PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Guilford Rail System changed its name to Pan Am Railways in 2006. Discussion relating to the current operations of the Boston & Maine, the Maine Central, and the Springfield Terminal railroads (as well as the Delaware & Hudson while it was under Guilford control until 1988). Official site can be found here: PANAMRAILWAYS.COM.

Moderator: MEC407

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby newpylong » Thu Jun 09, 2016 6:02 am

As of October this was the status

"352 as a lot of new parts and should be fine. 350 needs CSS parts which are "on order".....dunno what the prob is with 351 and 353 got stripped for parts for the other ones."
Last edited by newpylong on Thu Jun 09, 2016 7:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
newpylong
 
Posts: 3944
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:32 pm
Location: NH

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby amtrak-wnd » Thu Jun 09, 2016 6:04 pm

I just witnessed 351 lead EDPL down the Springfield line, with 2007 and 353 trailing. I guess this leaves 353 as the only one in question.
Brendan
amtrak-wnd
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 11:32 am
Location: Windsor, CT

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby BowdoinStation » Sat Jul 09, 2016 10:15 am

Will these engines ever be repaired and returned to service? These engines have been reported "Out of Service" within a range as little as four months to topping out at over two years.. Is this the next "Dead Line" generation ? Lot of 'Blue" on the shelf..
314, 332, 343, 349. 376, 377. 378. 381, 382. 511, 512, 602, 605, 607, 611, 612..
BowdoinStation
 
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:50 pm

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby KSmitty » Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:59 am

Off the top of my head:

332 and 607 both dead with busted crank. Apparently, when you're not buying oil and you run units on bare bones maintenance with old oil pressure sensors, the failsafe auto stop designed to keep them from self destructing doesn't always work. So in the name of pinching pennies they grenaded 2 cranks.

They also seem to have opted to stop maintaining the hihoods above anything super light. 377-378 both went down for turbos, relatively minor repair in the grand scheme of things and a part they have readily lying around the backshop.

The "Toast List"
332
377
378
382 (electrical fire)
607

All of those are of course figuring they don't get GATX to pay for a rebuild (332, 382, 607). 377-78 might come back, if they find themselves in need of more 4 axle power before they strip them to the frame.

The others on the list I don't know.
KSmitty
 
Posts: 1927
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 1:29 pm
Location: Maine

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby MEC407 » Sat Jul 09, 2016 5:50 pm

3404 has already lost one of its number boards and received an impromptu replacement. Photo by Bob Kise:

http://www.railpictures.net/photo/582103/
MEC407
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives
User avatar
MEC407
 
Posts: 10695
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:15 pm

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby gokeefe » Mon Jul 11, 2016 10:27 am

I have to say ... nothing that I read about in this thread leads me to believe that Pan Am has a long term plan or vision anymore aside from "exit stage left".
gokeefe
User avatar
gokeefe
 
Posts: 9918
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:28 pm
Location: Winthrop, Maine

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby Cosakita18 » Mon Jul 11, 2016 8:22 pm

So what is the total number of workable / in service locos in the PAR fleet right now?
Cosakita18
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2015 1:42 pm

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby guilfordrailfan » Tue Jul 12, 2016 7:22 am

It varies from day to day and from month to month. So far this year the number of in-service locos, including those leased to PAR, has been running in the high sixties and low seventies. Keep in mind that PAR relies heavily on NS and CSX run-through power to keep the railroad operating.
guilfordrailfan
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:53 pm
Location: PA

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby Z31SPL » Tue Jul 12, 2016 8:51 am

If CSX pulled their power off of SEPO/POSE that could make things pretty dicey
Z31SPL
 
Posts: 71
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 10:44 am
Location: Kingston, NH

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby guilfordrailfan » Tue Jul 12, 2016 1:09 pm

Just to clarify in case it wasn't clear, that 60's-70's figure includes locomotives owned by PAR and leased to PAR. It does not include all the NS, CSX, NHN and whatever other run-through power that's used daily on PAR/PAS.
guilfordrailfan
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:53 pm
Location: PA

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby jaymac » Tue Jul 12, 2016 3:02 pm

by Z31SPL » Tue Jul 12, 2016 8:51 am
If CSX pulled their power off of SEPO/POSE that could make things pretty dicey

A few years back, CSX limited how far east their power could go, reportedly even using GPS rats. Why did CSX run-through power become restored practice? I'm not privy to any decision-making, but given the importance of reliable predictability for interchange "partners" and the predictable unreliability of power from the PAR "partner," it's not surprising that Rigby run-throughs for CSX power became the rule again. Otherwise, there might be considerable delays in getting SEPOs to Shea.
"A white SUV with a roof antenna just might not be a company van."
jaymac
 
Posts: 3427
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:08 pm

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Wed Jul 13, 2016 2:11 pm

jaymac wrote:
by Z31SPL » Tue Jul 12, 2016 8:51 am
If CSX pulled their power off of SEPO/POSE that could make things pretty dicey

A few years back, CSX limited how far east their power could go, reportedly even using GPS rats. Why did CSX run-through power become restored practice? I'm not privy to any decision-making, but given the importance of reliable predictability for interchange "partners" and the predictable unreliability of power from the PAR "partner," it's not surprising that Rigby run-throughs for CSX power became the rule again. Otherwise, there might be considerable delays in getting SEPOs to Shea.


Probably because they need a lot less cab signal power to run Massachusetts than they used to pre- double stack, pre- relocation of intermodal from Beacon Park to Worcester, and pre- outsourcing the South Coast lines. They've combined so many trains into longer/taller consists that run on fewer B&A slots than before that they've been able this year to reinstate the Pittsfield helper loco job over the Berkshire grades. All the power for the Eastern MA locals now cycles out of Selkirk instead of a permanent base at Beacon Park...they come in on an IM train to Worcester, do a rotation in Framingham for a few days, then cycle back out to Selkirk on an IM train. It's a much more fluid supply at Selkirk than before, so they have fewer qualms about sending stuff further afield on SEPO than before.


I'm sure PAR's unreliability plays some small part in that equation, but CSX really does have considerably bigger fleet cushion for New England power than it had 4 years ago.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7230
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby KSmitty » Wed Jul 13, 2016 2:34 pm

I thought it boiled down to the simple fact that if CSX wanted SEPO in a timely manner they needed to let their power go all the way to Rigby. Also, thought the restriction was because of a growing divide in horsepower hours going out to coming in...Likely a combination of wanting better interchange service + a little cash from PAR for some horsepower hours and the power went back to Rigby.
KSmitty
 
Posts: 1927
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 1:29 pm
Location: Maine

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby atholrail » Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:08 pm

No oil or sand at Deerfield... Billerica maybe in F it mode...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/123370123@N05/
------------------------------------------------------------------
http://photos.nerail.org/show/?order=by ... =atholrail
atholrail
 
Posts: 1125
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 4:13 am

Re: PAR Locomotive Fleet - General Discussion

Postby gokeefe » Wed Jul 13, 2016 7:42 pm

atholrail wrote:No oil or sand at Deerfield... Billerica maybe in F it mode...


***Game Over***

Insert Coin(s)
gokeefe
User avatar
gokeefe
 
Posts: 9918
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:28 pm
Location: Winthrop, Maine

PreviousNext

Return to Pan Am Railways (formerly Guilford Rail System)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests