Re: AAR Rules


Dennis Storzek <dennis@...>
 

On Sun, May 15, 2022 at 03:53 PM, Guy Wilber wrote:
Mr. Dawson stated; "It also does not prevent individual railroads from operating non-compliant cars by agreement among themselves." 
 
Dennis, you recently made this same claim:  "The AAR regulations only governed interchange, and were based on an agreement between all the member railroads. As such, each road could use whatever "banned" equipment on its own lines, and even make side agreements to accept "banned" equipment from other roads."
I respect Mr. Dawson's contributions, he is well informed.  I do believe it is important to distinguish the differences within the periods of interest.  
Guy,
I agree completely, and since Mr. Dawson's entire career happened after our period of interest, he does not speak to the situation before his time. However, I felt that his explanation of how the standard charges for repairs worked, a topic that, to my knowledge, has never been discussed here, was worth the exposure and discussion. Indeed, just today someone seemed confused how a car could be repacked on a foreign line, and the answer is simple... it's due (which is why the date of the last RPKD is stenciled on the car) do it and bill the car owner.

As to side agreements to handle non-compliant cars, someplace I ran into a reference That one of the major Canadian roads agreed to handle non-compliant cars for the Pacific Great Eastern to the Vancouver docks, but not beyond the Vancouver switching district. I imagine the PGE was a signatory to the AAR Interchange agreement, but also had lots of non-compliant cars; this would allow more of their meager roster to service their traffic. The problem is, since I don't remember where I saw it, I can't say for sure if it was pre-1960.

Dennis Storzek 
 
 
 

 

Join main@RealSTMFC.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.