Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Pertaining to all railroading subjects, past and present, in New York State.

Moderator: Otto Vondrak

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby C2629 » Mon Feb 26, 2018 6:25 pm

sd80mac wrote:Maybe ONCT crew need to come back and turn this around for better.... hmm..... :-D :-D :-D


You could bring back the ONCT crew and the result would be the same, if the business dries up there is nothing that anyone can do. You cant force businesses to locate on the line. Along with that you cant force the few businesses that are already on line to ship or recieve anything by rail.
C2629
 
Posts: 175
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:21 pm
Location: Rochester NY

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby BR&P » Mon Feb 26, 2018 9:41 pm

Well, one of the things that used to come by rail - maybe the largest amount - was ground feldspar from Amco GA. N&W or SOU covered hoppers. I'm told that mineral reserve is worked out. Also used to get Feldspar from Pacer Corp in Custer SD. Tracks were removed from Custer probably 20 years ago. I think I heard the feldspar now comes from Germany. Gonna have a tough time getting that on rail.

Another thing that used to come in was powdered alumina. IIRC, the price of the material itself was very high. Once VI started the ability to receive by truck, they were buying in small quantities and didn't have to front the $$$ for a whole carload.

Actually the beginning of the end was the Conrail split. Before that, everything came by rail. When the meltdown in service happened the plant was in danger of shut-down account running out of materials. In desperation they brought in a bulk truck, bought some extra lengths of flexible hose, cobbed a way to get from the truck to the silo, and disaster was averted. And guess what - once the hose was set up, and routed to the appropriate silo, the TRUCK DRIVER was the only guy unloading - no more paying a VI guy to poke poles into the hopper cars all day, no more clumped up clay from leaking hatch covers, no more product spilled on the ground when a pocket slide didn't fit right.

As an indication of what used to be, in 1980 VI took an even 200 cars.
In 1985 they received 103.
In 1995, the railroad handled 126 cars for the year and 112 of those were for the insulator plant.
A while back I spoke to someone, can't recall who - might have been a VI person, may have been a railroad employee - who said the plant gets about 2 cars a month now. I have no idea how accurate that is, but I have driven by the place a few times recently and in each case there were either one, or no, cars at the spot.

Time is running out.
BR&P
 
Posts: 3830
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 7:58 pm

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby lvrr325 » Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:58 pm

No, making it independent again would be trying to make money from a smaller cut of the carload rate. Having to cut Finger Lakes in where it had just been Conrail before is what killed the road as an independent. There's a discussion on that on here somewhere I believe.

I think LA&L only bought in to get the RS36.
lvrr325
 
Posts: 4373
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: New York State

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby Matt Langworthy » Tue Feb 27, 2018 2:32 pm

It would have been cheaper for the LA&L to purchase the RS36 alone. The LA&L was in an expansion mode in the mid to late '90s. They also took over the B&H in that era, acquired the Avon-Chili segment and were in the early planning stages for the WNYP. I do agree that adding FGLK to the rate cut complicated matters for ONCT, but the arrival of trucks at Victor Insulator really killed that traffic. I am grateful for my opportunities to ride the the line because its future sure looks bleak.

Does Ryan Homes in Farmington still ship by rail?
Matt Langworthy

"It is highly likely that the 1990s were an overrated decade."
User avatar
Matt Langworthy
 
Posts: 3261
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:02 pm
Location: Rochester, NY

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby BR&P » Tue Feb 27, 2018 2:41 pm

lvrr325 wrote:No, making it independent again would be trying to make money from a smaller cut of the carload rate. Having to cut Finger Lakes in where it had just been Conrail before is what killed the road as an independent. There's a discussion on that on here somewhere I believe.

I think LA&L only bought in to get the RS36.


I appreciate your insight into the ONCT, that operation interested me from the first time I heard it was being planned to start up. Image

LA&L bought ONCT in 1998 (IIRC) and sold it in 2007. More than enough time to get the loco if that was all they were after. Overall, the LA&L ownership was quite beneficial to ONCT, bringing a depth otherwise lacking yet allowing it a degree of autonomy which would not have been possible if FGLK had bought it instead of LA&L at that time.
BR&P
 
Posts: 3830
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 7:58 pm

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby Matt Langworthy » Tue Feb 27, 2018 2:53 pm

BR&P wrote:I appreciate your insight into the ONCT, that operation interested me from the first time I heard it was being planned to start up. Image


You know a guy who worked at ONCT? I heard he gave cab rides back in the day. :wink:
Matt Langworthy

"It is highly likely that the 1990s were an overrated decade."
User avatar
Matt Langworthy
 
Posts: 3261
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:02 pm
Location: Rochester, NY

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby Matt Langworthy » Wed Mar 07, 2018 7:20 am

Sadly, the demise of the western end of ONCT may indeed be near. The ROW's future is one of six proposals to ease traffic congestion on Route 96 in Victor.

