• Trains on CSX St. Lawrence Sub (CR's Montreal Secondary)

  • Pertaining to all railroading subjects, past and present, in New York State.
Pertaining to all railroading subjects, past and present, in New York State.

Moderator: Otto Vondrak

  by K4Pacific
 
With the impending new intermodal yard in Sallebery...Quebec will the Secondary become more fluent with intermodal activity or would the intermodals run CP? Thoughts? Can the secondary handle it?
  by charlie6017
 
I find this pretty interesting because CSX is just beginning to get parts of this line back up to
40 mph speeds and that the line is dark territory. Then again I remember Roadster saying this
run can be made from DeWitt to Massena without outlawing at the 40 mph speeds.

Charlie
  by joha107
 
Any container traffic handled by the terminal in Valleyfield should be going via DeWitt up/down the St. Lawrence Sub, CP and CN have their own facilities in the Montreal area. Since Q152/Q153 began running DeWitt to Beauharnois this summer, traffic has moved pretty smoothly with occasional outlaws, but for the most part, trains have been able to make the full Syracuse to Massena run without needing a relief crew. This has been helped recently by speed increase to 40 mph between Gouverneur and Potsdam, now only the Pulaski to Gouverneur segment remains with a 25 mph speed limit, and CSX should be able to bring at least part of this up to 40 in the next couple years before the Valleyfield terminal opens in 2015. Trains have been running pretty much on schedule the last couple months which makes railfanning pretty easy since everything runs at roughly the same time day after day.

Based on the numbers CSX has provided for the amount of containers that will be handled by the new terminal, you're probably only looking at a maximum of one extra pair of trains per day, so six trains a day versus the current four a day. As long as train lengths matched siding lengths and everything was scheduled properly, it wouldn't be too difficult to run that much traffic, I believe there were times during Conrail when there were six trains a day, so it can be done. If you believe the current rumor mill, CSX may be adding CTC to this line anyway, if traffic levels justify it, which will remove a lot of the delays with meets and such.

I'm more curious to know what the $14 million in improvements to Massena will be, mentioned in the article below, probably more siding space since Massena is pretty filled up with the tri-weekly ALCOA unit ore trains.

http://www.montrealgazette.com/business ... story.html
Last edited by joha107 on Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
  by RussNelson
 
joha107 wrote:If you believe the current rumor mill, CSX may be adding CTC to this line anyway,
I saw some S&C guys working on the crossing at Sisson. They were in there with a directional digger, putting a conduit under the road. I asked them what the deal was, and they said that they were adding signalling to the switch that goes down to Unionville. A data point. Make of it what you will.
  by Leo_Ames
 
Could it have something to do with implimenting PTC? There's a decent bit of chemical traffic on this line including some that goes to the paper mill on that siding.
  by lvrr325
 
Line is currently unsignalled above CP "W" -

I will note while I haven't always paid attention to the trains, it seems like it's been very busy lately.
  by K4Pacific
 
"Trains serving the terminal will connect through CSX's intermodal hub in North Baltimore, Ohio. The new terminal, which is expected to handle up to 100,000 containers annually, will expand the Class I's intermodal presence in the greater Montreal and Quebec region, CSX officials said in a prepared statement." Running the old ST. Lawrence & Adirondack according to Progressive Railroading. This must be da place.
  by tree68
 
That much more traffic to watch, anyhow.

I've been by the new facility at North Baltimore (whilst visiting Deshler). It's impressive.
  by lvrr325
 
I wonder if this means they'll come off at CP291 and go directly west via the west leg of the wye? Right now that's mostly used for turning locomotives and cars (and may still be used to turn one Amtrak train that terminates at Syracuse).
  by Leo_Ames
 
lvrr325 wrote: I will note while I haven't always paid attention to the trains, it seems like it's been very busy lately.
It seems busier than 4 trains a day. It's not terribly uncommon for me to hear four trains just in the span of about three hours. Even if what I'm noticing includes a local going to somewhere like Canton and then hearing them on return, it seems busier than that.

They seemed to be doing about four a day back then it was all mixed traffic, long trains, and no or few double stacks. Service seems to me more frequent and shorter these days thanks I'm assuming to the intermodal traffic instead of holding traffic to run longer trains.
  by joha107
 
Current traffic and times are as followed, Q621 and Q620 run daily, Q621 departs DeWitt approx 1300-1400, Q620 departs Massena approx 2100-2200, Q152 and Q153 run six days a week with Saturday being the off day I think for both, Q152 departs DeWitt approx 00700-0800, Q153 departs Massena approx 0100-0200. Alcoa unit ore train seem to be running pretty consistently at three times a week, though no specific pattern on which days it operates. Northbound loaded K531 and K533 have routinely been departing DeWitt just before or after Q621 and tie down in Watertown, then generally run north to Massena the following morning in front of Q152. Space in Massena is limited so southbound empties K532 and K534 run as soon as ready, typically midday or afternoon departure from Massena, tie down in Watertown and run to DeWitt when a crew is ready. This works out to be about 4-5 trains a day most days of the week, most of these trains are shootable in daylight somewhere on the line, except Q620 which is completely nocturnal. North of Massena B798 has been taking Q621 north in the morning and bringing Q620 back in the afternoon, I'm not sure what times Q152 and Q153 operate north of Massena, probably overnight.

Traffic when I started photographing this line in 2002 was at 3-4 trains a day (Q621 and Q620 daily, Q622 Sat and Mon-Thur and Q623 Mon-Fri), this lasted until 2008 when traffic dropped to two trains a day after the recession. You'd probably have to go back to Conrail to find a busier time period in terms of number of road trains. That said, train lengths are much shorter, the K trains are between 40-65 cars, Q152/Q153 rarely exceed 50 cars, Q620/Q621 can break 100 cars probably once or twice a week, but often they can be under 50 cars. Obviously this will change when Valleyfield opens for business and their will be some changes to what freight moves on what trains and how many.

Any future stack service on this line will probably go through DeWitt and won't operate as a dedicated train to and from any one terminal. The current stacks coming south on Q153 go to DeWitt, than depart on three different trains to either Philadelphia, New Jersey or Chicago, inbound stacks going north on Q152 come on two different trains one from Philly and one from NJ (This information can be publicly seen on CSX's website on their shipCSX site under intemodal schedules).

The CTC rumor I saw elsewhere, it could be that somebody misinterpreted and all the signaling work is for PTC, either way one or both is coming in the next two years unless the deadline for PTC implementation is extended.
  by K4Pacific
 
“One of our problems with promoting rail service (near the industrial park) is because the rail car price is so high,” Mr. Pease said. “If the CSX project reduces the cost of shipping, it may increase the number of rail cars and increase competition at the industrial park.” From within above article. Who's going to enrich his ideologue of rail car pricing?
  by KEN PATRICK
 
k4pacific et al. Since CSXT follows a "what-the-traffic-will-bear' pricing theory, the investment will not impact pricing. What Mr. Pease needs are trucking alternatives. Then CSXT pricing will reflect what unknowledgeable pricing people at CSXT think is the 'market price'. Costs are never the determinant in pricing by railroads. Perhaps pricing based somewhat on fear of trucking might close the gap. If not, then get a friendly trucker to quote below-cost prices. Ken Patrick
  • 1
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 148