million tons of coal that pass me on the railroad track on a daily coal train (100 cars at 100,000+ tons each). Imagine trying to get 10 million tons of coal into Chicago on a dirt path in the rain. Regards, Bob S. Bob, Try about 100,000-150,000 tons of coal per train. 100-150 cars at 100 tons each, not 100,000 tons each. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
From: P. J. Alling The cattle going to the slaughterhouse in Chicago's famous stockyards get better treatment than American Airlines passengers going through O'hare. Alright I'll say it, MARK! Simple solution, do what I do, don't go through O'Hare. Wasn't given a choice. I was traveling on a government transportation request from Ft. Carson, CO to Raleigh-Durham, NC, returning from TDY. The next time I had to do TDY at Ft. Carson, the return routing was Colorado Springs to DFW to Cincinnati/N. Kentucky (and a 5 hour layover waiting for our connecting flight) to RDU. What really galls me about that is the flight we took from Colorado Springs to DFW was a one stop through to Atlanta. Atlanta had hourly departures to RDU. The aircraft we got off of left DFW half empty, they didn't board a single additional passenger for Atlanta. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Mon, 25 May 2009 10:57 -0400, frank theriault knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote: That's a terrific train shot! cheers, frank Thanks Frank. This thread has become an example of why I love this list. From a simple PESO it has morphed into: * a discussion of the decline of canals and stagecoaches in Britain and the rapid distribution of newspapers * why railway passengers are afraid to sit next to tattoo man * population distribution in Iowa * whether dirt tracks qualify for the term 'road * a debate on distribution of taxation funds between road, rail and air * coal haulage into Chicago * Disney movies (Hi ho. Hi ho.) * Changes to motor vehicle driving licenses * Maintenance of moats * the possibility of politicians telling the truth And I just thought I was posting a pretty picture of a steam train.. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 7:43 AM, Brian Walters supera1...@fastmail.fm wrote: G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html -- Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Choose from over 50 domains or use your own -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Thanks Frank. This thread has become an example of why I love this list. From a simple PESO it has morphed into: * a discussion of the decline of canals and stagecoaches in Britain and the rapid distribution of newspapers * why railway passengers are afraid to sit next to tattoo man * population distribution in Iowa * whether dirt tracks qualify for the term 'road * a debate on distribution of taxation funds between road, rail and air * coal haulage into Chicago * Disney movies (Hi ho. Hi ho.) * Changes to motor vehicle driving licenses * Maintenance of moats * the possibility of politicians telling the truth And I just thought I was posting a pretty picture of a steam train.. I beg to differ, on at least 2 counts. Edin: Snow White et al long pre-date Disney. Especially if, as I did, one spells 'dwarves' correctly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_White Dva: There is no possibility of politicians telling the truth Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
This thread has become an example of why I love this list. From a simple PESO it has morphed into: * a discussion of the decline of canals and stagecoaches in Britain and the rapid distribution of newspapers * why railway passengers are afraid to sit next to tattoo man * population distribution in Iowa * whether dirt tracks qualify for the term 'road * a debate on distribution of taxation funds between road, rail and air * coal haulage into Chicago * Disney movies (Hi ho. Hi ho.) * Changes to motor vehicle driving licenses * Maintenance of moats * the possibility of politicians telling the truth And I just thought I was posting a pretty picture of a steam train.. I beg to differ, on at least 2 counts. Edin: Snow White et al long pre-date Disney. Especially if, as I did, one spells 'dwarves' correctly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_White Dva: There is no possibility of politicians telling the truth Bob How strange these things are. By reading this wiki article and following a link I find that my patron saint is one of the sources for Snow White, Margaret of Cortona. Strangely, I once spent 2 weeks in a farmhouse just outside Cortona (down a dirt track (not a road!) outside the walls). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_of_Cortona Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
OK Add another one to the morphing list: * Margaret of Cortona - Bob Walkden's patron saint.. :-) Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ On Mon, 25 May 2009 23:59 +0100, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: This thread has become an example of why I love this list. From a simple PESO it has morphed into: * a discussion of the decline of canals and stagecoaches in Britain and the rapid distribution of newspapers * why railway passengers are afraid to sit next to tattoo man * population distribution in Iowa * whether dirt tracks qualify for the term 'road * a debate on distribution of taxation funds between road, rail and air * coal haulage into Chicago * Disney movies (Hi ho. Hi ho.) * Changes to motor vehicle driving licenses * Maintenance of moats * the possibility of politicians telling the truth And I just thought I was posting a pretty picture of a steam train.. I beg to differ, on at least 2 counts. Edin: Snow White et al long pre-date Disney. Especially if, as I did, one spells 'dwarves' correctly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_White Dva: There is no possibility of politicians telling the truth Bob How strange these things are. By reading this wiki article and following a link I find that my patron saint is one of the sources for Snow White, Margaret of Cortona. Strangely, I once spent 2 weeks in a farmhouse just outside Cortona (down a dirt track (not a road!) outside the walls). