|
“New Haven Railroad”
Joined: Apr 2, 2008
Comments: 50
Island of Sodor
ISP:
Trumbull, CT
|
Joeseph Hopster wrote: This guy that uses the handles of "Amtrak Stormtrooper", "Bridge Commander", "Toe Main", "NewHavenRailroad", and others is the same guy in Enfield, CT. He is a trouble maker that has nothing better to do than add his smart-assed comments on web news blogs. His comments are abound on these other 2 blogs on this site:
-
http://64.13.133.15/forum/sour ce/wtnh/T64672E27SERT27BM
-
http://64.13.133.15/forum/city /westport-ct/T0RGPJT4SR413S1IE
-
He and a guy going by "RedBloodedAmerican" and variations of that, are some type of railroad fans, otherwise known as "foamers" (start dueling at the mouth when you see a train). On the first of the 2 links above, this "Amtrak Stormtrooper" guy takes issue that the passing train crews are friendly to an retired guy that likes to watch the trains go across the road from his place of employment at Warehouse Point in Enfield, CT.
Ignore this guy, as he is a total idiot who is just trying to inflame people. Hey Hopster, you made a mistake on that web address. Here is the correct one: - http://64.13.133.15/forum/sour ce/wtnh/T64672E27SERT27BM - You can learn about how I fixed the butts of the Amtrak workers that frequent the tracks across the road from where I work. "Let's have some fun, if you like"
|
|
“New Haven Railroad”
Joined: Apr 2, 2008
Comments: 50
Island of Sodor
ISP:
Trumbull, CT
|
For some reason the javascript inserted a space inti the middle of that address. "source" should be without any spaces in it. Let's try again, so you can read my work: http://www.topix.net/forum/source/wtnh/TBUNGO... "looks like they are ready for a switch again"
|
|
“click-click, in custody”
Joined: Apr 4, 2008
Comments: 15
Trumbull, CT
|
Bridge Commander wrote: For some reason the javascript inserted a space inti the middle of that address. "source" should be without any spaces in it. Let's try again, so you can read my work: http://www.topix.net/forum/source/wtnh/TBUNGO... "looks like they are ready for a switch again" Bridge Commander, you are such a dork. Here is the correct page: - http://www.topix.net/forum/source/wtnh/T64672... - Can't you get anything right? How do you find your way to Old Depot Road every morning?
|
Joined: Mar 31, 2008
Comments: 118
Tamaroa, IL
|
Ok for anyone that thinks trains are any good.If it was reliable dont you think we would just load OUR trucks on the rail.Couldnt we save a ton and make our jobs easier?We could essentially pocket a buck
a mile.That would be 3000 bucks for sitting on our butts.What stops us from doing so?The load would be delayed and refused.We wouldnt get a dime for the load and would be blacklisted and never allowed to haul for shipper again.You people really think were completely stupid.
|
|
“If you like”
Joined: Apr 2, 2008
Comments: 30
West Hartford
ISP:
Trumbull, CT
|
Trucker for profit wrote: Ok for anyone that thinks trains are any good.If it was reliable dont you think we would just load OUR trucks on the rail.Couldnt we save a ton and make our jobs easier?We could essentially pocket a buck
a mile.That would be 3000 bucks for sitting on our butts.What stops us from doing so?The load would be delayed and refused.We wouldnt get a dime for the load and would be blacklisted and never allowed to haul for shipper again.You people really think were completely stupid. I work for the railroad so I'm going to be naturally prejuidiced towards rail, but rail and trucking each has their place. But we are with you on the fuel costs. The railroads are partially responsible for their own demise because if you remember Conrail, they had horrible service and people just gave up on rail and went to trucking even at a higher cost. The other part of the falling of the railroads was lack of government support, while at the same time taxpayers where paying for nice new interstate highways. But certain things are best moved by train, and other things by truck. Lots of heavy weight going a lot of miles across the country is far cheaper by rail. But smaller deliveries are best delivered by truck; the larger railroads don't want to bother with small deliveries like one boxcar, because the money is in large trains of the same or similar products. In some cases a blend of the two works best. They unload ships in Long Beach right to rail, and those containers can travel to the east coast in about 3 days on a priority freight, and be loaded quickly onto truck trailer frames for delivery to their final destination. UPS also does something with trailers on flats, that travel in a priority manner to where they are taken off the flats for prompt delivery. So a combination or rail and truck can work in some cases, truck only for other situations, and rail only for others. Anybody that thinks it should always involve rail is just some type of rail-nut.
