• CSX to acquire 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

  • 2446 posts
  • 1
  • 128
  • 129
  • 130
  • 131
  • 132
  • 164
  by roberttosh
 
So much for the Fitchburg becoming the freight Super highway into New England at the cost of the B&A.
  by NYC27
 
bostontrainguy wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 12:31 pmI thought there might be some additional trackage rights up the CSX River Line included, since NS has posted that they are looking for a better route into New England from the south, but don't see anything
I don’t think anyone but ANR&P said that...speaking of which looks like Josh needs to re-examine his sources (not that we didn’t already know that). No Conrail and the B&A is gaining traffic not the other way around. I guess the Castleton Bridge isn’t going to fall into the Hudson. :P

That story also makes me wonder if B&E will follow suit with the NS and look to shut off the signals since the line will be left with only a single train pair.
  by NYC27
 
... and the West End will continue to be a 10/25 mph railroad.

While the G&W was and is the most obvious choice for the PAS debacle, I can't imagine this bodes well for the line west of Deerfield
Let’s put it this way...if the Hoosac fails again it won’t be repaired. The Fitchburg Division’s curves limit 88 miles to 30 mph no matter how good the track is...it doesn’t make financial sense to maintain that to Class 3 anyway. Class 2 should be fine for the tonnage. There are good alternatives to move CP and CSX carloads but this is NS’s only route so it isn’t going away.
  by MEC407
 
johnpbarlow wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:55 pm Pittsburgh & Shawmut Railroad, LLC, doing business as Berkshire & Eastern Railroad.
And their official reporting mark is PSR. Hopefully just a coincidence. :wink:
  by MEC407
 
And then there's this:

"The Pittsburg and Shawmut Railroad Company began life on July 21, 1903 as the Brookville and Mahoning Railroad, leased by the Pittsburg, Shawmut and Northern Railroad. When the PS&N declared bankruptcy in 1905, the B&M was spun off into a separate entity and was renamed in 1909 due to confusion with the Boston and Maine Railroad's initials."
  by Shortline614
 
New STB App: https://dcms-external.s3.amazonaws.com/ ... 301685.pdf

SMS Rail is going to discontinue its lease over the ex-D&H line from Delanson to Voorheesville, meaning it will revert back to Norfolk Southern. NS is also going to have to restore the Voorheesville connection to make the B&A trackage rights work.

So looks like that 22K and 23K will head to Mechanicsville, pick-up/drop-off whatever they need to, backtrack to Delanson, go over the connecting track to Voorheesville, then west over the B&A to Ayer.
  by F74265A
 
The backtracking idea does not make sense to me
They would lose all the time they gained
I suspect separate trains to Ayer and mechanicville
  by F74265A
 
taracer wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 5:09 pm They've already begun clearing the old overgrown B&M yard property next to I 290 in Worcester.
Who is clearing the land and is it related to this transaction? I could easily be wrong, but I have a faint recollection that the old b&m Worcester yard land was sold
  by ANDY117
 
We're not backtracking to Delanson, just to run around the train again. Either the 205/206 return, or NS tries to stick the Mechanicvilles on 16R.
  by newpylong
 
NYC27 wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 5:51 pm Let’s put it this way...if the Hoosac fails again it won’t be repaired. The Fitchburg Division’s curves limit 88 miles to 30 mph no matter how good the track is...it doesn’t make financial sense to maintain that to Class 3 anyway. Class 2 should be fine for the tonnage. There are good alternatives to move CP and CSX carloads but this is NS’s only route so it isn’t going away.
There was only spot 30 (HRB to Valley Falls, little and big Hoosac, a couple miles in Charlemont, South River, and then South Ash) before Pan Am neutered it all in the latest timetables. Prior to that most of the curves were 35 and even before the risk adverse Guilford engineering department took over most of the RR was 40.

It would make sense to be Class 3 if the traffic was there as the topology physically supports it.
  by newpylong
 
ANDY117 wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 6:41 pm We're not backtracking to Delanson, just to run around the train again. Either the 205/206 return, or NS tries to stick the Mechanicvilles on 16R.
Absolutely. There are other routing options that wouldn't require rebuilding the Albany Main and VO connectors and booting SMS operating lease if they just wanted to waste time running around the train or a backup move.
Last edited by newpylong on Fri Feb 26, 2021 7:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
  by roberttosh
 
With the NS pair now thrown into the mix as well as a likely uptick (increased PAR & Waste traffic) in train starts with CSX on the B&A, I wonder how this effects the MBTA expansion plans to Springfield/Pittsfield? I don't see any way they can think of running 5-6 roundtrips a day without the addition of more double track, especially with the amount of 8-10K foot trains they're running now.
  by NYC27
 
newpylong wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 6:57 pm There was only spot 30 (HRB to Valley Falls, little and big Hoosac, a couple miles in Charlemont, South River, and then South Ash) before Pan Am neutered it all in the latest timetables. Prior to that most of the curves were 35 and even before the risk adverse Guilford engineering department took over most of the RR was 40.

It would make sense to be Class 3 if the traffic was there as the topology physically supports it.
It is a matter of perception I guess, but my early 90s GTI ETT, which has pretty much the same speeds as my 1980 B&M ETT shows the only 40s west of Fitchburg as East Gardner-Wrights; Tyter-Erving; 378-Deerfield West; Greenfield-390; N Adams-Johnsonville (less two single 1 mile 25s) with most of the rest 30 and some 35 just east of the tunnel. I look at that as spot 40. As rule of thumb the B&M single tracked the 40s and left the 30/35 double iron in the 1980 4R rebuild.

Regardless, I'm with you on the neutering, the COO needed to dumb things down to his level. He couldn't comprehend that the 5 mph slow down cost the intermodals and hour each way and that made the difference of them making on a single crew or not many days.
  by newpylong
 
Yes! Then they made everything 25 in I think PAR TT#4 (I was long gone by then) instead of 30 or 35 as was the case since the GTI ETTs so upper management stopped asking why the damn speedo was so damn long. When I left the RR it was 9 pages long.

I really do hope they don't retire the CTC out west. 402 to 428 is the oldest code on the entire system...

In reading this application more closely, I wouldn't be surprised to see CSX exit PAS within the first two years. I have never seen so many voluntary concessions to get something approved in a filing before, and the language is certainly there for an exit (initiated by them or NS) within the first 7 years.
Last edited by newpylong on Fri Feb 26, 2021 8:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
  by NHN503
 
NYC27 wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 5:42 pm
That story also makes me wonder if B&E will follow suit with the NS and look to shut off the signals since the line will be left with only a single train pair.

Most likely, except for the maybe in the tunnel. But there will remain more than a single train pair.
  • 1
  • 128
  • 129
  • 130
  • 131
  • 132
  • 164