CSX Acquisition of Pan Am Railways

CPF66 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 28, 2021 6:33 pm I can see CSX getting more mixed traffic than intermodal. Atleast with the current CP operations, 142 has been leaving mixed traffic at Brownville Junction depending on how much power 251 has. Someone else could probably explain the intermodal contracts to me a little better, but is CSX trying to get contracts of their own, or are they trying to rob traffic off CP?
Going a little off topic, I imagine if business starts picking up on EMR/NBSR that Irving will have to do some major upgrades. IIRC the rail east of Brownville Junction is mainly 100 LBS.

Didn't they upgrade the entire Moosehead to 40 for the CP traffic?

That's west of Brownville Jct. East of Brownville Jct is the Mattawamkeag Sub (and EMRY).

I meant the entire route, it was supposed to be upgraded to 40 MPH including the EMRY/NBSR portions.

I'm still curious about what it would take to get Ayer-Keag, or even Ayer-Portland cleared for double stacks and autoracks. How many obstacles are in the way? I would imagine that there would need to be fairly significant demand from Saint John for CSX to make that kind of investment. Would it ever be worth the trouble?

The sections of the PAR mainline from Northern Maine Junction to Waterville and from Danville Junction to Portland are already cleared for DS. Clearing Danville to Waterville and NMJ to Mattawamkeag would be a big job but not insurmountable.

Clearing Portland to Ayer would be a nightmare. Not impossible, but very difficult and costly.

If I recall correctly, SLR/SLQ is already cleared for DS from Danville Junction to Saint-Rosalie (interchange with CN), so that remains an option for moving double stacks westward out of Maine.

They ran them when the Auburn ramp was open didn't they?

You're right that Portland-Danville and the SLR are all Plate E cleared. When Eimskip was new to Portland I recall seeing somewhere that the only double stack obstacle between Yard 8 and Montreal was the Cassidy Point overpass.

SLR / CN had decent volumes of intermodal out of Auburn at one point. I filmed a cut of 30+ double stacks on 393 back in 2011. Mostly Hapag / CMA 40' boxes.

Cosakita18 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 3:31 pm You're right that Portland-Danville and the SLR are all Plate E cleared. When Eimskip was new to Portland I recall seeing somewhere that the only double stack obstacle between Yard 8 and Montreal was the Cassidy Point overpass.

I thought the original plan was to just remove that bridge. The alternative roadway over the RXR crossing is literally a stone's throw to the east.

Cosakita18 wrote: ↑30+ double stacks on 393 back in 2011. Mostly Hapag / CMA 40' boxes.

And by spring 2014, when I joined here to gain info about the line, it was down to 2-3 a train before CN canned the service not long after. What happened? And what effect could the CSX buyout have on that lane, beyond the status quo?

I highly doubt that CSX would ever run an Intermodal service from Maine via the SLR/CN. If they do anything it will be a single stack Portland or Waterville product via Worcester. Clearing the line for DS service through places like Lowell and Lawrence would be very costly, especially at one of the I-495 ramps up in Lawrence/North Andove which would be a major undertaking.

Cosakita18 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 11:56 am I'm still curious about what it would take to get Ayer-Keag, or even Ayer-Portland cleared for double stacks and autoracks. How many obstacles are in the way? I would imagine that there would need to be fairly significant demand from Saint John for CSX to make that kind of investment. Would it ever be worth the trouble?

From what I understand, the real challenge to bringing DS to Maine isn’t to be found between Ayer and Maine… but right in Worcester itself, within the first mile or two of the Worcester Main. I will gladly let someone correct me if I am wrong, or fill in details as may be warranted, but I believe there is a tunnel (under a hospital?) in downtown Worcester which would be very challenging to bring to DS-type clearances. (But then that makes me question what NS is planning to do with running their intermodal train over the B&A - apparently their “one train a day” to Ayer will be all single stacks?)

I suppose a possible workaround might be to run DS trains to Framingham, send them up the Ag branch and then over a newly-built connector to the Worcester Main at Clinton. But looking at the aerials, it would be mighty tough to build the right connector - and you’d have a large grade differential to deal with too. Prob not worth pursuing.

NS has already committed to making the clearance improvements in the Worcester tunnel, pretty sure that was in the filing. Otherwise, there would be nothing to gain by running on the B&A. A bigger issue is the previously mentioned I-495 off-ramp up in in the Lawrence/North Andover area, where there is no easy fix.

The Worcester tunnel doesn't go directly under St. Vincent's Hospital but it does go under an attached parking garage. One of the main entrances to the Hospital is on that side of the building.

The "tunnel" under St. Vincent's was built with full DS clearances. It's not an issue. If there is a tunnel height issue in Worcester, it's the one under Lincoln Square, which dates to the early 1970's.

District 2 is a double stack challenge for sure…. With numerous examples, the ‘arch’ at Dover immediately pops out. I’m sure in time they’ll get there, for now they’ll be happy to run singles or even TOFC