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_of_Cortona Bob -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Or how I learned to stop worrying and love email again -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Try about 100,000-150,000 tons of coal per train. 100-150 cars at 100 tons each, not 100,000 tons each. -- M. Adam Maas 100,000 ton trains are anything but common. I searched about and found this at a number of sources: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bU_3KfdG3fk Weight: 99,732 tonnes (109,935.711 US short tons, 98,156.885 UK long tons) Length: 7.35 km (4.57 miles) Not topped anywhere since 2001, and even then, from what I've read, was considerably above normal practice. The previous heaviest /longest was in South Africa a few years prior and was about 66.000 tonnes. regards, Anthony -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Hi Bob Yeah, I like that one too. I debated between that one and the shot of the loco on the bend as to which I'd post as a PESO. Thanks for looking. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ On Sat, 23 May 2009 20:58 -0500, Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com wrote: Brian, This is the other shot I especially like - pure railroad! http://supera.jalbum.net/The_Great_Zig_Zag/slides/_IGP1886j.html Regards, Bob S. On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 8:52 PM, Bruce Dayton bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote: Love the smoke coming out of the stack - you got a great moment at a nice location. Well done. -- Best regards, Bruce Saturday, May 23, 2009, 4:43:45 AM, you wrote: BW G'day all BW One for the railfans. BW This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to BW Australia BW during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue BW Mountains west of Sydney. BW http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html BW For those interested in such things, here's a gallery of other images BW from the Zig Zag. BW http://supera.jalbum.net/The_Great_Zig_Zag/index.html BW Comments appreciated. BW Cheers BW Brian BW ++ BW Brian Walters BW Western Sydney Australia BW http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ BW -- -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - A fast, anti-spam email service. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On 23/5/09, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: If it's any consolation we moan like hell about the service you admire, complaining that there aren't enough trains, they're too expensive, they break down too often, they're not steam, they're not electric, they don't levitate or move at 1,000 km/h, the service is poor, the stations are filthy, the sandwiches curl, nobody shuts up, nobody talks to anyone else, there's a suicide every 5 miles, the snow is the wrong type, the leaves on the track are too wet, the windows don't open, the air-conditioning doesn't work, the heater's broken again, there's not enough bike provision, the station staff are surly, you can't find the station staff, the buffet's closed, the whole line has been turned into a cycle path, there aren't any sleepers any more, the toilet doors open spontaneously, there's a chav in the first class compartment, someone's always sitting in my place. So (being a Brit) not too bad when said and done. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Sat, 23 May 2009 21:59 -0400, paul stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote: I love the shot. Making it a vertical to emphasize the smoke is a good choice. Thanks, Paul. I played around with a horizontal crop to make the loco larger in the frame but it lost a fair bit of impact. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ Saturday, May 23, 2009, 4:43:45 AM, you wrote: BW G'day all BW One for the railfans. BW This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to BW Australia BW during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue BW Mountains west of Sydney. BW http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html BW For those interested in such things, here's a gallery of other images BW from the Zig Zag. BW http://supera.jalbum.net/The_Great_Zig_Zag/index.html BW Comments appreciated. -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Choose from over 50 domains or use your own -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Sat, 23 May 2009 12:49 +0100, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: That's a lovely shot of a terrific subject. Bet the environment loves it too! I like railways travel. It's very civilised - by far the most enjoyable way of travelling long distances. Yes - couldn't agree more. I hate flying so if I'll always take a train if the option's available. In a couple of months my wife and I will be traveling across Australia from east to west by rail - 4500km; 3 days/3 nights. We're taking the car, so we'll be driving back. I can't wait!! Thanks for the comment. G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html For those interested in such things, here's a gallery of other images from the Zig Zag. http://supera.jalbum.net/The_Great_Zig_Zag/index.html Comments appreciated. -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Faster than the air-speed velocity of an unladen european swallow -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Sat, 23 May 2009 15:24 -0400, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Scott Loveless On 5/23/09, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: I like railways travel. It's very civilised - by far the most enjoyable way of travelling long distances. Obviously, you have never experienced Amtrak - the airline of the railways. It's not that bad everywhere Amtrak runs ... Still, it doesn't make sense that every other country in the world seems to be able to figure out how to get passenger trains to go where they're needed, pretty much when they're needed, in a fairly efficient expeditious, affordable manner, but we can't do it in the U.S. We struggle here as well. Our State Governmments seem more intent on closing intercity passenger services than on promoting them. Or they make the timetable so inconvenient and so infrequent that few people bother. Tasmania has even managed to totally remove *all* of it's passenger services. There are 3 or 4 memorable long distance services in Australia but that's about it. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Access all of your messages and folders wherever you are -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Intercity passenger rail is expensive. It's estimated that Amtrak would save the taxpayers money, (and in fact on some runs actually make a profit), if every time someone bought a train ticket they simply issued them a plane ticket to the same destination. Australia is a mostly low population density place, much like most of the US so I expect the same economics would apply. Brian Walters wrote: On Sat, 23 May 2009 15:24 -0400, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Scott Loveless On 5/23/09, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: I like railways travel. It's very civilised - by far the most enjoyable way of travelling long distances. Obviously, you have never experienced Amtrak - the airline of the railways. It's not that bad everywhere Amtrak runs ... Still, it doesn't make sense that every other country in the world seems to be able to figure out how to get passenger trains to go where they're needed, pretty much when they're needed, in a fairly efficient expeditious, affordable manner, but we can't do it in the U.S. We struggle here as well. Our State Governmments seem more intent on closing intercity passenger services than on promoting them. Or they make the timetable so inconvenient and so infrequent that few people bother. Tasmania has even managed to totally remove *all* of it's passenger services. There are 3 or 4 memorable long distance services in Australia but that's about it. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog. --G. K. Chesterton -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Sat, 23 May 2009 12:17 -0400, David J Brooks pentko...@gmail.com wrote: Thats a nice, dramatic engine shot. This one is nice.:http://supera.jalbum.net/The_Great_Zig_Zag/slides/_IGP0765j.html Dave Thanks Dave. Yeah the front of that old Queensland Railways Railmotor has a nice 1950s look to it! Well restored by the Zig Zag crew. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 7:43 AM, Brian Walters supera1...@fastmail.fm wrote: G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html For those interested in such things, here's a gallery of other images from the Zig Zag. http://supera.jalbum.net/The_Great_Zig_Zag/index.html Comments appreciated. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Sat, 23 May 2009 21:51 +1000, Derby Chang der...@iinet.net.au wrote: Those Baldwin brothers are really productive. Took me a while to figure out what you were on about. Is that just a peep of the engineer's face through the window? Excellent Thanks. Yes, the engine crew were very cooperative and only too happy to 'mug' for the camera! Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ Brian Walters wrote: G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html For those interested in such things, here's a gallery of other images from the Zig Zag. http://supera.jalbum.net/The_Great_Zig_Zag/index.html Comments appreciated. -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - mmm... Fastmail... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Sat, 23 May 2009 10:08 -0400, Scott Loveless sdlovel...@gmail.com wrote: That's a wonderful photo, Brian. It seems to invoke a sense of longing and wanderlust. Excellent! Thanks Scott and thanks to everyone else who commented. Much appreciated. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ On 5/23/09, Brian Walters supera1...@fastmail.fm wrote: G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Sun, 24 May 2009 03:07 -0400, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: Intercity passenger rail is expensive. It's estimated that Amtrak would save the taxpayers money, (and in fact on some runs actually make a profit), if every time someone bought a train ticket they simply issued them a plane ticket to the same destination. Australia is a mostly low population density place, much like most of the US so I expect the same economics would apply. True. But I still think that our State Governments don't have a clue when it comes to promoting rail travel. Not everyone wants or needs to get from A to B in the quickest time possible. Governments seem happy to let the infrastructure deteriorate and then wonder why passengers numbers fall. Yes, it's expensive. A few years ago we traveled from Brisbane to Cairns (about 1500km) on Queensland Rail's Sunlander. We could have flown there and back several times for what it cost. But it was one of the most memorable travel experiences my wife and I have experienced. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ Brian Walters wrote: On Sat, 23 May 2009 15:24 -0400, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Scott Loveless On 5/23/09, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: I like railways travel. It's very civilised - by far the most enjoyable way of travelling long distances. Obviously, you have never experienced Amtrak - the airline of the railways. It's not that bad everywhere Amtrak runs ... Still, it doesn't make sense that every other country in the world seems to be able to figure out how to get passenger trains to go where they're needed, pretty much when they're needed, in a fairly efficient expeditious, affordable manner, but we can't do it in the U.S. We struggle here as well. Our State Governmments seem more intent on closing intercity passenger services than on promoting them. Or they make the timetable so inconvenient and so infrequent that few people bother. Tasmania has even managed to totally remove *all* of it's passenger services. There are 3 or 4 memorable long distance services in Australia but that's about it. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - A fast, anti-spam email service. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 2:25 PM, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: What you disparage our nations High Speed rail? Fie. I say it has all the charm of porn produced by the post office, if you can imagine that. Before the internet, that's all we could get anyway. Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
From: Bob Sullivan It's the distance between cities that kills rail here. Except on the east coast, travel times between big cities require an overnight ride. Planes are so much faster for anything over 200 miles. Been that way since 1947... Regards, Bob S. There are a couple of flaws I find with that argument ... Who says service has to be only between big cities? Seems to me local services are what makes rail transportation viable. Feed from the small towns into the big cities and back again; and take the high speed expresses between big cities. The government spends a whole lot of money building and maintaining highways. Building and maintaining rail lines should get as much attention, but we gave away the tracks built with government subsidies to corporations who don't maintain them unless they get more government subsidies. And planes aren't a lot faster any more, once you factor in the time it takes to get to the airport and the time you have to wait so you can go through security. ... and all the delays once you're finally through the gate waiting for the aircraft to load. ... and all the delays waiting to take off once the aircraft HAS loaded. ... not to mention all the fees and surcharges for boarding fee, fuel cost surtax, security tax, extra fees because your bag weighs more than 25 pounds, extra fees because you have a camera bag as well as a suitcase, extra fees because your camera bag isn't the exact dimensions the airline specified for a carry-on bag ... Don't get me started on jet-lag and breathing the crap the airlines pass off as air inside the cabin if you finally manage to get off the ground. The cattle going to the slaughterhouse in Chicago's famous stockyards get better treatment than American Airlines passengers going through O'hare. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
From: Brian Walters On Sat, 23 May 2009 12:49 +0100, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: That's a lovely shot of a terrific subject. Bet the environment loves it too! I like railways travel. It's very civilised - by far the most enjoyable way of travelling long distances. Yes - couldn't agree more. I hate flying so if I'll always take a train if the option's available. And I wouldn't suggest holding your breath waiting for the BBC to produce a series on the Great Airline Flights of the World. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Michael-Palins-Great-Railway-Journeys/dp/B000OEZ2ZA/ref=pd_sim_b_1 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
From: Brian Walters On Sun, 24 May 2009 03:07 -0400, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: Intercity passenger rail is expensive. It's estimated that Amtrak would save the taxpayers money, (and in fact on some runs actually make a profit), if every time someone bought a train ticket they simply issued them a plane ticket to the same destination. Australia is a mostly low population density place, much like most of the US so I expect the same economics would apply. True. But I still think that our State Governments don't have a clue when it comes to promoting rail travel. Not everyone wants or needs to get from A to B in the quickest time possible. Governments seem happy to let the infrastructure deteriorate and then wonder why passengers numbers fall. Yes, it's expensive. A few years ago we traveled from Brisbane to Cairns (about 1500km) on Queensland Rail's Sunlander. We could have flown there and back several times for what it cost. But it was one of the most memorable travel experiences my wife and I have experienced. Such comparisons frequently fail to take into account hidden subsidies to the airlines, automobile and trucking industries when comparing costs. And Amtrak is saddled with the additional expense of renting use of tracks built at taxpayer expense; renting from freight railroad corporations already subsidized by the government. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On 5/24/09, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Bob Sullivan It's the distance between cities that kills rail here. Except on the east coast, travel times between big cities require an overnight ride. Planes are so much faster for anything over 200 miles. Been that way since 1947... Regards, Bob S. There are a couple of flaws I find with that argument ... Who says service has to be only between big cities? Seems to me local services are what makes rail transportation viable. Feed from the small towns into the big cities and back again; and take the high speed expresses between big cities. I agree. The Amtrak line between Pittsburgh and Philly makes about a zillion stops, which is nice for people commuting to or from either city. There is no express and there ought to be. The line that runs south out of St. Louis makes it's final Missouri stop in Poplar Bluff. It's next stop is 70 miles south in Walnut Ridge, Ar, bypassing countless little towns. I often wonder if those folks would take the train if it were more convenient, or does the train pass them by because they didn't ride it in the past. -- Scott Loveless Cigarette-free since December 14th, 2008 http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
