Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

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: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby BandA » Sat Aug 27, 2016 2:02 pm

[OT] most ex-MDC parkways are not built for heavy trucks or even the volume of traffic they get now.
User avatar
BandA
 
Posts: 1903
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:47 am

Re: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby fogg1703 » Sun Aug 28, 2016 10:47 am

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:PAR customer MS Walker, being evicted from the Innerbelt in Somerville because of Green Line Extension construction claiming their building, has taken a relocation deal to S&S and will become a CSX-Readville customer. Not sure when the moving vans are scheduled to take them across town, but it'll be a welcome infusion of new activity in Boston-proper despite Somerville's and PAR's loss.


Well its a draw as List Logistics moved their rail services from Readville to Billerica on PAR and MS Walker will be moving from Somerville to Readville on CSX. C
fogg1703
 
Posts: 671
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 5:55 pm

Re: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby Safetee » Mon Aug 29, 2016 10:07 am

i was just thinking the other day that wouldnt PAS and especially NS be much better off owning the line from gardner to providence and davisville not to mention the transloading empire in worcester than just letting gwi spread its short line wings wings for little money into a very interesting east coast port of entry? I find it hard to believe that theyre not even a little bit interested.
Safetee
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 8:07 am

Re: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Mon Aug 29, 2016 11:46 am

That ship has kinda sailed on Providence. But PAR does have the Worcester Main, whether they choose to take optimal advantage of it or not.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7254
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby newpylong » Mon Aug 29, 2016 1:08 pm

Yeah but PAR != PAS, and the fact that the Worcester Main was not included in the PAS transaction gives you an indication of their interest down there, at least as far as ownership.
newpylong
 
Posts: 3946
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:32 pm
Location: NH

Re: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby Safetee » Mon Aug 29, 2016 5:20 pm

Well, the way i read it is that a long time ago beyond lip service P&W never really tried to exploit the port connections partially i suspect because they didnt really have the money, political backing, and probably not the rail connections either for a variety of reasons.

as far as the worcester main is concerned, well why would ns want a piece of their main competitors bridge feeder lines with little or no on line traffic to steal that they might have to pay to fix up at no advantage to themselves. as far as their current east west traffic is concerned, gardner is a much shorter and in far better condition shot to worcester and providence.
Safetee
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 8:07 am

Re: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby F-line to Dudley via Park » Mon Aug 29, 2016 5:53 pm

Gardner's a much-inferior route. The yard is small, and it's operationally inefficient for PAS to have to play fetch from the real auto facility in Ayer to make the exchange. For P&W it's 25 miles of track they have to maintain to relatively good quality to transport racks, and there's absolutely no on-line biz justifying its existence beyond that. With the G&W buy both parties are probably going to look at their options for relocating the interchange to some more opportune place their systems intersect.

The Worcester Main may or may not be one of the places they look at. All depends on whether PAR or its successors are warm to the idea of letting a third wheel in P&W (not NS) have overhead trackage rights on its Worcester Main to do set-offs at Hill Yard instead of Gardner. If MassDOT floated some dollar bills for substantial track upgrades to bring the players to the table PAR would probably consider this (and have to consider this), because if the system is partitioned from PAS the Worcester Main becomes part of 'the' main and one overhead round-trip per day is a small barter for somebody else buying them a brand new railroad. Pure speculation at such an early date where the G&W purchase hasn't even gone in front of the STB, but that's the kind of all-options-on-table sifting the players will look at post-transaction about how to mutually optimize that interchange. If NS and P&W can find a mutually beneficial way to trim Gardner, they'll do it because it's subpar efficiency to interchange there.


Providence is simply way too small and way too close drayage distance to Ayer via I-190 and MA 146 to register on NS's radar. P&W's figured out the ports thing and is starting to do pretty well milking Davisville, Providence, and New Haven. Good on them, good for whatever PAS can schlep from that in interchange loads. NS certainly isn't displeased with the auto growth. But RI freight volumes are zit-sized for a Class I's interests just like CT's, VT's, and NH's are. Portland, being *just* at the outer limits of optimal drayage distance, is some interest as exploitable leverage via a second-party. But if NS has pretty firmly drawn its border at Ayer and shown little to no interest in sniffing around Div. 2, then the answer to every other question in the Norfolk boardroom is "Providence, Where?" Doesn't register for internal strategy at all.
F-line to Dudley via Park
 
Posts: 7254
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:26 pm
Location: North Cambridge

Re: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby strangelyamused » Tue Aug 30, 2016 12:10 am

i personally think that the PW coming up to ayer would be a pain in the ass considering it seems like half the time ayer is a cluster____ and becasue of the *usually* very unpredictable sepo and pose. Gardner aint ideal but it kinda seems like PW have more of an easy time going there whenever to do their thing instead of fighting with all the ayer locals and the pig etc.
Last edited by MEC407 on Tue Aug 30, 2016 8:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: language
strangelyamused
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2014 12:01 pm

Re: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby B&M 1227 » Tue Aug 30, 2016 7:12 am

