Connecticut River Line (Pan Am)

I wonder if they will undercut or just rip it up and relay it from the ground up.

Anyone know why an empty rail train was sitting in Bernardston on sat/sun? 340 was idling behind the police station facing south. I first thought they just threw the train up onto the conn river to get it out of the way for a bit, but Bernardston seems a bit far for temporary storage, and of course blocks the one customer (the feed mill) on the line...

Empty NECR rail train?

Hmm, would it take the conn river instead of the millers interchange? It was odd to see MEC 340 on the point of an empty rail train on absolutely deplorable tracks... My father told me he saw the tail of the train from rt 5 on Saturday, at least I'm not hallucinating.

I understand that NS is agressively seeking business along the rebuilt Patriot Corridor of "Pan Am Southern". If the powers that be ever get around to actually rebuilding this line instead of having meeting after meeting and, study after study concerning what has already been approved and funded for , it makes sense that NS would do the same for the Conn River. 10 MPH doesn't work for companies who do J.I.T. business as is the case in most modern operations. If and when they move, things could get interesting.

New Haven 1 wrote:I understand that NS is agressively seeking business along the rebuilt Patriot Corridor of "Pan Am Southern". If the powers that be ever get around to actually rebuilding this line instead of having meeting after meeting and, study after study concerning what has already been approved and funded for , it makes sense that NS would do the same for the Conn River. 10 MPH doesn't work for companies who do J.I.T. business as is the case in most modern operations. If and when they move, things could get interesting.

What's left to study? Seems pretty damn "shovel ready." And way back in the day, even most branch lines were faster than 10mph.

New Haven 1 wrote:I understand that NS is agressively seeking business along the rebuilt Patriot Corridor of "Pan Am Southern". If the powers that be ever get around to actually rebuilding this line instead of having meeting after meeting and, study after study concerning what has already been approved and funded for , it makes sense that NS would do the same for the Conn River. 10 MPH doesn't work for companies who do J.I.T. business as is the case in most modern operations. If and when they move, things could get interesting.

I'm pretty sure it had more to do with funding than studies. Now that they have the funding I am sure they are moving into the material aquisition phase.

Looks like they have started construction of the new Greenfield station. Drove by today, although it was dark one could clearly see work has begun. (Fenced in, heavy machinery on site)

atholrail wrote:Looks like they have started construction of the new Greenfield station. Drove by today, although it was dark one could clearly see work has begun. (Fenced in, heavy machinery on site)

Work has slowly been dragging on for months. I think they are trying to drill to the center of the earth for foundation peers. Typical state has more money then brains. The whole deal really makes me wonder if anybody regrets tearing down the original and beautiful train station located 1000' away 35 years ago.

ON a side note when it the actual rebuilding of the rail supposed to start ? I can't wait to see the nimby outcry when the line goes from a once weekly train at 5mph to twice daily vermonter at 90MPH. I always see people parked on the tracks at Damon Rd in Northampton.

It probably will be 79 MPH / FRA Class 4 track. 80 or higher you need cab signalling and I don't see them doing that but you never know.

newpylong wrote:It probably will be 79 MPH / FRA Class 4 track. 80 or higher you need cab signalling and I don't see them doing that but you never know.

I believe the NECR mainline is central-controlled wayside. I haven't seen any info on what the upgrades plan to do, other than "signal improvements" are planned from White River Jct. to St. Albans to up the speed from 59 MPH to 79 MPH and eliminate the delays caused by frequent faults in the existing signals. As for the Conn. River Line, I can't see all those Fed dollars going into a brand new wayside installation. That would be a horrible waste given the Fed requirements for installing PTC over the next decade. Especially since the existing route already runs on continuous cab signaling through Connecticut up to Springfield and any future CSX-Pan Am Southern interchanging via this new connection would benefit greatly from cabs because CSX already has 'em continuously from Selkirk to Framingham.

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote: I believe the NECR mainline is central-controlled wayside.

The NEC north of White River Junction is unsignaled. South of that point, the Conn River has the old B&M CTC.

TomNelligan wrote:

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote: I believe the NECR mainline is central-controlled wayside.

The NEC north of White River Junction is unsignaled. South of that point, the Conn River has the old B&M CTC.

Then I can't see why the whole thing wouldn't be cabbed if the heavy-rehab portion of the line is getting replacement signals and the NECR portion of the line is getting first-time signals. If they're stringing fresh fiber and conduits anyway, and replacing all track with CWR anyway, it's not that much additional expense to wire track circuits as part of the same construction project.

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:

newpylong wrote:It probably will be 79 MPH / FRA Class 4 track. 80 or higher you need cab signalling and I don't see them doing that but you never know.

I believe the NECR mainline is central-controlled wayside. I haven't seen any info on what the upgrades plan to do, other than "signal improvements" are planned from White River Jct. to St. Albans to up the speed from 59 MPH to 79 MPH and eliminate the delays caused by frequent faults in the existing signals. As for the Conn. River Line, I can't see all those Fed dollars going into a brand new wayside installation. That would be a horrible waste given the Fed requirements for installing PTC over the next decade. Especially since the existing route already runs on continuous cab signaling through Connecticut up to Springfield and any future CSX-Pan Am Southern interchanging via this new connection would benefit greatly from cabs because CSX already has 'em continuously from Selkirk to Framingham.

I can guarantee you Pan Am will not allow the line to be cab signalled as well - unless they are getting some of the funds themselves to purchase cab signal boxes. Everytime they ran a local or coal train down there they would need to find a cab signalled leader. It just wouldn't fly...

newpylong wrote:I can guarantee you Pan Am will not allow the line to be cab signalled as well - unless they are getting some of the funds themselves to purchase cab signal boxes. Everytime they ran a local or coal train down there they would need to find a cab signalled leader. It just wouldn't fly...

Don't forget Pan-Am already has cab signal-equipped locomotives - required to operate on Amtrak's Springfield Line in order to reach their isolated track from Berlin to Waterbury CT. I believe some of the "MEC" fleet is cab signal-equipped. And those trains run from East Deerfield down to CT. So only a couple more locos would need to have cab signals in order to supply power for the Mt Tom coal trains.

Never say never with Pan-Am. You just never know........