Railroad Forums 

  • NECR/P&W Executive Special

  • Topics relating to the operation of the P&W Railroad, which is a subsidiary of Genesee and Wyoming. Regional freight railroad based in Worcester and operating in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New York.
    Official Website
Topics relating to the operation of the P&W Railroad, which is a subsidiary of Genesee and Wyoming. Regional freight railroad based in Worcester and operating in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New York.
Official Website

Moderator: MEC407

 #1018648  by Cosmo
 
Ummm... no,... there IS NO "Moosup trackage" anymore, just a rail trail.
The HP&F ends in Plainfield, CT, on the West side of 395.
To get to Providence from there, they need to either go South to Amtrak then North, OR go North to Worcester then South over the P&W main.
 #1018872  by etna9726b
 
The X in Plainfield does not appear (per Bing maps) to have a connector on the west side to northbound P&W. Trains from Willimantic would have to proceed northeastbound through the X, then reverse through an existing connector on the eastside, in order to get on P&W.
(note: there does appear to be a long runout track on the old HP&F that could hold a decent length train).

Is Bing maps out of date, are there plans to install a connecting track there ?
 #1018892  by Cosmo
 
etna9726b wrote:The X in Plainfield does not appear (per Bing maps) to have a connector on the west side to northbound P&W. Trains from Willimantic would have to proceed northeastbound through the X, then reverse through an existing connector on the eastside, in order to get on P&W.
(note: there does appear to be a long runout track on the old HP&F that could hold a decent length train).

Is Bing maps out of date, are there plans to install a connecting track there ?
The diamond ("X") at Plainfield was removed 2 or 3 years ago. The track that runs up the old HP&F aways is there to serve a sand & gravel pit on the line.
 #1037243  by KEN PATRICK
 
My limited rail experience yields maintenance costs of $.35-$.50 per car per mile. So if a 25% uptick is true, then $.63 x 30 miles is $18.90 x 2 or $37.80 per car versus my suggested $100x2. Speed & pricing? How much of an increase when all railroads stuggle to better 20mph? My disbelief at the proposed routing arises from the additional 100+ miles- 10 hours/200 miles on the equipment. If you use $800/hr for GP power, a 60 car train @263 or 1581 tons and 5 hp/ton or about 8000hp ( 2 gp's), your power costs alone are $133 per car in and probably out since your baseline of 2 gp's would not change. Add in maintenance of $126 per car , your spending $392/car versus $200 plus pwrr"s ($1600 x 4hr)+ (60 x $.63)/60= $107 or $307/car. $85/car x 60 x 5 = $25,500 per week . $1.3 mil/year. I respect all the info in this forum but nothing stated can offset the additional costs. I remain convinced this is a negotiating tool for cn versus csxt. It will not survive the process. What am i missing? Ken Patrickken patrickKEN PATRICK

Posts: 163
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:08 pm
Location: mashpee, ma
E-mail KEN PATRICK why the second train? i posted the above on pan am millers falls. ( told you need 3gp's)