• 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

  • 3001 posts
  • 1
  • 182
  • 183
  • 184
  • 185
  • 186
  • 201
  by QB 52.32
 
markhb wrote:He may be the Congressman from the Berkshires, but he's also the chairman of the Ways and Means (tax) Committee, so you'd think they wouldn't want to aggravate him.
Yes, and strong advocate for the MA East-West Passenger Rail project. He has jumped on the bandwagon weeks after his MA political associates.
Gilbert B Norman wrote:How in heavens did this takeover originated with Timmy's desire to stop playing with his Lionels, and maybe improve rail service in Maine, become "all about passengers"?
Doubtful CSX's strategy in their play for PAR and 50% ownership and control of PAS does not directly and/or indirectly address growth of commuter and intercity passenger rail in Massachusetts as well as Boston metropolitan growth with transit-oriented development at the nexus. These growth pressures have been on-going for predecessor Conrail and CSX for over 30 years with an important player at CSX involved with past deals still in place and political power agitating and planning for transit-oriented development as well as expanded commuter and inland route Northeast Corridor intercity passenger rail on the B&A that might ultimately lead to a high-density, high-speed passenger railroad as far west as Springfield.

From my vantage point, it has been and continues to remain much too soon to conclude that CSX's strategy is simply about market growth north of Portland, ignoring an important on-going strategic pressure on CSX's New England freight franchise.
  by bostontrainguy
 
R&PEditor wrote: Sat Jul 17, 2021 10:43 am Oh contrayah! Neal's district hosts major chunks of all three main lines through the state, and it has both the most to win and the most to lose in this deal. That said, he is clearly swinging his Congressional elbows to get CSX to pay him more attention on the East-West project. Very clumsy, though.
https://railsandports.com/2021/07/csx-m ... ar-merger/
How about something more like: "I fully support the CSX/Pan Am merger to better serve the freight needs of all of New England and I look forward to working with them on future passenger rail projects in the State".
Last edited by MEC407 on Sun Jul 18, 2021 9:55 am, edited 1 time in total. Reason: excessive quoting
  by newpylong
 
Well, to the common person that certainly sounds level headed, sane, and would cover all of his constituents. However it's not "strong" enough for the special interest groups.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
A very reasonable statement you formulated, Mr. Train Guy.

This considering what an avid passenger train advocate your other postings would suggest.

In short, if an agency steps forward with a plan resulting in no interference with existing or planned freight operations, such as handling Container trains from St. John to the B&A in Worcester (over Chessie paid for Class 3) in, being reasonable, 15hrs, then "let's talk about it".
  by johnpbarlow
 
The small village of Voorheesville NY tells the STB to reject the NS 22K/23K trackage rights on CSX filing:
The Village respectfully urges that the Application as it is currently constituted be rejected in its entirety-because the significant, negative impacts on the Village that are likely to occur are not justified by the Applicants' commercial interests. And to the extent any version of the Application (that provides for the new level junction connection and increased traffic) is approved in the future, the Village respectfully requests that appropriate conditions be imposed such that the Village's significant public safety and quality of life concerns for its residents be addressed-at the Applicants' expense.
The burr under Voorheesville's saddle:
The proposed connection and additional high intensity traffic, if approved, appear highly likely to result in a total of three at-grade crossings in the Village being closed at the same time on a regular basis. Such closings would clearly result in additional traffic backups at intersections. They would also cut off a substantial portion of the Community from public safety services, all located on the opposite side of the tracks and hinder timely emergency vehicle access. (Residents and traffic on Foundry Road would seemingly be completely trapped.) This is an obvious safety problem for our residents. As are uncertainties about what potentially hazardous or dangerous materials-in addition to the automobiles we already have heard about-would be transported via the new specialty trains ( or even stored on the Norfolk Southern line).
Of course, today CSX blocks 2 of those 3 crossings perhaps 30-40 times each day with trains carrying the same sort of commodities that 22K/23K would handle PLUS ethanol, crude oil, LPG and other DOT-placarded commodities. The gall and ignorance of the village's legal representation are breathtaking!

https://dcms-external.s3.amazonaws.com/ ... 302755.pdf
Last edited by johnpbarlow on Wed Jul 21, 2021 2:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
  by newpylong
 
Not sure why these entities are wasting their breath.
  by bostontrainguy
 
CSX strikes back:

“We have worked with Chairman Neal to resolve various issues within his district and have continued to engage with his staff throughout the application process . . . CSX spokeswoman Cindy Schild says. CSX has a long history of working with the commonwealth to improve and implement new service,” Schild says. “Most recently, CSX has helped to advance infrastructure improvements to the Springfield passenger rail station, sold to MassDOT a line between Framingham and Mansfield for potential passenger service, facilitated the introduction of a pilot passenger service from Foxborough to Boston, supported the implementation of new Amtrak service to Greenfield, accommodated a new route for Amtrak’s Vermonter service travelling over a CSXT-controlled diamond in Springfield, and accommodated MBTA trains that needed re-routing for several weeks on CSXT lines to allow MBTA to perform work for the MBTA Green Line extension.”
  by CN9634
 
Sounds like NS can buy the CSX share of PAS anytime they want or designate a third party. Then I see referneces of 'when' CSX divests of its PAS stake... looks like positioning for a suitor. I suspect since NS wasn't fourth coming, the first goal is to buy PAR, then figure out who takes the other 50% of PAS, which makes complete sense. Could be GWI, could be a equity guy, or could be NS... who knows.

Further, NS is paying to doublestack the line from Worcester to Ayer. CSX is running a local from Worcester to Ayer, in addition to the two overhead pairs of trains. Then I think we know the rest about potentially more train pairs, ect
  by F74265A
 
Am very curious about this Ayer-Worcester local. I’m not aware of much, if any, online business on the route these days. I don’t think there is any at all. The big warehouse in Clinton should be a customer…………..
  by johnpbarlow
 
There is currently no local train servicing on-line Worcester main customers because, as you point out, there are none (having said that CSX local turn crew B728 does currently operate Q426/Q427 between Barbers and Ayer). But the way the proposed Ayer operating plan is written, it sounds like if CSX wants to run "overhead" trains through Hill Yard that are greater than 4,750 feet long, these trains can't make set-outs/pick-ups at Hill Yard and any CSX traffic to/from Ayer will need to be conveyed in a separate "local" train operating from Worcester (which may have schedule preference over NS' premium intermodal traffic over the Worcester main).
  by newpylong
 
Correct. It would also be nice to see the warehouse in Clinton (that is marketed as rail served on the Pan Am website) actually see service as well.
  by F74265A
 
Bottom line to me is csx will likely need a little more infrastructure someplace. Suppose this local hauls 3000 feet of general freight from the hill yard to Worcester? Where does it go? Not a lot of space in Worcester. Going east to the general freight yards in Framingham means a run around move and mbta. Might a Worcester local be able to range as far west as w spfld?
  by roberttosh
 
Doesn't CSX already do a lot of block swapping and set offs/pick ups on the triple track stretch West of the yard? I can't imagine that that they would run anything East to Framingham to get switched out.
  • 1
  • 182
  • 183
  • 184
  • 185
  • 186
  • 201