• Hoosac Tunnel Discussion & News

  • 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

  • 341 posts
  • 1
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 23
  by MEC407
 
They should just buy 100% control of the entire B&M and be done with it.*


*wishful thinking, I know...
  by BostonUrbEx
 
If the Hoosac Tunnel had better clearances, would SEPO likely become a rare move? Just curious as to what led to CSX hauling a train from somewhere not far from a PAR/PAS interchange all the way to Portland.
  by KSmitty
 
Short answer: No. There is nothing on SEPO/POSE that couldn't go through Hoosac Tunnel.

Long answer:

Its all about revenue distribution and service. Pan Am and CSX, in interchanging at Barbers instead of Rotterdam, cut Pan Am Southern out of the way bill, and only have to split the revenue 2 ways, instead of CSX/ST/PAS. It also allows a couple operational benefits. With the Barbers interchange Pan Am can reduce the need for locomotives on 2 daily heavy trains because CSX will allow runthrough. There is no way CSX is going to let their power run through from Rotterdam to Rigby. Barbers interchange also cuts service time. Pan Am/CSX were offering 48 hour service from Rigby to Chicago. Given the 'lack of fluidity,' for lack of a better term, on the west end this type of service would be hard to offer with a Rotterdam interchange. But mostly its about thing 1...
Last edited by KSmitty on Mon Sep 29, 2014 7:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
  by CN9634
 
Tunnel can handle F plates, which are the tallest type of car SEPO hauls. Also, it can handle bi-level autoracks and some low clearing double stacks (An international 8'6" box and a domestic 9'6" hi-cube, but not two hi-cubes I believe)
  by newpylong
 
KSmitty wrote:Short answer: No. There is nothing on SEPO/POSE that couldn't go through Hoosac Tunnel.

Long answer:

Its all about revenue distribution and service. Pan Am and CSX, in interchanging at Barbers instead of Rotterdam, cut Pan Am Southern out of the way bill, and only have to split the revenue 2 ways, instead of CSX/ST/PAS. It also allows a couple operational benefits. With the Barbers interchange Pan Am can reduce the need for locomotives on 2 daily heavy trains because CSX will allow runthrough. There is no way CSX is going to let their power run through from Rotterdam to Rigby. Barbers interchange also cuts service time. Pan Am/CSX were offering 48 hour service from Rigby to Chicago. Given the 'lack of fluidity,' for lack of a better term, on the west end this type of service would be hard to offer with a Rotterdam interchange. But mostly its about thing 1...
This is 100% correct. Prior to Pan Am Southern the majority of the paper loads moved out to Rotterdam and the empties came back in via Barbers. Now it's all via Barbers, just local traffic via Rotterdam.
  by BostonUrbEx
 
newpylong wrote:
KSmitty wrote:Short answer: No. There is nothing on SEPO/POSE that couldn't go through Hoosac Tunnel.

Long answer:

Its all about revenue distribution and service. Pan Am and CSX, in interchanging at Barbers instead of Rotterdam, cut Pan Am Southern out of the way bill, and only have to split the revenue 2 ways, instead of CSX/ST/PAS. It also allows a couple operational benefits. With the Barbers interchange Pan Am can reduce the need for locomotives on 2 daily heavy trains because CSX will allow runthrough. There is no way CSX is going to let their power run through from Rotterdam to Rigby. Barbers interchange also cuts service time. Pan Am/CSX were offering 48 hour service from Rigby to Chicago. Given the 'lack of fluidity,' for lack of a better term, on the west end this type of service would be hard to offer with a Rotterdam interchange. But mostly its about thing 1...
This is 100% correct. Prior to Pan Am Southern the majority of the paper loads moved out to Rotterdam and the empties came back in via Barbers. Now it's all via Barbers, just local traffic via Rotterdam.
Thank you for all the answers, folks.

Also, why does CSX power stay on the set? They can't run Selkirk to Worcester and then PAR uses their power for Worcester to Portland?

I just have never really understood how routings are determined. Who is behind these decisions, exactly?
  by KSmitty
 
Why does CSX power run through? Its easier, no power swap, no brake test,etc. recrew and go. It also saves Pan Am, since 2 csx units can do the work for 3-4 par units. So even when you figure Pan Am has a couple units on csx paying back hph, they still come out ahead.

Who controls routing? The customer, technically. But railroads control pricing. So PAR and CSX set the pricing slightly lower, and offer slightly better service through Barbers than through Rotterdam. Its the customers call, but why pick a slower more expensive route?
  by CN9634
 
Cash is king! I've seen times where a slower serviced was used because it was cheaper... if you properly build up the supply chain it doesn't matter a whole heck of a lot (unless its refeer trafic...) when things arrive, as long as they are consistent and expected.

