RE: (erielack) Auto Racks

[pat.moore_@_att.net]

Paul...  

- -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Paul Brezicki" <doctorpb_@_bellsouth.net>
> I would amend your statement to read, "The list of Class 1 RR's..." 

Yeah, that is what I meant to say.  Very few Class 1 railroads did not have at least a few auto racks.

> Like 
> autoparts cars, autoracks were in assigned service, accounting for the high 
> empty miles. The tiedowns were specific to model groups. The racks were 
> owned by all the RR's in the pool participating in a particular model's 
> movement. 

Really?  I never knew that.  It makes sense, though.  It must be that the pools were much bigger compared to some of the auto parts pools.  That would account for the wider variety of racks compared to Hi-Cubes, for example.  

Then again, if you are talking about the freight traffic to and from an automobile distribution facility, like the Chrysler facility at Mt. Pocono, I suppose that sort of facility would receive racks loaded from many different Chrysler plants.  Is that correct?  That way, we would have seen auto racks from many different equipment pools all being gathered for delivery to Mt. Pocono.  That could also account for the variety.  That is opposed to something like Ford at Mahwah, which made just one type of vehicle so it would have involved fewer equipment pools and less variety?

- -pat



	The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
	http://EL-List.railfan.net/
	To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html

------------------------------