CSX Acquisition of Pan Am Railways

NYC27 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 12:47 pm I think JD Lang is on the right track, ending through service on the Fitchburg and running PAS/NS traffic on the B&A is a definite possibility.

But this plan ignores the fact that the Commonwealth of Mass seems interested in buying the B&A for their East-West Passenger Rail Plan. This would be big bucks for CSX and is probably a big part of this puzzle.

J.D. Lang wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 12:54 pm Yes Mr. Norman I meant the Alfred Smith bridge, my bad.

Fear not, Mr. Lang

I had for the longest of time, thought it was the Alfred Emanuel Smith Bridge, a New York Governor, who unsuccessfully ran against Herbert Hoover during '28. Principal reason history has cited for his loss was that he was Roman Catholic, and so the opposition said "may as well make the Pope president".

Well, so glad we as a society dispelled that nonsense. First with JFK and now Joe.

disclaimer: author is Episcopalian, if anything.

The speculation here is pretty interesting and creative, but let's all consider that this supposed upending of the two primary New England rail gateways is being driven by a report that says the NS filing "...in conjunction with other going-on (sic),...presents solid ground for these... presumptions:... 2) That the PAS Patriot corridor will become the primary freight corridor... shared by NS and CSX..."

The filing says nothing to that end, so what are all these "other going-on (sic)"? What is the actual condition of the Castleton Bridge?

newpylong wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 1:46 pm There are no passenger trains beyond Wachusett, so no PTC required.

There are 5-10 MGTs on this line, so it is in the FRA's authority to force PTC on it if there is a Class I operator since it was handling TIH in 2008. Again that is open to interpretation. There are plenty of places without passenger trains that are getting PTC.

I am well aware of territories getting PTC without passenger trains as I ran trains over them. But I'm speaking of only the FML west of Wachusett. I guess the exemption could be revoked with a new owner, if a Class I. They may choose to install it regardless so they do not need to enable/disable it enroute, etc.

bostontrainguy wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 1:47 pm

NYC27 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 12:47 pm I think JD Lang is on the right track, ending through service on the Fitchburg and running PAS/NS traffic on the B&A is a definite possibility.

But this plan ignores the fact that the Commonwealth of Mass seems interested in buying the B&A for their East-West Passenger Rail Plan. This would be big bucks for CSX and is probably a big part of this puzzle.

Exactly. The possible existence of government $ may be a factor pushing in favor of the B&M solution vs B&A. Government money has a way of distorting business decisions

Don't forget that Massachusetts paid CSX $100 MILLION DOLLARS eight years ago to purchase the line to Worcester plus a few other lines in eastern Mass. There is a history here.

Interesting that the market analyst reaction one of confusion ... I don't think this makes any more sense to the business press than it does to us ... Access to Saint John, NB seems to be the only rationale they can hang their hat on ...

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

It's not at all clear to me where states will get money to fund any of this potential private sector RR re-alignment during the pandemic. For example, the MBTA is recommending cutting back on commuter rail service to meet its operating budget given an 85% - 90% reduction in patronage and I'm guessing many capital expense expansion projects will be slowed.

Q: if the Castleton bridge is showing its 100+ year old age and requires replacement a la NS Portage trestle over Letchworth Gorge (at a cost of ~ $75M), what's the state of good repair status on the B&M bridge at Mechanicville that was constructed in 1914?

If I recall correctly, that bridge got some TLC as part of the initial NS-funded Pan Am Southern rehab.

The Portageville bridge was built in 1875 which makes the Castleton bridge seem new. There are plenty of 100+ year old mainline bridges across the US that are in fine condition. It appears to me that if anything, unlike the spindly Portageville bridge, the Castleton bridge was overbuilt so I wouldn’t assume that it’s ready to crumble into the Hudson anytime soon.

Right, isn't the story that the AE Smith Bridge was built strong enough to quadruple track it in the future? That could be railfan BS, but it was rated for 315K. Clearly there is something going on there but I think it has been greatly exaggerated. https://www.bergmannpc.com/project/csx-castleton-bridge

The bad bridges on the PAS are the Conn River Bridge at Deerfield which is under a phased repair (may be done?) and Bardwell's Ferry, which they had to slow to 10 mph for trains with 286K cars. The Hudson Bridge has pretty much been repaired and redecked.

If you were CSX, what would your demands be? We can maybe speculate that the grand plan is for the entire Pan Am/Pan Am South system to become a new joint venture between CSX and NS, but at the very least let's speculate that CSX wants to move to the northern route through Massachusetts and the Commonwealth wants to purchase the B&A for their East-West Rail Project.

Besides lots of money, what would your demands as CSX be? What would you need from the State to make this plan work for you? I can think of the following items that I would ask the State to help with:

Double Stack clearance for the entire PAR/PAS route through Massachusetts including the Hoosac Tunnel.
Double Stack clearance for the Worcester - Ayer main line.
Reactivation of the short gap at the north end of the Fitchburg - Framingham line.
Rebuilding of the Yard 8 loop track through the inner belt area in Somerville (already in the GLX plan some say).
Reconnection of the Charlestown Wharf/Moran branch through FX with OWL diamonds (a wild card but why not at least try so you can give a little?).

Any other ideas?

gokeefe wrote: ↑Thu Nov 12, 2020 6:26 pm ... Access to Saint John, NB seems to be the only rationale they can hang their hat on ...

Mr. O'Keefe, much to the chagrin of the US East Coast port operators, either of these two Atlantic Province ports represent one to three days less sailing time, before the vessel's cargo is transloaded to land transportation (rail or highway). They are ice free year round, and could be competitive with better access to land transportation.

Halifax has FRA (equivalent) Class 4 in that there is (or until recently) a passenger train over such, and the route is direct to the markets.

Saint John has minimal rail, and for that matter highway, access. That two US Class I's seek access to Maine, for what reason beyond the potential of maritime traffic, escapes many an observer. But many, many, investor $$$, as well as some Loonies from Irving, will be needed to get the Maine Central and those two Irving Short Lines, up to FRA Class 4 to expediently handle high value traffic (Bennies, Bimmers, and Containers loaded with something more than garbage) to the US Midwest or South someone in Saint John has told them can come their way.

bostontrainguy wrote: ↑Fri Nov 13, 2020 9:12 am Any other ideas?

Mr. Train Guy, regarding your immediate, Worcester-Ayer as in the B&M line that was "route of the State of Maine"?

I guess what I'm at a loss to understand is if the master plan is to route all traffic over the B&A, why need anyone spend $$$ to upgrade the B&M/PAS to Class 3 or 4 and dig out Hoosac?

That's $$$$ for which Chessie's and/or Topper's shareholders will want "bang".