• CSX Acquisition of Pan Am Railways

  • 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.
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

  by bostontrainguy
 
Wow, extensive report. Thank you for all that information.
  by MaineRailfan
 
I appreciate it! The topic was brought up at the right time, I am doing research for an upcoming article on the three Irving roads.
Last edited by MEC407 on Wed Jul 03, 2024 6:10 am, edited 1 time in total. Reason: unnecessary quoting
  by newpylong
 
What does this mean for CSX's traffic potentials?
  by MaineRailfan
 
I was just correcting an incorrect statement and thought it would be worth including some additional information on Irving's traffic, since other members might find it interesting.

As for the mill expansions, those will directly correspond with increased traffic on CSX since most of Woodland's finished products and a good deal of the paper from Saint John go via CSX. With the expansions, its not that far of a stretch to say those will bring increased traffic.
  by newpylong
 
Oh I found it extremely interesting, I was honestly asking if this will trickle down to CSX that's all. The fact that a load can leave mid Maine one day and be in Selkirk the next has to be positive for any potential new tonnage.
  by F74265A
 
Thank you for the info. I had always heard that Irving had at least 10,000 carloads. Good to know it is far more.

Also, that R&R article on the Woodland operation was excellent. One of my favorites.
  by BlueFlag
 
The fact that a load can leave mid Maine one day and be in Selkirk the next has to be positive for any potential new tonnage.
Just how much had the time line deteriorated under PAR to move cars from Maine to the Albany region?
  by newpylong
 
Was always faster going via the Barbers gateway, maybe 3 days. If
It went via Deerfield maybe 5.
  by MaineRailfan
 
NMJ to Rigby they could do in one day if the moon and stars lined up perfectly. However that was rarely the case, in the winter if they got back to back storms it would be even longer. That big storm we had in 2017, which was followed by two more big storms fouled things up east of Waterville. Between the snow and locomotive issues it took them almost a week to do a round trip to Mattawamkeag.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Mr. Newpy, I had not heard the term Barbers Gateway before; is that a physical interchange wherever it may be between the B&M and the B&A?

Judging how Timmy let your piece of the road (Hoosac Tunnel) "go to pot", sure doesn't sound like much of a contest.

Now that Chessie is clearly showing she wants to be a "player" and that "sweetheart Springfield Terminal Agreement" be abrogated, might you want to get back behind the throttle for her?
  by MaineRailfan
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the CSX agreement get implemented last month?

I heard that it had been, however my source has been out due to an injury for a few months.
  by jamoldover
 
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Wed Jul 03, 2024 7:35 am Mr. Newpy, I had not heard the term Barbers Gateway before; is that a physical interchange wherever it may be between the B&M and the B&A?
The connection between the ex-Worcester & Nashua (now the CSX Worcester Sub) and the Boston, Barre, & Gardner (now the P&W Gardner Sub) is at Barbers Crossing (named for the family that used to own the land). That was the official interchange point between the B&M/Conrail (later B&M/CSX) as well as between the B&M/P&W for any traffic coming from the eastern half of the B&M.
  by newpylong
 
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Wed Jul 03, 2024 7:35 am Now that Chessie is clearly showing she wants to be a "player" and that "sweetheart Springfield Terminal Agreement" be abrogated, might you want to get back behind the throttle for her?
Couldn't pay me enough me to hire back and I dont live anywhere close to the active B&M or MEC any more. :-D
  by QB 52.32
 
jamoldover wrote: Wed Jul 03, 2024 7:59 am
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Wed Jul 03, 2024 7:35 am Mr. Newpy, I had not heard the term Barbers Gateway before; is that a physical interchange wherever it may be between the B&M and the B&A?
The connection between the ex-Worcester & Nashua (now the CSX Worcester Sub) and the Boston, Barre, & Gardner (now the P&W Gardner Sub) is at Barbers Crossing (named for the family that used to own the land). That was the official interchange point between the B&M/Conrail (later B&M/CSX) as well as between the B&M/P&W for any traffic coming from the eastern half of the B&M.
Mr. Norman, just to offer further placement within Mr. Moldover's information and what I recall was your experience riding a camp train up to Maine through Worcester, Barbers is almost 3 miles north of Worcester's Union Station and became the interchange point late "80's when Timmy sold his track down through Union Station to the (ex-) New Haven (ex-PC, now P&W) South Worcester yard where the B&M had previously interchanged traffic to/from Maine.

As an old network business where the future can be considered by looking backwards, across a very dynamic environment interesting to note that when the B&M fell into early 1970's bankruptcy and among its multiple interchanges, the MEC and BAR jointly offered to buy the Portland to Worcester route in response.
  • 1
  • 308
  • 309
  • 310
  • 311
  • 312
  • 315