When Maine Yankee was being disassembled it was not unheard of for 50+ car consists to be seen on the branch. Most of it was gondolas full of hazmat materials with the gondola covered. Search the NERail you should find some pictures.
CN9634 wrote:When Maine Yankee was being disassembled it was not unheard of for 50+ car consists to be seen on the branch. Most of it was gondolas full of hazmat materials with the gondola covered. Search the NERail you should find some pictures.Sure, that makes sense, but although each movement in of itself would have been "routine" I'm more impressed by the fact that an ongoing business, with no prospect of future shutdown is in fact able to take advantage of the service.
Here's another angle to consider. When this whole "shipments to Grimmels" got started all it looked like to me, and perhaps others as well, was that a local business on an isolated branchline had successfully prevailed upon PAR to provide them service under common carrier obligations. This was a big deal in many respects as GTI/GRS/PAR had really been trying to get away from an incremental branchline traffic generation model to something that roughly focused around the idea of getting major shippers to relocate close to one another. Part of this was based on very long ongoing litigation dating back into the 1990's between Grimmels and GTI/ST.
So on its face the "5 cars here three cars" there service seemed to be simply Grimmels getting from PAR what they had wanted all along.
Now comes along the prospect of an apparent significant increase in business by Grimmels which makes me wonder if something in the above model has changed. Specifically, whether or not PAR is now suddenly interested in generating incremental car traffic on its local branchlines again and is doing something either through changes to freight tarriffs or service improvements that is making rail attractive for Grimmels.
So the question remains modal shift, model shift or business increase?