|
|
Steve
Commodore, PA
|
Joeseph Hopster wrote: ...start dueling at the mouth... What is "dueling at the mouth"? That's a new one. Is it some kind of dueling using your mouth instead of swords or other weapons?
|
|
“play with your Lionel”
Joined: Apr 2, 2008
Comments: 7
Provincetown
ISP:
Meriden, CT
|
Steve wrote: <quoted text>
What is "dueling at the mouth"? That's a new one. Is it some kind of dueling using your mouth instead of swords or other weapons? Rogereee! I must agree. I think he meant to say drueling, but it came out wrong. Anyhoo, he is absolutely correct. "Hartel? Where is this Hartel place" Do we go there?"
|
|
NOYFB
Middletown, CT
|
Toe Main wrote: <quoted text>You fixed my spelling Amtrak is the correct spelling no point in tring to make a point with a dolt truckers wife.......... Aren't you the smart one? I bet you wouldn't have the guts to say that in front of that lady's husband or boyfiend, you coward. Trains suck.
|
|
|
|
Truckers Wife
Bloomfield, CT
|
Toe Main wrote: <quoted text>You fixed my spelling Amtrak is the correct spelling no point in tring to make a point with a dolt truckers wife.......... well no point in still trying to correct your spelling ha ha. guess dumb or stupid was to big of a word for you. so you took the easy way out and typed dolt. oh by the way tring is actually trying. the word amtrakless was put in there from a site i looked up to prove my point about the diesel. i see you had nothing to say about that part but only about the part where there was a c in my word. So once again my point is proven. now go to your other blog sites and stir up some more mierda some where else.
|
|
Joined: Mar 31, 2008
Comments: 118
Logan, IL
|
Joeseph Hopster wrote: <quoted text>
I work for the railroad so I'm going to be naturally prejuidiced towards rail, but rail and trucking each has their place. But we are with you on the fuel costs.
The railroads are partially responsible for their own demise because if you remember Conrail, they had horrible service and people just gave up on rail and went to trucking even at a higher cost. The other part of the falling of the railroads was lack of government support, while at the same time taxpayers where paying for nice new interstate highways.
But certain things are best moved by train, and other things by truck. Lots of heavy weight going a lot of miles across the country is far cheaper by rail. But smaller deliveries are best delivered by truck; the larger railroads don't want to bother with small deliveries like one boxcar, because the money is in large trains of the same or similar products.
In some cases a blend of the two works best. They unload ships in Long Beach right to rail, and those containers can travel to the east coast in about 3 days on a priority freight, and be loaded quickly onto truck trailer frames for delivery to their final destination. UPS also does something with trailers on flats, that travel in a priority manner to where they are taken off the flats for prompt delivery.
So a combination or rail and truck can work in some cases, truck only for other situations, and rail only for others. Anybody that thinks it should always involve rail is just some type of rail-nut. Very good response..
|
|
Wake up Foolz
Sorento, IL
|
Amtrak Stormtrooper wrote: <quoted text> Lady your so wrong. Yes they run on diesel but only to drive the generators thats why they are called diesel-eletrics 2 7,000 Hp engines can pull the max on CSX 250 trailers on one train, thats 250 less cabs on the highway say if the trip is 30 hours, each and every truck is using countless gallons of fuel over that 30 hour trip, the driver can only drive X number of hours a day the trains change crews and the train countinues on. More and more intermodal trailers are shipped by rail than truck, why because it's unprofitable to truck it. Do some reseach go to EMD or GE transportion website and check the new green loco they sip fuel and are really clean burning.......... Yet the whole moral of your story is railroads require trucks whether if it's for track/railroad maint. or keeping the railroads supplied. I agree the railroads should haul cheap freight that is less profitable for truckers. Our tax dollars support the railroads with welfare otherwise known as subsidies. Our tax dollars subsidize the oil industry,agi-businesses(not family farms),airlines and a whole slew of other businesses. The only thing the government subsidizes this industry is cheap labor(Mexican trucks,lumpers,etc) and trucking schools.
|
|
“If you like”
Joined: Apr 2, 2008
Comments: 30
West Hartford
ISP:
Middletown, CT
|
Wake up Foolz wrote: <quoted text>Yet the whole moral of your story Ignore this "Amtrak Stormtrooper" guy. Read my posting back a day ago about HIM. - Actually the railroads get very little to no help from the government, with the exception of a few table scraps for some commuter rail projects. Now on the other hand there is Amtrak which gets a feast of a subsidy from the taxpayers, and that is sad because the ticket sales don't even pay for the fuel. Without much help, this is why it has been so slow for the railroads to rebuild. One of the smarter railroads like went into a partnership with JB Hunt, and the railroad might hold a major amount of stock in the company; sort of a "if you can't beat 'em, join em" philosophy.
|
|
Wake up Foolz
Sorento, IL
|
Joeseph Hopster wrote: <quoted text>
Ignore this "Amtrak Stormtrooper" guy. Read my posting back a day ago about HIM.
