RAILWAYS IN
Despite having one of the most developed infrastructures in the world, the transportation facility available in the
General Scenario
The
2.61 trillion ton-miles of freight moved in 1990, an annual growth rate of 2.0 percent[1]. A similar growth in the demand has been forecasted by several studies including the study of AASHTO, 2002, which has forecasted domestic freight tonnage, increase by 57 percent by 2020.
Growth of Freight Traffic
As per Association of American Railroads (AAR) May 2009, in terms of ton-miles during 1980 to 2004, rail and trucking continued to capture a larger portion of the domestic freight market. As shown in annexure I rail has improved from 30% in 1980 to 43% in 2008. During this period trucking market share has grown from 20 percent in 1980 to 33 percent in 2004. Trends for domestic waterborne freight have followed an opposite path, with modal share declining during this period from 30percent of ton-miles in 1980 to 15 percent in 2004. Airfreight has increased in mode share over this period, from 0.3 percent to 0.4 percent, but still represents a small fraction of overall freight ton-miles. If we include international trade as well, trucking moves approximately two-thirds of freight tonnage nationally. Marine vessels move nearly 20 percent of freight tonnage. Rail moves 15 percent of
Performance of Railroad
When we analyze overall performance of Railroad, we find that there is continuous improvement in almost all measures. The operating ratio has improved from 86.6% in 2004 to 78.6% in 2006. During this period net income has improved from $2.9billion to $6.5 billion and return on average equity has further improved from 6.16% to 11.30% in 2006 (see annexure IV). As noted in
However, the Railroad was not always in good performance mode as we see it today. In fact during 1970 the survival of the entire Railroad industry was under big question mark with rising cost, unviable operation, losses and bankruptcies. The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) regulated almost all the rates that railroad charged to the shippers. Many unproductive lines were being operated by the Railroad industries, which were giving undue economic burden on different companies. Such companies were not given freedom to close the operation in such lines. Due to this a large number of companies were turning bankrupt every year. There was very less fresh investment in the dense traffic routes and very few new rolling stocks like wagon, engine etc. were being added. At this time the share of roadways kept increasing and captured a very big chunk of market.
As a response to this, Congress passed the Railroad Revitalization and Reform Act of 1976 and the Stagger’s Rail Act of 1980. These changes brought about some breathing to the industry. Particularly, the 1980 act encouraged greater reliance on competition to set rates and gave railroads increased freedom to price their services as per the market condition. Freedom to use differential pricing was also given. This means that companies recovered a greater proportion of their cost from those parties who were more dependent on railroad transportation like powerhouse companies who were more dependent on railroad for bringing their coal from mines to their industrial premises.
To further improve this process in 1995 Interstate Commerce Commission was terminated and all regulatory functions were transferred to the Surface Transportation Boards (STB). This was done to minimize the need for federal regulatory control and require fair and expeditious regulatory decision when regulation is required. Thus an element of competition and competitive balance was added in the functioning of the railroad industries. In case of exorbitant unreasonably high price STB was there to regulate the industry, which followed the principle that the industry should not charge more than 180% of the variable cost. Differential pricing recognized that some customers may use rail if rates are low—and may go to other transportation if rail rates are too high or service is poor. Therefore, rail rates on these shipments generally cover the directly attributable (variable) costs, plus a relatively low contribution to fixed costs. In contrast, customers with little or no practical alternative to rail generally pay a much larger portion of fixed costs. Moreover, even though a railroad might incur similar incremental costs while providing service to two different shippers that move similar volumes in similar car types traveling over similar distances, the railroad might charge the shippers different rates. Furthermore, if the railroad is able to offer lower rates to the shipper with more transportation alternatives, that shipper still pays some of the joint and common costs. By paying even a small part of total fixed cost, competitive traffic reduces the share of those costs that captive shippers would have to pay if the competitive traffic switched to truck or some other alternative. Consequently, while the shipper with fewer alternatives makes a greater contribution toward the railroads joint and common costs, the contribution is less than if the shipper with more alternatives did not ship via rail.
Consolidation of Railroads
After these developments consolidation of railroad industry took place. While the passenger operation was handed over to the government supported ‘Amtrak’, the freight operation went to the private sector. After several sell out, bankruptcies and closure only the following seven Class I railroads were able to survive: -
1) The
2) CSX Transportation (CSX).
