Portageville Bridge Replacement, Future Tier Traffic

Pertaining to all railroading subjects, past and present, in New York State.

Moderator: Otto Vondrak

Matt Langworthy
Posts: 3384
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:02 pm
Location: Rochester, NY

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by Matt Langworthy »

johnpbarlow wrote:Re: development of Buffalo-NY/NJ intermodal traffic over the Tier, couldn't NS be running such traffic today via Allentown? Why are the Bergen Tunnels critical to this traffic? I would think the ex-Erie between Binghamton and Port Jervis might need investment to accommodate time sensitive traffic whereas the NS south/east out of Wilkes Barre is already in decent shape handling multiple daily manifest/intermodal trains.
NS already contends with trackage rights on the R&N when they use they LV/CNJ alignment between Scranton/Wilkes Barre and Allentown. A purely Erie routing means they own the tracks and don't pay a cent to another RR company. Enlarging the Bergen Tunnel will help the traffic flow in NJ.
Matt Langworthy

"It is highly likely that the 1990s were an overrated decade."

Matt Langworthy
Posts: 3384
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:02 pm
Location: Rochester, NY

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by Matt Langworthy »

poppyl wrote:The second was whether CN will gain trackage rights on the Tier all the way into North Jersey if the east end of the Tier comes back to life. With CP coming down the River Line, this would seem to be very appealing to CN from a competitive standpoint. Or conversely, will CP now be interested in the route east from Binghamton to Jersey given the congestion on the River Line?
CP doesn't use the River Line. They had been exercizing trackage rights on the other side of the Hudson, but recently relinquished those rights in favor of an agreement that will have CSX handle the freight between Albany and NYC, while CP will handle freight for CSX between Albany and Montreal.
Matt Langworthy

"It is highly likely that the 1990s were an overrated decade."

User avatar
scottychaos
Posts: 4597
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 7:18 am
Location: Rochester, NY

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by scottychaos »

poppyl wrote:
Two things jumped out at me after reviewing the charts. The first was the "apparent decision" as evidenced by the "picture" of the new bridge that the bridge will be replaced in its current location rather than built new to the south. If that is the "final" decision (and I wasn't aware that this decision had been reached), I guess the two year detour plan possibly using the Secondary is back on the radar.
Poppyl
I dont think that conclusion can be drawn just from the artwork..
yes, maybe the new bridge appears in the same position as the old bridge, but thats just an artist rendering and doesnt necessarily have any bearing on reality.
the artist was simply told: "photoshop out the old bridge, replace it with the new bridge"
the artist probably doesnt know, or care, anything about the bridges actual positions..

its just some promotional artwork, just for show, and IMO it isnt meant to imply anything about the exact bridge placement..

Scot
~ Scot Lawrence
Moderator: Lehigh Valley
Co-Moderator: Anthracite Railroads
Scot's railroad webpages

century430
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 3:32 pm
Location: La Plata, MD

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by century430 »

Not knowing the lay of the land on the extreme east end of the Erie I have to ask this question. Where is/are the Bergen Tunnel(s) and how do they tie into the Tier? If this tunnel is a problem, how did Conrail get their double stacks down the Tier since 1985/86? Is the Bergen tunnel part of another route to the Port of NJ/NY?

Also, regarding Binghamton east, wasn't it part of CNYK's lease to have that track upgraded to a higher class by the 2010/2012 timeframe?

Jim Rowland
JJR

K4Pacific
Posts: 937
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 3:47 pm
Location: EC&N Right of Way near Elmira Branch

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by K4Pacific »

The responses are good as we've have been duped before and you have every right. The precedent was set when NS came to town at the time of merger and I was at several of the public meetings in Elmira. If you recall, they said they would run several trains and did for less than a year. They did what even I would have done. Run a core route on the LV/RDG/PRR.

Now the time has come for a secondary route. I do know for the line to work, NS must make Newark to Bison in 16 hours. Right now, NS can do Bison to Bing in 6 with a clear board all the way. So that leaves ten hours on the east end. It can be done. Roadster can probably chime in on this.

Look. I've seen NS do wondrous things, like completely rebuild 6 miles of track in two days (albeit another 2 days rebuilding a really bad crossing), build brand new yard offices in Binghamton, Elmira, and Gang Mills, and rebuild the yards. The track west of Binghamton has never ever been this good - since the 1955 Erie rebuild. (I don't want to sound like an advocate for NS, but hopefully stating what's been done in capital improvements)

NS would not indicate the east end unless they are serious. I'd re-read the presentation. Sure it's a sales piece. But, read it for what it is. They want to be serious contenders with CSX in New York (no - that won't take runs away from you roadster). They will. I have never seen the east end on NS sales slicks before - even with the patriot corridor pieces. This is the first, so I really think they mean business.

I agree with the "I'll believe it when i see it." Perhaps I can find out the 2011 budget for the Southern Tier Line. It is budget season you know.
Proficient on the Southern Tier Line, The former PRR Elmira Branch, A little LV, A lot of EL, And of course, the Corning Secondary. Someone always knows more than me. Remember the Binghamton yardmaster that routinely said in a high voice, "No! No! No! That's not what I told you to do!"?

poppyl
Posts: 617
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:56 pm

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by poppyl »

scottychaos wrote:
poppyl wrote:
Two things jumped out at me after reviewing the charts. The first was the "apparent decision" as evidenced by the "picture" of the new bridge that the bridge will be replaced in its current location rather than built new to the south. If that is the "final" decision (and I wasn't aware that this decision had been reached), I guess the two year detour plan possibly using the Secondary is back on the radar.
Poppyl
I dont think that conclusion can be drawn just from the artwork..
yes, maybe the new bridge appears in the same position as the old bridge, but thats just an artist rendering and doesnt necessarily have any bearing on reality.
the artist was simply told: "photoshop out the old bridge, replace it with the new bridge"
the artist probably doesnt know, or care, anything about the bridges actual positions..

its just some promotional artwork, just for show, and IMO it isnt meant to imply anything about the exact bridge placement..