-
Actually the railroads get very little to no help from the government, with the exception of a few table scraps for some commuter rail projects.
Now on the other hand there is Amtrak which gets a feast of a subsidy from the taxpayers, and that is sad because the ticket sales don't even pay for the fuel.
Without much help, this is why it has been so slow for the railroads to rebuild.
One of the smarter railroads like went into a partnership with JB Hunt, and the railroad might hold a major amount of stock in the company; sort of a "if you can't beat 'em, join em" philosophy. I hear ya on the scAmtrak Stormpooper
|
|
“I am the best”
Joined: Apr 4, 2008
Comments: 27
Cromwell
ISP:
Bloomfield, CT
|
adam s wrote: I agree that women in SUVs are quite scary. They are typically either going well-below the speed limit, or well above it. I, too see them fly past me at 90 mph on the highway with kids in the car. And I've seen or read about them getting in accidents with kids in the car. An SUV is not the safest vehicle for a woman with children as DMD seems to think. The safest vehicle would be any vehicle with a good crash rating and a good driver. Most SUVs suck in accidents. The only thing their size guarantees is that you will kill whomever you hit. But maybe that's the goal. A mother with 2 kids doesn't need a Ford Excursion or even an Expedition. Those truck are too big to just carry a few kids and some clothes. What you should look into is this list of the 13 safest cars for 2007. See if your car is on the list. http://money.cnn.com/popups/2006/autos/iihs/1... l It isn't only women in SUV's i see men in big SUVs or Big trucks with hemis even. I own a SUV yes only because i drive a big vehicle for a living and driving a small vehicle at 6ft tall is not my thing.SUV is the safest vehicle for myself and my children. I feel that this little fast and furious cars need to get off the road though as they weave in and out of traffic. they deserve what they get. as for the men and women who drive fast in their truck , suv or car it isn't what the people are driving it is just the people in general. not just women. I see both sexes on their cell phones driving all the time too. Plus i would rather be in a big vehicle then a small one when some idiot decides to slam into me. i know i drive safe seeing my license is my bread and butter. so if they get injured then so be it. they should not have been driving that way. least i am safe and i know i was not driving like a idiot.
|
|
Nyra Hartell
Wallingford, CT
|
What about garbage trucks?
|
|
COS Beetleguse
Trumbull, CT
|
I think they should start shipping cullet by truck.
|
|
Hosed by the system
Berlin, CT
|
Not for nothing, but if you look at diesel worldwide, the prices we have are in line if not cheaper than other country's........in American dollars in Mexico its about $3.85 a gallon as of a few days ago and thier oil company is GOVERNMENT owned.........Europe its over $5.00 per gallon..................... We ARENT THAT special than everybody else.............
|
|
Janell Domel
Lexington, TX
|
MikeG wrote: Wow, I can't wait to be on the highway today, in the rain, with no speeding trucks!! You mean I can drive 60 or 65 mph, and no big rig blowing by me in the right lane doing 75 approaching an onramp full of cars!!!! And best of all, with the rain and all, no jack-knifed rig to delay my afternoon commute either!!!!!! It's a miracle!!!!! MikeG If it were not for the trucks you would not have an on or off ramp to complain about. you certainly need to be informed how much trucks make you life so much more conveinant for people like you who have no clue!!!!!!
|
|
Amtrak MOW
Trumbull, CT
|
Garbage Trucks???
|
|
“I am the best”
Joined: Apr 4, 2008
Comments: 27
Cromwell
ISP:
Bloomfield, CT
|
Hosed by the system wrote: Not for nothing, but if you look at diesel worldwide, the prices we have are in line if not cheaper than other country's........in American dollars in Mexico its about $3.85 a gallon as of a few days ago and thier oil company is GOVERNMENT owned.........Europe its over $5.00 per gallon.......... We ARENT THAT special than everybody else.......... That is why you need to come drive me around so i can save on gas ha ha
|
Judge it!
WTNH Hartford, New Haven and Connecticut Forum
