Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So, based on that map I see:
Chicago
St. Louis
Memphis
Dallas
Minneapolis/St. Paul
All have 4 or 5 (or more) Class I railroads running to/through it. But it's REALLY hard to see!
Looking at that map I see..
Chicago - 5
St. Louis - 4 or 5
Memphis - 5
Dallas - 2 or 3
Minneapolis/St. Paul - 3
-------------------------
Shreveport - 3
New Orleans - 5
Mobile - 4
Kansas City - 4
My mistake, I see it now.
Notice how with the exception of Chicago, all of the major Class I centers are the Mississippi River cities. Minneapolis, St. Louis, Memphis, New Orleans.
Location: Cleveland bound with MPLS in the rear-view
5,509 posts, read 11,875,397 times
Reputation: 2501
And rightfully so....the Mississippi is like another Class 1 route, along with any oceanic or Great Lakes port (e.g. New Orleans and Duluth, MN -- respectively).
Three Class 1 railroads serve Philly's ports, and all three are doing work or are done so that they can double stack containers. And the ports are themselves expanding, and the river channel is being deepened. The other ports are maxing out, while Philly's has room to grow. PHL is also a major hub for UPS. And about 100 million live within 600 mile radius of the city, so as far as logistics and distribution goes, it's a great location.
For most railways, the much of their track infrastructure is very lightly used, while the network totally hinges on a few crucial pieces. So it makes more sense to look at a traffic map than a route map.
This is a map as produced by The Economist. Note the dashed blue and red ones are freight rail lines too--you've got to look at the density of the red line under the dash.
It's really a fantastic article that accompanies it, but not on the subject of this debate.
As you can see, there are a few cities that have a few very congested rail lines (Los Angeles, Cleveland, Dallas, Atlanta), a few cities that have a huge number of very congested rail lines (Kansas City, Chicago), and a few cities that have a bunch of underused lines (Denver, New Orleans). Some cities might have good rail infrastructure theoretically, but it just happens not to fit very well into the network of whoever owns it.
Also, some places appear "important" because there is a ton of freight traffic, but it's just because a lot of freight passes by--Hastings, Nebraska, for instance. If there were some need, a bypass could be easily built to reroute the traffic, so it's difficult to think of the infrastructure as terrifically "important". On the other hand, the Chicagos, LAs, Atlantas, and Kansas Citys are vital links that it is nearly impossible to avoid, so the freight infrastructure that runs through town is really, really vital to our economy.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
