• CSX Track Upgrades & Infrastructure of Pan Am

  • 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 jamoldover
 
That's nothing new. There's never been clearance for double stacks of any kind (except for maybe the half-height trash containers) east of Lowell. CSX is well aware of that, but even if addressing that is on the long-term wish list it's likely to be at least a decade or more away.
  by newpylong
 
fromway wrote: Fri Feb 17, 2023 10:56 am Not claiming to know much about railroading, but if there is a clearance problem then it will mean that everything picked up at the Keag from Saint John will have to be single stack. That is not a great marketing feature because it will add more expense on tothe shipper.
Not if it's still cheaper than trucking.
  by CN9634
 
It’ll be cheaper as a port/rail combo for sure. Also the Maine Rail Plan lists a project as CSX double stacking the line, so it would appear to be (at some point) on their agenda
  by F74265A
 
With the preparations for the B&E split underway and EDPO reportedly no more, I am watching to see if csx launches this spring into the renovation and reconfiguration of the hill yard in Ayer as outlined in the stb filings. I’m not aware of any big work done yet in Ayer or Lawrence yard although google maps shows a number of new turnouts in an otherwise derelict looking Lawrence yard
  by newpylong
 
Unless CSX provides the equipment and manpower (which is possible), it will be the B&E doing that work in the Hill Yard when it occurs. It's PAS. I'm also not sure how much of a priority that work is given the bridge in Clinton still needs to be undercut and all the work out on the Albany Main done.
  by jamoldover
 
The reconfiguration of the Hill Yard is independent of clearance issues - if I recall correctly, it was to provide additional track that could be used for block swaps between CSX and PAS without tying up the yard, as well as allow simultaneous moves in the yard via the east and west wyes.
  by newpylong
 
It is intertwined because it would not be happening to that extent if 264 was not also going to be coming up from the south (eventually).
  by jamoldover
 
What does 264 have to do with it? They come nowhere near PAS territory. CSX isn't going to run a train across PAS, then down to Worcester and back east to Brookfield.
  by johnpbarlow
 
Interesting point! If CSX doesn’t change NS 264 IM symbol, there could be 2 “264” trains on the Southern Route: M264 autos to Brookfield and NS264 to Ayer.
  by NHV 669
 
F74265A wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 3:17 pm The intermodal train off of NS to Ayer that may get rerouted via VO and barbers
There is no "may", that is literally the reason for the VO rehab, as was outlined in the STB filing.
  by F74265A
 
I know what was stated in the stb filing and I know rail was dropped on the Albany main. The reason I used may is that until NS invests in the VO interlocking and pays to raise the clinton bridge, DS train can’t move on that route. NY grant is largely funding the Albany main rail work. Since corporations sometimes reverse their decisions midstream even after substantial investment-many many examples-in my book an event remains at may until it occurs in fact.
  by ST377
 
Good bet NS264 gets changed to a Z symbol (or whatever CSX is using for a foreign railroad's train these days) on the B&A.
  by newpylong
 
F74265A wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 6:50 pm I know what was stated in the stb filing and I know rail was dropped on the Albany main. The reason I used may is that until NS invests in the VO interlocking and pays to raise the clinton bridge, DS train can’t move on that route. NY grant is largely funding the Albany main rail work. Since corporations sometimes reverse their decisions midstream even after substantial investment-many many examples-in my book an event remains at may until it occurs in fact.
I think this is a very reasonable position.
  by NHV 669
 
F74265A wrote: Sat Feb 18, 2023 6:50 pm The reason I used may is that until NS invests in the VO interlocking and pays to raise the clinton bridge, DS train can’t move on that route.
Why would NS pay to undercut a CSXT owned bridge? They can't move DS over PAS as is, excluding the trash, so why would the inability to move stacks stop them moving trains over the B&A?
  • 1
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 56