• East Deerfield Gawking

  • 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 newpylong
 
It doesn't effect their trains I don't think they will care any more than any other yard derailment.
  by Dick H
 
The NS notice advises that train "23K-10" is effected. Is that train 23K of May 10th?
If so, it probably was the derailment two nights ago.
  by newpylong
 
Yep, apparently the yard derailment fouled the main for a couple hours so I stand corrected. Wouldn't expect to see a service bulletin about it though.
  by johnpbarlow
 
Dick H wrote:The NS notice advises that train "23K-10" is effected. Is that train 23K of May 10th?
If so, it probably was the derailment two nights ago.
Good point! Thanks.
  by gokeefe
 
newpylong wrote:Wouldn't expect to see a service bulletin about it though.
I was kind of wondering about that as well. It felt to a certain extent as if lower management did that to communicate with upper management, "Hey look they've screwed us all again." It also puts NS on record company wide as acknowledging that any delay really is in fact due to PAR and not NS.
  by BostonUrbEx
 
newpylong wrote:Wouldn't expect to see a service bulletin about it though.
I wouldn't have either. The delay was drastically less than 12 hours, as opposed to the alleged minimum of 12 hours.
  by CN9634
 
It's an NS service so the end customer doesn't care about who caused the potential delay but IF one were to occur they certainly would be grateful to know. I think NS expected worse case and sent out a bulletin accordingly, likely as a CYA in case they did incur large delays. When you quote a service time of 72 hours from box ingate to availability, then 12 hours is a big deal.
  by newpylong
 
I figured you all ould like this I found one of my old switch lists in one of my jackets
20160528_090900.jpg
.
  by atholrail
 
EDRJ today had the 374-371 and 13 cars. Here's a shot from Buckland...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/123370123 ... 308361502/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

EDBF had the 380-327.

EDPL power was 352-351-2007.

ED4 had the 353.
  by atholrail
 
ED1 GMTX 5000-5001

ED4 348 stone train for Conn River.

POED 618-619-502-GMTX 2015

EDPL 313 local work.

14R NS 8901-NS 6961-NS 9309-3401-3403

RJED 518-604-306-307

EDPL power in the pit, 352-351-PW 2007

374-519-319 in the pit.

Ex. VTR GMTX units still stored.
  by atholrail
 
EDPO was out of Deerfield early this morning with 608-601 and 46 cars, a mix of Nashua's, Lawrence's, and Rigbys.

EDAY was out of Deerfield late this morning with 3400-603-3404 and 54 cars, mix of P&W, Fitch, Ayers. In typical Pan Am fashion the 3400 died before Farley.
  by atholrail
 
EDAY made it as far as Farley today. Lead unit crapped out before Farley's. Spent all day waiting for maintainer's to try and fix, before giving up and running around to pull it back to Deerfield.
  by 161pw165
 
Pretty bad when they can't keep their "newest" power running.
  by atholrail
 
EDPO stalled on the Hill at Athol early this morning. 317-615 and around 50 cars. As of 1030 there was a crew at Deerfield waiting for an engine to add to EDPO...
  by johnpbarlow
 
PAS Facebook page reports rumor that there are no locomotives in East Deerfield Yard currently. No idea if the posting is referring to engines on ready tracks or anywhere in yard. Any confirmations?
  • 1
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 25