O'Connor, stated "- railroad traffic distances and routes often have nothing to do with the "shortest path" between two points."
I do not think so. There is a cost to the railroad and every cost needs to be accounted for otherwise the railroad ultimately goes
- like the Rock Island example given, bankrupt. So hey, good example.
Next - give a summation that "Present day shipping is VERY different than it was in the STMFC era." Present day does not exist here on the STMFC, it ends at the end of 1960. However you have heard that before. (Moderators - time to repost the date frame for this list.)
This list exists in the still much regulated era of ICC and AAR.
Extra cars can be a company use car or any other. And even if a car is used as filler for an under-tonnage manifest, there are still costs involved. In handling the car, switching the car, the extra fuel used. If management are doing their jobs properly, they already have a handle on costs and room for marginal freight is rare. Even more rare on the NP where the loaded freight moved predominantly eastbound.
And the comment - that's what lawyers are for, cutely sidesteps showing any factual documentation to support the opinions expressed.
I will say this again I have said it before: railroads are a business legally bound to their shareholders to maximize profits.
You have gone after others before in this manner and I guess I am just the latest one. Jim Dick - Roseville, MN