• CSX to acquire Pan Am Railways

  • Guilford Rail System changed its name to Pan Am Railways in 2006. Discussion relating to the current operations of the Boston & Maine, the Maine Central, and the Springfield Terminal railroads (as well as the Delaware & Hudson while it was under Guilford control until 1988). Official site can be found here: PANAMRAILWAYS.COM.
Guilford Rail System changed its name to Pan Am Railways in 2006. Discussion relating to the current operations of the Boston & Maine, the Maine Central, and the Springfield Terminal railroads (as well as the Delaware & Hudson while it was under Guilford control until 1988). Official site can be found here: PANAMRAILWAYS.COM.

Moderator: MEC407

  • 1885 posts
  • 1
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 126
  by DogBert
 
With a single carrier, Poland Spring could potentially ship direct to the NYC market (via the Bronx, perhaps at hunts point terminal market—alleviating the need to build that terminal in CT and dealing with trucking down I-95).
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
jamoldover wrote: Tue Dec 01, 2020 6:24 pm ]You've forgotten about CSX's ex-CNJ/B&O line down to Trenton and the Philadelphia area that starts from Bound Brook (at the same junction NS's ex-LV line does). They have no problems getting south from the New York area on their own rails.
Interesting to learn that former CNJ line got clawed by Chessie. I was of thought that any former RDG lines went to Topper so he could gallop his way to his PRR at Harrisburg.

As a kid during the later 40's, I can recall sitting by the tracks at Fanwood near my Aunt's house. Quite the parade of Blue B&O trains, Black and Green striped RDG, and best of all, CNJ Camelbacks.
  by newpylong
 
As the discussion evolves around only the known possibilities, when coupled with many unknowns, the reasoning towards them making this move begins to make more sense to my previously bewildered brain.
  by roberttosh
 
I wonder if they have any plans for the Fuel terminals in Revere? Am guessing there's probably a few different products that could potentially move in there by rail.
  by F74265A
 
newpylong wrote: Tue Dec 01, 2020 9:31 pm As the discussion evolves around only the known possibilities, when coupled with many unknowns, the reasoning towards them making this move begins to make more sense to my previously bewildered brain.
Which pieces of this make sense to you given your special knowledge of the property?
  by Jedijk88
 
How will this affect shortlines that currently connect with CSX and Pan Am? (think Pioneer Valley in Holyoke) A great deal of money was spent to reconnect that interchange and gain access to an alternative to CSX.
  by Ken Rice
 
The routing guide here http://www.panamrailways.com/maps-and-routing-guide has two separate sections - one for PAS, and one for ST.

The PV interchange is with Pan Am Southern, so that may not be directly affected. But I guess that depends on what happens with PAS.
Last edited by MEC407 on Wed Dec 02, 2020 7:46 am, edited 1 time in total. Reason: UNNECESSARY QUOTING
  by CN9634
 
Global at Portland had danced around with NS on taking ethanol trains, so possibly we can see opportunities like that take off now. Intermodal at Waterville I think is a given, easy to rip up half that yard and pave over. JB Hunt will be there quickly, likely Schneider too. Also potentially even intermodal from Saint John to Worcester “short haul” could be economically feasible, there is little drayage capacity on that lane so they can command a premium rate rail wise. Opens up a lot of previously impossible maneuvers... think for instance customers on the SLR (even the mills in Canada) who ship to the southeast USA and now have more direct market access. Irving shipping pulp to their tissue mill in Macon another example.... it’s a aggregate of opportunities that Pan Am could never establish
  by MEC407
 
MEC407 wrote: Tue Dec 01, 2020 4:11 pm Regarding news media coverage or lack thereof:

As of 4pm today, there hasn't been a single word about the CSX-PAR acquisition in any of Maine's newspapers or on any of Maine's TV stations.

Maine Public Radio, which is Maine's NPR affiliate, did mention it briefly on-air today and posted a brief story on their web site at 2pm...
Maine's second-largest paper, the Bangor Daily News, finally decided to post something about the PAR sale on their web site, but instead of assigning a reporter to do a story, they picked up the brief blurb from Maine Public Radio.

Maine's NBC affiliates, WCSH and WLBZ, posted a short story here:

https://www.newscentermaine.com/article ... f81a91d4ce

Still not a peep from Maine's largest paper, the Portland Press Herald, nor from Maine's ABC or CBS affiliates.

I think I'll go make another donation to Maine Public Radio.
  by newpylong
 
Jedijk88 wrote: Wed Dec 02, 2020 7:27 am How will this affect shortlines that currently connect with CSX and Pan Am? (think Pioneer Valley in Holyoke) A great deal of money was spent to reconnect that interchange and gain access to an alternative to CSX.
You have the Battenkill, the VTR, PVRR, NECR and P&W that all enjoyed multiple interchange partners (at a single interchange) due to PAS and that should continue unless NS makes a move to acquire the entire thing. The others on PAR only had one so things should remain the same for them.
  by newpylong
 
F74265A wrote: Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:05 pm Which pieces of this make sense to you given your special knowledge of the property?
I don't think I have any special knowledge per se just starting to see where they believe they have opportunities leveraging one network. Whereas two weeks ago I was thinking, "WTF are the thinking?"
  by cpf354
 
roberttosh wrote: Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:02 pm I wonder if they have any plans for the Fuel terminals in Revere? Am guessing there's probably a few different products that could potentially move in there by rail.
There was serious talk of moving ethanol by rail into that area a few years ago but it was thwarted by local ordinances that would have prohibited storage of the product, so that's out, unless CSX makes a legal challenge.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
"Not one peep" in either The Times or Journal on what I consider a newsworthy story to the entire shipping community.

Giving a virtual monopoly to a single Class I road for an entire region certainly "flies in the face" of regulatory philosophy for the past quarter century.

You could think of Pan Am as a "Conrail Shared Assets" arrangement for Northern New England, affording the two Class Ones more or less equal access to what traffic there is up that way. But Timmy had played with his Lionel long enough and didn't want to invest in the property to attract new business, such as maritime shipping.

Finally, let me note how DPM likely sixty years ago remarked in a TRAINS column how the railroads were "Out of sight, out of mind". This was still a vestige of "John Q" using trains to get from here to there - and "great experiential trains" to ride. I guess general circulation media still perceives that "The world looks at the railroads through the windows of its passenger trains (another DPM quote)". Here there is no "window" and, hence, no story.
  by MEC407
 
I think that's very true, although I remain perplexed by the near-complete lack of coverage in Maine, and here's why: when CP bought CMQ, most Maine news outlets covered it. When CMQ bought MMA, most Maine news outlets covered it. When MMA bought BAR, most Maine news outlets covered it. When MaineDOT awarded the Rockland Branch operation contract to Morristown & Erie, most Maine news outlets covered it. When the shriveled remains of the Calais Branch were torn up and hauled away, most Maine news outlets covered it. Heck, when a trespasser gets clipped by a train and doesn't die and doesn't even lose a limb, most Maine news outlets cover it.

The only thing different about the CSX-PAR situation is that we're living in the year 2020 and nothing makes sense and the old rules don't apply.
  by FatNoah
 
There was serious talk of moving ethanol by rail into that area a few years ago but it was thwarted by local ordinances that would have prohibited storage of the product, so that's out, unless CSX makes a legal challenge.
Here's everything you could want to know on that topic:
https://www.railroad.net/ethanol-trains ... 73238.html
  • 1
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 126