CSX Acquisition of Pan Am Railways

The aforementioned Dovah Arch: http://photos.nerail.org/s/?p=131034

johnpbarlow wrote: ↑Tue Mar 09, 2021 5:23 pm The impression I have re: Q115 is its containers are international cubes loaded at P&W’s Stackbridge facility so its IM traffic isn’t originating on CSX Worcester. I might be wrong....

Yes that is correct

CN9634 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:34 pm The aforementioned Dovah Arch: http://photos.nerail.org/s/?p=131034

Perhaps just an optical illusion but the ATR clearance appears to be more than 17'6"? Can a simple undercut be done at that location (realizing that nothing is simple these days).

Not trying to beat a dead horse re: the current CSX IM service offerings westbound from Worcester but I watched the last 12 hours of the Palmer Live cam this AM and saw:
- an obvious Q115 with some international containers passed at 2144
- a fairly long DPU-configured Q017 with double stacks and quite a few priority pigs (UPS and other TOFC) passed at 0140 (and picked up another 46 loaded wells at W Springfield per eyeballing the Westfield cam)
- a short 37 well pig/double stack Q019 passed at 0608 (it apparently filled out to ~50 wells at W Springfield based on Westfield observation).

So my confusion is why the ShipCSX web site's intermodal schedule doesn't show a Q017 service offering from Worcester. Is it perhaps because the allocated capacity from Worcester is all contracted out and the only space remaining would be on Q019? Or is the schedule web site just out of date? Or something else?

RE: the suggested Sappi service from the mill at Hinckley ME to Bedford Park IL distribution center, the DC is in a large industrial park adjacent to the CSX IM yard at Bedford Park and has a siding with at least 9 spots used presumably for unloading. I would guess CSX with its new PAR franchise will prefer to sell Sappi its box car service from Maine to the Chicago DC rather than containers via Waterville.

At any rate, the original query was what IM destinations from Worcester would be offered to a hypothetical Waterville origination? Taking the ShipCSX at face value indicates the only CSX destination available currently is Bedford Park. (although E St Louis is also a destination for W Springfield service via Q115 to Syracuse). Certainly UP destinations could be marketed but how much Maine originating traffic is bound for the western US? Certainly more CSX destinations could be added if volume warranted. But at this point it seems as if CSX has limited its westbound from southern New England IM offerings only to Chicago / St Louis - no IM service is offered to the southern or SE US (eg, Florida, Atlanta, Tennessee, Louisville, etc.). Is there enough Maine originating IM business to encourage CSX to add service lanes (they did cull a lot of service lanes a few years ago when it was determined that the N Baltimore OH intermodal hub was a bad idea).

roberttosh wrote: ↑Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:05 pm Realistically, under cutting is probably the only option at that location and from what I recall, that presents its' own serious issues as well. Dropping the tracks down 4 feet under the highway would almost certainly require some type of reinforcement, encasement, or pile driving in and around the support columns which is not an easy task being under all the overpasses. In addition, the street is already on a steep downhill slope to the grade crossing so not sure if they would be able to lower by 4 feet at that location. I'm sure it can be done, but it will be very expensive and not sure if it's really worth it. Also, for some reason I think the main highway isn't a clearance issue, just the ramps, but then agin, it's been a long time since I've seen this discussed so my facts may be off a bit.

Another option would be to shift the tracks north under the next span of the bridge which has higher clearance as it rises over the river, and would give the street more room to slope down if the tracks still need to be undercut further.

The other challenge with that location (this may have been mentioned, but I don't recall seeing it) is that only 400 feet on the other side of the I-495 ramps is a bridge over a brook that's a tributary to the Merrimack - you can't drop the tracks very far before you're hitting the water level or blocking a waterway.
You also only have 1/4 mile after clearing the I-495 bridge to bring the tracks back up for the next pair of grade crossings - at least one of which is of a major road. That's a fairly sharp roller coaster that's also going to be used by lots of passenger trains.

Scalziand wrote: ↑Wed Mar 10, 2021 12:23 pm Another option would be to shift the tracks north under the next span of the bridge which has higher clearance as it rises over the river, and would give the street more room to slope down if the tracks still need to be undercut further.

That would actually make the problem worse. Take a look: https://goo.gl/maps/kGueVqnj2HUSyskV8

Clearance is actually lower under the next span because a) the plate girders are thicker and b) the ramps are descending to the lower level of the Merrimack River bridge.

Another problem with undercutting here is that less than 150 yards west of the highway overpass the tracks cross the Shawsheen River on a ballasted deck bridge.

The span with the deeper plate girders is not the one I was talking about. I was considering the immediately adjacent span to the current one, where the girders are the same depth, and the natural grade already appears to be a couple feet lower than the tracks. The river crossing shouldn't be an issue because it's 20ft below the current tracks according to the DEMs I can find, allowing a decent margin for undercutting while maintaining an acceptable flood risk.

You are talking about here:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7034574 ... 312!8i6656

Note the catch basin indicating the lowest point on the road.

Re-aligning the ROW, if it could even be done, would clearly be a last resort option, would still require undercutting and would have its' own new set of issues to overcome. In terms of undercutting in general, we haven't even touched upon the required utility work involved with lowering a road by 4 ft, which in and of itself would probably be a nightmare. At the end of the day, I think we can all agree that there is no easy, inexpensive fix at this location and considering the limited business/benefits, I'm not sure that anyone is going to want to spend that kind of $$.

I don't think the volume is there in the near term either from Waterville or the Maritimes to get a ROI for clearing the entire route. They'll run em singled just like now out of Waterville.

With an infrastructure bill probably coming, they might aim to get some government assistance for the project to save on capital expenses

My guess is they've got enough track work to pay for before even considering it.

Look on the bright side at least the Essex branch was abandoned, that branched off right around the I-495 bridge. One less thing to worry about.

It would most certainly be a single stack operation for the foreseeable future but again, get it going now, bring ‘em to Worcester and cap ‘em off. Tack on some manifest while you’re at it for your second train pairs et voila