Guilford wide-cab GP40 on Hampton Branch

RBP

Too bad that the track north of Kittery is abandoned, on the original "Eastern Route". If it wasn't, than this would be a great route for the Downeaster, instead of taking the "Freight Main" inland until reaching Wells/Kennebunk.

-Jay

Guilford sold the Mountain Division ROW to the state of NH. NH didn't seize the ROW. Guilford kept the ends of the Mt. Division Line to keep other competing freight railroads out. Guilford only does it to the lines that have access to other railroads like that of the Mountain Division Line. Guilford owning 1,000 ft or so of track on the Hampton line is for the soul fact that the MBTA owns the track in MA an can allow anyone else to operate freight on there tracks if they so please... so technically another freight railroad could snake there way up and Guilford wouldn't be able to stop it. So there for Guilford has kept a section of track to there own name to prevent such a case. If any freight comes back on the line after the re-opening of commuter service it will be handled by Guilford.

What ever happened to the proposed Maglev train test track that was going to run from Hampton to Seabrook? It was in the local press about 3 or 4 years ago.

rr_explorer wrote:What ever happened to the proposed Maglev train test track that was going to run from Hampton to Seabrook? It was in the local press about 3 or 4 years ago.

Maglev... nuclear power plant... wasn't that an episode of The Simpsons?

Here are some links about the Maglev project:

http://www.seacoastonline.com/2000news/9_10e.htm

http://www.seacoastonline.com/2000news/ ... h9_12c.htm

Guilford owning 1,000 ft or so of track on the Hampton line is for the soul fact that the MBTA owns the track in MA an can allow anyone else to operate freight on there tracks if they so please..
----------------------------------------------------------------

Don't think that's true. When the MBTA bought the commuter district from the B&M, the B&M retained all freight rights in perpetuity including dispatching the so-called "perimeter lines" (Fitchburg to NH State Line over
what is now the Freight Mainline).

So unless GRS agrees to a third party operator, it ain't gonna happen whether they own a 1000ft or whatever. Still, Big G knows how to confound things

D

rr_explorer wrote:Here are some links about the Maglev project:

http://www.seacoastonline.com/2000news/9_10e.htm

http://www.seacoastonline.com/2000news/ ... h9_12c.htm

Thanks for the links. Very interesting. I totally missed that 6 years ago!

True you do have a point but then there's got to be some reason they did it that way, it’s the only reason I can come up with. I know it holds true for why Guilford didn't sell all of the Mountain Division. I don't know maybe Guilford is playing Devils Advocate, maybe there just covering themselves if god for bid anything happens to the MBTA and the contracts and whatever else get thrown out the window. All I know is that the 1,000ft of Guilford own track won’t hurt the chances of commuter service being revived on the line; I don’t know why people think it would anyways. Where is this section of track located?

Yeah, where is this 1000ft of track? Is it the track between the Rte 1/101 interchange and Foss?

RBP

If anybody is still interested, I saw my first train in months pass by Hampton Airfield -- on a Saturday, no less. (I believe it was July 8.) It was one engine (I think the number was 318), and three hoppers down to Foss, with three hoppers back eastbound.

Lately, I have noticed quite a bit of rust on the tracks in Hampton, and was wondering, given Foss's recent difficulties, if that branch was heading for abandonment.

Nice to see there's still some life on the branch.

(BTW, I've asked this in other forums, but does anybody have any info on the fire along the Eastern Route years ago that was caused by a passing train, and that destroyed several airplanes tied down along the tracks at Hampton Airfield?)

don'tcha mean wide NOSE???

Wide nose would be a more technically-accurate way to describe them. The cab is the standard width, but the nose is wider than the noses on the older "standard" cabs.

I believe the "correct" designation, at least when CN first started spec'ing them on its units, was "safety cab." "Comfort cab" "Deluxe cab" and "Supercab" have also been cited as "correct" by some folks.

Safety cab - brings back memories of #393 on the GT...