Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

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

Moderator: Otto Vondrak

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby C2629 » Sat Jan 27, 2018 4:35 pm

Back to the original theme of this thread, new traffic. I have heard that they now run multiple sections of 310 some days. Have there been any new trains added ? I spent eight hours on the line Friday and saw three trains, 310, 37T and 36T. Heard of nothing else.
C2629
 
Posts: 175
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:21 pm
Location: Rochester NY

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby thebigham » Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:29 pm

John Kucko pic

I think it was taken today, Jan. 27
Attachments
Letchworth120.jpg
thebigham
 
Posts: 3510
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: Arcade, NY

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby SALSDP35 » Mon Jan 29, 2018 9:37 am

C2629 wrote:Back to the original theme of this thread, new traffic. I have heard that they now run multiple sections of 310 some days. Have there been any new trains added ? I spent eight hours on the line Friday and saw three trains, 310, 37T and 36T. Heard of nothing else.


They have run up to three sections of 310 on some days. I talked with a collage friend of mine who works in operations for NS and he said that they had been assigning "made up" symbols to the trains just to run them. Eventually that will shake out and they will get regular symbol's.
SALSDP35
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:32 am

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby Matt Langworthy » Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:04 am

W10 is an extra section of 310, which is running on a frequent basis. In fact, I saw W10 at MP 266 aka the Rt 427 crossing in Ashland on Saturday afternoon. The current scenario with NS 310's extra sections is reminiscent of the way NS ran 14T (now 28N) as either I06 or I2K before designating a separate symbol a few years back. NS also ran a pair of 310s on the same day last week. As SALSDP35 says, the symbols will be a confusing hodgepodge for now.
Matt Langworthy

"It is highly likely that the 1990s were an overrated decade."
User avatar
Matt Langworthy
 
Posts: 3244
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:02 pm
Location: Rochester, NY

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby JoeCollege » Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:32 am

310 is general freight/mixed merchandise, correct?
JoeCollege
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 10:52 am
Location: Put in the corner by Otto.

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby Matt Langworthy » Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:54 am

Yes, it is. NS 309 is the westbound counterpart.
Matt Langworthy

"It is highly likely that the 1990s were an overrated decade."
User avatar
Matt Langworthy
 
Posts: 3244
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:02 pm
Location: Rochester, NY

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby 452 Card » Mon Jan 29, 2018 3:06 pm

DSCN0056.JPG
Soon to be no more.
DSCN0055.JPG
Wheelslip! Back to the Barn.
MOTEL
452 Card
 
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 8:25 am

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby el3625 » Mon Feb 05, 2018 9:04 pm

Where is our weekly update, and picture on the old bridge coming down. I am missing it, been looking for a couple days now. I look forward to the updates until I can get there to see it for myself, it's been 8 months since I was there last.

Bruce
el3625
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 4:04 pm

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby nessman » Mon Feb 05, 2018 9:49 pm

nessman
 
Posts: 1682
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:58 pm
Location: Isle of Sodor

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby Scott K » Mon Feb 05, 2018 10:20 pm

The approaches are gone on both sides. Just the towers and what's between them left now.
Attachments
27503596_2008506856086527_4065171368568369971_o.jpg
Scott K
 
Posts: 214
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 10:14 pm
Location: Parma Center, NY

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby SST » Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:53 am

What's the possibility of CSX selling its mainline to NS and then NS abandoning the Southern Tier Line leaving this brand new bridge to rot for the next 142 years. Did anybody put a poison pill into the bridge contract to the effect that: If NS or any operator should abandoned the line [bridge] that operator shall be financially responsible for the repaying all who invested in the bridges construction......mainly NYS?

Too crazy?
SST
 
Posts: 1246
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 12:11 pm
Location: Buffalo

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby Matt Langworthy » Tue Feb 06, 2018 10:21 am

LOL!!!

