Connecticut River Line (Pan Am)

The brush crews are working their way south. I ride my bike up Rt 5 nearly every day. They were getting near the Holyoke. Easthampton line couple days ago.

Rich

dowlingm wrote:Given the work train location it's a shame the town didn't offer to contribute to a power hookup to avoid the noise/nuisance of generators, no?

Seriously. Generating makes sense when you're out in the wilds: there's no hookup and nobody to complain about the noise. But in urban area, everyone's time would be better spent (particularly town officials) just *giving* electricity to the RR--cheaper than all the theatrics around the health department.

While the hard core NIMBY is never going to be happy, most of the public is going to side with whomever seems the most reasonable, and with small or *very small* gestures, that could/should be the railroad. There's got to be some kind of clever PR ju-jitsu that can be applied here. I'd say it'd go like this:

1) If someone will pay for the "town electrician" to make a "big" hookup at either a municipal office or a Chamber of Commerce member, be prepared to take a donation of electricity. Saves the RR the considerable extra cost of generating their own electricity. Heck, don't install a new meter (that's expensive and a big hassle), just find an existing metered commercial "host" and the RR could offer a flat $20/day (or something roughly in line with the grid costs), and cut one check for $140 and be done. But put the onus on the "host community" for providing the hookup (and it'll be there the next time they come to town)

2) Some kind of cheap/easy sound deadening, like:
- park a trailer or shipping container between the noise source and the residences
- erect old "cubicle walls" around the generator (even if mostly-ineffective, its a cheap way to look like you're trying)

The railroad spokeswoman says the crews aren't sleeping there... and two of the crew members say they ARE sleeping there.

Am I the only one who finds that a little odd?

I have no problem with them sleeping there; the denial just strikes me as strange.

Around 11-1pm a crew with a machine was dropping tie plates behind my condo here in Holyoke. Not sure, but I think he was moving north, as there were tie plates all along the tracks to the south of the "crossing" (which was an actual paved crossing until about 2-3 years ago), and the machine was up near the Mueller bridge.
Peace,
Jonathan

Here's a link to a set of 16 images that I took in Greenfield and Deerfield earlier today:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/26316537@ ... 205230277/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Lots of work happening out on the railroad now.

::

Thanks, Ben. I really like the photo with the McGinnis B&M paint scheme!

So much work for so little freight/passenger traffic. If only the PAS main line between Westminster and CP would get such attention!

MEC407 wrote:The railroad spokeswoman says the crews aren't sleeping there... and two of the crew members say they ARE sleeping there.

Am I the only one who finds that a little odd?

I have no problem with them sleeping there; the denial just strikes me as strange.

Honestly Cynthia Scarano has never seen a camp/work train before. She probably has no idea.

BenH wrote:Here's a link to a set of 16 images that I took in Greenfield and Deerfield earlier today:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/26316537@ ... 205230277/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Lots of work happening out on the railroad now.

::

Without taking away from the ST gangs, this is what happens when you have the right equipment, are given the time, and aren't pulled to do 5 different projects. These guys could have done Springfield to East Northfield in one construction season. 42 miles is nothing compared to what they do down south.

johnpbarlow wrote:So much work for so little freight/passenger traffic. If only the PAS main line between Westminster and CP would get such attention!

The plan is for four daily Greenfield-Springfield round trips after the sale to the state is finalized. The rolling stock is funded from $30 million in the big state bond bill, and the stations are being completed for the Vermonter anyway (Springfield Union Station is getting a separate renovation), so the only major logistical challenge would be a maintenance facility for the rolling stock.

I'm not sure if four round trips is a generic starter service, or if that's a PTC issue. Is the line getting PTC with the project?

No PTC. That would effectively bar PAS from the line, they would never go for it.

newpylong wrote:No PTC. That would effectively bar PAS from the line, they would never go for it.

It would be a non- cab signal brand of PTC like the wholly un-designed ACSES flavor the T is employing for its cabless northside commuter rail. Of which it would be the only commuter rail operator in the entire country to use this FrankenACSES adaptation, because every other commuter train from D.C. up to the Albany/Mass Pike dividing line is on cabs or to-be-cabbed installations that will be using the same ACSES PTC that's been bulletproof on the NEC for 13 years now. That alone makes the question kind of moot, because with the wireless spectrum issues all the other non-cab feight PTC's have had to deal with the T probably needs a deadline extension till 2020 (or more) to actually debug FrankenACSES into a functional system.


PAR's protesting of the need for PTC at all doesn't stop the installations in commuter rail territory...only raises the question of whether they're actually going to use it inside that territory (which of course basically cripples it for the commuter trains when they're intermixing with un-equipped freights). It's a whole other mess on the lines PAR owns like the Downeaster in NH and ME or whatever booby-trapped fine print they stuff into the Conn River sale to MassDOT to forbid any installation here or up to White River Jct. And since Congress hasn't even acted on the deadline extension question total paralysis means this dispute isn't going to be mediated by any authoritative party anytime soon. I would think Pan Am's playing a weak hand here throughout PAS territory because of the half-ownership by a real-deal Class I carrier. But the feds haven't even fleshed out the regs enough to have a basis for making that mediative decision, so the parties are likely to just keep staring each other down in stasis for the remainder of the decade. Nothing to see, nothing to do, nothing to debate until the feds make the first move finishing their own incomplete procedure-making.

The EGE wrote:

johnpbarlow wrote:So much work for so little freight/passenger traffic. If only the PAS main line between Westminster and CP would get such attention!

The plan is for four daily Greenfield-Springfield round trips after the sale to the state is finalized. The rolling stock is funded from $30 million in the big state bond bill, and the stations are being completed for the Vermonter anyway (Springfield Union Station is getting a separate renovation), so the only major logistical challenge would be a maintenance facility for the rolling stock.

From what I read in recent newspaper articles/op-ed pieces (see attached URLs), non-Vermonter, commuter rail service between Springfield and Greenfield is only at the discussion/proposal state amongst various local pols and the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission and is not a concrete plan at this point. Right now, Federal money is being spent to upgrade the Conn River line for the Vermonter's use. AFAIK, the Commonwealth has yet to commit $ to Springfield commuter rail service operations.

http://www.gazettenet.com/opinion/talkb ... vice-start
http://www.masslive.com/opinion/index.s ... eam_n.html

I have to chuckle at MassLive's editorial implication that the proposed commuter service will employ rehabbed Red and Orange Line equipment!

Caught EDBF heading thru CPF 385 yesterday. 306-310 and 23 cars. One NS rail gang was working CPF 385 south, another was tied down at East Deerfield...

CWR in at Elm st South Deerfield this afternoon. Quite the operation to observe