3) Grand Trunk Corporation, which consists of the
4)
5)
6) The former Soo Line (800), owned by Canadian Pacific (CP).
7) Union Pacific (UP).
As per study of Association of American Railroads (AAR) August2007, Class I railroads were those with operating revenue of at least $319.3million in 2005. Class I carriers comprise only 1 percent of the number of
In addition, the two major Canadian freight railroads Canadian National Railway and Canadian Pacific Railway - each have extensive
Performance in Post Stagger Act Era
Price Trends and Rates
After these changes intercity ton- mile started moving upward for last 20 years, which was falling continuously for several decades. Railroads now move about 43% of intercity 
Traffic in 2008. However, due to low rates this freight generates only 10 % of total revenue. Prior to 1980 there was 2.9%increase in freight rate per year. In Post- Stagger Era as the above graph indicate the freight rates, adjusted for inflation, have decreased by an average of 1 to 2%. In 2008 it was costing 49% less than what it was costing in 1981.
In 2006 and 2007, railroads hauled more freight than ever before — so much, in fact, that
they began facing serious capacity constraints on parts of their networks. Rail traffic fell
in 2008 due to weakness in the economy, but experts agree that, over the long term,
demand for freight transportation will rise sharply.
If inflation is adjusted than it cost 57% less. There has been all round improvement in the performance of the railroad i.e. productivity, volume, revenue and price as shown in the above graph.
Major Commodities
Coal is the most important single commodity carried by rail. In 2005, it accounted for 42 percent of tonnage and 20 percent of revenue for Class I railroads. Coal is primarily carried to different powerhouses.
Other major commodities carried by rail include chemicals, including massive amounts of industrial chemicals (9 percent), plastic resins, and fertilizers; grain and other agricultural products (predominantly grain and soybeans) (9 percent), non- metallic minerals such as phosphate rock, sand, and crushed stone and gravel; food and food products; steel and other primary metal products; forest products, including lumber, paper, and pulp; motor vehicles and motor vehicle parts; and waste and scrap materials, including scrap iron and scrap paper. The fastest growing segment of rail traffic has been intermodal traffic, with the number of trailers and containers increasing substantially, almost quadrupled in the last 25 years from an average of 3.4 million loadings in the early 1980's, when double stack container trains were introduced, to 12.3 million in 2002. The highest traffic corridor for intermodal traffic is between
Self Reliance
After privatization, all railroad industries are maintaining their own tracks, wagons and locomotives. There has been 38% increase in heavier hauling locomotives. However, there has been 39% decline in mile owning. This has led to concentrated traffic over a smaller network. The railroad owned fleet capacity has declined by 14%, whereas large shippers have increased their fleet capacity by 74%. The net effect has been 20% increase in total freight car capacity. Between 1981 and 2002, the railroads have spent $349 billion on capital and maintenance of their track and equipment. Capital expenditures have grown 56 percent from $3.6 billion in 1990 to $5.7 billion in 2002 while the price level of railroad purchases of inputs rose only 38 percent. There has been substantial improvement in labor productivity. Between 1990 and 2002 it improved from 4.8 to 9.6 million ton-miles per employee.
The Public Benefits of Freight Railroads
Energy Efficiency
Besides cost competitiveness and efficiency, as per
Environmentally Friendly
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that for every ton-mile, a typical truck emits roughly three times more nitrogen oxides and particulates than a locomotive. Other studies suggest trucks emit six to 12 times more pollutants per ton-mile than do railroads, depending on the pollutant measured. Railroads also have a clear advantage in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. According to the EPA, railroads account for just 9 percent of total transportation-related NOx emissions and 4 percent of transportation-related particulate emissions, even though they account for 42 percent of the nation's intercity freight ton-miles.
Alleviating Highway Congestion.
A single intermodal train takes up to 280 trucks (equivalent to more than 1,100 cars) off on highways; a train carrying other types of freight takes up to 500 trucks off Overcrowded highways act as an "inefficiency tax" on the economy, seriously constraining economic growth. Freight railroads help relieve this restriction by reducing gridlock, enhancing mobility, and reducing the pressure to build costly new highways. The sixth annual study of traffic congestion by Demographia (2007) estimates that if 25% of freight is shifted from trucks to rail, commuters across the U S could each save 43 hours a year’s time spent in their cars.
