• "Up North" Gawking (District 1 sightings)

  • 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 KSmitty
 
Seeing that the title has been altered to cover all of D1, I think I can post here. Please excuse my ramblings...

About 5:30 tonight 9/14 I heard the now familiar chug of GE's. Out the door in time to spot the tail end of a lite power move of returning oil train power. To Leeds Jct...As I'm driving down Leeds Jct Rd I see the flashers lit up, surprising that they made such good time Monmouth-Leeds...As I get closer, I look right to turn onto the side road, and wouldn't you know it, theres a BNSF unit and a ton of tanks stretched out on the main.

The loads, behind 5414 stopped on the main, waiting for the lite move to clear up. A few minutes later, 7057 and company shows up. I clicked shot 1 a bit too late. --> http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=3191993 <-- Anyway, 7057 takes the siding --> http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=3191994 <-- leading to the most awesome sight. I was instantly in Essex MT looking at a set of helpers roll back off the Continental Divide as another prepares to assault the hill, all without moving a muscle. --> http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=3191997 <-- In the clear, the lite power continues to roll towards the south end of the siding. --> http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=3191996 <----> http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=3191998 <-- The lite power was barely out of sight before 5414 was throttling up. Rolling north --> http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=3191999 <-- The loads were sporting 3 NS units, NS 8408 --> http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=3192000 <-- NS 9487 --> http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=3192001 <-- and an EMD, NS 2634 --> http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=3192003 <-- Trailing was also a surprise, to my knowledge the first 4 axle on an oil train MEC 370 --> http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=3192004 <--

Once the loads were clear, I headed for the south side of the siding. There in time to catch the 7057 get rolling again. --> http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=3192005 <-- Without knowing what I was in for I walked right into a heck of a shot! Between NBSR and PAR at Keag in one sitting and a BNSF meet, I think I should buy a lottery ticket, Its been my week!
  by gokeefe
 
Holy cow! BNSF meets BNSF on PAR. Can't imagine I would have ever thought that would happen.

That is an incredible series of shots and I think it really says a lot about why PAR is doing as much work as they are on their tracks.

Big heavy Class I engines with long unit trains. They haven't got a choice.
  by JB283
 
@ KSmitty, those last two pics you posted from your Keag trip where actually at the crossing in on the Old Military road, in Winn and not Olamen. Great pics though! Im glad to see that there finally taking care of stuff up that way.
  by KSmitty
 
Thanks for the correction, you are quite right. I've fixed the description on the other site to reflect that. When I posted, I quickly looked at google maps and saw Old Military Rd. in Olamon and labeled it as such. I didn't see a reason why not, as ties are in fact laid out that far south.
  by MEC407
 
KSmitty wrote:Seeing that the title has been altered to cover all of D1, I think I can post here.
I hope that's ok! I'm happy to change it to something more specific if you don't want it to cover all of District 1. I just wanted to clarify it a little bit, since our friends from the west end tend to think of District 2 as "up north." :wink:
  by KSmitty
 
MEC407 wrote:
KSmitty wrote:Seeing that the title has been altered to cover all of D1, I think I can post here.
I hope that's ok! I'm happy to change it to something more specific if you don't want it to cover all of District 1. I just wanted to clarify it a little bit, since our friends from the west end tend to think of District 2 as "up north." :wink:
No no, its all good by me, this lets me have a thread where I can ramble on and on no matter where in the state I might be... :)
I personally think of north being TT east of Waterville, but it all depends are where you're from, If you live in D.C. New York would be "up north"...I think.
  by KSmitty
 
gokeefe wrote:I think it really says a lot about why PAR is doing as much work as they are on their tracks.
Big heavy Class I engines with long unit trains. They haven't got a choice.
I can only imagine that the ultimate goal is to run the train whole across the railroad. Would be a lot easier on their power desk if oil moved point to point with the same power. Would also be easier on the crew callers, and dispatch as it would be 1 train to move Waterville-Keag as opposed to 2...
From the looks of the ties they are hoping to come as far south with ties as about MP.44. Thats just north of Old Town if I'm not mistaken. Currently, 6packs are prohibited east of Bangor (logistically NMJ) so assuming they get this tie project done by ground freeze it would leave less than 15 miles. I wonder if an exception might be made?
  by gokeefe
 
