• 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

  • 2398 posts
  • 1
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 160
  by Ridgefielder
 
Mr. Norman- The former CNJ/RDG trackage in Hudson, Essex, Union and Middlesex counties all went to Conrail Shared Assets. CSX and NS ownership both start at Bound Brook, with NS heading west on the old Lehigh Valley to Allentown, and CSX heading southwest on the old Reading to Philadelphia. You can see that here: https://www.conrail.com/system-map/
So a CSX through train could use either the ex-CNJ to Port Reading and then the ex-RDG from Port Reading to Bound Brook, or (more likely) the ex-LV from Oak Island Yard to Bound Brook and the RDG.
Last edited by MEC407 on Thu Dec 03, 2020 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total. Reason: UNNECESSARY QUOTING
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Thank you very much, Mr. Ridgefield, for locating that map. It also dispells my previous thought that the RDG and CNJ arbitrarily went to Topper, and that there was some "slicing and dicing" in that region extending Chessie far North enough on the RDG so as to access CRSA.

But then chopping up the Water Level Route at Cleveland giving the West to Topper and the East to Chessie, seemed groundbreaking to me. With that went Al Pearlman's 24hr NY-CHI Container trains - nevermind Precision Railroading tells shippers "you get your stuff at our convenience - oh, you got a problem with that?".
  by Shortline614
 
CP responds! From Trains Magazine: https://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2 ... apag-lloyd
CSX Transportation’s proposed acquisition of New England regional Pan Am Railways will create a new direct CP-CSX interchange in Maine. Creel was asked if that would lead to growth opportunities for CP and CSX.

“We haven’t looked at it yet, but rest assured we will,” Creel says. “But if you’ve got two like-minded railroads with similar operating models and similar minds about how to grow and with a desire to grow in that low-cost, sustainable, profitable manner, I’ve got to say that it’s going to unlock some opportunities for our customers that don’t present themselves today.”

Creel spoke with analyst Allison Landry at the Credit Suisse 8th Annual Industrials Conference.”
A possible CSX-CP alliance in Maine would be interesting to see. Irving must be very happy about that possibility!
  by bsweep
 
I've been wondering what CP's reaction would be. There are as many complimentary arrangements as competitive ones. For instance, perhaps CSX could also ship bulk materials into/out of Searsport and CP access to the mills. Sure, if CSX spent a fortune and spent years upgrading - rebuilding is a better word - D1 for double stacks, they in theory could compete for intermodal traffic from Saint John. But alas, right now CP's priority traffic to the midwest already moves via CSX from Buffalo to Chicago.
  by roberttosh
 
CSX already directly serves multiple East Coast port bulk facilities so can’t imagine them wanting to drag anything all the way up to Maine only to hand it off to the CP.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
bsweep wrote: Thu Dec 03, 2020 3:48 pm . But alas, right now CP's priority traffic to the midwest already moves via CSX from Buffalo to Chicago.
Wouldn't CP be more inclined to keep it on their own, or SOO's, rails to Chicago and even Kansas City?

After all, why divide the Bill with Chessie if Beaver can have it all to himself?
  by Shortline614
 
New (sub-only) Bill Stephens article: https://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2 ... ets-growth

CSX is refusing to comment on any specific traffic that will be gained from the purchase or on any infrastructure upgrades they would make. Seems rather odd?

The STB application is expected to be filed before the end of this year. Things seem to be moving very quickly.
  by bsweep
 
Mr. Tosh - excellent point about Searsport.
Mr. Norman - I could be wrong, but I think currently CP double stack trains already travel CSX via Buffalo. I guess that could change via the tunnel and NS? It’s also interesting you brought up Kansas City. I was considering each carriers “route map” so to speak and CSX and CP really don’t have many competitive lanes, even now. Chicago and Detroit? Even in the Midwest CSX hits Saint Louis and CP has Kansas City.

I do wonder what access or exclusivity CP might be able to garner for Saint John containers. If they are putting up money to beef up the port - trackwork and expansion - I can’t imagine they’d be anxious to give access to CSX, and as we’ve noted before Saint John will function because of fast ship to railcar transfers and a fluid operation. If CSX were forced to dray containers to Devers yard I can’t imagine the scheme would work.

I would be very interested to know exactly how the NBSR haulage rights for both Pan Am and now CP are written.
  by pnolette
 
CP doesn't have a say about who uses Saint John, Irving owns the tracks.
  by bsweep
 
I get that Irving owns the tracks in Saint John. But if CP is putting any investment dollars of their own (I certainly don’t know that to be the case) I would be shocked if there wasn’t some sort of exclusivity clause.
  by newpylong
 
pnolette wrote: Thu Dec 03, 2020 6:49 pm CP doesn't have a say about who uses Saint John, Irving owns the tracks.
Oh yes they do, because Irving goes nowhere without them.
  by newpylong
 
Shortline614 wrote: Thu Dec 03, 2020 6:31 pm CSX is refusing to comment on any specific traffic that will be gained from the purchase or on any infrastructure upgrades they would make. Seems rather odd?
Not odd, because they simply don't know (yet). They jumped on a "generational" opportunity. They have a rough plan, but nothing concrete enough to say, we are going to put x amount into this mileage, for this customer, etc.
  by bsweep
 
An interesting point newpy aluded to - Irving’s railroads only connect because of CP trackage rights. I’m guessing those rights have an expiration - and wouldn’t be surprised if it coincided with the MNR lease expiration. Irving will likely want to play nice with CP.
  by pumpers
 
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Thu Dec 03, 2020 10:34 am
pumpers wrote: Wed Dec 02, 2020 12:44 pm ….. Via Conrail in the northern NJ area metro area and then their own ex-Reading line, CSX is now good for double stacks from Selkirk right down to Philly, I think.
Mr. Jim S (Pumpers; are/were you a Firefighter?)
Yes, a member of an all-volunteer dep't in the Hopewell area for quite a few years.
Finally, IIRC, the "interchange" between the RDG and the B&O at Philly was simply a sign "End B&O begin RDG" somewhat North of B&O's 24th & Market passenger station.
There is a nice walking/bike trail now all through there now squeezed in between the tracks and the Schuylkill. Don't know about the sign though...
  by Trinnau
 
Shortline614 wrote: Thu Dec 03, 2020 6:31 pm The STB application is expected to be filed before the end of this year. Things seem to be moving very quickly.
But it'll probably take a year to finalize - I would be surprised if it was significantly shorter than that. Application is filed, then reviewed, NS and whoever else weighs in, possibly some negotiations. So depends on what you think is "very quickly".
  • 1
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 160