Safety Advantages
Railroads are the safest way to transport hazardous materials. Railroads and trucks carry roughly equal hazardous material ton-mileage, but trucks are 16 times more hazardous than railroads.
In the above analysis we have seen that how the railroads have been able to establish as a dominant mode of transportation. But the most important question is whether the railroad is going to maintain its dominant position in future. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in one of study in 2002 have pointed out that between 1970 and 2000, the 
freight and 31 billion trucks VMT to the highways, costing shippers $326 billion, costing highway users $492 billion (in travel time, operating, and accident costs), and adding $21 billion to highway costs over the 20-year period.
Railroads Need Urgent Attention
Let us examine why the railroad is not going to maintain its dominant position in the future: -
Problem of Investment
One of the major problems of Railroad industry has been lower return on the investment. As per
Hence the policy question remains unresolved is that how to attract more capital. Due to this problem the railroad has always suffered the problem of shortage of fund as shown in the following diagram: -
The above diagram indicate that the railroads have been historically not been able to earn its cost of capital and despite some improvement in recent past it has not been able to match it from the return on investment. This has led to consistence fund shortage problem as shown in the following diagram: -
The above diagram clearly indicate that the railroads have persistently suffered the problem of fund shortfall and fund available for capital expenditure has always been lesser than its requirement. This has affected its future growth prospects. There have been a large number of debates, hearings and discussions on these aspects. Some experts have argued that whatever benefit of the deregulation was to be achieved has already been achieved. Now the Railroads have reached in a stagnation stage, and it cannot generate internal resources to make it fit to meet the challenges of the future. Of its own, the Railroads are not attracting necessary capital. Hence the federal government should again impose a list of regulations and then some amount should be provided to improve the capacity of the railroads. However, other experts like, Clifford Winston 2005 etc.have vehemently opposed this stance. They believe that fully deregulated environment will spur the additional adjustment for the potential logistic and operational efficiencies. This will contribute in a big way to the efficiency of the nation’s distribution system for years to come. However the country has not reached to any conclusive stage on these issues When we see that many heavy routes are dangerously clogged and it takes more than 24 hours to reach the destination with an average speed of 50 miles or so, it is an indication of imminent danger and the country need to resolve it for better performance. The issue cannot be left to its own fate.
Improving the Railroad – An Unfinished Agenda
AASHTO, 2002 report has mentioned some of the measures, which can help the railroad to improve the productivity. Despite passing more than 5 years not much progress has taken place. Some of the challenges, which are going to be valid or relevant for many years to come, are mentioned below for more attention.
Mainline Capacity Improvement
There are tremendous possibilities to improve the mainline capacity by adopting right kind of technology and necessary changes in the rule. However no vigorous attempt has been made to improve the situation by the Railroads. Sooner or later they have to start the processes like adding more tracks (sidings, double tracking), processing more trains on a given track (signaling improvements, speed increases, electronic braking), expanding the capacity of a track (longer sidings), or increasing the capacity of each car (higher clearance, heavier-axle loads). These all provides additional freight throughput capacity.
Bridges and Tunnels
Bridges and tunnels made in 1800s are unfit to move the traffic of present era. These need systematic rehabilitation. But the fund crunch comes in the huge capital expense issue. Reconstruction and modernization of these antiquated bridges and tunnels represents a huge capital expense — billions of dollars at a national level. Policy planners have to find a solution that how to get fund to reconstruct these tunnels and bridges.
Heavier Axle Loads
By making track fit for heavier axle load more train per train could be run. Although over the past decade, the industry has generally moved from 128-gross ton cars to 143.5-ton cars, with a significant part of the network ready for 157.5-ton cars the journey would remain incomplete until unless class I network is made fit for 157.5 ton or more.
Height Clearances
Although double stack container has been started running in some routes, all-important routes have not been given height clearance for double stack containers. For getting more flow of intermodal traffic it is very significant to get early height clearance for double stack container.
Terminal Growth and Highway Access
With increasing traffic the need for more terminal and easy highway access arises. Although some new terminals have been constructed, these have been constructed at a far off place, as the land cost near the town is high. These constructions don’t serve the intended purpose. Due to distance these terminals are also facing the problem of highway congestion.