From the Rochester D&C today:

1) Converting part of the Ontario Central Railroad into a village street.

A section of the railroad would become a two-lane street, running parallel to Route 96 and Shallow Creek Trail, starting at Route 251 and ending at a roundabout at School Adams streets.
Matt Langworthy

"It is highly likely that the 1990s were an overrated decade."
User avatar
Matt Langworthy
 
Posts: 3261
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:02 pm
Location: Rochester, NY

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby nydepot » Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:48 am

Looks like it's the unused part of the former-double track main.

"Part of the Ontario Central Railroad would be converted into a street. Under the current recommendation, the plan includes room for both the railroad and a two-lane street. The new local street would also accommodate pedestrians and cyclists."
nydepot
 
Posts: 2064
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 7:50 am

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby Matt Langworthy » Thu Mar 08, 2018 12:08 pm

That's good news! The D&C article wasn't as specific as your source. Gannett's reporting ain't what it used to be.
Matt Langworthy

"It is highly likely that the 1990s were an overrated decade."
User avatar
Matt Langworthy
 
Posts: 3261
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:02 pm
Location: Rochester, NY

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby D Alex » Thu Mar 08, 2018 7:14 pm

Well, Adams street already follows the old LVRR main. West of there from School st, it just parallels rt. 96 up to 251. Anything east of there will cut Victor Insulators off from rail traffic, so you might as well abandon it all the way to rt. 332.
D Alex
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2017 5:15 pm

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby TB Diamond » Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:33 pm

Back to Manchester west end for that matter.
You can't go home again- Thomas Wolfe
TB Diamond
 
Posts: 1669
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 9:40 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby lvrr325 » Fri Mar 09, 2018 4:20 am

IMHO the road is probably a waste of money.

Some local people might use it, but no through traffic would. Which, maybe that's the idea, but frankly 96 needs to become 4 lanes from the village limits west and there is room to do it. It's already 4 lanes up to just below the Thruway interchange.

Probably what should be done is make 96 west 2 lanes on the current road and put 96 East on the LV ROW through town with a new connection behind Victor Mini-Storage, leaving one track that goes directly to VI with a runaround on the connector track and all west of there removed. Sort of like Route 13 in downtown Ithaca, each side is a block apart through the busiest part of the route. They could feed back together at the Brace Rd. intersection.
lvrr325
 
Posts: 4373
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: New York State

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby Matt Langworthy » Fri Mar 09, 2018 7:33 am

I'm thinking the new road is intended to divert traffic off Rt 96 that comes into downtown Victor from Rt 251. I have no idea if it will work or not. I might use the bypass when heading to the Finger Lakes through Victor, especially when they have their big festival in September.

The D&C also printed the revised proposal for ONCT in today's edition.
Matt Langworthy

"It is highly likely that the 1990s were an overrated decade."
User avatar
Matt Langworthy
 
Posts: 3261
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:02 pm
Location: Rochester, NY

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby sd80mac » Mon Mar 19, 2018 9:31 am

Matt Langworthy wrote:I'm thinking the new road is intended to divert traffic off Rt 96 that comes into downtown Victor from Rt 251. I have no idea if it will work or not. I might use the bypass when heading to the Finger Lakes through Victor, especially when they have their big festival in September.

The D&C also printed the revised proposal for ONCT in today's edition.



why would you drive thru victor, including bypass? I would take thruway to 332. Way a lot faster than 96/bypass. If Victor doesn't want traffic to increase (Bypass WILL) I would keep things as it and force people who want to travel to Farmington or to eastview/thruway from Farmington to take thruway instead of 96 or backroads. Thruway from exit 45 to 44 is easily 5 minutes vs 96 which is about 15-30 min.
sd80mac
 
Posts: 1829
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 8:28 am
Location: Rochester, ny

Re: Finger Lakes Railway (FGLK) Discussion

Postby Matt Langworthy » Mon Mar 19, 2018 12:25 pm

Route 332 has a looong stretch of 40 mph and Canandaigua itself has a 30 mph speed limit. Granted, Rt 96 in VIctor can be slow... but I can bypass most of Canandaigua by using a combination of Brace Rd/McCann Rd/Rts 5 & 20 (west of Rt 332) with a speed limit of 55 mph. Routes 5 & 20 are 40 mph from Rt 332 to Rt 364 for both your route and my route. My route is slightly faster than Rt 332. The bypass would help me get around the bottleneck in downtown Victor and make my route even faster. There really is no way for Victor to stop drivers like me from going through the village, so they might as well make it easier.
Matt Langworthy

"It is highly likely that the 1990s were an overrated decade."
User avatar
Matt Langworthy
 
Posts: 3261
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:02 pm
Location: Rochester, NY

PreviousNext

Return to New York State Railfan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests