Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #213056 > unrolled thread

OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

Started byhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
First post2020-08-24 14:05 -0700
Last post2020-08-29 11:36 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 98 — 18 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers


Contents

  OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2020-08-24 14:05 -0700
    Re: OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-24 18:50 -0400
      Re: OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2020-08-25 14:29 -0700
    Re: OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2020-08-24 17:29 -0700
      Re: OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2020-08-25 14:33 -0700
        Re: OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-25 18:29 -0400
          Re: OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-08-26 00:12 +0000
            Re: OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-25 20:37 -0400
              Re: OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-08-26 04:47 +0000
                Re: OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-26 11:37 -0400
          Re: OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2020-08-26 14:35 -0700
            Re: OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-26 18:20 -0400
              Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-08-26 20:39 -0700
                Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-27 00:13 -0400
                  Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-08-27 07:50 -0700
                    Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-27 18:59 -0400
                  Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-08-27 16:04 +0000
                    Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2020-08-27 11:53 -0700
                      Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-27 19:00 -0400
                      Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-08-27 16:40 -0700
                        Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2020-08-28 12:54 -0700
                  Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2020-08-27 16:58 +0000
                    Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-08-27 18:51 +0000
                      Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2020-08-27 19:42 +0000
                    Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2020-08-27 12:03 -0700
                      Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-08-27 16:40 -0700
                        Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-08-28 08:14 +0000
                          Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2020-08-28 10:28 +0100
                            Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-08-28 09:32 +0000
                              Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2020-08-28 11:10 +0100
                              Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2020-08-31 17:31 +0000
                      Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-27 19:51 -0400
                        Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-08-28 14:26 +0000
                    Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-27 19:14 -0400
                      Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-08-28 14:21 +0000
                    Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Robin Vowels <robin.vowels@gmail.com> - 2020-08-29 00:28 -0700
                      Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2020-08-31 16:23 -0700
                        Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-31 19:40 -0400
                          Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Fred Smith <fred@thejanitor.corp> - 2020-09-01 01:39 +0000
                            Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2020-08-31 22:13 -0700
                          Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-09-01 04:40 +0000
                            Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> - 2020-09-01 17:05 -0500
                        Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2020-09-01 08:48 +0000
                          Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-01 06:34 -0700
                          Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-09-01 19:09 +0000
                          Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2020-09-01 16:57 -0700
                            Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2020-09-02 06:29 +0000
                              Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Gerard Schildberger <gerard46@rrt.net> - 2020-09-02 03:26 -0700
                                Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-02 06:35 -0700
                                  Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> - 2020-09-02 09:42 -0500
                                    Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-02 09:53 -0700
                                    Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Gerard Schildberger <gerard46@rrt.net> - 2020-09-02 22:42 -0700
                                      Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> - 2020-09-03 11:38 -0500
                                        Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-03 10:16 -0700
                                      Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 jtmpreno <none@znet.com> - 2020-09-20 21:14 -0700
                              Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-09-02 06:35 -0700
                                Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2020-09-02 11:25 -0400
                        Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Robin Vowels <robin.vowels@gmail.com> - 2020-09-01 04:24 -0700
                          Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2020-09-01 17:01 -0700
                            Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-09-01 20:15 -0400
                Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Robin Vowels <robin.vowels@gmail.com> - 2020-08-29 00:11 -0700
                  Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2020-08-29 11:34 -0700
                    Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-08-29 21:52 +0000
              Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2020-08-26 22:43 -0500
                Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2020-08-27 11:52 -0700
                  Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-08-27 16:40 -0700
              Re: OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-08-27 11:59 +0000
                Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-08-27 07:50 -0700
                Re: OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-27 19:01 -0400
                  Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-08-27 16:45 -0700
                    Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-27 20:00 -0400
                      Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-08-27 20:12 -0400
                        Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-08-28 14:20 +0000
                          Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-08-28 11:13 -0400
                      Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-08-28 07:20 -0700
                        Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-28 13:13 -0400
                          Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> - 2020-08-28 13:38 -0400
                            Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-28 16:51 -0400
                          Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-08-28 11:28 -0700
                            Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-08-28 18:38 +0000
                              Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-08-28 18:50 +0000
                            Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-08-28 18:46 +0000
                            Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-28 16:52 -0400
                              Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-08-28 15:15 -0700
                                Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-28 18:29 -0400
                                  Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2020-08-28 23:19 +0000
                                  Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2020-08-28 18:08 -0700
                                Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2020-08-29 00:58 +0000
                                  Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2020-08-28 22:47 -0400
                                    Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> - 2020-08-29 02:51 +0000
                                    Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2020-08-29 03:25 +0000
                                Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2020-08-29 11:28 -0700
                                  Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> - 2020-08-29 14:21 -0500
                              Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2020-08-28 23:12 +0100
                                Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-08-28 22:51 +0000
                                Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> - 2020-08-29 08:17 -0500
                    Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-08-28 00:14 +0000
    Re: OFF TOPIC  Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2020-08-29 11:36 -0700

Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5  Next page →


#213348 — Re: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

Fromhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date2020-08-28 12:54 -0700
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<0873fa94-5976-4940-880e-561bde51d82bo@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#213300
On Thursday, August 27, 2020 at 7:40:16 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:

> US trains are pathetic. Acela, the pride of AMTRAK could run at 150mph, but
> is limited to 66mph because of outdated track. Most passenger trains run a
> lot slower. It’s usually faster (and more comfortable) to drive. Too bad,
> because the times I have ridden trains I had about 3x the room as on a
> plane, and could get up and move around whenever I wanted. The aisles were
> wider, too, and the seats much more comfortable.

The speed of Acela varies by location.  On the old PRR
segment it goes at 135 mph.  On the Metro North segment
it goes about 70.  On parts it can go 150.

There are proposals to build an entirely new straight ROW
for the NEC.  But very expensive.

A hybrid approach might be prudent, such as rebuilding
the worst bottlenecks.

Amtrak developed a number of plans to improve service
on congested travel corridors, to get the most bang
for the buck.  Good ideas.  Too bad Congress had no interest.



[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213266 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromJohn Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Date2020-08-27 16:58 +0000
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<ri8onv$15q9$1@gal.iecc.com>
In reply to#213238
In article <cfcekf596bhvph3ct7olkl3m36sjn4tgah@4ax.com>,
J. Clarke  <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>How much money do interstate highways make? All transportation is heavily
>>subsidized, highways, airports, etc. It’s a public service. The US has a
>>third-world rail system, for short-haul intercity (east and west coast) it
>>is more cost-effective than flying, and if we upgraded our system to the
>>equivalent of the rest of the world it would be faster downtown to
>>downtown.
>
>It's funny that our inferior rail system moves a higher percentage of
>our freight than does the rail system in the EU.  It's passengers in
>the US who don't like trains.

We have no way to tell, because for most people in the US, there's no
train for them to like. Despite what you might have heard, at least
until the pandemic most of Amtrak's long distance trains are full, and
if they reversed short-sighted cuts and restored 3x week to daily,
they'd probably recover more costs proportionally since they could
spread the fixed costs across more passengers.

>As for subsidies, the rails are owned and maintained by the freight
>lines which are making profits without any subsidies, so why should
>passenger rail get subsidies.

Because passenger everything else gets subsidies. Roads and airports
don't pay property taxes, and airports only appear profitable because
they're not charged for the opportunity cost of what else might be
using the land. One of the greatest unappreciated subsidies to cars is
free parking, vast amounts of land given to car users at no cost.

Freight and passenger rail are completely different businesses these
days. A 50 MPH freight train is fast, while a 100 MPH passenger train
is slow, making it hard for them to share the same sets of rails.
Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US
are much greater, to the advantage of trains here, while Europe has a
whole lot of rivers and canals where containers on barges are
competitive to rail.
-- 
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213282 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2020-08-27 18:51 +0000
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<ri8vb21k00@news1.newsguy.com>
In reply to#213266
On 2020-08-27, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

> Roads and airports don't pay property taxes,

Are you sure about airports?  If so, that might only apply to major
airports, and possibly only in the U.S.  Our hangar complex pays its
share of the $500K property tax bill at the small airport where I'm based.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  Apple is a cult.
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  Linux is anarchy.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |  Pick your poison.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213291 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromJohn Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Date2020-08-27 19:42 +0000
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<ri92bn$402$2@gal.iecc.com>
In reply to#213282
In article <ri8vb21k00@news1.newsguy.com> you write:
>On 2020-08-27, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>
>> Roads and airports don't pay property taxes,
>
>Are you sure about airports?  If so, that might only apply to major
>airports, and possibly only in the U.S.  Our hangar complex pays its
>share of the $500K property tax bill at the small airport where I'm based.

Public airports don't, same as your town hall or DPW garage don't.

Private airports do, but I would be surprised if there were any
scheduled flights in the US from private airports.

-- 
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213286 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

Fromhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date2020-08-27 12:03 -0700
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<adf1865c-c48b-485c-92c2-dac032f89c61o@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#213266
On Thursday, August 27, 2020 at 12:58:41 PM UTC-4, John Levine wrote:

> We have no way to tell, because for most people in the US, there's no
> train for them to like. Despite what you might have heard, at least
> until the pandemic most of Amtrak's long distance trains are full, and
> if they reversed short-sighted cuts and restored 3x week to daily,
> they'd probably recover more costs proportionally since they could
> spread the fixed costs across more passengers.

So true.

Before the virus, Amtrak could've easily carried three
times as many passengers as it did if it had the rolling
stock and track to run trains.  There is a demand
in developed travel corridors.  Highways and airways
are very congested and Amtrak would be great for short
haul travel.

Unfortunately, for whatever reason, certain political
elements despise passenger rail and go out of their
way to demonize it, despite its cost-efficiencies.

Those element impose all sorts of inefficiencies 
on Amtrak which hurt service quality and waste money,
and then serves as an excuse to criticize it.

(Like what they're doing now to the post office.)

> >As for subsidies, the rails are owned and maintained by the freight
> >lines which are making profits without any subsidies, so why should
> >passenger rail get subsidies.
> 
> Because passenger everything else gets subsidies. Roads and airports
> don't pay property taxes, and airports only appear profitable because
> they're not charged for the opportunity cost of what else might be
> using the land. One of the greatest unappreciated subsidies to cars is
> free parking, vast amounts of land given to car users at no cost.

Yes.  Look at an aerial shot of a building complex and notice
how much land is devoted to parking.  Parking lots are not 
cheap.  They need to be maintained and that's expensive.



> Freight and passenger rail are completely different businesses these
> days. A 50 MPH freight train is fast, while a 100 MPH passenger train
> is slow, making it hard for them to share the same sets of rails.
> Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US
> are much greater, to the advantage of trains here, while Europe has a
> whole lot of rivers and canals where containers on barges are
> competitive to rail.

While ideally psgr and freight should be separate, with
good planning and some passing tracks they could share
the same tracks. 

Unfortunately, railroads are hell bent to reduce their
trackage to the absolutely minimum.  I don't get it.

Isn't there a high cost to starting and stopping
a freight train to enter and leave a passing siding
on a single track line?  To wait for clearance on
congested track?  Don't shippers want faster delivery?



In several places, they took a fluid double track railroad
and put freight on one track, psgr on the other.  Runs
far less efficiently due to delays of single track.
Real stupid, but they wanted the segregation.

Computer note:  Railroads were pioneers in the use
of data processing to track freight trains, first
punched cards, then computers.  see
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Railway_Signaling_and_Communications/mRYTAAAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=railway%20signaling%20punched%20cards&pg=PA622&printsec=frontcover

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213301 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromPeter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date2020-08-27 16:40 -0700
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<1644875754.620263358.116289.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#213286
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> 
> Unfortunately, railroads are hell bent to reduce their
> trackage to the absolutely minimum.  I don't get it.

They may get taxed by the track.

> 
> Isn't there a high cost to starting and stopping
> a freight train to enter and leave a passing siding
> on a single track line?  To wait for clearance on
> congested track?  Don't shippers want faster delivery?

There are some signs this may be changing. Recently the (whatever railroad
it is now, maybe CPRail?) railroad restored double-tracking between Albany
and Schenectady NY. A short stretch, but supposedly it makes a big
difference.

-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213320 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromNiklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se>
Date2020-08-28 08:14 +0000
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<hqrsmiFgfgvU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#213301
On 2020-08-27, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> There are some signs this may be changing. Recently the (whatever railroad
> it is now, maybe CPRail?) railroad restored double-tracking between Albany
> and Schenectady NY. A short stretch, but supposedly it makes a big
> difference.

In Stockholm, for a long time there were only two tracks between the
northern and southern parts of the city, known as the "wasp waist".
Recently, they made a big dig, putting the commuter trains (being the
most frequent) on separate tracks running underground through the city
center. This has freed up a lot of capacity for freight and
long-distance passenger rail.