Scot

I was a little surprised that they didn't show both options for completeness but I can see your point since the purpose of the briefing was to elicit support for the replacement and not review specific options for doing it. Since the project seems to be dependent on matching federal funds (and we all know the current conditions of the state and federal budgets), I wonder what the Plan B is if these funds are not forthcoming.

Poppyl

poppyl
Posts: 617
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:56 pm

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by poppyl »

Matt Langworthy wrote:
poppyl wrote:The second was whether CN will gain trackage rights on the Tier all the way into North Jersey if the east end of the Tier comes back to life. With CP coming down the River Line, this would seem to be very appealing to CN from a competitive standpoint. Or conversely, will CP now be interested in the route east from Binghamton to Jersey given the congestion on the River Line?
CP doesn't use the River Line. They had been exercizing trackage rights on the other side of the Hudson, but recently relinquished those rights in favor of an agreement that will have CSX handle the freight between Albany and NYC, while CP will handle freight for CSX between Albany and Montreal.
Thanks for setting me straight on the current situation.

Poppyl

poppyl
Posts: 617
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:56 pm

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by poppyl »

I don't want to sound like a pollyanna, but bringing back the east end of the Tier seems to me to be very consistent with the NS "corridor" strategy being implemented across the company.

Poppyl

northjerseybuff
Posts: 2593
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by northjerseybuff »

Are there any crews qualified on the east end? This "resurgence" if it happens will be within the next year it sounds. Are they planning on hiring people, fixing up more on the east end? sidings, signals, etc.
"I'm an analog man in a digital world"

SecaucusJunction
Posts: 3082
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 9:40 pm
Location: NS Watchdog

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by SecaucusJunction »

I see NS does have conductor positions open in both Binghamton and Croxton.
I think it may be possible that NJ Transit might not be the perfect, infallible organization that most people assume it is.

K4Pacific
Posts: 937
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 3:47 pm
Location: EC&N Right of Way near Elmira Branch

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by K4Pacific »

The east end is probably off topic and could be under the why so little traffic thread. But, the assumption, even with lease arrangements with CNYK and MNJ at Campbell Hall, is that track upgrades and qualified crews for the line would occur in similar fashion to the WNYP and coal run throughs using NS Crews.

It would be interesting to see the time on the 39z detour today running Bing to Bison once its loose from track work single tracking. Can someone hunt that down?
Proficient on the Southern Tier Line, The former PRR Elmira Branch, A little LV, A lot of EL, And of course, the Corning Secondary. Someone always knows more than me. Remember the Binghamton yardmaster that routinely said in a high voice, "No! No! No! That's not what I told you to do!"?

century430
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 3:32 pm
Location: La Plata, MD

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by century430 »

What is the status of the single tracking project between Johnson City and Waverly? I see in NS's presentation it says it is completed.

Jim Rowland
JJR

K4Pacific
Posts: 937
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 3:47 pm
Location: EC&N Right of Way near Elmira Branch

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by K4Pacific »

In process. The. Susquehanna valley district website has a nice expose on the project.
Proficient on the Southern Tier Line, The former PRR Elmira Branch, A little LV, A lot of EL, And of course, the Corning Secondary. Someone always knows more than me. Remember the Binghamton yardmaster that routinely said in a high voice, "No! No! No! That's not what I told you to do!"?

Matt Langworthy
Posts: 3384
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:02 pm
Location: Rochester, NY

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by Matt Langworthy »

poppyl wrote:
Matt Langworthy wrote:
poppyl wrote:The second was whether CN will gain trackage rights on the Tier all the way into North Jersey if the east end of the Tier comes back to life. With CP coming down the River Line, this would seem to be very appealing to CN from a competitive standpoint. Or conversely, will CP now be interested in the route east from Binghamton to Jersey given the congestion on the River Line?
CP doesn't use the River Line. They had been exercizing trackage rights on the other side of the Hudson, but recently relinquished those rights in favor of an agreement that will have CSX handle the freight between Albany and NYC, while CP will handle freight for CSX between Albany and Montreal.
Thanks for setting me straight on the current situation.

Poppyl
No problem. I've made my own share of mistakes in the past- it's human nature.
Matt Langworthy

"It is highly likely that the 1990s were an overrated decade."

Matt Langworthy
Posts: 3384
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:02 pm
Location: Rochester, NY

Re: Portageville Bridge Replacement: Why?

Post by Matt Langworthy »

K4Pacific wrote:The east end is probably off topic and could be under the why so little traffic thread. But, the assumption, even with lease arrangements with CNYK and MNJ at Campbell Hall, is that track upgrades and qualified crews for the line would occur in similar fashion to the WNYP and coal run throughs using NS Crews.

It would be interesting to see the time on the 39z detour today running Bing to Bison once its loose from track work single tracking. Can someone hunt that down?
I was out at CP Cass and in the Canisteo River Valley 12 days ago. At the time, the track work in the Canisteo-Hornell area was ongoing. NS opened a "window" around 12:30 or so to let 23Z and another train get through CP Cass. MOW work resumed around 1 PM and continued until shortly after 5 PM, when I saw a couple of trains (1 each westbound and eastbound) meet at the West Cameron siding. This was not related to the single tracking further east... but it did affect train traffic, including those trains passing over the Portageville Bridge.
Matt Langworthy

"It is highly likely that the 1990s were an overrated decade."

Return to “New York State Railfan”