B&M - CSXT Connections

The RJ interchange isn't going anywhere - if anything it will become larger.

RJ may not be going anywhere but is CSX still going to be there, that's the question?

Is there room to expand it? Did you look at the other thread?

Many guys that work there say it's a lousy place to do an interchange.

I think they have to by law,it is an established Interchange Point.

Tommy Meehan wrote:RJ may not be going anywhere but is CSX still going to be there, that's the question?

Is there room to expand it? Did you look at the other thread?

Many guys that work there say it's a lousy place to do an interchange.

If CSX isn't there then RJ has no reason to exist. They have been trying to get rid of what little customers they have left out there. Without interchange the branch would go bye bye.

That said, like I said, the CSX interchange isn't going anywhere.

Yes, it is a lousy place. At the west end, going uphill towards CPRJ to CSX from the B&M there is a serious grade. There are only two running tracks and one yard track (used for storage mostly). At the east end there is a very busy grade crossing and if you go out far enough to switch you need a form D because the yard trackage ends and DCS begins. It wouldn't be so hard if there were more tracks.

RJ wasn't used much, if at all, back in the early 90s when almost all CR interchange went though Selkirk to Barber. So who is to say history won't repeat itself?

cpf354 wrote:RJ wasn't used much, if at all, back in the early 90s when almost all CR interchange went though Selkirk to Barber. So who is to say history won't repeat itself?

Because there is no reason for history to repeat itself. A ton of VTR interchange is with CSX and some is already going out the Hoosick Junction interchange - and there are rumors than eventually all VRS to CSX interchange will go that route instead of over the GMRC to Bellows Falls to the NECR.

Not to mention, that is going to be Pan Am Southern's only CSX interchange (besides Springfield). Barber is not part of the deal and I would suspect minimal if any PAS traffic to go that route - strictly cars going to PAR in Maine.

Rotterdam Junction has a very large customer there, Schenectedy Chemical. That alone assure that the branch will stay intact and there will be traffic no matter what.

And i have heard nothing about RJ closing down anyhow. Rumous yes, but nothing even remotley approaching reality. Especially now with the idea of closing the Worcester interchange except for emergencies or special moves.

Just wondering, with the talk of Barber's closing, is their any talk about Springfield becoming a bigger interchange point?

In the late 1980s, Guilford and Conrail got together and worked out a arrangement to move Ford autos through Barber via a rebuilt Worcester Route Main Line. In April of 1990, all of the Conrail bound freight began this routing using a haulage agreement between the two railroads, with most of the freight cars remaining way-billed through Rotterdam. Following the breakup of Conrail, CSX routed some of the cars back through Rotterdam Jct. while other cars are routed via Barber. For CSX bound cars to and from Pan Am, with Norfolk Southern in the picture owning one half of the west end now, Pan Am will have to choose between either giving NS half of the line haul from Rotterdam to Ayer or paying CSX car haulage fees between Rotterdam and Barber.

With luck, the Barber's gateway closing talk is a delayed April Fools joke.
Neither the RJ nor Springfield options seem feasible. Even if RJ is expanded, it'll be a while before track speed and capacity from RJ to the east will permit anything other than horror-show transit times for any more-than-marginal traffic increases there. (Hi, loads on MOAY/AYMO, is this your second or third day on PAS iron?) If Springfield becomes the gateway, think of the ugly/slow moves involved in getting trains to and from the Boston Line to the Conn. River. ED can get clustered even now. Add more Conn. River/eastern Freight Main traffic, and any D-3 TOM will be doing two days of work for one day of pay, assuming no problems.
Finally, the fewer miles on generally-50-mph CSXT iron, behind reliable CSXT power, and with CSXT crews, the more stress on track capacity, power capacity, and crew capacity will be shifted to PAS/PAR. In a few years, maybe. Right now, this may be a case of CSX and NS head-games.

Loads on MOAY/AYMO do not go to Rotterdam Junction. They go to the CP at CPF-477. The Conn. River Line is in D4 not D3. The T.O.M's just took a pay cut so maybe they want the xtra money.

Once any former Barbers traffic gets shifted RJ and is east of CPF-477, it's going to be contending for time and space with what was already there, on a compromised-capacity and low-speed line. Repairs and upgrades are great, but in the short term, they take track out of service, reducing the traffic window even more.

There are reasons why an RJ routing would be preferred over Barbers. It would provide a longer line haul for the ST. Keep it mind, even though is in on PAS, it is still owned by the same people who own PAR as well - which makes the further routing beneficial for both roads.

Even the ST manages to get the Freight Main from Xo to Fitch mostly up to 25 every year for winter. Then, the spring thaw hammers it and its all back down to 10. It will not take that long to get it all back to 25 with the new ballast, ties, and rail in some places. Then - they can focus on project improvements such as the new sidings, tracks, and time table speed increases. Keep in mind when the entire thing was 25, I used to get from Ayer to Crescent in NY in less than 8 hours. While I am sure it takes CSX quite a bit shorter to go this distance, the B&M was only 25 MPH and this time is not that terrible if it can be maintained. The line is no where near saturated and at 25 MPH or greater, adding multiple trains will not be a problem. Add in the passing tracks they want and it will be even better.