Operational Issues
There are certain operational issues, which can help in improving the turnaround of the railroad assets, if properly implemented.
Electronic Braking
Presently railroads are using air- pressure for braking the stock, which take several minutes for braking or releasing the brake affecting speed performance. Brake can be applied or released instantly by using wire or radio electrical signal, which may provide tremendous improvement in the track capacity. However the
Positive Train Control (PTC)
Presently the trains are being run by following absolute block system in which only one train is permitted in a block. By using Global Positioning Systems and continuous data communications inter-distance between different trains can be controlled which could permit more than one train in a block section. Even better fuel efficiency can be achieved, as speed will be totally coordinated.
Upgrading the Use of Information Technology
Railroads are not fully utilizing information technology. The programme for yield management and assets utilization can give tremendous benefit. Computer aided dispatching, real time traffic and schedule information sharing by different railroads may lead to better scheduling and incident response. To derive proper benefit the railroads have to adopt these things earliest.
Scheduled Railroad
For better utilization many railroad companies are sending trains only when the load is complete. This leads to a lot of inconvenience to the shippers, including uncertain delivery time. These days many customer desires for schedule delivery and railroads have to adjust this expectation to get their business.
Efficient Interchange
Although many problems of interchange between different railroads have been solved, many other problems are yet to be resolved. For effective and better utilization of the assets these problems are required to be resolved effectively in shortest time.
Learning for the Indian Railways
The above analysis gives large number of insights for the Indian Railways to follow. Although the Indian Railways may not be blindly follow the pattern of the American Railroads, it gives a large spectrum of issue where some kind of model for the future development or direction of change can be understood.
Acceptance of the Market Force
Although the Indian Railways are presently getting budgetary support of the government of
Ending Differential Pricing
Presently the Indian Railways are following 16 kinds of rate, which start at Rs.50.00 for LR4 class and finish at Rs.375.30 for 200 X class. The minimum amount that a customer pays for 1000 KM is Rs.355.10 whereas the maximum amount is Rs.2663.60. As we have seen, in the case of the American Railroads, customer could be charged up to 180% of the variable cost and this is not considered to be unreasonable. Probably, the Indian Railways is required to reduce the upper limit; otherwise the upper segment customers will sooner or later shift to other mode may be road sector.
Use of ICT
The use of ICT in the Indian Railways is still in rudimentary stage. To make the effective utilization of stocks and improve the throughput the Indian Railways have to utilize ICT in a big way. Automatic identification of wagons and coaches, electronic exchange of information including interchange of trains, use of GPS for the running of train, use of positive train control for running more than one trains in block section etc. offer tremendous opportunity which the Indian Railways is yet to utilization.
Growth of Intermodal Traffic
Although the Indian Railways some container trains, its proportion of traffic share is relatively less. As we have seen a large chunk of the American Railroads is now intermodal traffic, the Indian Railways should get prepared and make all arrangement for similar share of the intermodal traffic.
Further, presently the Indian Railways share of
It is now upon the policy planner of
Footnotes
1 Assessing the Effects of Freight Movement on Air Quality at the National and Regional Level --Final Report, April 2005 U.S. Federal Highway Administration
2 Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics, National Transportation Statistics 2004.
3American Association of Railroads, Railroad Facts, 2004
Annexure I
Modal Share of Domestic Ton-Miles, 1990 and 20012
|
| Class I Rail | Intercity Trucking | Domestic Waterborne Freight | Domestic Air Freight |
| 1980 | 30% | 20% | 31.9% | 0.3% |
| 2004 | 40.0% | 33.0% | 15% | 0.4% |
| 2008 | 43.0% | N.A. | N.A. | N.A. |
Annexure II
Modal Share of Freight Tonnage, 2002
| Type | Trucking | Marine vessels | Rail | Aircraft |
| Percentage | 64.6 | 19.8 | 15.4 | 0.1 |
Annexure III
Domestic Freight Shipment Value by Mode, 2002
| Mode | Truck | Rail | Waterborne | Air | Parcel | Others |
| Percentage | 75% | 4% | 1% | 3% | 12% | 5% |
Annexure IV
| Traffic | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 |
| Carloads Originated (million) | 30.09 | 31.14 | 32.11 |
| Intermodal Units (million): | | ||
| Containers | 8.07 | 8.71 | 9.40 |
| Trailers | 2.93 | 2.98 | 2.88 |
| Total | 10.99 | 11.69 | 12.28 |
| Tons Originated (billion) | 1.844 | 1.899 | 1.96 |
| Ton-miles (trillion) | 1.663 | 1.696 | 1.772 |
| Operating Statistics | | ||
| Freight Revenue Per Ton-Mile | 2.354¢ | 2.621¢ | 2.840¢ |
| Average Tons Per Carload | 61.3 | 61.0 | 60.9 |
| Average Tons Per Train | 3,126 | 3,115 | 3,163 |
| Average Length of Haul (miles) | 901.5 | 893.2 | 905.6 |
| Financial | | ||
| Freight Revenue (billion) | $39.1 | $44.5 | $50.3 |
| Operating Revenue (billion) | $40.5 | $46.1 | $52.2 |
| Operating Expense (billion) | $35.1 | $37.8 | $41.0 |
| Net Income (billion) | $2.9 | $4.9 | $6.5 |
| Operating Ratio | 86.6% | 82.1% | 78.6% |
| Return on Average Equity | 6.16% | 9.12% | 11.30% |
Source: Class I Railroad Statistics 2007 -Association of American Railroads (
From http://www.aar.org/
Annexure V
|
| 2007 | 2006 |
| Agricultural Products | 48,878 | 40,811 |
| Chemicals | 37,093 | 35,631 |
Coal | 142,925 | 146,691 |
| | 13,951 | 15,713 |
| Metallic Ores & Minerals | 24,959 | 28,802 |
| MotorVehicles& Equipments | 21,132 | 21,131 |
| Non-metallic Minerals & Products. | 33,090 | 41753 |
| Other Car Loads | 16,169 | 15,631 |
| Total car Loaded | 338,147 | 346,263 |
| Trailers | 52,874 | 57,675 |
| Containers | 199,409 | 199,851 |
| Total Units
| 252,283 | 257,526 |
Annexure VI
Return on Equity: Selected Industries
| Industry | ROE % |
| Oil & Gas Equipment, Services | 31.8% |
| Petroleum Refining | 30.7% |
| Pharmaceuticals | 24.2% |
| Mining, Crude Oil Production | 21.2% |
| Aerospace and Defense | 21.5% |
| Chemicals | 20.9% |
| Beverages | 18.0% |
| Fortune500 Median | 15.4% |
| Food & Drug Store | 15.4% |
| Railroads | 15.0% |
| Energy | 14.9% |
| Food &Grocery Wholesalers | 14.8% |
| Motor Vehicle & Parts | 12.6% |
| Utilities: Gas & Electric | 10.6% |
| Packaging, Containers | 9.6% |
| Telecommunication | 6.4% |
Source: Fortune (April30,2007)
Annexure VI
Capital Expenditure as a % of Revenue for Various U S Industries
Avg. 1996-2005
| Average all Manufacturing | 3.4 |
| Food Manufacturing | 2.5% |
| Petroleum | 2.7% |
| Machinery | 2.9% |
| Motor Vehicle and Parts | 2.9% |
| Wood product | 3.0% |
| Fabricated Metal Product | 3.3% |
| Plastic and Rubber Product | 4.4% |
| Chemical | 4.4% |
| Paper | 4.5% |
| Computer& Electrical Product | 4.9% |
| Non-metallic Material | 5.3% |
| Electrical Utilities | 12.6% |
| Class I Railroads | 17.2% |
Source : U S Bureau of Census ,
Annexure VII
Source :AASHTO, 2002
Bibliography
1. American Association of Railroads, Railroad Facts, 2004.
2. Association of American Railroads (
Adequate Rail Investment.
From http://www.aar.org/
Note: - All Association of American Railroads (AAR) materials are available on
this website
3. Association of American Railroads, July 2007- Rail industry Structure and
Market Behavior.
4. Association of American Railroads, July 2007- Why the Rail Regulation Debate
is Important.
5. Association of American Railroads, July 2007- Antitrust and Railroads.
6. Association of American Railroads, July 2007- Interchange Commitments.
7. Association of American Railroads, July 2007- Product and Geographic
Competition.
