Newspaper story about PAR from Valley Advocate

Came across this news story about PAR, and specifically PAR's East Deerfield operations. Here is the link:

http://tinyurl.com/33h3vn

It doesn't exactly cast them in a positive light... but as always, young Mr. Fink had several opportunities to tell his side of the story, but chose not to.

While this paper is to the left on alot of issues. This story holds true. How long did Pan Am hold up the rebuilding of the two I91 bridges in Deerfield because they wouldn't move the powerline running under the bridges? Darn long time

I like the part about employees walking the side of the train to "stretch their legs". Yeah, right, I do it all the time. It's called inspecting the train. Another case of reporters piping in on something they know absolutely nothing about. They see a freight go by and start asking "why don't they carry people?" Then they start going on about Hazmat and derailments, and don't even stop to think that the perfume they are wearing or the cup they are drinking out of is made from those very chemicals. They talk about using rail more to reduce pollution, then when the railroad wants to build a new facility in their town to expand service, they go totally off the wall.

Amen Mick!

Guilford may have it faults but this story is so far off base it's ridiculous. I too liked the part of walking along the train to stretch ones legs. Why should Guilford maintain its tracks in condition required to run passenger service? I'm not saying they practice good maintanence procedures but Amtrak isn't their responsibility. Then theres always the rabid selectperson from some small town. Don't get me started on small town politics. Let's get in there and shut old Guilford down completely. I'm sure the local economy would love that.

Excuse my rant but that article has really irked me. Obviously written by a staff writer with no knowledge of railroads, or probably business in general.

When Pan Am workers want to stretch their legs they will sometimes get off the train they’re on and walk alongside it as it travels up and down the Valley.

Oh man did that make me laugh. I guess PAR should be lauded for providing on-site fitness facilities.

In any case, I agree with most of the posters that this article is just ridiculous. I think PAR could certainly be a much better railroad that it is, but why should it maintain tracks for high-speed passenger rail. The author also fails to mention that the Downeaster has one of the best on-time percentages of any Amtrak train.

Unfortunately, this article is just another case of a small town writer who does not understand how business, railroads, or anything else other than a word-processor works.

I wrote in to them to congratulate them for pointing this out but also to point out that this isn't just PAR. CSX also skimps on track work to save money.

I pointed out that trains cannot exceed 79mph unless millions of dollars of signals were installed, and trains cannot exceed 110mph unless wire was strung and electric engines used.

Absolutely amazing article. Amazing, in that it seems to have little point and was seemingly written by a high school student with ADD. Mellon didn't buy Pan Am Airlines, only the naming rights, to heap on all that's wrong with this pathetic attempt at journalism.

It could have been written as one run on paragraph instead of an article. Oh, say...

"Pan Am Railways is run by like this evil rich guy Mellon who's just rich because he's like an heir to a mega huge fortune and stuff, and he's so evil that he donates to Republicans, I mean like, DUH!!! And because he's so rich, he won't put any money into the railroad to stop global warming because like 50 people a day could be speeding along a multi-billion dollar high speed rail system instead of driving around in gas guzzling SUVs and the planet would be saved. But Mellon's too rich and evil. Meanwhile, the dangerous trains are derailing, like, everywhere, and releasing chemicals that are causing global warming. So, we like, all need to get on the train and stop global warming. The End."

How'd I do?

gprimr1 wrote:I wrote in to them to congratulate them for pointing this out but also to point out that this isn't just PAR. CSX also skimps on track work to save money.

I pointed out that trains cannot exceed 79mph unless millions of dollars of signals were installed, and trains cannot exceed 110mph unless wire was strung and electric engines used.

While the article does indulge in unrealistic ideas like commuter rail from Brat to Springfield Ma there are some valid points concerning taxes in Deerfield as well as the fact that GRS defaulted on maintenance of the Conn River ROW forcing amtrak to use a circuitous route between Springfield and East Northfield.

Ohh I agree completely and I hope they print the part where I said that service restoration on the Conn River line would be a boom to the economy, would provide students with transportation choices, and would due alot to help the enviroment since trains pollute alot less than Buses.

I ended by suggesting they tear up the Nortwotuck Bike Trail and run a train from Amherst to Northampton to bypass traffic on route 9.

Now that's good dreaming.

The Advocate group is better known for entertainment/leisure and leftist politics. OK, a lifestyle too. They typically have one drive-by attack per week. This article had more of a cut-and-paste aspect than normal.

I think most people in this forum agree in principle...

I also enjoyed the deep thinking comparison between 5-10 mph travel in the valley and 150 mph on the NEC.

Maybe it will inspire people to demand western ma passenger rail beyond the Vermonter.

ShortlinesUSA wrote:Absolutely amazing article. Amazing, in that it seems to have little point and was seemingly written by a high school student with ADD. Mellon didn't buy Pan Am Airlines, only the naming rights, to heap on all that's wrong with this pathetic attempt at journalism.

It could have been written as one run on paragraph instead of an article. Oh, say...

"Pan Am Railways is run by like this evil rich guy Mellon who's just rich because he's like an heir to a mega huge fortune and stuff, and he's so evil that he donates to Republicans, I mean like, DUH!!! And because he's so rich, he won't put any money into the railroad to stop global warming because like 50 people a day could be speeding along a multi-billion dollar high speed rail system instead of driving around in gas guzzling SUVs and the planet would be saved. But Mellon's too rich and evil. Meanwhile, the dangerous trains are derailing, like, everywhere, and releasing chemicals that are causing global warming. So, we like, all need to get on the train and stop global warming. The End."

How'd I do?

Mellon did buy the airline, but not the original. He bought out the bankrupt Pan American Airways that had taken on the name from the first one.

I was in Springfield last weekend for the Amherst Show. After arriving Friday night, about to head out and do some night shots, we stopped by a gas station to top off the tank and grab a bite to eat. While there I saw the Valley Advocate with the headline "No Way To Run A Railroad." Well I've got to get this!

Finally got around to reading it this weekend. While I know that GRS/PanAm have its problems, I thought the research for this was very spotty. For example when talking about the railroad and FRA fines it says "When the Advocate asked the FRA for the average total fines for railroads the same size as PanAm for the same time period, the FRA claimed it has no way to provide that information", that could have been solved by getting some information on other railroads of the same size and presenting that (That's PanAm, and this is the information for such and such railroad of the same size), otherwise the argument isn't helped. There are a few other points that are irrelevant including that Mellon was a Republican donor (regardless of ones political afflation, that has nothing to do with the story at hand). They also mentioned the ground pollution at East Deerfield which I would imagine is pretty much the same at any other railroad facility.

In the end there were some points I could agree on, mostly pertaining to the efficiency of rail. Anyone who has driven down I-95 and have gone head to head with tractor-trailers that certainly make the road a much more dangerous place, as apposed to having it moved on rail in a more economic and efficient fashion (little more environmentally-friendly that way as well).

But those are my thoughts

-Justin Franz