Western Railroad Discussion > Like to hear opinons on the Trains '70's issue

I think it was among their all time best. I'm glad to see that Mark Hemphill tackled the senario of SP's downfall during the 1970's (can a book be far behind???), though I a bit perplexed at some of the statements made in the article.

Congrats to my favorite RR photographer/employee Jamie Schmid for having his photos used in an article (again)...


AM

I've got to agree about the SP article, very thought provoking.

yeah, and the Chessie Steam in that '70's yellow...

the 70' were a sad time in American railroading.

and the SP was a supernova, shining the brightest before it died.

Oh yeah...yellow steam is so much worse than no steam at all.

I grew up 2 miles from the Erie Lackawanna Main Line so I might be a "bit " biased. Larry DeYoung ALWAYS does the EL right! Having "grown up" railfanning in the 70's, I just loved the issue. It was the fastest I devoured a Trains issue in YEARS.

I believe the article we are discussing is, "The Golden Empire came crashing down" by Mark W. Hemphill in the March issue of "Trains" magazine page 80.

Here's some interesting things to consider. "SP's technology was the best" pg 81. "Sp's car distribution and shipper billing computer programs" were eventually used by BNSF and UP. SP started Sprint a Microwave communications system and later sold it to GTE. SP had it's own computerized system for dispatching. The model for BNSF and UP.

Technologically speaking, SP should have been the leader, the inovator, the railroad to lead all others. What did them in? Bottom line, California's cost of doing business, business taxes in the form of Inventory taxes, City or County taxes, employees cost of living which reflected on wages, all of these far exceeded what most companies (G.M. & Ford) were willing to pay and they headed out of the state. They left California. With those companies went the carloads that had sustained SP. During the 60's. As a stand alone railroad, it wasn't going to happen. SP was forced to diversify and Mark brings all of that out in this article. Worth the read.

My personal observation, for what it's worth. The SPSF merger thing, along with an adopted brother the D&RGW would have made for an interesting railroad. AT&SF had coal and oil. The freight being moved over SP thru and on the Cotton Belt would have rode down the AT&SF super freeway. Today with the UP and SP merger it is still a roundabout trip to the East. It doesn't stop there but, I need to stop. Besides, it's to late ...now!! >:-(

Till later.

RickH

Yes, the E-L was a class act and greatly missed...

While not in the 70's the year of 1980 will go down as possibly the worst year ever in modern railroading: the loss of the Rock Island and the ending of service on Milwaukee Roads "Lines West". Of course many things happened in the 1970's to lead up to the 1980 "year of disaster" (the economy tanked too).

AM

chico Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> yeah, and the Chessie Steam in that '70's
> yellow...
>
> the 70' were a sad time in American railroading.
>
> and the SP was a supernova, shining the brightest
> before it died.
>
>

I disagree with the statment that the 70's were a sad time,

Don't forget, 1976 was the year that started the "mega merger" era. Conrail was the best thing to have happened for the 70's railroading. with in five years it was turning a heaftey profit, and, that merger saved seven money starved railroads.

Since I began to shoot train slides in 1972, and I started work for the railroad (MP) in 1975, the 70's issue was great reading. I knew quite a few people who worked for the RI (I once considered going to work for them as a dispatcher in El Reno, OK), so the RI article really appealed to me.

I have not read everything in the 70's issue of Trains but have read the SP article by Mark Hemphill and found it to be very interesting and enlightening. While it is true that California had and continues to have a hostile environment for business I think that it is an oversimplification of a complex set of circumstances to totally blame the fall of the mighty ESPEE on the over regulation and over taxation inflicted by the State of California. ATSF survived and apparently prospered in that environment, I realize that ATSF did not have as large a part of their operations dependant on California as SP so could survive the problems inflicted by the State of California more easily.

According to my reading of the Hemphill article, the fall of the SP was as much due to self inflicted wounds as anything. Yes, SP lost much of their traffic base but there were some bad decisions made at the highest levels regarding spending large amounts of capital on non rail enterprises rather then recovering the traffic that had moved or improving the Sunset Route where there was money to be made. One big lost that the Trains article failed to mention was the loss of the daily iron ore trains between Ferrum and Fontana, as I understand Kaiser was one of the SP’s largest shippers.