With that being said, take logic and throw it out the window in logistics. Even the big guys have problems.... trust me. They can just manage them better. 9 times out of 10, the problems come from people
  by rdeastcl
 
Also for the CSX units, the Worcester main still uses cab signals from the conrail days. Pan Am only has a few units with cab signals which they usually keep around Plainville CT to run on Amtrak territory. They certainly don't have enough to keep in rotation for the SEPO/POSE, and its incredibly time consuming to swap power in Lowell like they were doing for a while earlier this year.
  by KSmitty
 
Don't believe that is true, not on the Pan Am portion anyway. The Worcester main is all DCS territory, they can send anything down there. The B&A from Worcester to Selkirk is cab signaled, but that wouldn't matter if the exchange happened in Worcester on the P&W.
  by CPF363
 
BostonUrbEx wrote:I just have never really understood how routings are determined. Who is behind these decisions, exactly?
Here is a little history of the Barber interchange and the Worcester Main Line since back in the late 1980s. Ford has had an automobile off loading yard for many years in Ayer. When Guilford owned the D&H, they ran auto trains from an interchange with NS in Buffalo to Ayer via the Southern tier Line and the D&H. However, as the covered auto racks were coming on line, their vertical height prevented these auto racks from running through the Hoosac Tunnel and under many of the overhead bridges between Rotterdam Jct. and Ayer. That and the bankruptcy of the D&H put Conrail in the position to grab the Ford auto traffic on to their line east of Buffalo. Conrail was able to work an arrangement to move autos across N.Y. State and into New England via the B&A. Part of this was to open up a new interchange at Barber and repair the Worcester Main line, fix up a few clearance issues and move auto trains up to the Hill Yard (prior to that, much of the Worcester Main Line was a parking lot for old boxcars). Ayer ST locals would handle the switching of the Ford Yard and Conrail crews would handle the train from Selkirk or Springfield to Ayer. Then, Guilford worked out a separate arrangement with Conrail to include a haulage arrangement between Rotterdam Jct. and Barber to move all or most of their freight through the Barber interchange after April 1st, 1990. Conrail crews would turn the entire train, power and all to Guilford at Barber with ST crews handling the train to Rigby. The Worcester Route was in much better shape than it is today with trains running over the line in and around an hour. For a while, there were two freight trains in each direction plus the autos, and for a short period, TV trains made for a busy line; all DCS territory. Following the breakup of Conrail, CSX decided to move move some of their B&M bound cars back via the Rotterdam Jct. interchange. Then came along Pan Am Southern with Norfolk Southern and that changed everything, effectively breaking up the B&M between PAR and PAS. Now, CSX trains bound for PAR move via Barber and CSX trains bound for PAS (the grain trains for example as this consignee is on PAS) have to go through Rotterdam Jct. PAS set up an interchange with PAR at the Willows East (PAR has trackage rights from there to Harvard). If CSX cars are interchanged at Rotterdam, these would have to pay a fee to NS to run over the PAS territory, so hence the reason why Maine Central bound cars are not going over the B&M's west end any longer. NS built up the container business that they have today plus they got the autos back via the same routing that Guilford had over the D&H and Southern Tier to their new auto yard at San-Vel in Ayer.
  by johnhenry
 
Well said by CPF363. I'll add that for some years in the 1990's there were 2 Conrail originated trains each way on the Worc main, SEOP/POSE (called SENE and NESE at the time, NE being New England), and SENA/NASE (going to Nashua or Lowell). That in addition to the daily autorack trains and frequent loaded and unloaded coal trains and also AY locals to serve coal and minerals to Norton Co (St Gobain now) and a distributor at Greendale (now gone). And a rare high/wide load and circus train! Busy line - meets at the hand throw siding in Clinton (located in the middle of the Worc branch) were not uncommon.
  by newpylong
 
No place to swap power at New Bond or Burncoat Street, otherwise you would see it more often.
  by Sprinter611
 
The Worcester branch doesn't see as much as it used too now, now we see BOPW/PWBO every few months, POSE/SEPO daily, then the occasional Ayer local then the Circus Train (which happened to go up the Worcester Main this morning following SEPO). Meets at Clinton are very rare now. I was able to catch one between SEPO & POSE back in May which was pretty cool. It is also faster to go to Barbers instead of running Selkirk-Rotterdam-EDY-Ayer-Portland. It is about 6hrs to take a freight on the B&A from Selkirk to Worcester, then 2 hours to Ayer, then about 5 hours to Portland, while if they went via Rotterdam, it would take a hour from Selkirk to Rotterdam where they would then switch power! Then it would take another 5 hours or so to get to Deerfield, then 4 hours to Ayer, then 5 hours to Portland. It's just more efficient to go via the B&A.
  by Trinnau
 
To add a little to the above.

Q426/SEPO handles an Ayer block, and then all the rest of the traffic is basically Portland-East souped together. So Pan Am breaks it down there for distribution to PORU/POWA/Local traffic.

Q633/RJED is all souped together. Pan Am handles it to Deerfield, classifies it, then sends the Maine traffic (along with the Maine traffic on MOED) to Portland on EDPO, then re-classifies it, then to PORU/POWA/Local traffic.

So take your run times and add a 24-hour (minimum) dwell at Deerfield coming over the west end.

The reality is depart Selkirk heading east for Portland (via the B&A) and be there in 24 hours, or depart Selkirk heading west for Portland (via Rotterdam) and be there in about 96 hours. There are more miles via Rotterdam so naturally the car costs more going the longer (and slower) route.
  • 1
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 23