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

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

Moderator: Otto Vondrak

lvrr325
Posts: 4623
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: New York State

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

Post by lvrr325 » Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:50 am

I guess the only question I have is why only to Woodard and not right down to CP 291? effectively all trains operating on this portion will be CN trains.

I'm going to presume it has something to do with this section being signaled where the rest is not, control of it remains with the CSX dispatcher, no changes are needed.

Now the next question is what of the B'ville Sub? Some talk was that most didn't want it without the lines CN got. However Finger Lakes or NYS&W would be a natural for it.

Forgot to mention that last.. Friday I think another military train came down. Be interesting to see how they work this, if the power runs through they could change crews at 291 as has been done in the past rather than at Belle Isle.

tree68
Posts: 946
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:03 pm

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

Post by tree68 » Thu Oct 17, 2019 7:41 am

lvrr325 wrote:
Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:50 am
I guess the only question I have is why only to Woodard and not right down to CP 291? effectively all trains operating on this portion will be CN trains.
I would opine it might have something to do with that little restriction against any connections with FL or NYS&W.

Either that or they want to keep trains north of Woodard until CSX can be sure to get them cleanly through CP291 and into one of the two yards.
Tree

Everyone Goes Home - Safety Begins With Me
Opinions are my own. No Expiration Date

UP4141
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 9:09 pm

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

Post by UP4141 » Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:28 pm

Hello all, Here is a what if: could C.N. one day rehabilitate the right of way between Richland and Rome or the tracks
from Lowville to Lyons falls to connect to the NYS&W. I read somewhere that Railroad right of ways are forever right of ways.

TrainDetainer
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2016 5:37 pm

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

Post by TrainDetainer » Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:10 pm

I read somewhere that Railroad right of ways are forever right of ways.
You want to keep your rubber boots on when you wade through stuff like that. Will keep you from getting polluted with BS. Might be nice if it were true sometimes though.

tree68
Posts: 946
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:03 pm

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

Post by tree68 » Fri Oct 18, 2019 8:15 pm

UP4141 wrote:
Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:28 pm
Hello all, Here is a what if: could C.N. one day rehabilitate the right of way between Richland and Rome or the tracks
from Lowville to Lyons falls to connect to the NYS&W. I read somewhere that Railroad right of ways are forever right of ways.
It all depends on how the railroad acquired the property in the first place.

Sometimes, when the tracks come up, the property reverts to the landowner (or their successor) who granted the railroad access in the first place

If the railroad acquired the ROW "fee simple," it means they bought it outright. Odds are if that was the case, they sold the property to adjacent landowners, probably at a bargain rate.

There are plenty of other permutations. But the short answer is no - RR ROWs are not forever.

As for restoring Lyons Falls - Lowville, there's very little reason to do so. That's why there was no traffic Carthage-Lowville, although that line is now isolated due to a tipped bridge pylon in the Black River. There's little reason to restore Rome - Richland, either.
Tree

Everyone Goes Home - Safety Begins With Me
Opinions are my own. No Expiration Date

lvrr325
Posts: 4623
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: New York State

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

Post by lvrr325 » Mon Oct 21, 2019 4:52 am

If CN wanted a NYS&W connection it would be infinitely cheaper to buy some additional trackage rights or otherwise negotiate with CSX. Unless there's been a change in what NYS&W is allowed to do, both now have overlapping rights now between CP-296 and CP-285 or thereabouts. There's no reason to restore track anywhere, save perhaps adding a crossover if trains are to come south and enter the NYS&W through the hand throw at 292.7.

Which is also why preventing that from happening as a factor in what CN gets makes no sense. Their trains likely with their crews will already be running through either to Dewitt or Belle Isle for interchange to CSX.

Further, holding trains out at Woodard, at least at the station, would block crossings to the north. In the past trains have occasionally been held at CP-291 for crew changes if Dewitt was busy or the crew was short on time, although CSX doesn't seem to have done this much.

And beyond that, the line below Richland has been dispersed, including structures built on it and bridges removed, I believe it's been gone over 50 years. Lowville to Lyons Falls has similar issues. It would cost untold billions to try to bring them back.

johnpbarlow
Posts: 2135
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:50 pm

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

Post by johnpbarlow » Mon Oct 21, 2019 5:23 am

Re: CN getting interchange rights with NYS&W at Syracuse, what would be the business value? Sure, CN would conceivably get intermodal access to New Jersey via NYS&W's track (eg, Little Ferry intermodal yard) but more likely than not wouldn't get carload interchange with NS/CSX Conrail Shared Access there as I'm guessing NS will require interchange at Niagara Falls or Rouses Pt via existing services while likewise CSX would require interchange at Dewitt Yard and Buffalo. I don't think NS and CSX want to short-haul themselves on NJ-bound or originating business.