I've seen huge blocks of P&Ws come through EDFLD, in many cases, enough to warrant a full train. I know there was once an ED190 which took care of "MILFS," PW's and Fitchburgs, though the Millers Falls interchange is stagnant now and EDPO takes care of the remainder. Honestly it might be time for G&W trackage/haulage rights EDFLD-Gardner. Could probably strike up a ceasefire over the Conn River North to push it through. Not that transit times or scales of efficiency really mean anything to Pan Am, but removing the Gardner Interchange would increase the likely hood of EL-23 actually making it to Lawrence. EDFLD would be a reasonable place for blocking G&W Norths vs G&W souths, with either a PAR shuttle working to Millers, Gardner, or Brattleboro, or a NECR shuttle Bratt-EDFLD. PAR's attitude has changed regarding carloads, no longer chasing them, but the physical plant and motive power situation is restrictive in the ability to provide all the services they want to. Maybe time to bite the bullet and let G&W into EDFLD to save on their own resources and inefficiencies.
Did we ever hear a music sweeter than the one that thrills, as it floats along the Deerfield, as it echoes o'er the hills.
How we watch that little engine as it stalks across the plain; was there ever music sweeter, was there ever sight completer, than the coming of the train?
-E. A. Fitch
User avatar
B&M 1227
 
Posts: 334
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 8:43 pm
Location: on the ground

Re: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby CPF363 » Fri Sep 02, 2016 4:02 pm

strangelyamused wrote:i personally think that the PW coming up to ayer would be a pain in the ass considering it seems like half the time ayer is a cluster____ and becasue of the *usually* very unpredictable sepo and pose. Gardner aint ideal but it kinda seems like PW have more of an easy time going there whenever to do their thing instead of fighting with all the ayer locals and the pig etc.

This might not be all that bad of an idea. If the Worcester Main Line were able to handle train movements at a reliable 25 MPH and a re-engineered Hill Yard could have significant benefits to all parties. Racks would not need to be set off at Gardner in the small yard on a hill, instead those could be brought to Ayer and set off there on an interchange track with a run-around track. Train 287 could start out of the Hill Yard with locals handling the Ford Yard, especially with power switches off the Camp track. Freight interchange could remain over the Garner Branch with a run-through train out of Deerfield. A significant change to the Worcester Route would be extending the Greendale siding to New Bond Street to the west and east to Burncoat Street for meets and crew changes with SEPO/POSE.
CPF363
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:00 pm

Re: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby CN9634 » Fri Sep 02, 2016 5:01 pm

Why would Pan Am (which is separate from PAS) give up it's only direct connection with CSX? That would be foolish.
CN9634
 
Posts: 2207
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 5:50 pm

Re: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby CPF363 » Sat Sep 03, 2016 5:47 am

CN9634 wrote:Why would Pan Am (which is separate from PAS) give up it's only direct connection with CSX? That would be foolish.

If you read the text of my post again, where does it say that Pan Am should give up its direct connection with CSX? This is most especially true with my last statement:
CPF363 wrote:A significant change to the Worcester Route would be extending the Greendale siding to New Bond Street to the west and east to Burncoat Street for meets and crew changes with SEPO/POSE.

I furthermore stated regarding improvements to the Hill Yard and the Worcester Route:
CPF363 wrote:If the Worcester Main Line were able to handle train movements at a reliable 25 MPH and a re-engineered Hill Yard could have significant benefits to all parties.

All parties would be PAR, PAS, P&W and the MBTA.
CPF363
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 9:00 pm

Re: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby Scalziand » Sat Sep 03, 2016 10:57 pm

roberttosh wrote:From what I've been told, East Worcester has the capacity to handle and offload more trains but is running out of parking spaces. If you look at google maps, there does seem to be at least some adjacent property (some with buildings, some without) that they could expand their parking space into, but they'll still always be tight for space at best with any future growth. Not ideal by any means, but off-site parking/storage is always an option too. West Springfield seems to be in a similar predicament and I'm sure the abutters at both locations know they have all the leverage now regarding sale price. It's really too bad they couldn't expand their Westboro footprint lengthwise as that would have given them a much more traditional rectangular shaped layout with excellent highway access to I-495 and the pike.



Pretty much all the warehouses between Arctic and Plastic street next to the CSX yard are owned by a single developer. They've been planning on turning them into lofts for a while now, but if CSX gave them an offer they couldn't refuse...

Image
http://www.telegram.com/article/20141115/NEWS/311159832
Scalziand
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2015 8:28 pm
Location: Naugatuck

Re: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby johnpbarlow » Sun Sep 18, 2016 7:26 am

A newly divulged news item wrt G&W's acquisition of P&W: Per a Worcester Telegram article of 9/12/16, there were at least two other serious bidders, "party A" (the initiator of the idea to merge P&W) and "party B".

http://www.telegram.com/news/20160911/turns-out-pampw-created-bidding-war-for-its-sale

Could Party A, seeking "to further develop strategic opportunities and enhance regional connectivity" have been Pan Am Southern or NS?
johnpbarlow
 
Posts: 1666
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:50 pm

Re: Pan Am Railways, For Sale/Acquisition/Merger?

Postby Mikejf » Sun Sep 18, 2016 9:27 am

Watco was in town remember..
Mikejf
 
Posts: 1489
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 6:46 pm
Location: Maine

PreviousNext

Return to Pan Am Railways (formerly Guilford Rail System)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests