west point wrote:F line please explain the PAR signal exemption ???
Between 1973-76 on the southside and 1976 on the northside the T purchased all commuter rail lines, equipment, and physical plant from the bankrupt RR's. On the southside they inherited some cab signaled lines from Penn Central. Other RR's in ex-PC territory also had lots of pre-existing cab signal territory, so it was inevitable up-and-down the East Coast that the newly-minted public commuter rail agencies and Amtrak would be standardizing on PRR-style cab signals and filling in all/most gaps in cabs territory as they overchurned their lines for state-of-repair upgrades.
Unlike all of the southside railroads, B&M never had cab signals anywhere on its native system. Its first foray into cab signal territory didn't come until 1982 when it purchased a bunch of ex-Conrail territory in CT and had to run on the Springfield Line. And unlike Penn Central which allowed itself to be liquidated and join Conrail, B&M decided to remain independent and fight its way through bankruptcy the old-fashioned way with an (ultimately successful) reorganization plan. Since it was mid-bankruptcy and very touch-and-go survival wise at the time it got its 1976 cash infusion from the T asset sale, they feared the cost burden of having to acclimate its stretched-thin locomotive fleet to new cab signal installations on the northside. The T was obviously going to go with the flow on the southside where gradual expansion of cabs territory was inevitable, so for self-preservation purposes B&M put a perpetual right-of-first-refusal clause in the '76 sale agreement regarding any changes in the signaling tech on the northside. For the huge--and hugely below-cost--windfall of assets they got, the T was happy to oblige. And still is, given how many times over that '76 sale has paid for itself. Guilford/PAR inherited that right-of-first-refusal when it bought B&M in '83, and still...refuses. As is their full and legal right. It means the T and Amtrak can't install their preferred signal system and will have a tougher time debugging the cabless variant of ACSES when PTC is installed on the northside. But nobody can complain about the deal that was made 4 decades ago. It was very, very, very good for all sides and northside passenger AND freight owes its continued--and thriving--existence directly to that deal and, indeed, this very clause in that deal since it helped B&M claw its way back to profitability.
The exemption probably is not going to ever be lifted unless PAR gets bought out by somebody who runs on a mostly pre-existing cab signaled network. Norfolk Southern, if/when it swallows the other 50% of Pan Am Southern, may be willing to drop the exemption on the Conn River Line since nearly all of its loco fleet that serves New England from point of origin in Harrisburg is fully equipped. But of all the possible suitors for the PAR side of the system, only Providence & Worcester has the pre-existing cabbed territory and 100% equipped fleet that would make them willing to waive the exemption. Everybody else touching PAR contiguously, and any possible owners who zoom in from outside New England, wouldn't be setting up shop with pre-existing cab signal territory or have an equipped fleet. And therefore, everybody who isn't P&W would have a vested interest in keeping the cab signal ban in perpetuity. Since there'd be many suitors stepping forward, realistic odds are overwhelming that it'll be kept permanent for the long haul. At least as far as the MBTA northside and Downeaster are concerned (north-of-Springfield Vermonter obviously a different story probability-wise for lifting the exemption).
