NS through trains over the WNYP

Does the WNYP have a direct NS connection on the west end of the track? Could NS conceivably run trains out of NJ or Binghamton to Chicago via this route?

See the map at http://www.wnyprr.com but I'm not sure I understand what you're asking.

PlayMania wrote:Does the WNYP have a direct NS connection on the west end of the track? Could NS conceivably run trains out of NJ or Binghamton to Chicago via this route?

yes, it does, and yes they could.

NS connects to the west end of the WNYP near Meadville.
NS could run trains from Binghamton to Hornell along their current southern tier route, then, instead of continuing up to Buffalo, they could run over the WNYP to Meadville, then connect back to NS trackage to head west.

although im not really sure if they would need to..it would just be another route between the east coast and Ohio.

It might be technically shorter than going up to Buffalo, but I dont know if they gain enough time to make it worthwile.
could be used as a "bypass" route though skirting to the south of Buffalo.

and..doesnt NS already do this anyway?
or do they not run through-trains along the entire WNYP?
Im not sure what parts of the WNYP NS is running on.

Map:

http://www.wnyprr.com/

(Otto's link picked up the comma)

and looking at NS maps, it looks like the NS line that heads west from (near) Meadville wanders somewhat randomly into Ohio..it doesnt appear to be a straight route heading to chicago.

I believe its the green NS route that ends near the "d" in Cleveland on this map:

http://jim-frizzell.com/2006-norfolk-so ... rn-map.jpg


Scot

Is there a connection to the Nickle Plate in Erie? It looks like there is on the NS map

and..doesnt NS already do this anyway?

Yes, from what I read online NS runs a few "as needed" coal trains via this route that everyone keeps talking about, which runs over the WNYP from Meadville to Hornell and then into Binghamton...

scottychaos wrote:and..doesnt NS already do this anyway?
or do they not run through-trains along the entire WNYP?
Im not sure what parts of the WNYP NS is running on.

NS does run detour trains on the WNYP if the former Pennsy mainline is blocked. A good example occurred last summer when a landside buried the NS east of Conway. NS ran a couple of eastbound trains on the former Erie from Meadville to Croxton.

Not a common practice, though, because of the congestion near Croxton (from NJT's commuter trains).

scottychaos wrote:and looking at NS maps, it looks like the NS line that heads west from (near) Meadville wanders somewhat randomly into Ohio..it doesnt appear to be a straight route heading to chicago.

IIRC, it's pieces of former Erie and PRR trackage stitched together by CR back in the '80s... the sections with key connections and/or enough local traffic to keep CR from ripping them out.

NS has trackage rights over the WNYP from Meadville to Hornell. Each month 30-40 NS unit trains use this route to reach utilities in New York's Southern Tier and a power plant at Bow, NH.

blabey wrote:NS has trackage rights over the WNYP from Meadville to Hornell. Each month 30-40 NS unit trains use this route to reach utilities in New York's Southern Tier and a power plant at Bow, NH.

Thanks Gene!

Could you please email me off list at your convience??
I want to try and make it up there this summer!


Steve

I have always thought that bypassing Buffalo was a good idea, due to congestion in and around Buffalo. With the continued upgrades in the WNYP tracks, it seems even more of a practicle route. Could a train go from Hornell to Corry, and interchange there, to go to Erie? Corry to Erie is a relatively short distance.

Greg

I don't mean to leap in ahead of Gene if he posts again.

There really isn't a list, per se, in the sense that they run when they appear. There are a number of symbols that cross the WNYP, and you might not see one of the symbols for two weeks, and then there's three of them in 36 hours.

As for Corry, there's no interchage track now that would allow a train to go from Erie to Hornell. The WNYP does interchange in Corry, but nothing on that large a scale.

Now, also understand that the trackage from Corry to Erie is owned by the G&W (they're headquartered where I live) and since they regularly go to Erie, I doubt you'll see a sale to the WNYP to run big trains across teh line. Now, I don't think it would be too hard to add a way to get from Erie to Hornell...but that's a whole other ball of wax.

David Becker

Oh, yeah! Hornell to Meadville is one of those lines CR saw fit not to want but did not want anyone else to have it. It gets around Buffalo congestion, sort of cirumnavigates eye of lake effects snow, is shorter than NYC route from the east coast, and, because it was Erie built, it has high and wide clearences not found anywhere else in the East. Not being a "main line" by cutting the Binghamton west route at Hornell meant CR was clear on Water Level and Keystone (NYC and PRR) lines. Cost of moving Pennsylvania coal north to Buffalo and back down to Hornell and Binghamton was over looked, thus WNY became a good idea to bring coal east from Olean. Then, when paper plant in Lock Haven closed, the Allegheny lost the traffic Lock Haven to Erie and closed down, the WNY track looked better and better as an east west bypass and thus leading to its current success and possible Buffalo by pass. Still waiting for a NJ to Meadville (via S.T. Line by NS or NYSW) train or two which will have to happen as CSX and NS lines get more congested. But with NS owning Hornell to Suffern and Croxton, no shortline will get it done. It will have to be a NS/CXT desperation move before being developed for what it can be.

I think that the Norfolk Southern or CSX will have to use these lines in the near future. It looks like their lines out of New Jersey are getting very congested and they will need to have another road to use shortly.

The old Erie was a great route back in the day, but it a lot like the old LV lines, it bypassed major cities. In the current age of railroading, you need to hit the major markets. The WNY&PA is a nice route for the NS coal trains, but it is not some mainline by any means. It is a single track line with a lot of curves that wouldn't fit in the modern day game of railroading where double track lines and good clearances are king. The ex PRR and the ex NYC are the 2 mainlines where the jack was put into, and you just have to live with that.

No you don't. Don't have to live with anything. If something can be done to make money, why not do it. Lakeshore, you are right that monies were put into the NYC and PRR routes. But the other point is that it was CR that did that at the expense of the Erie route because, the old mantra, they didn't want it but didn't want anyone else to have it. Thus they decimiated the line west of Hornell and downgraded the line east of Binghamton (and in fact would have downgraded the line from Buffalo to NJ if DH/CP weren't a tenant!). So what if it bypasses a lot of major metropolitan areas...the idea of using the line would be to do just that because of congestion at Pittsburgh and Buffalo yards (as well as along the mains). And when snow plugs Buffalo's lake shore, what a godsend this route could be for east west traffic. The fact is the route could be rededicated for long distance freight hauls if the market were determined and a marketing strategy instigated, i.e. need determined and cost effective service instituted. Nothing is cast in stone if someone has the need and the wherewithal to satisfy that need.

Nothing is cast in stone if someone has the need and the wherewithal to satisfy that need.

Now that big, bad Conrail is gone, the market will be free to direct the fate of this line. Time will tell. Maintain a secondary route "just in case?" Not a likely scenario these days. What's more likely is a continuing overhead agreement for the occasional re-route -- like the SuzyQ.