Niklas
-- 
Technology makes it possible for people to gain control
over everything, except over technology.
                         -- John Tudor

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213321 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromAhem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date2020-08-28 10:28 +0100
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<20200828102843.3730d367d50887267ec2c2cb@eircom.net>
In reply to#213320
On 28 Aug 2020 08:14:10 GMT
Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> wrote:

> On 2020-08-27, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > There are some signs this may be changing. Recently the (whatever
> > railroad it is now, maybe CPRail?) railroad restored double-tracking
> > between Albany and Schenectady NY. A short stretch, but supposedly it
> > makes a big difference.
> 
> In Stockholm, for a long time there were only two tracks between the
> northern and southern parts of the city, known as the "wasp waist".

	The Munich S-Bahn is like that (or was when I was last there), the
map looks like the field lines of a bar magnet. What I found remarkable was
that in the morning when the trains were coming through every couple of
minutes they came through in the same order every day.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN                                     | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213322 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromNiklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se>
Date2020-08-28 09:32 +0000
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<hqs19sFgfgvU2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#213321
On 2020-08-28, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On 28 Aug 2020 08:14:10 GMT
> Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> wrote:
>> 
>> In Stockholm, for a long time there were only two tracks between the
>> northern and southern parts of the city, known as the "wasp waist".
>
> 	The Munich S-Bahn is like that (or was when I was last there), the
> map looks like the field lines of a bar magnet. What I found remarkable was
> that in the morning when the trains were coming through every couple of
> minutes they came through in the same order every day.

The Germans (and Swiss) seem to be a lot better at running railways than
we are. Unfortunately, service here is often very unreliable.

Niklas
-- 
Oh sure, you think you'll be dead and gone in Y10K when it all catches 
up to us.  But by then they'll be able to raise folks from the dead just 
to patch the code.  Imagine: endless eternity being rewoken to patch 
some old chunk of COBOL.  -- Eric Remy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213323 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromAhem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date2020-08-28 11:10 +0100
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<20200828111005.4c4c8c370c1755b8a0c9312f@eircom.net>
In reply to#213322
On 28 Aug 2020 09:32:44 GMT
Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> wrote:

> The Germans (and Swiss) seem to be a lot better at running railways than
> we are. Unfortunately, service here is often very unreliable.

	Better at it than anyone else as far as I can tell, the Dutch
aren't bad at it but platform changes and small delays are common there (I
got quite good at Tannoy Dutch while I was there).

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN                                     | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213495 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromThomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de>
Date2020-08-31 17:31 +0000
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<rijc53$nb6$2@newsreader4.netcologne.de>
In reply to#213322
Niklas Karlsson <anksil@yahoo.se> schrieb:

> The Germans (and Swiss) seem to be a lot better at running railways than
> we are.

You're right about the Swiss, but train service in Germany has
really bad.  More than 50% of the time I used the train in the
last few years, there was a more than one hour delay due to a
missed connection somewhere.

You learn to plan your trips that you stay in the same train,
so that you may be late, but at least you keep your seat.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213308 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromJ. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com>
Date2020-08-27 19:51 -0400
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<tjhgkfdp4vvbca7hkjh0pgq93025nnccqr@4ax.com>
In reply to#213286
On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 12:03:10 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

>On Thursday, August 27, 2020 at 12:58:41 PM UTC-4, John Levine wrote:
>
>> We have no way to tell, because for most people in the US, there's no
>> train for them to like. Despite what you might have heard, at least
>> until the pandemic most of Amtrak's long distance trains are full, and
>> if they reversed short-sighted cuts and restored 3x week to daily,
>> they'd probably recover more costs proportionally since they could
>> spread the fixed costs across more passengers.
>
>So true.
>
>Before the virus, Amtrak could've easily carried three
>times as many passengers as it did if it had the rolling
>stock and track to run trains.  There is a demand
>in developed travel corridors.  Highways and airways
>are very congested and Amtrak would be great for short
>haul travel.
>
>Unfortunately, for whatever reason, certain political
>elements despise passenger rail and go out of their
>way to demonize it, despite its cost-efficiencies.

What cost-efficiencies are those?

