• 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

  • 2957 posts
  • 1
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 198
  by CN9634
 
CSX actually explained this week the reason for the purchase and it’s simple— growth.

Railroads don’t come up for sale every year and they aren’t building new ones, so when the opportunity arises sometimes you just gotta do it.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Mr. Shortline, every place you note CSX in your immediate post, NS could have been substituted.

Now our "Mainers" around here could stringently object with a "Mr. Norman, you're mistaken", but as I recall (yes, I've been up there), Maine is a "transportation desert" (or should I say "forest").

There are industries up there, logging, paper products, maritime shipping, all needing good railroad transportation. I've been stuck behind a "semi" up there hauling raw timber "doing about 45" and concerned that some of his "lading" could "alter the face of my buggy" (and maybe me). I remember once upon a time, I learned the Maine Turnpike was in such state of disrepair, it was in danger of being stricken from the Interstate Highway System.

I'd like to think that Chessie (since she appears to be the winner and, honest, I've have no skin in the game either way; no longer hold CSX or NSC), is prepared to give up her Fancy Feast for whatever is on the shelf at Save A Lot, and put what she must into at least an FRA Class 3 Maine Central (presume the B&A is at least that and maybe even 4 since it has passenger trains). It's disturbing to learn from this discussion that "Keag" is on FRA Class 1, and the two Irving roads to reach Saint John from "Keag" are maybe 2. If that Port wants to get in the game by offering at least one day less sailing time from Europe and maybe two compared with a Southeastern port, it would be in all parties interest to have Jawn Henry doing a little "steel driving".
Last edited by Gilbert B Norman on Fri Dec 04, 2020 2:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.
  by Ridgefielder
 
CN9634 wrote: Fri Dec 04, 2020 10:48 am I guess it’s a good thing neither of you work in maritime logistics or port operations. Remember, containers can be stacked.... arm chair quarter backing via Google maps multimillion investments and commitments from multiple logistics parties isn’t how the world works. Perhaps check out Prince Rupert, you’ll notice that it’s also small by acreage by can handle 1M TEU per annum... the “secret” is the fluidity of the rail network and reducing on dock dwell. Also remember when 90% or the containers will be railed, you have greater fluidity of the terminal since you aren’t waiting on truckers to get containers to the local markets. If the tidal range was a concern they wouldn’t have put 4 ships through there this summer and committed to one steamship line (CP says they are chasing a second by end of 2021)
No, I'm not in maritime logistics. But I've spent enough time on the water, including in Maine, and have enough friends with naval and marine experience to know that the tides in Fundy aren't something you can just wave away. I wasn't saying St. John isn't a functional port -- I'm aware that it's Canada's third-largest by tonnage. I was just speculating on whether the navigational challenges could potentially make greater development of somewhere like Searsport attractive. Especially since depending on where you're coming from it saves a few hours steaming time.
  by J.D. Lang
 
I don’t think that maritime containers are major reason that CSX is buying PanAm. They can only run doublestacks from Worcester to the west. Worcester’s container yard is space constrained and I can’t see them stacking maritime containers there nor filleting eastbound ones. I think that their initial focus will be the long line haul of merchandise traffic from and to Maine. There is substantial traffic up there for them to get the long haul. You don’t need Class III all the way to Keag to do that. Giving consistent and more reliable service than PanAm did should allow them to build on that.

