Adirondack Scenic Railroad (ADIX) Discussion - 2012

Could somebody explain the big deal about hiking trails? We've got miles and miles and miles of them anywhere you go, yet there are always demands for more. If you want to walk, open your door and walk. You want nature? Go to a park - and walk! Why the obsession with big long trails from one end of the state to another, that have to be maintained and worried about. If someone wants a long walk let them walk around their block 10, 20 50 times if they want. You can ride a bike or take a hike with what's there now without spending more money on new trails.

I don't read this thread very much so this may be a repeat.

Why can't you have both next to each other? The access road becomes the hiking trail. I rode a trail from the town of Ripley in PA. Bike path is right next to an active line.

Instead of bashing each other and trying to put each other out of business, why don't you guys find a solution to operate together. I would love to ride my bike along an active rail and have a train come along and pass me. I even try to x-country ski along an active line if it's possible during the winter.

Keep in mind that despite appearances and claims to the contrary, it's entirely possible that there are those who don't really want a trail, but they do want the tracks lifted:
http://nextstoptupperlake.org/786/are-t ... trail-plan

The fact that they don't seem to be interested in a parallel trail would seem to bear this out.

I think it's kind of funny that the #1 reason the railroad has made so many strides lately toward total restoration is BECAUSE the 'trail advocates' have been making noise... ironic, isn't it.
Maybe rail restoration is really Tony's goal?

Anyway, if people realized the millions of gallons of dihydrogen monoxide that's been dumped on the corridor over the years, maybe they'd have a different opinion of making it a trail.
Neither the state nor the railroad has tried to keep it a secret, but many people don't take this into consideration.
It has been proven that DHMO has no effect on train riders or even snomobilers - but it would have a massive impact on hikers and bikers!
Good luck with that!!!

P.S. hi The Man, I don't make it on here as much as I used to - been busy making those blue and gold diesels pull freight!

Wouldn't DHMO in a non-crystal form have a direct effect on snowmobile operations? For example, if DHMO dumped tons in a crystal form, wouldn't this benefit the snowmobileers? Where is in liquid form, it would stop them in their tracks.....likely before that.

When mixed with Castor canadensis, DHMO can have a catastrophic effect, requiring a significant amount of remediation. Regular prophylaxis is required to prevent such outbreaks.

Yes SST, DHMO impact can vary due to change of state!!!
Sadly, while a fan favorite, steam locomotives emit large quantities of DHMO in their exhaust. I myself have been exposed to DHMO vapor by this method!

SST wrote:Wouldn't DHMO in a non-crystal form have a direct effect on snowmobile operations? For example, if DHMO dumped tons in a crystal form, wouldn't this benefit the snowmobileers? Where is in liquid form, it would stop them in their tracks.....likely before that.

Yes it would seem intuitive that DHMO dumped by the ton in crystal form would benefit the snowmobileers. However, doing so would collaboratively matrix leveraged benefits in regard to the railroad, and furthermore might dramatically myocardinate cross-platform expertise.

These are important things to consider.

hojack wrote:I'm tired of reading Tony's views and commentary on this subject. Why not take the spin to "BikeTrail's.net" or some appropriate site. Tony, you might get a believer or two there. I don't think it's doing anything for your cause here. Like the readers of your "advocate" group's letters to the editor in the Enterprise...... They and those of us here aren't falling for spun economic development, and tourism numbers. Wow, reading Trains for 50 years makes someone a railroad and tourism expert. I guess I should have subscribed earlier in my 40 years in railroading, business, and economic development.

Yeah. I'm pooped out on it, too. Tony is now just here to piss people off, and his whole 18 (at last check) post count proves that he has no reason to be here but to troll with his agenda. Put the spin somewhere else and find some "like minded" friends on a website that will champion your cause of something that is most likely NOT going to happen--ESPECIALLY after the last few weeks of news events.

50 years of TRAINS, eh? Just as well that it wasn't the Hubbard years of RAILROAD that we're talking about, or else there would be advocating going on as to the fact that Virgil Staff's "rail-girl" pics broke too many safety rules by having the ladies step ON the rails in the pics instead of OVER them. Now THAT would be a controversy! :D

Gentlemen: Can we please return to the topic at hand? If you don't like Tony's agenda, then don't discuss it.

Let's move on to a more productive topic, shall we?

-otto-

Can someone point me to video or photos of some of the OOS sections north of Thendara? I'm curious what they look like.

SST wrote:I don't read this thread very much so this may be a repeat.

Why can't you have both next to each other? The access road becomes the hiking trail. I rode a trail from the town of Ripley in PA. Bike path is right next to an active line.

Instead of bashing each other and trying to put each other out of business, why don't you guys find a solution to operate together. I would love to ride my bike along an active rail and have a train come along and pass me. I even try to x-country ski along an active line if it's possible during the winter.

A parallel trail is possible at some locations, but not the entire length. There are sections on fills that are wide enough only for a single track, and the construction necessary to make it wider would never happen in the Adirondacks even if there was funding. That said, the railroad is more than willing to work with trails along the ROW where it is feasible to do so. Construction of a parallel trail is already under way between Saranac Lake and Lake Placid. It would appear that it is ARTA who is inflexible on this matter. Read this letter written by Pete Snyder, volunteer and former ops manager: http://nextstoptupperlake.org/774/why-c ... k-together

Maybe you guys should censor some of your postings. Perhaps Tony likes to stir up trouble so somebody accidently provides some information that would give him ammunition to use against the RR.

I recall a dicussion a few years ago regarding the CSX detrailment at Union Rd in Cheektowaga. It was clear that several posters were providing information [which we thrive on] but could be considered proprietary informtiona that someone else could use against CSX.

Again, I don't read this thread very often so I haven't really seen what is posted. But you should always watch your own back as well as the RR and don't provide any ammunition that can be used against you.

Just be careful what you write.

Otto - all due respect, but the whole trails vs rails thing is very pertinent.

SST wrote:But you should always watch your own back as well as the RR and don't provide any ammunition that can be used against you.

Methinks the railroad has nothing to hide - it's operations are a matter of public record via 990's and reports to the FRA. I have yet to see anything here that wasn't published elsewhere first. And the goal is clear- restore service on the line.

The "trail advocates," on the other hand, may well be hiding some portion of their agenda. I find it difficult to imagine that the amount of time and resources they are putting toward their stated goal is for the altruistic purpose of creating a trail. Even the suggested benefits of their proposal are questionable.

tree68 wrote:Otto - all due respect, but the whole trails vs rails thing is very pertinent.

SST wrote:But you should always watch your own back as well as the RR and don't provide any ammunition that can be used against you.

Methinks the railroad has nothing to hide - it's operations are a matter of public record via 990's and reports to the FRA. I have yet to see anything here that wasn't published elsewhere first. And the goal is clear- restore service on the line.

The "trail advocates," on the other hand, may well be hiding some portion of their agenda. I find it difficult to imagine that the amount of time and resources they are putting toward their stated goal is for the altruistic purpose of creating a trail. Even the suggested benefits of their proposal are questionable.

Agreed. There are lots of other places for trails. And there are abandoned rail corridors with the tracks already pulled. Why such a persistent focus on a rail line that is not only actively being restored, but has the real prospect now of vastly increased service?