>Those element impose all sorts of inefficiencies 
>on Amtrak which hurt service quality and waste money,
>and then serves as an excuse to criticize it.
>
>(Like what they're doing now to the post office.)
>
>> >As for subsidies, the rails are owned and maintained by the freight
>> >lines which are making profits without any subsidies, so why should
>> >passenger rail get subsidies.
>> 
>> Because passenger everything else gets subsidies. Roads and airports
>> don't pay property taxes, and airports only appear profitable because
>> they're not charged for the opportunity cost of what else might be
>> using the land. One of the greatest unappreciated subsidies to cars is
>> free parking, vast amounts of land given to car users at no cost.
>
>Yes.  Look at an aerial shot of a building complex and notice
>how much land is devoted to parking.  Parking lots are not 
>cheap.  They need to be maintained and that's expensive.

And tax is paid on all of it unless it's a government-owned lot.

>> Freight and passenger rail are completely different businesses these
>> days. A 50 MPH freight train is fast, while a 100 MPH passenger train
>> is slow, making it hard for them to share the same sets of rails.
>> Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US
>> are much greater, to the advantage of trains here, while Europe has a
>> whole lot of rivers and canals where containers on barges are
>> competitive to rail.
>
>While ideally psgr and freight should be separate, with
>good planning and some passing tracks they could share
>the same tracks. 
>
>Unfortunately, railroads are hell bent to reduce their
>trackage to the absolutely minimum.  I don't get it.

Track is expensive.

>Isn't there a high cost to starting and stopping
>a freight train to enter and leave a passing siding
>on a single track line?  To wait for clearance on
>congested track?  Don't shippers want faster delivery?

A little bit of diesel.  And if shipers wanted faster delivery they'd
have paid for air freight.

>In several places, they took a fluid double track railroad
>and put freight on one track, psgr on the other.  Runs
>far less efficiently due to delays of single track.
>Real stupid, but they wanted the segregation.
>
>Computer note:  Railroads were pioneers in the use
>of data processing to track freight trains, first
>punched cards, then computers.  see
>https://www.google.com/books/edition/Railway_Signaling_and_Communications/mRYTAAAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=railway%20signaling%20punched%20cards&pg=PA622&printsec=frontcover

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213331 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

Fromscott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date2020-08-28 14:26 +0000
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<1u82H.139423$mK4.60425@fx03.iad>
In reply to#213308
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 12:03:10 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

>>Isn't there a high cost to starting and stopping
>>a freight train to enter and leave a passing siding
>>on a single track line?  To wait for clearance on
>>congested track?  Don't shippers want faster delivery?
>
>A little bit of diesel.  And if shipers wanted faster delivery they'd
>have paid for air freight.

Silly fellow - most freight shipped by rail (coal, lumber, various liquids,
grain, grain products (starch, alcohol), standard shipping containers)
cannot be shipped by air economically or otherwise.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213298 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromJ. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com>
Date2020-08-27 19:14 -0400
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<n2fgkfhbeiuf3nrs4dggj23lsnutfkgool@4ax.com>
In reply to#213266
On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 16:58:39 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
<johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

>In article <cfcekf596bhvph3ct7olkl3m36sjn4tgah@4ax.com>,
>J. Clarke  <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>How much money do interstate highways make? All transportation is heavily
>>>subsidized, highways, airports, etc. It’s a public service. The US has a
>>>third-world rail system, for short-haul intercity (east and west coast) it
>>>is more cost-effective than flying, and if we upgraded our system to the
>>>equivalent of the rest of the world it would be faster downtown to
>>>downtown.
>>
>>It's funny that our inferior rail system moves a higher percentage of
>>our freight than does the rail system in the EU.  It's passengers in
>>the US who don't like trains.
>
>We have no way to tell, because for most people in the US, there's no
>train for them to like. Despite what you might have heard, at least
>until the pandemic most of Amtrak's long distance trains are full,

Source?

> and
>if they reversed short-sighted cuts and restored 3x week to daily,
>they'd probably recover more costs proportionally since they could
>spread the fixed costs across more passengers.
>
>>As for subsidies, the rails are owned and maintained by the freight
>>lines which are making profits without any subsidies, so why should
>>passenger rail get subsidies.
>
>Because passenger everything else gets subsidies. Roads and airports
>don't pay property taxes,

Why would the government pay itself taxes?

> and airports only appear profitable because
>they're not charged for the opportunity cost of what else might be
>using the land.

Like what, a farm?

> One of the greatest unappreciated subsidies to cars is
>free parking, vast amounts of land given to car users at no cost.

Where is this government-provided free parking?

>Freight and passenger rail are completely different businesses these
>days. A 50 MPH freight train is fast, while a 100 MPH passenger train
>is slow, making it hard for them to share the same sets of rails.
>Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US
>are much greater, to the advantage of trains here, while Europe has a
>whole lot of rivers and canals where containers on barges are
>competitive to rail.

While that's a nice notion, the fact is that 75.3 percent of the
freight in the EU moves by truck, 18.7 percent by rail, and 6 percent
by waterways.

<https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Freight_transport_statistics_-_modal_split#Modal_split_in_the_EU>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213330 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

Fromscott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date2020-08-28 14:21 +0000
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<_p82H.139422$mK4.7234@fx03.iad>
In reply to#213298
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>On Thu, 27 Aug 2020 16:58:39 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
><johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <cfcekf596bhvph3ct7olkl3m36sjn4tgah@4ax.com>,
>>J. Clarke  <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>How much money do interstate highways make? All transportation is heavily
>>>>subsidized, highways, airports, etc. It’s a public service. The US has a
>>>>third-world rail system, for short-haul intercity (east and west coast) it
>>>>is more cost-effective than flying, and if we upgraded our system to the
>>>>equivalent of the rest of the world it would be faster downtown to
>>>>downtown.
>>>
>>>It's funny that our inferior rail system moves a higher percentage of
>>>our freight than does the rail system in the EU.  It's passengers in
>>>the US who don't like trains.
>>
>>We have no way to tell, because for most people in the US, there's no
>>train for them to like. Despite what you might have heard, at least
>>until the pandemic most of Amtrak's long distance trains are full,
>
>Source?

You didn't  provide a source for your claim above,  turnabout is fair play.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213399 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromRobin Vowels <robin.vowels@gmail.com>
Date2020-08-29 00:28 -0700
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<663322bf-2bf0-44de-8f38-c65d8e890aedn@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#213266
On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 2:58:41 AM UTC+10, John Levine wrote:
> In article <c......@4ax.com>,
> J. Clarke <j......@gmail.com> wrote: 
> >>How much money do interstate highways make? All transportation is heavily 
> >>subsidized, highways, airports, etc. It’s a public service. The US has a 
> >>third-world rail system, for short-haul intercity (east and west coast) it 
> >>is more cost-effective than flying, and if we upgraded our system to the 
> >>equivalent of the rest of the world it would be faster downtown to 
> >>downtown. 
> > 
> >It's funny that our inferior rail system moves a higher percentage of 
> >our freight than does the rail system in the EU. It's passengers in 
> >the US who don't like trains.
> We have no way to tell, because for most people in the US, there's no 
> train for them to like. Despite what you might have heard, at least 
> until the pandemic most of Amtrak's long distance trains are full, and 
> if they reversed short-sighted cuts and restored 3x week to daily, 
> they'd probably recover more costs proportionally since they could 
> spread the fixed costs across more passengers.
> >As for subsidies, the rails are owned and maintained by the freight 
> >lines which are making profits without any subsidies, so why should 
> >passenger rail get subsidies.
> Because passenger everything else gets subsidies. Roads and airports 
> don't pay property taxes, and airports only appear profitable because 
> they're not charged for the opportunity cost of what else might be 
> using the land. One of the greatest unappreciated subsidies to cars is 
> free parking, vast amounts of land given to car users at no cost. 
> 
> Freight and passenger rail are completely different businesses these 
> days. A 50 MPH freight train is fast, while a 100 MPH passenger train 
> is slow, making it hard for them to share the same sets of rails.

Depends on the frequency of passenger trains.
Usually for high speed, a separate new line is required,
that is straighter and more level than that used for freight traffic.
High-speed rail attracts passengers, and so we find that, for example,
Madrid to Barcelona offers 18 return trips a day.
 
> Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US 
> are much greater,

Not really.  Try travelling from Lisboa (Lisbon) to Budapest.  It's 3,000 km.
Or Lisboa to St Petersburg (4,500 km).

San Francisco to New York is 4,130 kms.

> to the advantage of trains here, while Europe has a 
> whole lot of rivers and canals where containers on barges are 
> competitive to rail.

Europe also has some high speed passenger trains. France 300 kph,
Spain 300 kph, Russia 250 kph, Italy 200-250 kph, Ukraine 160 kph,
Germany 250 kph.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213501 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromQuadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
Date2020-08-31 16:23 -0700
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<86cdc264-7dce-45be-964f-64b1c852cb9co@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#213399
On Saturday, August 29, 2020 at 1:28:50 AM UTC-6, Robin Vowels wrote:
> On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 2:58:41 AM UTC+10, John Levine wrote:
 
> > Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US 
> > are much greater,
> 
> Not really.  Try travelling from Lisboa (Lisbon) to Budapest.  It's 3,000 km.
> Or Lisboa to St Petersburg (4,500 km).
> 
> San Francisco to New York is 4,130 kms.

San Francisco to New York could be compaired, fairly, to, say, Aix-la-Chappelle 
to Ghent.

Lisbon to Budapest, on the other hand, would have to be compared to, oh, say, 
Montreal to Buenos Aires.

Of course, you could compare San Francisco to New York with St. Petersburg to 
Vladivostok, but that is partly in Asia, not just Europe.

John Savard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213502 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromJ. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com>
Date2020-08-31 19:40 -0400
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<sg2rkfd5mr4hf3kubp161hjjk498pdlajh@4ax.com>
In reply to#213501
On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 16:23:32 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
<jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

>On Saturday, August 29, 2020 at 1:28:50 AM UTC-6, Robin Vowels wrote:
>> On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 2:58:41 AM UTC+10, John Levine wrote:
> 
>> > Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US 
>> > are much greater,
>> 
>> Not really.  Try travelling from Lisboa (Lisbon) to Budapest.  It's 3,000 km.
>> Or Lisboa to St Petersburg (4,500 km).
>> 
>> San Francisco to New York is 4,130 kms.
>
>San Francisco to New York could be compaired, fairly, to, say, Aix-la-Chappelle 
>to Ghent.
>
>Lisbon to Budapest, on the other hand, would have to be compared to, oh, say, 
>Montreal to Buenos Aires.
>
>Of course, you could compare San Francisco to New York with St. Petersburg to 
>Vladivostok, but that is partly in Asia, not just Europe.

Europeans are fond of telling Americans how big Europe is.  Then they
decide while in New York to nip down to Miami for lunch and are
surprised when dinner time rolls around and they're still in the
Carolinas.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213505 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromFred Smith <fred@thejanitor.corp>
Date2020-09-01 01:39 +0000
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<rik8no$75e$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#213502
On 2020-08-31, J  Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2020 16:23:32 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
><jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>>On Saturday, August 29, 2020 at 1:28:50 AM UTC-6, Robin Vowels wrote:
>>> On Friday, August 28, 2020 at 2:58:41 AM UTC+10, John Levine wrote:
>> 
>>> > Comparisons with Europe are hard to make because distances in the US 
>>> > are much greater,
>>> 
>>> Not really.  Try travelling from Lisboa (Lisbon) to Budapest.  It's 3,000 km.
>>> Or Lisboa to St Petersburg (4,500 km).
>>> 
>>> San Francisco to New York is 4,130 kms.
>>
>>San Francisco to New York could be compaired, fairly, to, say, Aix-la-Chappelle 
>>to Ghent.
>>
>>Lisbon to Budapest, on the other hand, would have to be compared to, oh, say, 
>>Montreal to Buenos Aires.
>>
>>Of course, you could compare San Francisco to New York with St. Petersburg to 
>>Vladivostok, but that is partly in Asia, not just Europe.
>
> Europeans are fond of telling Americans how big Europe is.  Then they
> decide while in New York to nip down to Miami for lunch and are
> surprised when dinner time rolls around and they're still in the
> Carolinas.
>

Yeah, they just want to pop over to Perth from Sydney, too.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#213514 — Re: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951

FromQuadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
Date2020-08-31 22:13 -0700
SubjectRe: OFF TOPIC trains and planes, Sante Fe Super Chief ad, 1951
Message-ID<a896aafd-7352-4f16-b9a7-aaff73e408f5o@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#213505
On Monday, August 31, 2020 at 7:39:09 PM UTC-6, Fred Smith wrote:
 
> Yeah, they just want to pop over to Perth from Sydney, too.

Of course, Perth is closer to Sydney than you might expect, given the number of time zones that separate them...

if you had thought the Earth was flat.

John Savard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers


csiph-web