Central New York RR to lease NS Southern Tier

The portion of the line in PA has an interesting history, of which I only know a part. The original Erie charter was only from NY State, that's why they started at Piermont (NY) just N of NJ. Similarly they were going to stay on the E bank of the Delaware, and then cross over from Deposit to Windsor to Binghamton without going through PA. I have an old wall map from 1850 with that line traced on it. Of course they discovered cliffs along the Delaware so they had to cross into PA, then they realised that they couldn't go up and down hill like the modern NY17, and routed over Gulf Summit. I'm not sure then how they got agreement from PA, which was investing heavily in their various state-funded canal systems including the portgage by Gallatin/Horseshoe.

...Sodus...the real trick was getting the NY legislature to allow the line into PA because the bonding rules and charter were for an all NY route. Getting despensation from Albany in 1840's was just as difficult as today!

The RR had to cross into PA west of Port Jervis because the Delaware and Hudson Canal occupied the east side of the Delaware River from PJ to Minisink Ford south of Narrowsburg NY.

The original charter was for the RR to begin and end in NY and also forbid interchange with other RRs, which is why it was built so broad of a gage (6 foot, I believe). PA would have likely welcomed forays by the Erie into their state as there was no other year-round transportation available to the citizens in the region. And if PA was not being asked to fund it in any way, there was nothing to lose.

I think we're getting away from the original topic here regarding the CNYK operation of the Southern Tier. Feel free to start another thread if you'd like to talk about the history of the Southern Tier, the Erie, etc... or try visiting our Erie/EL forum for more information as well.

Let's try to keep the discussion related to the CNYK's proposed operation of the Southern Tier.

-otto-

Okay, to get back on topic (somewhat):

1) Conrail had little use for the Southern Tier- no on-line business.
2) NS has little use for the line- no on-line business, just occaisional run-throughs.
3) The only reason the Erie ever built it was to move freight from Buffalo area to NYC area. When that traffic shrunk, there was no on-line business to keep it solvent, a condition made worse by the redundancy of the Erie Lakawanna merger.
4) Any attempt to develop the line as a Jersey gateway is greatly hampered by the commuter service.

Passing off the Tier to a paper company is simply a cost-cutting measure for taxes, labor and maintenance.

Maybe this will give NYS&W a place to run their steamer.....?

3) The only reason the Erie ever built it was to move freight from Buffalo area to NYC area. When that traffic shrunk, there was no on-line business to keep it solvent, a condition made worse by the redundancy of the Erie Lakawanna merger.

its not quite as simple as that..
you cant really say "the only reason the Erie built it"..
it WAS the Erie! the entire Erie..(originally)

thats like saying "the only reason the PRR was built was to ship goods between Pittsburg and Phildelphia"..
thats only a very small part of the whole story.

and it was much more than just Buffalo-NYC..
it was the entire Great Lakes industrial complex to the huge markets of the East Coast..not just New York City..
instead of "Buffalo to New York City" it was more like "the entire Western USA to the entire (industrial) Eastern USA."
(in the 1850's Chicago was the "west coast"!
the Erie was BIG! it was Huge, it was a major major very important American railroad..
much different from the pitiful single-track line remaining today.

I dont think the Erie had any major problems keeping solvent until after WWII..it basically ran an entire century as a healthy railroad.

And the redundancy that hurt the Erie wasnt caused by the EL merger..
the redundancy existed before the merger.
Erie
DL&W
NYC
LV
PRR
too many railroads running the Buffalo/Chicago to "the east coast" route.
The EL merger actually DEcreased the redundancy!
because the newly formed EL basically abandoned the Lackawanna mainline west of Binghamton..took one player out of the game.
the redundancy was a problem long before the merger.

im just sticking up for the greatness of the Erie!
the Erie was much more than just the last 40 years..
Scot

Amen on the importance of the Erie to the development of:

-- the vast, productive interior of New York state not well-served by the canals (expensive, slow. unreliable, hard-to-maintain Chenango, Genessee and Seneca Lake canals -- yes they were romantic but not money makers like the Erie Canal)
-- the American west via the Great Lakes gateway at Dunkirk, and later by the all-rail line via Meadville
-- the American railroad industry: major technologic innovations especially in route location and grading in hilly terrain

The existing line is a living memorial and still a nice low-grade route for the most part.

Yes, the Erie was important when it was built. But it had a checkered history most of its life. Gould and Fisk really ran the company into the ground. The track was in horrible condition by the time they were ousted (or dead in Fisk's case). The financial structure was a mess - it didn't get the name "The Scarlett Woman of Wall Street" for nothing. While its competitors were making improvements to curvature and the hills and dales across Ohio and Indiana the Erie was paying for the conversion from six foot gauge to standard gauge. J.P. Morgan spent some time cleaning up the finances and making the Erie a paying proposition - mostly by tapping the anthracite in northeastern PA by buying control of the Erie & Wyoming Valley and the NYS&W. However he never anticipated coal would be a goner 35 years later. The Van Swerigans bought control with the promise of the Erie being the eastern terminal of their empire. Sadly the empire was a house of cards that came crashing down.

IMHO the only "great" Erie president was Underwood. Mostly the Erie bounced from bankruptcy to bankruptcy until the final one ended in Conrail.

