• 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

  • 3062 posts
  • 1
  • 194
  • 195
  • 196
  • 197
  • 198
  • 205
  by Mandy Saxo
 
newpylong wrote: Tue Sep 07, 2021 2:44 pm Nickname for the VRS among some circles. Referencing their quasi-governmental status.
I have an acquaintance (co-worker of a very close friend of mine with SMS), who now throttles for SMS, was a long time engineer with VRS. He says VRS pays their engineers $15 an hour... no offense to VRS or it's employees, but hard to get good talent with that kind of pay rate.
  by MEC407
 
You'd have to pay me a lot more than $15 an hour to run trains through the Hoosac Tunnel.
  by bostontrainguy
 
Saw this and wondered about the line:

"Under a deal worked out with NS in exchange for its support of the Pan Am acquisition, CSX would step into Pan Am Railways’ shoes in the Pan Am Southern"

Did they mean to say NS would step into the PAS shoes? I know NS hasn't made much of an effort or shown any interest in buying out CSX's share of PAS, but if the price was cheap enough I think this is certainly a possibility and maybe the move that seals the deal.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
OK, Mr Train Guy; Mr. Foote, Chessie's CEO, says he's willing to "be out of" PAS.

Now does that automatically mean that Topper will "barrel out of the gate" and build a competitive route of Class 3 track and "fix Hoosac"?

Lest we forget that Chessie is not about to sell her shsre to "that nag" for $1. Who knows what she will want?

I cannot foresee any Class II Short Line, such as a G&W property, stepping up to make the necessary investment. Seek help from a public agency within the "Commonwealth of Tax".... and they will have you operating "four a day Flying Yankees".

Nevermind if anyone shows to ride.
  by newpylong
 
bostontrainguy wrote: Fri Sep 10, 2021 2:24 pm Saw this and wondered about the line:

"Under a deal worked out with NS in exchange for its support of the Pan Am acquisition, CSX would step into Pan Am Railways’ shoes in the Pan Am Southern"

Did they mean to say NS would step into the PAS shoes?
No. It is exactly as it is written. CSX will assume Pan Am Railway's 50% share of PAS ( because NS doesn't want it).
  by newpylong
 
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Fri Sep 10, 2021 3:38 pm Now does that automatically mean that Topper will "barrel out of the gate" and build a competitive route of Class 3 track and "fix Hoosac"?

I cannot foresee any Class II Short Line, such as a G&W property, stepping up to make the necessary investment.
No, NS will not "barrel out of the gate". They can barely get to the gate in New England right now.

There will be plenty of suitors should the STB say no bueno with GWI. Do you see the tonnage they are moving right now? There are enough carloads to run a dedicated Ayer manifest train, an ED495 type train (minus Ayer), and likely every other day Maine train plus their daily intermodal. If PSR was never a thing you can bet NS would be all in on PAS. They would still have the resources to operate it. Right now they simply do not. Neither does Pan Am anymore for that matter with mass crew exodus.
  by J.D. Lang
 
Wasn't The deal to allow a G/W subsidiary to run PAS was so they would sign off on letting CSX run on P/W owned trackage in Worcester? I wonder what will happen with that part of the deal if the STB won't let the G/W's BLE run PAS.
  by csx2039
 
VRS does not have the ability to run it, although it would make the most sense if they could. They are more concerned with government handouts then actually railroading… with that being said they do provide decent service for their customers, probably because if they didn’t, the state would give them the boot… just my 2 cents. Also a thought. An operator who could grab PAS and Wrestle the WACR Conn River line away from Vrs could have put quite a few pieces of the old B&M puzzle back together… especially if the could take the CP Newport Sub… Just a thought…
  by NHV 669
 
What difference would a new WACR or Newport Sub operator make? CP would still route bridge traffic around them to the Albany area as they are now.
  by PBMcGinnis
 
First off.....G&W was NOT CSX's choice for a "designated operator " of the Pan Am Southern portion. That was NS's chosen dance partner. Also an intentional one since they know it will bog down the sale process due to all the monopolistic issues west of Ayer.

2nd...CSX has ALWAYS wanted to divest themselves of the PAS side. They have made that clear from the beginning that they are interested in traffic from Maine and Eastern Canada and the Maritimes.

3rd....VRS is a NON UNION operation. BLE and all the other craft unions are not going to allow VRS to run Pan Am Southern.

4th...there is still nothing being proposed or objected to that CSX didn't already anticipate. This includes Amtrak's objections.

Now....Due to the current political climate and Administration nothing is guaranteed so this sale is not a slam dunk.
  by MEC407
 
The STB has five board members: four of them (including the chairman and the vice chairman) were appointed by President Trump; the fifth was appointed by President Obama. I think it's pretty unlikely that this particular board would be unduly influenced by the Biden Administration.
  by F74265A
 
Current state of the RR with myriad slow orders and crew shortages is arguably competitive with a broken down truck
  by newpylong
 
J.D. Lang wrote: Sat Sep 11, 2021 7:23 am Wasn't The deal to allow a G/W subsidiary to run PAS was so they would sign off on letting CSX run on P/W owned trackage in Worcester? I wonder what will happen with that part of the deal if the STB won't let the G/W's BLE run PAS.
No, it was for NS to run over said P&W mileage to run their IM trains over the B&A. CSX already has rights over the P&W Gardner Branch south of Barbers and so does PAR dating back to the B&M days.
  • 1
  • 194
  • 195
  • 196
  • 197
  • 198
  • 205