***I assume you are being sarcastic.***
Matt Langworthy

"It is highly likely that the 1990s were an overrated decade."
User avatar
Matt Langworthy
 
Posts: 3244
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:02 pm
Location: Rochester, NY

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby lvrr325 » Wed Feb 07, 2018 6:56 am

From 1976 to 1998 Conrail operated both of those lines and still found some degree of traffic to run via this line.
lvrr325
 
Posts: 4336
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: New York State

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby SALSDP35 » Wed Feb 07, 2018 8:52 am

lvrr325 wrote:From 1976 to 1998 Conrail operated both of those lines and still found some degree of traffic to run via this line.


Yeah mostly at gunpoint after 1980. In 1981 they shut down the Meadville line and ran one train each way Buffalo-Croxton until the summer of 1982 when the state of New York took them to court and forced them to live up to the agreement that they had in place. 6 trains a day returned but the minute Conrail could, they reduced the number. Four state agreements, each with fewer trains kept Conrail on the Tier.

In 1992, Jim Hagen reversed the sale to CP (which was Binghamton-Buffalo only), did a mild upgrade and opened the Tier as an overflow route for three years while they opened up the clearance on the PRR for double stacks. Once this was completed (late summer 1995), almost everything was removed. Conrail was even in discussions on how to close the line when the CSX/NS takeover battle began in October of 1996. When CSX and NS assumed control of the company in 1997 through a trust, the old CR management departed and a care taker management was put in place. During that time, trains returned to the Tier (stacks and multi-levels as well as OIBU/BUOI returned), but Conrail was really no longer Conrail.

CSX may single track the NYC, but they won't sell it. People are reading way to much into some of the company's comments.
Last edited by SALSDP35 on Wed Feb 07, 2018 3:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SALSDP35
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:32 am

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Postby Matt Langworthy » Wed Feb 07, 2018 1:21 pm

SALSDP35 wrote:
lvrr325 wrote:From 1976 to 1998 Conrail operated both of those lines and still found some degree of traffic to run via this line.


Yeah mostly at gunpoint after 1980. In 1981 they shut down the Meadville line and ran one train each way Buffalo-Croxton until the summer of 1982 when the state of New York took them to court and forced them to live up to the agreement that they had in place. 6 trains a day returned but the minute Conrail could, they reduced the number. Four state agreements, each with fewer trains kept Conrail on the Tier.

In 1992, Jim Hagen reversed the sale to CP (which was Binghamton-Buffalo only), did a mild upgrade and opened the Tier as an overflow route for three years while they opened up the clearance on the PRR for double stacks. Once this was completed (late summer 1995), almost everything was removed. Conrail was even in discussions on how to close the line when the CSX/NS takeover battle began in October of 1986. When CSX and NS assumed control of the company in 1997 through a trust, the old CR management departed and a care taker management was put in place. During that time, trains returned to the Tier (stacks and multi-levels as well as OIBU/BUOI returned), but Conrail was really no longer Conrail.


I think you mean October of 1996 for the take over battle. With that being said, I agree with most of what you wrote. Several posters on this message board have tried to paint the 1990s as a rosy decade for the Tier... but it really wasn't. I was rather worried about the future of the Tier in the summer of 1996. There were very few trains on the line at that point and it was looking like the Tier was going to be axed under Conrail's X strategy. The sale of former CNJ/LV track in PA to the R&N was also an ominous sign. I greeted the CR split with relief, because NS had a place for it in their plans. I shudder to think what would have happened if Conrail had remained Conrail.

SALSDP35 wrote:CSX may single track the NYC, but they won't sell it. People are reading way to much into some of the company's comments.


I am pretty sure that SST's comment was not meant to be serious. There have been erroneous claims (both on this message board and the NS Southern Tier/D&H FB page) about the feds and NYS paying for all of the bridge replacement. IMO, SST was ridiculing them -he is fully aware that NS paid for the majority of the new viaduct.
Matt Langworthy

"It is highly likely that the 1990s were an overrated decade."
User avatar
Matt Langworthy
 
Posts: 3244
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 3 guests