Pan Am FINALLY updated/upgraded their web site

newpylong wrote:You would be surprised then. This deal was very much in the works outside of the fact that the consignee wants HiCubes and the branch can't handle them.

Well color me surprised. Seems like a good candidate for Tighe or another warehouse operation to unload the high cubes for them.

newpylong wrote:They do not pay for trackage rights on the Fitch, NH or Western mains (or any MBTA trackage for that matter), so there really is nothing to get rid of. If they don't exercise their rights, they don't.

Why'd they abdicate all Eastern Route rights north of Salem if it's free and perpetual? Salem-Beverly, Newburyport, and Rockport were all formally expunged of freight rights in the MBTA era, not just left unused. Except for pre- commuter rail restoration Ipswich-Newburyport there's nothing different about those lines vs. letting Reading go idle and letting the ranks of crews qualified on it atrophy while still retaining the rights.

Or was that a purposeful Guilford-weirdness strategy from the bad old days?

Both PAR and Amtrak keep crews qualified on the Reading line in case of outages/detours
related to the Lowell main and/or Wildcat.

It's true the AB distributor in Medford wanted rail service, but height restrictions nixed it.
Am also hearing PAR has other potential customers in the commuter zone, but the recent
hassle of the Montvale/Tighe situation makes everyone skidish.

The last switch between Reading and CPW-WJ on single track - DF Munroe - has been
officially retired.

New Plate F restrictions now exist at Sullivan Square.

Speaking of weight restrictions, understand two covered hoppers weighing over 263K
for Peabody were rejected at Lawrence last week.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, the GLX project vs. Yard 8 has huge implications.
If the MW facility does displace MS Walker and the track reductions between MS and BET come
to fruition, the chickens will come home to roost. The Rotem coach deliveries have already
exposed the lack of storage space even with the two ex-B&A tracks at 3rd Ave. The only place
for last night's Rotem delivery was on the already occupied Valley Track. We haven't even
started to see the cycling of K-Cars coming and going for rehab. And then there's the
MW car issues.

D

WRT clearance map, given that CP/NS trains with domestic DS containers operate between Mohawk and Mechanicville, shouldn't PAR reflect this segment as Plate H clearance or is there a vertical obstruction on that short stretch that clears nothing higher than 20' 2"?

And the fairly detailed System map suggests that traffic can run from RJ to Mohawk yard directly. Have CP/PAR/PAS ever thought of trying to build a short connection to the D&H at Mohawk yard and abandon the track to the Crescent connection? There's about 500' of separation and looks there's nothing in the way as much of the land is abandoned rail yard.

http://binged.it/1eqNgbS" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:

newpylong wrote:They do not pay for trackage rights on the Fitch, NH or Western mains (or any MBTA trackage for that matter), so there really is nothing to get rid of. If they don't exercise their rights, they don't.

Why'd they abdicate all Eastern Route rights north of Salem if it's free and perpetual? Salem-Beverly, Newburyport, and Rockport were all formally expunged of freight rights in the MBTA era, not just left unused. Except for pre- commuter rail restoration Ipswich-Newburyport there's nothing different about those lines vs. letting Reading go idle and letting the ranks of crews qualified on it atrophy while still retaining the rights.

Or was that a purposeful Guilford-weirdness strategy from the bad old days?

Done before the great trackage rights/land swap (Green line) of 2011. They had to pay before that.

BTW - the website is a big improvement but still sucks. They've gone from 1995 to 1999 with it. I guess no worse than the other regionals though.

I'm glad that Pan Am has finally upgraded its website.

The website contains the vital information -- available through the site map -- that the designation for the Millers Falls interchange is "MILFS" -- seriously. If not 21st century, that is at least late 20th century.

newpylong wrote:BTW - the website is a big improvement but still sucks. They've gone from 1995 to 1999 with it. I guess no worse than the other regionals though.

The JPEG system map is a steep downgrade removing all the interchange points and major intermodal sites. They'd be well-advised to use Google Maps API and do something nice and zoomable. CSX has a map like that. Any idiot can embed a customized Google Map on a website now. There's no excuse for a webmaster to not be able to do that on a site that contains such vital geographical information for prospective customers.

The clearance and weight maps are really nice, though. And not much different from the static maps CSX and NS have. I don't know how prospective customers could've ever lived without that info beforehand.

jaymac wrote:The website contains the vital information -- available through the site map -- that the designation for the Millers Falls interchange is "MILFS" -- seriously. If not 21st century, that is at least late 20th century.

Wow. Perhaps it's a clever ploy to dramatically increase web traffic.

Nonetheless, it's an improvement in all areas except the jpeg maps.

Moderator Note:

I enjoy the various offshoot conversations, but at this point they're all over the place and we're at risk of this thread becoming a free-for-all. Let's focus on the Pan Am web site. In-depth discussions about clearance issues, potential/existing customers, Boston-area issues, etc., are better suited to other threads. Thanks.