The cattle going to the slaughterhouse in Chicago's famous stockyards get better treatment than American Airlines passengers going through O'hare. Alright I'll say it, MARK! Simple solution, do what I do, don't go through O'Hare. John Sessoms wrote: From: Bob Sullivan It's the distance between cities that kills rail here. Except on the east coast, travel times between big cities require an overnight ride. Planes are so much faster for anything over 200 miles. Been that way since 1947... Regards, Bob S. There are a couple of flaws I find with that argument ... Who says service has to be only between big cities? Seems to me local services are what makes rail transportation viable. Feed from the small towns into the big cities and back again; and take the high speed expresses between big cities. The government spends a whole lot of money building and maintaining highways. Building and maintaining rail lines should get as much attention, but we gave away the tracks built with government subsidies to corporations who don't maintain them unless they get more government subsidies. And planes aren't a lot faster any more, once you factor in the time it takes to get to the airport and the time you have to wait so you can go through security. ... and all the delays once you're finally through the gate waiting for the aircraft to load. ... and all the delays waiting to take off once the aircraft HAS loaded. ... not to mention all the fees and surcharges for boarding fee, fuel cost surtax, security tax, extra fees because your bag weighs more than 25 pounds, extra fees because you have a camera bag as well as a suitcase, extra fees because your camera bag isn't the exact dimensions the airline specified for a carry-on bag ... Don't get me started on jet-lag and breathing the crap the airlines pass off as air inside the cabin if you finally manage to get off the ground. The cattle going to the slaughterhouse in Chicago's famous stockyards get better treatment than American Airlines passengers going through O'hare. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -- The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog. --G. K. Chesterton -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Some of these tracks were built at taxpayer expense, (well subsidies of one form or another), some were not. So were roads, and airports. Until quite recently, (the 1970's) railroads were taxed to subsidies airports and truck transport a practice that started in the late 1920's, Today we tax automobiles to subsidize rail. Prior to the 1940's the US had some of the fastest interurban trains in the world. John Sessoms wrote: From: Brian Walters On Sun, 24 May 2009 03:07 -0400, P. J. Alling p_all...@hotmail.com wrote: Intercity passenger rail is expensive. It's estimated that Amtrak would save the taxpayers money, (and in fact on some runs actually make a profit), if every time someone bought a train ticket they simply issued them a plane ticket to the same destination. Australia is a mostly low population density place, much like most of the US so I expect the same economics would apply. True. But I still think that our State Governments don't have a clue when it comes to promoting rail travel. Not everyone wants or needs to get from A to B in the quickest time possible. Governments seem happy to let the infrastructure deteriorate and then wonder why passengers numbers fall. Yes, it's expensive. A few years ago we traveled from Brisbane to Cairns (about 1500km) on Queensland Rail's Sunlander. We could have flown there and back several times for what it cost. But it was one of the most memorable travel experiences my wife and I have experienced. Such comparisons frequently fail to take into account hidden subsidies to the airlines, automobile and trucking industries when comparing costs. And Amtrak is saddled with the additional expense of renting use of tracks built at taxpayer expense; renting from freight railroad corporations already subsidized by the government. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -- The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog. --G. K. Chesterton -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
John, The arguement breaks down on the cost to build rail service to every small town in order to feed the big towns. Regards, Bob S. On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 2:08 PM, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Bob Sullivan It's the distance between cities that kills rail here. Except on the east coast, travel times between big cities require an overnight ride. Planes are so much faster for anything over 200 miles. Been that way since 1947... Regards, Bob S. There are a couple of flaws I find with that argument ... Who says service has to be only between big cities? Seems to me local services are what makes rail transportation viable. Feed from the small towns into the big cities and back again; and take the high speed expresses between big cities. The government spends a whole lot of money building and maintaining highways. Building and maintaining rail lines should get as much attention, but we gave away the tracks built with government subsidies to corporations who don't maintain them unless they get more government subsidies. And planes aren't a lot faster any more, once you factor in the time it takes to get to the airport and the time you have to wait so you can go through security. ... and all the delays once you're finally through the gate waiting for the aircraft to load. ... and all the delays waiting to take off once the aircraft HAS loaded. ... not to mention all the fees and surcharges for boarding fee, fuel cost surtax, security tax, extra fees because your bag weighs more than 25 pounds, extra fees because you have a camera bag as well as a suitcase, extra fees because your camera bag isn't the exact dimensions the airline specified for a carry-on bag ... Don't get me started on jet-lag and breathing the crap the airlines pass off as air inside the cabin if you finally manage to get off the ground. The cattle going to the slaughterhouse in Chicago's famous stockyards get better treatment than American Airlines passengers going through O'hare. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Brian Walters wrote: G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html For those interested in such things, here's a gallery of other images from the Zig Zag. http://supera.jalbum.net/The_Great_Zig_Zag/index.html Comments appreciated. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ Those Baldwin brothers are really productive. Is that just a peep of the engineer's face through the window? Excellent D -- der...@iinet.net.au http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html For those interested in such things, here's a gallery of other images from the Zig Zag. http://supera.jalbum.net/The_Great_Zig_Zag/index.html Comments appreciated. That's a lovely shot of a terrific subject. Bet the environment loves it too! I like railways travel. It's very civilised - by far the most enjoyable way of travelling long distances. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On 5/23/09, Brian Walters supera1...@fastmail.fm wrote: G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html That's a wonderful photo, Brian. It seems to invoke a sense of longing and wanderlust. Excellent! -- Scott Loveless Cigarette-free since December 14th, 2008 http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On 5/23/09, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: I like railways travel. It's very civilised - by far the most enjoyable way of travelling long distances. Obviously, you have never experienced Amtrak - the airline of the railways. -- Scott Loveless Cigarette-free since December 14th, 2008 http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On 5/23/09, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: I like railways travel. It's very civilised - by far the most enjoyable way of travelling long distances. Obviously, you have never experienced Amtrak - the airline of the railways. I haven't, although I'd like to sometime - it seemed to suit Cary Grant very well, and Strangers On A Train shows what interesting people you can meet. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=un91Kyp-m5Q Indian railways are very enjoyable, but the most enjoyable, if you're not in a hurry, are the 'personal' trains that dawdle around Maramures in Romania. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 7:43 AM, Brian Walters supera1...@fastmail.fm wrote: G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html Thats a nice, dramatic engine shot. For those interested in such things, here's a gallery of other images from the Zig Zag. http://supera.jalbum.net/The_Great_Zig_Zag/index.html Comments appreciated. This one is nice.:http://supera.jalbum.net/The_Great_Zig_Zag/slides/_IGP0765j.html Dave Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Brian Walters wrote: G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html oh, yezz -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Brian, That's a terrific shot, but my favorite in the gallery is the last on the 2nd page, 218 at the top points signal box. You've got the locomotive, smoke, semifore signals, track w/switch, rock wall, and station all there. Quite a jam packed photo! Regards, Bob S. On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 6:49 AM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html For those interested in such things, here's a gallery of other images from the Zig Zag. http://supera.jalbum.net/The_Great_Zig_Zag/index.html Comments appreciated. That's a lovely shot of a terrific subject. Bet the environment loves it too! I like railways travel. It's very civilised - by far the most enjoyable way of travelling long distances. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
Wow, that's a great shot, Brian. The composition, color, interesting subject are all terrific. The gallery is great too, though I think the shot you picked really stands out as the best. Cheers, Christine - Original Message - From: Brian Walters supera1...@fastmail.fm To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2009 6:43 AM Subject: PESO - Baldwin Downunder G'day all One for the railfans. This narrow gauge 2-8-2 locomotive was one of 20 sent from the US to Australia during WW2. It now operates on the Zig Zag Tourist Railway in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. http://www.blognow.com.au/PESO/137961/Baldwin_Downunder.html For those interested in such things, here's a gallery of other images from the Zig Zag. http://supera.jalbum.net/The_Great_Zig_Zag/index.html Comments appreciated. Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://members.westnet.com.au/brianwal/SL/ -- -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: PESO - Baldwin Downunder
What you disparage our nations High Speed rail? Fie. I say it has all the charm of porn produced by the post office, if you can imagine that. Scott Loveless wrote: On 5/23/09, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: I like railways travel. It's very civilised - by far the most enjoyable way of travelling long distances. Obviously, you have never experienced Amtrak - the airline of the railways. -- -- The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog. --G. K. Chesterton -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