...important to understand today and the future. The ERIE actually was conceived concurrent to the building of the Erie Canal but struck cross country to shorten the route going ot Dunkirk on Lake Erie. That all withstanding, the Erie became important because of it having a wide right of way because of initial 6 foot guage. After that, coal out of PA was as important as overhead traffic. The EL used the line for freight while the DL was relagated to what passenger traffic was left. Conrail knew the value of the route because of its clearences and shortness from the midwest and feared it because it would take away from both the PRR and NYC routes (For instance, United Parcel Service used the EL Chicago to North Jersey on schedules Conrail could not duplicate). Therefore CR abandoned west of Hornell in favor of Buffalo bottleneck and decreased the use of the Southern Tier line, especially east of Binghamton. NS continuted the disuse of the line using the Harrisburg-Buffalo line instead. Now, some of the traffic goes Buffalo to Binghamton to Scranton to Sunbury or Scranton to Allentown via Reading Northern to avoid using the Delaware Division east of Binghamton. NYSW uses the line to bring trains of garbage, wood products, and agricultureal products like corn syrup up and down the line plus some detour and overspill traffic from CSX via Syracuse. This all begs the question: does the line have a future? The answer is yes, especially in light of the fact that the Western NY RR has refurbished the line west of Hornell to Meadville. The need for the Delaware division has not gone away, it is merely asleep.

Just to nitpick- the Tier itself has a moderate amount of work- the end east of Bingo has most of the emptiness. One could argue west of Hornell too.

Tom H>

JBlaisdell wrote:Okay, to get back on topic (somewhat):

1) Conrail had little use for the Southern Tier- no on-line business.
2) NS has little use for the line- no on-line business, just occaisional run-throughs.
Passing off the Tier to a paper company is simply a cost-cutting measure for taxes, labor and maintenance.

Maybe this will give NYS&W a place to run their steamer.....?

Is there any thought on increased traffic from Montreal to Syracuse and eventually down the Tier?

...as the D&H line is being used extensively by the NS, CN, and CP and for this purpose. CSX does what they have to and seem content with their connections at Buffalo-Niagra and interchanges with CP, Guilford, and others in New England. But it would have to be CSX to take the initiative on finding value in the line. The idea of a Montreal-NY route via NYSW is romantic but not practical. Unless traffic overflow elsewhere warrents it, it probably won't happen.
As for comments concerning use of the Southern Tier Line overall, yes, traffic generation is light between Binghamton and Campbell Hall and somewhat light west of Hornell. Still room for short line service, thouugh, such as CNY and WNY are doing. Plus need for overhead overflow and emergency traffic. Always asked myself, though, if Buffalo is always plugged up, especially in winter, why not bypass it? I have my answer, but the operators have theirs and its different!

its not quite as simple as that..
you cant really say "the only reason the Erie built it"..
it WAS the Erie! the entire Erie..(originally)

thats like saying "the only reason the PRR was built was to ship goods between Pittsburg and Phildelphia"..
thats only a very small part of the whole story.

and it was much more than just Buffalo-NYC..
it was the entire Great Lakes industrial complex to the huge markets of the East Coast..not just New York City..
instead of "Buffalo to New York City" it was more like "the entire Western USA to the entire (industrial) Eastern USA."
(in the 1850's Chicago was the "west coast"!
the Erie was BIG! it was Huge, it was a major major very important American railroad..

I was referring to the Erie as originally conceived and built. Its sole purpose was to provide a year-round alternate to the seasonal Erie Canal. That is why the original charter required it to begin and end in NY and set the gage so wide as to prohibit interchange with other lines. NY even went so far as to require the RR to pay the canal for any lost revenues!

When the Erie Canal was built, Buffalo was a small town of about 750 people. It was actually cheaper for farmers in NY and Ohio to send their goods over the lakes to Canada or down the Ohio and Mississippi to New Orleans and NY felt it was losing too much in commerce. I don't know Buffalo's status when the Erie RR was built, but I doubt it was much until the big industrial development of the 1870s & 1880s. By then a larger RR network was in place. Iron could be brought in to Ohio and western NY cheaply by ship, coal and coke by rail from PA, and finished goods to the East by way of rail. The Erie RR benefited from Buffalo as much as Buffalo did from the RR, but that was some years after the RR was originally built. The Erie Canal and RR both built Buffalo.

Not only did they build Buffalo, but most of western NY (along with the other RRs), but Great Lakes shipping played a major role as well. Look at an old map- notice the network of lines in the major industrial areas. With all the raw materials & grain coming into Buffalo by ship, and going further east by rail, it was easy for a company to take a carload of ore here, a load of grain there, and make something of it. Once the St. Lawrence Seaway opened, a lot of raw materials that were transferred to rail for east coast ports now went all the way by ship.

One reason why the Erie had a hard time being solvent later was its route. Despite running on a diagonal across NY, its milage was actually longer than NY Central's and its grades steeper. E-L probably did so well for UPS because of the LACK of traffic on its rails- it had the capacity to run a hotshot express and desperately needed the revenue.

The Tier west of Bingo may be alive (if not all that well), but east it is dying. Susi-Q is only able to run its trains effectively because they exit at Campbell Hall and do not go all the way down the Tier east of Port Jervis. Otherwise it is easier to run Jersey traffic via PA. The commuter trains are why the Erie once controlled the NYS&W and the little M&NJ (then Middletown & Unionville)- coal drags were detoured around the congestion east of Middletown this way until the Graham Line was built.

West of Hornell, one could argue that the WNYP has been quite aggresive with its marketing strategy to land new customers.

Can the same be said of the Susie Q? Or is the disprportinately less to begin with than the WNYP had?

Does the Susie Q have a good track record of winning business back to rails that has been lost due to poor customer service in the same manner as WNYP?

Thoughts?

Brooks