Railroad Forums
Moderator: MEC407
rr_explorer wrote:Perhaps they could extend the line from Hampton to Seabrook and provide service to this growing company that is adjacent to the R.O.W.Aside from the obvious costs involved with rejuvenating the line (what is it, about a million a mile?), it sounds like you would have NIMBYs galore were the prospects of rail service raised.
http://www.newburyportnews.com/punews/l ... 30432.html
Hux wrote:NIMBYS always have the option to move. [I know, easier said than done!]. In any case, I'm willing to bet the railroad was in place well before the current residents placed themselves near it!rr_explorer wrote:Perhaps they could extend the line from Hampton to Seabrook and provide service to this growing company that is adjacent to the R.O.W.Aside from the obvious costs involved with rejuvenating the line (what is it, about a million a mile?), it sounds like you would have NIMBYs galore were the prospects of rail service raised.
http://www.newburyportnews.com/punews/l ... 30432.html
Rockingham Racer wrote:I hate that phrase. A train hasn't gone through the area since 1963 (excluding the service used to build the power plant, which came from Portsmouth). The train has been missing for 45 years nowHux wrote:NIMBYS always have the option to move. [I know, easier said than done!]. In any case, I'm willing to bet the railroad was in place well before the current residents placed themselves near it!rr_explorer wrote:Perhaps they could extend the line from Hampton to Seabrook and provide service to this growing company that is adjacent to the R.O.W.Aside from the obvious costs involved with rejuvenating the line (what is it, about a million a mile?), it sounds like you would have NIMBYs galore were the prospects of rail service raised.
http://www.newburyportnews.com/punews/l ... 30432.html
rr_explorer wrote:...assuming bridges can be reused and signals do not need to be installed?Unfortunately, by the time the rails and ties have been ripped up, the signals are usually long-gone as well, and the bridges are most likely in questionable condition... so you'll need to assume that the bridges and signals do need repair work, at the very least.
MEC407 wrote:I was using the "million per mile" based on the comments made by the new owner of the Grafton & Upton regarding work they need to do on their road.rr_explorer wrote:...assuming bridges can be reused and signals do not need to be installed?Unfortunately, by the time the rails and ties have been ripped up, the signals are usually long-gone as well, and the bridges are most likely in questionable condition... so you'll need to assume that the bridges and signals do need repair work, at the very least.
Hux wrote:I always thought the $1 million per mile figure was for brand new track/roadbed.MEC407 wrote:I was using the "million per mile" based on the comments made by the new owner of the Grafton & Upton regarding work they need to do on their road.rr_explorer wrote:...assuming bridges can be reused and signals do not need to be installed?Unfortunately, by the time the rails and ties have been ripped up, the signals are usually long-gone as well, and the bridges are most likely in questionable condition... so you'll need to assume that the bridges and signals do need repair work, at the very least.
Dick H wrote:A businessman in North Hampton is planning to buy a state bridge in Rye and use it to cross the B&M in North Hampton. It is unclear from the article if this is the current Hampton Branch or not. Perhaps someone from the area can elaborate.
Story here: http://tinyurl.com/5jaa95
Dick