CP ran to Oak Island NJ from Toronto and Montreal decades back and low traffic levels couldn't sustain their service as CP only had minor direct access to NJ area customers via transload. And CP had similar access to NYC with the same result.

But I would be happy to be wrong about this...

In closing, here is CN's reason for acquiring the Montreal-Syracuse line as stated in their STB filing - it's primarily a defensive motivation because CN understands that CSX will sell the line to somebody:
The CN System is seeking to acquire the Massena Lines to preserve its direct connection and gateway with CSX and extend the CN System’s length of haul. In effect, the Transaction will result in moving the CN System-CSX interchange from Huntingdon, Quebec to Woodard, NY. More than 45% of the current carload traffic on the Massena Lines is overhead traffic exchanged between the CN System and CSX, for which the
Massena Lines provide a direct connection and gateway. If the acquirer of the Massena Lines were a rail carrier outside of the CN System, then an additional railroad would operate as a bridge carrier between the CN System and CSX, adding another interchange and requiring coordination with and participation of a third carrier. This would reduce operating efficiency, increase costs, and increase transit times to the detriment of existing interline customers of the CN System and of CSX that move overhead traffic over the U.S. Massena Lines. If the CN System were to use an alternative gateway for current overhead traffic now moving over the U.S. Massena Lines, it would likely involve a longer, less efficient route,with higher transit times and costs over the next-closest gateway between the CN System and CSX for that movement. This would not be beneficial for rail customers.
There's little mention, if any, of the possibilities of overhead traffic growth.

lvrr325
Posts: 4623
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: New York State

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

Post by lvrr325 » Wed Oct 23, 2019 6:16 am

Worth noting that CSX and NS have ownership of NYS&W, in fact NYS&W was thought to be a potential candidate to take over these lines per some rumors.

if CN became unsatisfied with CSX they could conceivably find a way to send traffic to Binghamton and then on via either NS or NYS&W. That would be the only advantage to a connection there. But CSX would probably have to drop the ball pretty badly since any NYC traffic already would go to the same place.

lvrr325
Posts: 4623
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: New York State

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

Post by lvrr325 » Thu Nov 14, 2019 6:10 am

FWIW, QM 3.0 is the point where ownership will change. Probably calling this Liverpool or Salina would be more accurate than Woodard. That's just a mile or so from QC 291, marked with a big concrete NYC milepost. (the miles on this line reflect the RW&O starting in downtown Syracuse, about two miles southeast of it's current end).

The point is far enough south to give CN all existing and potential customers on the line, but still gives CSX full control of where the trains go once they reach the main line.

tree68
Posts: 946
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:03 pm

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

Post by tree68 » Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:08 am

lvrr325 wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2019 6:10 am
FWIW, QM 3.0 is the point where ownership will change. Probably calling this Liverpool or Salina would be more accurate than Woodard. That's just a mile or so from QC 291, marked with a big concrete NYC milepost. (the miles on this line reflect the RW&O starting in downtown Syracuse, about two miles southeast of it's current end).
I could be wrong, but I believe the original railroad was the Syracuse & Northern, so that would be their MPs, unless RW&O renumbered.
Tree

Everyone Goes Home - Safety Begins With Me
Opinions are my own. No Expiration Date

lvrr325
Posts: 4623
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: New York State

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

Post by lvrr325 » Thu Nov 14, 2019 1:40 pm

Well, whoever built it, the mileposts start downtown, possibly from what would be the NYC station on Washington St. given the distance.

lvrr325
Posts: 4623
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: New York State

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

Post by lvrr325 » Thu Nov 28, 2019 1:19 pm

Well, the maintainer didn't get the day off, hirail truck went down about 1:00.

lvrr325
Posts: 4623
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: New York State

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

Post by lvrr325 » Fri Nov 29, 2019 9:47 pm

Found out why as a northbound went up later in the evening, a fairly long one.

tree68
Posts: 946
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:03 pm

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

Post by tree68 » Mon Dec 02, 2019 8:37 am

The Virtual Railfan webcam at Pulaski is presently available free on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOIL9y7D-7A

Normally this cam is subscription-only, but because one of the weather outfits is sponsoring it, you'll likely see it up on YT any time there is serious snow expected in Pulaski (ie, much of the winter).
Tree

Everyone Goes Home - Safety Begins With Me
Opinions are my own. No Expiration Date

User avatar
charlie6017
Posts: 3133
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 9:42 pm
Location: Rochester, New York

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

Post by charlie6017 » Mon Dec 02, 2019 3:04 pm

tree68 wrote:
Mon Dec 02, 2019 8:37 am
The Virtual Railfan webcam at Pulaski is presently available free on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOIL9y7D-7A

Normally this cam is subscription-only, but because one of the weather outfits is sponsoring it, you'll likely see it up on YT any time there is serious snow expected in Pulaski (ie, much of the winter).
Thanks for that heads-up! :-D
~Charlie Ricker

Return to “New York State Railfan”