New Syracuse Terminal Subdivision

Does anyone happen to know the exact milepost the Syracuse Terminal Sub starts? 263.?? or is it 263.0? Thanks in advance.

gracebeliever077 wrote:Does anyone happen to know the exact milepost the Syracuse Terminal Sub starts? 263.?? or is it 263.0? Thanks in advance.

263.14159265359...

-otto-

Otto Vondrak wrote:

gracebeliever077 wrote:Does anyone happen to know the exact milepost the Syracuse Terminal Sub starts? 263.?? or is it 263.0? Thanks in advance.

263.14159265359...

-otto-

Good morning Mr. Pi!

As a physical location, it would be the masts of the West Bound Absolute signals of CP 263. CP 263 is part of the Syracuse Terminal Sub., and controled by the ND Dsp.. Just an FYI. The West end will be the West Bound Absolute signal masts for CP 296. CP 296 is actually part of the Rochester Sub. and controled by the NF Dsp..

I heard a rumor that may be implemented next Wednesday, May 15th......

The NF desk would be abolished with the following changes:

-NG desk would control their current desk (Buffalo Terminal, Belt, Niagara, Lockport subs and Somerset RR), and the Rochester sub from WAS CP-429 to EAS CP-382 would be added to their desk

-ND desk would control from WAS CP-263 to the EAS CP-382, along with the West Shore sub and Charlotte runner.

-NE desk would be re-instituted from CP-W north controlling all the DCS territory into the north country like it used to along with the Baldwinsville & Fulton subs.

Rumor is the FRA didn't like the ND controlling so much DCS along with the 33 miles of the Syracuse Terminal sub, because of the switch awareness forms, possibility of an overlapping form, etc. I guess the FRA is concerned with the possibility of another accident happening in non-signalled territory.

Roadster, I'd like your opinion on this. IMO, if they split the NG/ND at CP-382, that is the absolute worst location to do it. The dispatchers don't talk to each other now, how are they going to coordinate movements onto the Shore? I would think that CP-402 or 406 would be better, although that'd be another 20 miles onto the ND desk. Just my .02

Haven't heard a word of this. Doesn't mean there isn't something to it, but they usually inform us by General Bulletin prior to a major change such as this. I'll see what I can find out.
Just as a "what if" scenario, until I hear something official. I sooner like CP 393 as a split point. CP 393 could be controlled by the NG Dsp., and ND would have the territory East of the WAS CP 393. Personally, I think having the ND trying to control Syracuse and Rochester, both renowned for the quagmires that seem to pop up repeatedly, is simply asking for a gridlock meltdown of CSX proportions. We'll see.

nyswb40 wrote:I heard a rumor that may be implemented next Wednesday, May 15th......

The NF desk would be abolished with the following changes:

-NG desk would control their current desk (Buffalo Terminal, Belt, Niagara, Lockport subs and Somerset RR), and the Rochester sub from WAS CP-429 to EAS CP-382 would be added to their desk

-ND desk would control from WAS CP-263 to the EAS CP-382, along with the West Shore sub and Charlotte runner.

Just curious as to why would the West Shore Branch, Charlotte Runner, and the Rochester Sub be put under the control of different dispatchers?

-otto-

Looks like a dollar saving move....Otto, if I read this correctly, the current NF dispatcher position would be eliminated....the ND would get from 263 to 382 and the Shore and the Runner, so they would all still be under one dispatcher, just not the one they are under currently. I don't know who I envy least on this, the T&E folks or the dispatchers....while the lines through Rochester look like three (mostly, four from 373 to 367) parallel lines on the board, having the transition point at 382 still seems less than a stellar idea....I hope the NG folks have a lot of Grecian Formula to cover the gray hair they are about to get.....maybe they should change the name of the NG desk to show the merger with the NF desk and call it the "NFG" desk......(just kidding!)

Amazing how well it worked under Conrail and they keep making changes to try to save a few pennies somewhere. How many years was it the Buffalo division, Mohawk-Hudson division and St. Lawrence division? I have NYC era timetables laid out that way.

lvrr325 wrote:Amazing how well it worked under Conrail and they keep making changes to try to save a few pennies somewhere. How many years was it the Buffalo division, Mohawk-Hudson division and St. Lawrence division? I have NYC era timetables laid out that way.

Well yes things did run well, but for most of those years the operator at "GS" controlled the track in the middle cp278-cp296 and handled trains
off the St.Lawrence.

IMHO, this is what happens when people 1000 miles away who may have never even seen the track in question are making management decisions.

At least the N* dispatchers are in NYS. Last time I was in Michigan, I heard a CSX dispatcher (former C&O line) with a distinct southern twang.

Are these pending subdivision changes related to the new antenna mast and instrument case that recently appeared at the Savage Rd crossing in Churchville?

Or is this part of the signal upgrade project? Or is it simply an additional repeater station to improve 2-way communications (often marginal) west of Rochester?

Note the new equipment is not yet operating - the RG&E pole is set and meter box mounted, but the triplex power cable and meter have yet to be installed/connected.



...FB

wow this is a fascinating topic. kinda reminds me of what we heard over the last few weeks leading up to the nfl draft on the sports talk radio shows i listen to. if these changes happen, i don't understand why 382 would be the point where you would want to divide up the territories.

"Are these pending subdivision changes related to the new antenna mast and instrument case that recently appeared at the Savage Rd crossing in Churchville?"

I believe those antennas are all PTC related. They don't look like the radio base antennas at Batavia, Wende, etc. and they're unfortunately not ATCS antennas so I'd go with PTC. If anyone can clarify what they are that'd be great

nyswb40 wrote:"Are these pending subdivision changes related to the new antenna mast and instrument case that recently appeared at the Savage Rd crossing in Churchville?"

I believe those antennas are all PTC related. They don't look like the radio base antennas at Batavia, Wende, etc. and they're unfortunately not ATCS antennas so I'd go with PTC. If anyone can clarify what they are that'd be great

From what little I can see in that photo the top antenna is a 4-bay VHF high band dipole array, so that is no doubt to cover the standard 160MHz railroad frequencies. What radio is hooked to it, I have no idea. Maybe it's simply to provide better coverage for the dispatchers through there? Is it a valley or surrounded by tall hills that might obstruct the signal?

There might be a beam mounted below that inline with the mast, but I really can't tell from the photo.

Hope this helps.