That said it would be nice if they did set up an intermodal terminal in Waterville at some point. I’ve driven I 290, 495, 95 many times to visit my brother in OOB and the truck traffic is a nightmare.
  by roberttosh
 
CN9634 wrote: Fri Dec 04, 2020 10:48 am I guess it’s a good thing neither of you work in maritime logistics or port operations. Remember, containers can be stacked.... arm chair quarter backing via Google maps multimillion investments and commitments from multiple logistics parties isn’t how the world works. Perhaps check out Prince Rupert, you’ll notice that it’s also small by acreage by can handle 1M TEU per annum... the “secret” is the fluidity of the rail network and reducing on dock dwell. Also remember when 90% or the containers will be railed, you have greater fluidity of the terminal since you aren’t waiting on truckers to get containers to the local markets. If the tidal range was a concern they wouldn’t have put 4 ships through there this summer and committed to one steamship line (CP says they are chasing a second by end of 2021)
LOL, Rupert is being expanded to handle 1.8 million TEU's while Saint John is going to max out at 330K TEU's, nice comparison! Before insulting people I suggest you check your facts.
  by F74265A
 
In the fall, cp top executives stated publicly on an investor relations call that they are aiming for 800,000 teu at SJ by the end of 2022
  by fromway
 
The biggest drag against any Searsport expansion will be the NIMBYS. Searsport is too close to where people "FROM AWAY" like to spend their time watching the nice sailboats float by. It would be great to see expansion at Searsport but it will be a fight that will drag on for years.
  by Cowford
 
CN, it's ok to have differing opinions, but keep it respectful. And for the record, there are plenty of maritime/rail/logistics professionals who scour Googlemaps/earth as part of their day job. In fact, I know of a couple of massive transload facilities that were located in that manner.

So, Saint John is the size of Portland (Maine, not Oregon). Could you please expand on where all this import traffic coming from and where it is going to flow to. And why will shipping companies and BCOs give preference to this port over Halifax, Montreal, (soon to be) Quebec City, Boston, NYNJ, etc.?
  by roberttosh
 
F74265A wrote: Fri Dec 04, 2020 2:19 pm In the fall, cp top executives stated publicly on an investor relations call that they are aiming for 800,000 teu at SJ by the end of 2022
Interesting. Would you happen to have a link to that statement? That is more than double what DP World's max buildout plan was supposed to be.
  by CN9634
 
The hinterland North America. SJ is a competitive gateway port (key there) and gives an alternative to Halifax as well (Hapag diverted equal number of ships to Halifax but guess how that went with CN) as provides the steamship lines a way to bring larger vessels into the Transatlantic trade as the aging Ice class ships that go the Seaway (many 22 years old and approx 3800TEUs) start to age out. Canadian ports are more favorable from a cost standpoint— the Canadian Govt pays harbor maintenance whereas in the USA those types of fees are tacked onto the shippers bills. Also you have single line carriers with capacity that can reach a bit further past Chicago than the USA east coast class Is, as well as Western Canada.

Back to topic— CSX gaining access is a huge win to them and where else do you get a port with three class Is on the east coast? I think NOLA has a few but it’s Gulf. Also who is to say CSX can’t tap into the NBSR domestic intermodal facility (assuming no exclusive access by CP)
  by Red Wing
 
Okay with all this port talk. What are the ports that CSX could have rail access too? Boston, Portsmouth, Portland. Are there more?
  by roberttosh
 
It will certainly be interesting to see how that pans out, but in my opinion they're being extremely optimistic in that the 2 Halifax terminals, which have been around forever, barley do 600K TEU's combined while Saint J currently hovers around 100K TEU's.
  by F74265A
 
roberttosh wrote: Fri Dec 04, 2020 4:12 pm It will certainly be interesting to see how that pans out, but in my opinion they're being extremely optimistic in that the 2 Halifax terminals, which have been around forever, barley do 600K TEU's combined while Saint J currently hovers around 100K TEU's.
The expectation is that Asian imports will move more to Suez Canal than trans pacific as Asian manufacturing shifts out of China to southern and southeast asia
  by F74265A
 
Red Wing wrote: Fri Dec 04, 2020 4:05 pm Okay with all this port talk. What are the ports that CSX could have rail access too? Boston, Portsmouth, Portland. Are there more?
There is essentially zero rail access, never mind service, at port of Boston today and nothing will change with this acquisition in all likelihood
  • 1
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 198