Just my opinion.

Don Bowen
Exeter, CA

20thCENTURYLIMITED Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I disagree with the statment that the 70's were a
> sad time,
>

RickH Responding:

The 70's brought with it a wake-up call for railroads. The realization that diversification, mergers, innovation and operational changes were essential. Spinning off spur lines and mainline track, that was costly to maintain or didn't show a profit.

Breaking even, wouldn't save some railroad operations. Downsizing, as in plant size and crew reductions. Perhaps, best summarized with one descriptive word "Survival".

It may have seemed like a sad time as railroad after railroad went under. Today, we describe them as "Fallen Flags". Mergers didn't necessarily mean the railroads were saved. New owners moved-in. New management style implimented. Many of the old timers from the former administration, left sitting on the curb.

Obviously, ICC didn't understand the impact it had or the role it played when it blocked the Rock Island's buy out to either SP or UP. For SP this would have opened up a direct route to Chicago. I believe Milwaukee and AT&SF were the only western railroads that had direct access to Chicago. For those western roads who didn't have this access it was an expensive hand off.

Efficiency and profit became the key words of the day. Keeping your head above water, took on new meaning.

The future was headed toward Intermodal traffic. SP did see this coming and begin to plan for it. Other railroads looked at it but saw this adventure and/or the capital expenditure as to costly.

Today, as I write or as we discuss this here on TO., most railroads are still playing catch-up. I can only wonder what we would have said on TO during the 70's.

In land ports or Intermodal facilities are being installed or built. Seaports are gearing up for increased traffic flow. Railroads are reacting, along with local governments to provide better access to these ports. National and Local trucking companies are getting into the swing of things by utilizing these ports.

Times they are a changing. I didn't write that. Seems to me it was a song written in the 70's. I used to sing along with it, on the radio.

Before, I sign off, a look at the future: San Diego, has a deep water port. The U.S. navy hangs out there. If the Garrizo Gorge route could be reopened to containerized freight and seaports constructed. One can only wonder how that would impact shipping by sea or rail. Anyone listening, hello are you there?

From Rick's: For What It's Worth Department. >:)

RickH

Edited Portion: You cannot focus on or blame just one thing and say this is responsible for bringing down SP. I am not sure it is fair to say the SP crashed and burned (figuratively speaking). It was a combination of many things that slowed SP down. Mark Hemphill, brings this out. SP had unrealized potential.

Speculation but hear me out. If SP and the D&RGW held, not merging with UP, SP could have stood alone. D&RGW had coal and SP negotiated carrying Utah Coal (away from UP) to Wisconsin. They were well on there way to becoming a competitive threat to UP and BNSF. Alas, Anschutz (not a hard core railroader but rather an investor) saw an opportunity to add to his finanicial portfolio. There's a think it thru for you!

That's where I'l leave it for now.

Yes , the 70's were indeed interesting times. I watched the events unfold in Iowa while I was growing up.

The Rock Island was dying a slow death and all of their equipment and track looked it.

The Milwaukee Road was slowly retrenching. In fact, it got to the point where the Milwaukee gave up on a large portion of their east-west main across Iowa. Then they started running on the parallel Northwestern mainline.

The C&NW became employee owned. During the seventies the Northwestern was in rough shape, but not as dire as the Milwaukee or the Rock. The C&NW was still a decade away from the Powder River coal business and better days.


Bob Perkins

I wasn't that much of a railfan in the 70's, but I did grow up in NJ near the EL commuter lines, so reading that bit of history was very enlightening. I never knew they were at such a disadvantage with their routings to Chicago.

The SP article was also well written. I couldn't help feeling that some of the folks on here who continue to say that the SP was the greatest thing since sliced bread would find the article disturbing in that it points out a lot of management decisions that doomed the RR.

One thing I'd disagree with in the issue was the description of Chessie's paint scheme as disco. I liked it then, and I like it now. It was bright, gave a nod to heritage, and looked sharp on the rolling stock. I felt it gave the RR a great public image and I sure prefer it to the boring CSX color blocks of today.