• 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

  by mrj1981
 
I am very curious to see how CSX ends up running District 1. Right now, to get a car from Rigby to Keag requires three different trains (POWA then WANM then OT-1). Will CSX try to reduce that to two trains (or even one train)? Is there an “obvious solution” to how to run that section of railroad? (PONM/NMPO, with OT-1 to go the rest of the way?)

Ultimately, whatever track speeds CSX will aim to achieve will be contingent on how they want to run the trains. For the 65 miles from NM to Keag, if you just need to run an OT-1 in one direction on one crew, with work along the way, then a reliable 10 is plenty. But if you want your crew to go NM to Keag and back to NM, then you’ll need 25.

CSX may well be cutting multiple days off of transit times for the bridge traffic they hope to nab in Keag; losing one of those days on District 1 (because your line to Keag is 10 rather than 25) may not be an issue in the end.
  by BobbyT
 
I think in order to really compete with CN and CP, they are going to have to upgrade the Keag line to 25 MPH minimum. At one time didn't Pan am run a POMA train from Portland to Keag? If CSX can build Keag traffic up to 50-60 cars per day, I could see them replacing POWA/WANM with a Portland to Keag train with drop-offs at Waterville and N Maine Jct. I also wonder what type of symbol the Rumford job will be given. I doubt it will be an M train but more likely use a local train designation.
  by F74265A
 
I’m pretty sure that csx said in the filing that all main track would e eventually be at least 25. I expect 25 on that stretch. Long distances of 10 kill crew expenses
  by newpylong
 
Yes, it's not even up for discussion. They're opening the line back up at a reliable Class I, and within a couple years it will be higher. With so much deferred maintenance system wide they're going be crawling before they walk.
  by johnpbarlow
 
FWIW (not much), from monitoring the Westfield live cam and train list, I observe that only four M426 trains seem to have operated over the B&A in the past seven days (Sunday 8/14/22 - Saturday 8/20/22). No M426 trains passed the Westfield cam on Saturday 8/20/22, Tuesday 8/16/22, or Monday 8/15/22 according to the train log. Also note that M426 doesn’t operate with DPU (even though it could conceptually as far as Worcester) because its currently assigned dual mode PTC equipped AC4400 leaders are not DPU-capable. Therefore the M426 consists are not monsters. In the long run, One would hope that there would be enough P&W interchange and Pan Am bound traffic to operate daily across the B&A.

Six M427s (including 2 on Sunday 8/14/22) have operated over the B&A in the past 7 days but it’s apples v oranges when comparing to M426 as 427’s consist is often Pan Am + Framingham/Westborough traffic given P&W traffic goes west on IM I115.

I'm guessing lack of crews to run these non-intermodal trains has a lot to do with this erratic operation pattern.
  by BobbyT
 
Definitely due to crew issues, Selkirk is extremely backed up right now. Things should start to improve in September with fewer vacations and mark-offs.
  by CN9634
 
Bluenose was the name of the service and was manifested as POSJ/SJPO. I can’t remember if it ran 5 or 7 days a week but it was “daily”. The NMJ to Keag portion was a turn POSJ to SJPO, with them getting to Keag overnight and coming back west in the morning out of Keag (afternoon into NMJ) where it met the inbound POSJ. I can’t remember if they ran POSJ/SJPO over top of WAPO/POWA, but we also had BKWA/WABK in the mix at that time (every other day or something) so it was quite busy. Then there was oil trains for a time too.
  by BandA
 
How long will it take for CSX to traverse 60 miles & insert 72K ties? Plus they might discover other defects along the way that slow them down. Is this track presently oos, "excepted", or "class 1 in theory"?

How long do ties last in Maine?
  by BobbyT
 
Is there still any light rail left up there? Not too long ago I believe there was either 80 or 90 lbs rail in places. Can’t imagine that CSX will want to send much traffic over that light a rail.

They’re currently running over the line once per week, so it’s in service, but I think it’s excepted.
  by F74265A
 
If you research the gov grant applications that pan am filed a couple years back, they say there was then a substantial amount of rail up there that is 85, 100 and 112 pound jointed rail. Now defunct Rails and ports had a big write up on the application that is still accessible, Since no rail has been changed since then, it must still be there. Pan am ran oil trains over it.
  by newpylong
 
F74265A wrote: Thu Aug 18, 2022 9:26 pm Clinton bridge needs to be replaced to accommodate NS DS or needs to be replaced as a general matter?

It was raised and undercut to accommodate rax in the conrail era
For more clearance for NS.

The amount of money that NS is going to have to spend to rebuild the Albany Main for two trains and then any clearance items to use the Worcester Main and then on top of trackage fees may make this a non-starter. Seems silly to me, but they didn't ask 😀
  by taracer
 
BobbyT wrote: Sun Aug 21, 2022 8:37 am Definitely due to crew issues, Selkirk is extremely backed up right now. Things should start to improve in September with fewer vacations and mark-offs.
Selkirk is backed up due to the fact that they abolished a bunch of jobs in the yard. It has nothing to do with the crews. It's just more PSR "more with less" nonsense, and when that doesn't work just blame the crews.
  by BobbyT
 
The bottom line is that they are short on manpower at Selkirk and that is a fact. They clearly realize this and are hiring and training people as quickly as they can.
  by newpylong
 
Chopping switchers from an already taxed MAJOR regional switching terminal is not a tenet of PSR. Nor should everything be blamed on PSR, despite its (rightfully) poor reputation. The fact of the matter is they are short crews and have to choose between running road jobs or switchers. Pick your poison. T&E rarely see the big picture.
  by taracer
 
Yes handwave all the damage that PSR has done at CSX over the past 5 years, the crew shortage it created.

It's all the crew's fault. I just don't see the big picture.
  • 1
  • 269
  • 270
  • 271
  • 272
  • 273
  • 278