||December 13th, 2007|
Observations on The Sprinter
On the announced inauguration day, December 28th, l500 invited VIPS will be the first to ride the rails on the two hundred plus passenger capacity, two car train for the twenty two mile trip between Escondido and Oceanside. Traveling at 55 miles per hour, there will be some heavy braking for the over fifteen station stops. After all the hype, keep your eye on the Sprinter and hope it does better than all the practically empty Breeze buses already traveling the North County city streets.
In addition to the $477 million dollar initial cost, the Sprinter's operational and maintenance expenses are estimated to be over one million dollars a month. Add to this the over four million dollars a month for the Breeze buses and it comes to over $60 million of taxpayer's money per year just to keep them running. Where but in America can so few be served with public transportation at such tremendous cost?
Extensive efforts by concerned citizens were made to derail the Sprinter but to no avail. It's pretty difficult to fight bureaucracy in the control of politicians. Time will tell how many people will be able to access it for regular use. Of one thing sure, it won't mitigate the traffic congestion and gridlock on Hwy.78 that was predicted to justify the Sprinter or the diverted completion of the long, badly needed upgrade of Hwy. #76 between I-15 and I-5 at Oceanside.
The manner Transnet's funds are prioritized and used for transportation is in the hands of the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), now currently planning how to spend another $57 billion dollars on transportation solutions. Where is the restraint and accountability for prudent stewardship of such public funds?
It will take more than pouring money into misguided commuter rail lines, like the Sprinter, to compensate and even just keep pace with the predicted future increased population growth for San Diego County. Today we are already facing a water shortage that transcends the transportation problem. How long can "biting the bullet" be postponed?
/s/Henry M. Sanford
San Marcos, CA 92078
A Western Aficionado
Lyle: As you might expect, I really enjoyed this edition of The Paper.
I think you did a great job on this! I have never seen the news paper version of this famous gun fight. Since Clum (who I had heard of when he worked with the Indians) was editor and a friend of Wyatt's, he may have given the Earp's the benefit of the doubt. Still I really enjoyed reading first hand accounts of what went on.
The pistols used were mostly Colt, Single Action Army models (so called because the first models went to the US Army Calvary in 1873). As you know, single action means you must cock the hammer, prior to pulling the trigger. These pistols were quite popular and by 1880 just about everybody had one or two. They could be had in 3 different barrel lengths, 7.5 (the Calvary model), 5.5 (the Artillery model) and 4.75 (the civilian model). The shorter barrels were more popular with civilians, because they could be pulled from a holster more quickly. These pistols were originally 45 caliber, but by 1880, they were available in 44-40, 38-40,41 and 32-20 caliber. The new calibers corresponded to the Winchester lever action rifle calibers. Thanks to this development, a cowboy or gun fighter could carry a rifle and pistol that fired the same caliber of ammunition.
That's probably more than you wanted to know about Colt Single Action Armies so will close.
Letters to the Editor should be emailed (preferably) to:
They may also be faxed (if you insist) to:
3643 Grand Avenue, Suite B
San Marcos, Ca. 92078