SEWA Changes

Is this still going on, or was it a "one-time" thing?

Thanks much for your response. It's interesting how "flexible" Pan Am appears to be in making adjustments with their train network to match traffic.

cpf354 wrote: When the PAS starts, it'll be interesting to see if the Barber interchange traffic diminishes even more. Traffic is down all over the system anyway.

All things being equal, I don't think PAS is intended to change Pan Am's relationship with CSX as a second, competing outlet for their originated traffic out of Maine. Unless CSX's rates rise visa vi NS or for some reason both carriers want to shift traffic to Rotterdam Jct. I'd guess Barber as a gateway will remain the "same", although affected by the downturn in traffic. PAS is the vehicle for NS to rescue the west end from collapse through capital investment while gaining a share in the managment of their investments, while for Pan Am it represents essentially giving up 50% of the revenue on the move from Ayer to Mechanicsville via PAS to pay for NS's investment. I'd have to believe that with PAS going only as far east as Ayer belies what has been a long-term situation from Pan Am's (and earlier with MEC) perspective: that the ex-MEC franchise is amongst their most profitable lines of business and having as many possible competing outlets works to their benefit, so Pan Am needs "direct" access to CSX via Worcester.

cpf354 wrote:Good points. After all CSX didn't raise any objections to PAS. My thought would be that given the history of the Barber connection (it was created only as recently as 1989, to handle covered auto racks) and that Pan Am is hoping to get more CSX interchange at Rotterdam to and from the VRS, that less CSX traffic will move through Barber in favor of Rotterdam Jct. Pan Am also needs to maintain 20 some miles of track to reach the connection. But, the obvious isn't always the truth in the railroad bussiness, so I guess we'll see!

True enough! It will be interesting to see how things play out with Pan Am's CSX gateways once PAS gets under way. Because Pan Am will now be effectively splitting the revenue (and cost) of taffic moving via PAS to Rotterdam Jct. with NS, it could very well be advantageous for Pan Am to own/operate and funnel traffic for CSX via the Worcester Main. I would also believe that Pan Am would want to maintain that strategic connection should the NS take outright ownership of the Freight Main and Conn River, et. al. somewhere down the road. Perhaps Pan Am will try to "do" a PAS with CSX for the Worcester Main! Also, I would have to wonder how PAS will view that shorthaul traffic from the VTR Hoosick Jct. to CSX Rotterdam Jct. Lastly, IIRC, there was PC-B&M interchange via Worcester for traffic coming out of Maine during the '70's, handled on the "Bullet" from Portland, though shut down late in the B&M's independance or early in Guilford's tenure. From my perspective it's a chess game informed by economics and history and played by participants trying to meet their own needs at any given time.

cpf354 wrote:IIRC, the PC and prior New Haven B&M Worcester interchange was via the South Worcester yard. The B&M would run all the way past Worcester Union Station and under the B&A down into So. Worcester. There wasn't, to my knowledge, a way for B&M trains to go directly onto the B&A, until a connecting track was installed at CP-45.

Yeah, back in the early '70's, like many railroad operations in the area, the B&M-PC Worcester interchange was handled in a "yard-intensive" way, reflecting labor agreements, interchange agreements, ICC regulation governing interchange gateways and without the yet-to-come deregulation and streamlining of the '80's. In today's environment, a "run-through", or at least B&M delivery to PC's East Worcester yard, would have taken headroom down into S Worcester and shoved back through the eastward connection onto the B&A, but back then constraints dictated that the interchange be handled by both PC's S Worcester and E Worcester yards. S Worcester's switchers would forward the interchange to/from E Worcester who would switch the pick-ups and set-outs made by the road trains to/from the west. S. Worcester, IIRC, had switchers on duty 24/7, to bring the interchange to the B&M's N Worcester yard, amongst other duties, as I think it was an interchange standard back then that the delivering road would bring the interchange to the other carrier's yard and come back light. In recalling this operation, it would make sense that the B&M Worcester I/C ended in 1976 with the start of Conrail and the sale of the S. Worcester yard and Norwich branch to the P&W. I believe that traffic moving via the Worcester interchange was shifted over to Springfield at Conrail's inception until the start of 'streamlined', run-through interchange via Barbers. Under today's regulatory and labor environments, but contributiing to the loss of yards and switch jobs, carriers are able to have more control over how and where interchange occurs.