Pan Am GE DASH 8 Locomotives

Dunno its age, but the posting for diesel mechanics -- http://www.panamrailways.com/index.php? ... ncm5mp74f0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; -- on the Pan Am website careers page hasn't been expanded beyond experience on EMDs to GEs, and there's nothing about electricians, either.

Well, GE does repairs for the first year, if not two. They have mechanical at Pan Am. Though, it wouldn't surprise me if this page has not been updated. Existing workforce is being trained on GE.

newpylong wrote:As for the 35 number, they want PAS to be entirely GE around that number and will park the EMDs or send them to PAR.

So ... NS runs entirely on GE in the Northeast?

gokeefe wrote:

newpylong wrote:As for the 35 number, they want PAS to be entirely GE around that number and will park the EMDs or send them to PAR.

So ... NS runs entirely on GE in the Northeast?

No. NS runs on anything and everything, so anything and everything could make an appearance in New England. They're just holding Billericadome's feet to the fire on running the Corridor with non-gimp engines they can get regular service & support for. Apparently after 7 years The Pony's had quite enough of watching Waterville's garbage power sputter and wheeze across their big investment on a daily basis and is making demands for fleet segregation if PAR insists on keeping its EMD rolling ruins in perpetual ruin.


The cab signal requirement for the GE's is interesting given how little share EDPL needs as the only Pan Am power -sourced job to cross into cabs territory. Maybe NS has already made the executive decision that NYSDOT is going to be allowed to fresh-install cabs on the Corridor when it's time to upgrade Mickeyville-Hoosick Jct. to Class 4 track for new Amtrak service up the lower VT Western Corridor?

That's an interesting thought when you consider possible PTC implications ...

4 units with cab signals is exactly what they used to have for the CT jobs so it makes sense, if only for that.

gokeefe wrote:That's an interesting thought when you consider possible PTC implications ...

Actually, PAR would've had trouble with PTC anyway on just the overlap with CP between Mickeyville and Mohawk, as CP is under the mandate as a Class I to install I-ETMS there. That little wrinkle doesn't get much pub on this New England-centric subforum because it's self-contained in New York and tangled up with an out-of-region carrier, but there wasn't a resolution for that little snag either. Whatever bulletproof trackage rights PAR has for running through there 24/7 until the end of time, it's still signalized Class I -owned/operated track they have to traverse to get in and out of their shiny new IM yard. And CP is deadline-bound to install I-ETMS there (which is no sweat for NS, since they're also deadline-bound to install it on D&H South for getting here in the first place). Weakens their spat with the MBTA over PTC a little bit further, since they'd need the same freight main I-ETMS install to get all the way through the west end too. There's something awfully rich about making such a show of biting the hand of a Massachusetts public agency that pays for those signal units when it's a Canadian-based, New York-operating private behemoth that ain't into giving out charity to smaller carriers who's ultimately going to force the issue. But ascribing logic to Billerica's spite has always been a waste of energy.


It's entirely possible that the bargain-basement price on these GE units was in no small part due to NS greasing the skids behind the scenes to ensure that there was no 12/31/2020 terror threat with the real inescapable PTC dilemma for the Corridor...the one in New York, not Massachusetts.

Is I-ETMS ptc? What instance would trigger the mandate on the joint mainline?

For CP,to handle Haz-Mat loads,and in the near future,the Amtrak "Ethan Allen" reroute into Vermont

Neither of those are concrete causes to require PTC installation. There are so many exemptions they are hard to keep track of. For instance, they can file for an exemption if the annual tonnage is less than 15 million lbs and 4 or less daily passenger trains. Also the hazmat only applies to TIH and Pan Am only runs a hand full every month (CP none). There are average yearly exemptions to that too. Etc and so on.

Have not looked to see if CP has filed for relief from PTC there or if they will install it.

The four C40-8s have been picked up already, and six B40-8s were picked up today.

Ex-CSX 7500, 7575, 7594, and 7595 for the C40s

Ex-CSX 5930 (NYSW 4010), 5948 (NYSW 4044), 5955 (CR 5071), 5956 (CR 5074), 5966 (CR 5068), and 5976 (CR 5084)

6 B-40's in Rotterdam Junction today.

Here the STB recordation on them:

https://www.stb.gov/recordations.nsf/f8 ... enDocument" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Of note, some of the 4 axles were reduced to B-20 (2000HP) by CSX but are being returned to 4000 for the sale.

That answers that question. Curious that they're doing so, as the main applications for the B40s right now (besides the cab signaled ones) are on RUPO/PORU and MAWA/WAMA, where they won't really be able to take advantage of that 4000 hp.