8. Association of American Railroads, June 2007- Public- Private Partnership for
Freight Rail Infrastructure Projects.
9. Association of American Railroads, June 2007- Railroad Trust Fund.
10. Association of American Railroads, June 2007-Destructive Railroad Regulation.
11. Association of American Railroads, June 2007- Overview of Railroad
Regulation.
12. Association of American Railroads, June 2007: Mandatory Reciprocal Switching
and Terminal Trackage Rights.
13. Association of American Railroads, January 2007- Association of American Railroads’ Principles regarding Amtrak Restructuring.
14. Association of American Railroads, January 2007- Overview of U. S. Freight Railroads.
15. Association of American Railroads, July 2006-Differential Pricing: Efficient and Necessary.
16. American Association of
From http://freight.transportation.org/doc/FreightRailReport.pdf.
17. Clayton, Kenneth C. 2007- Rail Competition and Services, U S Department of Agriculture,
18. Clifford Winston, 2005 – The Success of the Staggers Rail Act of 1980.
Brookings Institution
From- www.aar.org/pubcommon/documents/staggers/winston_study_pdf
19. Connor, Tom O’, Oct. 2005- Progress Since the Staggers rail Act of 1980;
Snavely King ,
20. CSX, 2007- Geared for Growth
From – http:/www.csxt.com/index.cfm?
21 Demogragraphia, 2007: study Reveals How Freight Rail Can Alleviate Gridlock
on
From - http://www.aar.org/
22. Department of Transportation Office of Intermodalism and Federal highway
Administration –
From- http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/documents/eu_us2.pdf
23. G A O- Oct. 2007- Freight Railroads, Updated information on Rates and Other
Industry trends.
D. C.
From-http:/www.gao.gov/
Note: All GAO materials are available on the above site.
24. G A O – Sept. 2007- Transforming Transpotation Policy for the 21st Century
25. G A O – Sept. 2007- Freight Railroads, Updated information on Rates and
competition Issues.
D. C.
26. G A O-
27.G A O- October 2006- Testimony- Freight Railroads, Industry Health Has Improved, but Concerns about Competition and Capacity should be addressed.
28. G A O- October 2006- Report to Congressional Requesters- Freight Railroads,
29. G A O-June 2006- Testimony- Freight Railroads, Preliminary Observations on
rates, Competition, and Capacity Issues.
Office,
30. G A O-June 2006- Testimony- Intermodal Transportation, Challenges to and Potential Strategies for developing Improved Intermodal Capabilities.
31. Hearing- Subcommittee on Railroads-Sep, 28, 2007-New Hands on Amtrak Throttle. U. S. Government Washington D. C.
32. Hearing- Subcommittee on Railroads-Sep, 7, 2007-Freight Logistics: The Road ahead as Seen by the Users of the Highway System. U S. Government Washington D. C.
33. Hearing- Subcommittee on Railroads-May 10, 2006- Highway Capacity and Freight Mobility: The Current Status and Future Challenges. U. S. Government Washington D. C.
34. Hearing- Subcommittee on Railroads-
Infrastructure Financing Proposal.
35.
From-www.ndu.edu/icaf/industry/reports 2006/pdf-TRANSPORT.pdf
36. National Railroad Passenger Corporation, 2007: The Travel Solution for Our
Time, 2006 Annual Report of Amtrak, Amtrak Washington D. C.
37.
Act before the Senate Judiciary.
From- http://www.stb.dot.gov/Test And Speech.nsf/
38. Railway: The Employee Magazines of Team B N S F -Various Issues
39. Railway Age Journal, Various Issues, particularly October 2007 issue
40. Saunders. Richard Jr. De Kalb 2003 – Rebirth of North American Railroads.
41. Testimony of
Act, U S Senate Committee on the Judiciary.
From http://judiciary.senate.gov/print_testimony.cfm?id=2971&wit_id=6694
42. United Nations, 2003 – The Restructuring of Railways Economic and Social Commission on Asia and Pacific,
43. U.S. Federal Highway Administration Office of Natural and Human Environment, April 2005- Assessing the Effects of Freight Movement on Air Quality at the National and Regional Level-Final Report, 400, 7thStreet, S.W.
From- www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/freightaq/chapter2.htm
44. Vence. James E .1995: The North American Railroad. The
No comments:
Post a Comment