by Gilbert B Norman
CPF363 wrote:CSX might decide to sell a part of the system instead of going for an outright merger with CP acquiring the Water Level Route from Weehawken, N.J. through Selkirk to Greenwich, Ohio, the old PRR Crestline to Chicago line and the B&A. An agreement to jointly own the Big Four between Greenwich and Crestline would also be a part of the arrangement linking the two segments together. CSX would route cars bound for New York via its line through Pittsburgh, Baltimore and Philadelphia (Q388). The sale would get CSX out of the highly taxed State of New York and give CP access to the New York market at the same time. Could be a win-win for CSX in the end with them getting hefty price for the whole line and still remain in the major eastern market places at the same time.It is difficult to envision Yäger wanting to part company with likely the most efficient piece of railroad - the NYC/CR/CSX Water Level Route - in the Northeast and routing all CSX traffic via the B&O. If there is any foundation to the Railway Age report noted over at the Hyndman topic, suggesting that Yäger's idea of precision railroading means relying on all too often "the other guy's" brake shoes (private owner ---X cars) rather than his Diesel fuel for dynamic braking, he is fast becoming another Eddie Burkhardt. Exposure to more of Hyndman would be "doubled in Spades".
Now possibly what Yäger has in mind for the NYC is to have passenger agencies come begging at his feet for the opportunity to purchase the second main track, resulting in an operation like that prevalent Salt Lake-Ogden between the UP and Utah Transportation Frontrunner. With ROW sufficient for four tracks from NYC days, the Agency (Amtrak, NYSDOT, NYMTA; whoever) would have room to build what passing sidings were needed. Since "precision railroading" does not seem to mean "swift railroading", he could let his track be regraded as Class 4, putting the wampum in his pocket from now excess maintenance.