P&W coal into Binghamton, NY?

Here's a question for you..... it was stated that the ship was coming into Port of Providence, then New London was mentioned in the routing.

Since I can't see Amtrak allowing a coal train between PVD & New London, does this mean that the P&W will go from PVD to Worcester, then down their main-line to New London? Or would it go to Worcester to Gardner to the B&M?

As for not giving it to CSXT @ Worcester, I heard that CSXT does not want coal trains on the B&A (mainly on the Berkshires).

I think it will go from Providence to Worcester and then down there main to New London. What other way is there? I dont think the B&M is supposed to have any part in moving the coal train.

To bad CSX doesnt like the idea of coal trains going over the hill. That'd be something to see .

yes, the P&W train originated in Providence, went north on the Main Line to Worcester, then south to Groton, CT on the Norwich Branch, then over to New London for interchange with the NECR. This move was done strictly to avoid CSXT and the ST.

CSX Conductor, the loads need to go through Worcester to be weighed, there is no other scale, IIRC, on the P&W System, nor between PoP and New London. Also before a load can be interchanged, it needs to be weighed.

Rich C.

Saw a train of coal cars led by six P & W engines heading north around noon on Saturday 28 JAN.

Couldn't tell if the car were loaded - I was at the Coast Guard Academy (west side of Thames) and they were on the P & W side.

The train you saw was the empties returning from Test train #3, attached to the local crew.

Rich C.

When is the next train scheduled to come to Binghamton?

joshuahouse wrote:When is the next train scheduled to come to Binghamton?

Next train is scheduled to be delivered to the NECR in New London, CT the morning of 1/31/06. My guess is it should be into Binghamton somewhere on 2/1.

-Tom

B&A_Railfan wrote:Dont you think it would be 10 times faster to send it up to CSX and have CSX take it west over the Boston Line to Selkirk and then run it up the Port Sub to D&H's Kenwood Yard and go from there?

Yes it would, but neither CSX nor Guilford's Spfld Term have space to add the train to their traffic so P&W/CP had to cobb this together!

NERAILS webgroup just posted that there are "four engines and (x# of) coal cars" on the ground in Worcester! I'd run up there but I'm at work and it'll probably be cleared up by the time 1400 (that's 2pm to most normal folks,) rolls around. (Besides, I can't afford to waste the gas OR 45 min 1-way to drive up.)
Anyway, happy hunting!
Cosmo

Yep, 4 engines and 4 cars on the ground. Word is everything is upright.

4s are wild - 4 locos & 4 cars derailed on the 4th Johnson City coal train at 4am. Weird..... Anyways, it'll probably run tomorrow.

-Tom

I recall the "load limit" for Washington hill was 9700tons, according to a reference book from the Conrail era.

JoeF

[u]Railpace News Magazine [/u]issue for March 2006 has an article about the P&W Coal Train with operating summary for the first 5 trains.

I was also wondering the same thing mentioned previously, why are they sending the train to Bellows Falls VT? It would seem that interchanging with CSX in Worcester and then heading west through Selkirk would be a lot shorter and less expensive.

The point of this routing is to develop a competitive routing to the ST or CSX gateway routings. I'm sure this routing would not have developed if ST was competitive and effective.

The moves have gone for the most part very well. Hopefully the efforts of all involved in the test will not go for naught.

For those of you that have followed these movements, you're probably aware that they made fantastic time over the NECR/VRS/CPRS to Binghamton, something like less than 24 hours I believe. All these roads committed to having crews available as soon as these trains showed up and the results speak for themselves. Guilford on the other hand is in no position to make such of promises. A Coal train arriving at Gardner is just as likely to sit for 3-4 days untouched as it is to get picked up by a Guilford crew within 3-4 hours of arrival; in fact it's alot more likley to sit for 3-4 days! On the rate side, instead of agreeing to fairly split up what kind of revenue was available, they probably would have demanded two or three times more than everyone else was getting and had a laundry list of ridiculous conditions that needed to be met before allowing PW power on their property. I'm probably preaching to the chior here, but Guilford is not an easy bunch to do business with and in situations like this, where they're just a potential overhead carrier, they're almost always going to be the last resort option - regardless of how circuitous other routings are compared to theirs. Even on Coal going to Guilford served powerplants, such as Mt Tom, the railroads and Utility companies have gone out of their way to find ways of avoiding them altogether as was the case with last years shipments to CSXT's West Sprinfield yard.