KSmitty wrote:
gokeefe wrote:I think it really says a lot about why PAR is doing as much work as they are on their tracks.
Big heavy Class I engines with long unit trains. They haven't got a choice.
I can only imagine that the ultimate goal is to run the train whole across the railroad. Would be a lot easier on their power desk if oil moved point to point with the same power. Would also be easier on the crew callers, and dispatch as it would be 1 train to move Waterville-Keag as opposed to 2...
From the looks of the ties they are hoping to come as far south with ties as about MP.44. Thats just north of Old Town if I'm not mistaken. Currently, 6packs are prohibited east of Bangor (logistically NMJ) so assuming they get this tie project done by ground freeze it would leave less than 15 miles. I wonder if an exception might be made?
I think you're entirely correct. They would rather run these trains whole. But more importantly not only would it be easier on their dispatchers but it would be more profitable. That is the reason why they are going to do whatever it takes to upgrade the line between WA and MA. Cutting these trains in half does substantial and immediate damage to their profits on these trains.

So unlike other situations that we have discussed in the past, where PAR/GTI was foregoing incremental business in this case they have a very short term incentive to make very substantial improvements to their infrastructure as fast as possible. This year is shaping up to be a historic one for the former Maine Central and in my opinion will be seen as nothing short of transformative. We are watching a clear break with history take place right before our very eyes and it is going to have second and third order effects in Maine that are impossible to predict at this stage.
  by MEC&BAR
 
KSmitty wrote:Currently, 6packs are prohibited east of Bangor (logistically NMJ) so assuming they get this tie project done by ground freeze it would leave less than 15 miles. I wonder if an exception might be made?
Please correct me if I am wrong but I was under the assumption that the 6packs were prohibited east of Bangor because of the curves. They could not negotiate the tight curves in Bangor.
  by deeptrax
 
This is literally as "down south" as "up north" gets, but I noticed a parked train (WBD) at CPF 199 today, with 2 NS and 1 BNSF unit. Judging by the Sappi boxcars, I'm guessing this was WAPO. But why was it parked here? this was at 1700. It was gone when we drove by at 2040.
  by KSmitty
 
MEC&BAR wrote:
KSmitty wrote:Currently, 6packs are prohibited east of Bangor (logistically NMJ) so assuming they get this tie project done by ground freeze it would leave less than 15 miles. I wonder if an exception might be made?
Please correct me if I am wrong but I was under the assumption that the 6packs were prohibited east of Bangor because of the curves. They could not negotiate the tight curves in Bangor.
Finally found it. Apparently Veazie is the issue, tight curves... http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... or#p651812 of course crappy track cant help, but I would say based on them allowed as far as Bangor that its Veazie's curves that are the issue.
I still wonder if some allowance would be made if the track is brought back to decent shape for oil trains. Realistically they don't have any need to send manifests north with 6 axles, but the oil would seem more economical behind foreign power as one set.
  by mick
 
If only the Maine Central wasn't so narrow-minded and short sighted back in the 70's, they would have realized that one day they would need to run six-axle diesels on thair little railroad.
  by gokeefe
 
mick wrote:If only the Maine Central wasn't so narrow-minded and short sighted back in the 70's, they would have realized that one day they would need to run six-axle diesels on thair little railroad.
Were they doing well enough back then that they could have afforded whatever improvements or changes were necessary to run six axle power?
  by KSmitty
 
Definitely, Maine Central was a prized property even into the Guilford Era. Sure, many changes were coming. The Mountain and Calais branches were doomed either way but the railroad was solid. Remember, the paper industry was a lot more profitable back then and Maine Central served the mills essentially both ways, pulp in paper out. They had the cash, but realistically I wonder how many actually saw the need for 6 axles? I mean until 3 months ago there was no need and now the only need is off a business that is ultimately very dependent on many economic and political factors. A pipeline, a move to renewable energies, a move to domestic production...it might be long term enough to warrant trackwork (which is needed as traffic from NBSR has so rapidly increased over the last couple years) but the court battles over land ownership to make the changes now might outlast the business...
  by gokeefe
 
KSmitty wrote:They had the cash, but realistically I wonder how many actually saw the need for 6 axles? I mean until 3 months ago there was no need and now the only need is off a business that is ultimately very dependent on many economic and political factors.
That's part of the reason I found mick's post so interesting. He seemed to imply that there were indeed more than a few people working for the railroad at the time who could see the utility in being able to run six axle locomotives north (TT EAST) of Bangor.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 155