> Rails to Trails definitely has been a more
> cohesive force than we have, and they are
> definitely more politically astute. Our only
> points of conflict are when they advocate
> the destruction of extant trackage that we'd
> like to see used again - this has happened
> many times, unfortunately.

Rails to Trails has always had a built-in clean and healthy look. Like mom and applie pie, how can anyone possibly complain about any program that promotes exercise, gets people walking and biking instead of running their cars, and supports environmentally sound activities? Any politician who votes against this is gonna get in trouble.

Keeping the rails there for potential use doesn't have much sex appeal in the real world where many people think trains are evil (grade crossing accidents, noisy whistles outside your house at 3 a.m., scheduled trains that are never on schedule). Add to that, the notion that the restoration of heavy pacific ### tends to look more like a crazy hobby than a true historical activity, we've got trouble trying to look good when we ask for TEA-21 funds.

Personally, I think we need to change the way we ask for money. Those who are dedicated and excited about the prospect of running their heavy pacific again, think THAT is reason enough to get the funds. 99.99% of the public don't agree.

If we show that there is truly a historical purpose and an educational purpose for running that old locomotive again, then we are doing something that really can have an impact on the public.

--Malcolm

malcolmrcampbell@cs.com

Over here in New York, the Susquehanna operates a shuttle service less than 20 miles using a few Budd RDCs, and nothing else. Sounds like what you mentioned.

I have heard talk of extending the VTA light rail over the old SPC/SP right of way (what is left; the rest would be rerouted) to Santa Cruz. I personally am against light rail, they are wasting millions to run the light rail right next to SP (now UP) trackage from San Jose to Vasona Junction when they can just run a few trains a day using Caltrain equipment. There's less than 20 miles between Vasona Jct (current end of track) and Olympia (where the Santa Cruz Big Trees & Pacific begins), it would probably be cheaper to just put that track back than to build a new track alongside the portions from SJ to LG and Olypmia to Santa Cruz AND electrify it.

The VTA recently has had problems with its Kinki-Sharyo low-floor LRV cars because of squeeking on turns in downtown San Jose.

-Ed Kelley

gtngrr@aol.com

Happy Monday to All...

I'm wondering if the passenger car or p.v. savy folks can help me out on this one. Is there somewhere online (or in print) an assembling of acceptable practices for having propane generators installed under passenger cars. Size of tanks, restrictions, practices etc...

Also curious what everyone here might have to say. I'm interested in the nuances of propane fired equipment only (as opposed to diesel etc...). I'm completely ignorant in this department and would hope to correct that.

Thanks in advance

Dave Crosby