The rush to rip up track, and why keep the track they did...

Pacobell73 wrote:Oh, I know it was not an actual bomb: that was just my way of saying the PC allegedy felt the Poughkeepsie Bridge was something of an albatross, so they sent a train over it to purposely burn the bridge down. I know nothing has been proven, but after reading all the details over the years, I would not put it past the financially put-upon PC to literally "burn their own bridges."

That has to be the most asinine thing I've ever read here. And that's saying something. It's quite common and easy for a fire to be caused unintentionally by a train - one reason for mufflers and spark arrestors added to steam, and some diesel, locomotives. Hot spark + dry grass, dry wood, etc. = fire.

The last train over the bridge was PC symbol CB-2 at about 1:00 PM on May 8th, 1974, carrying connections from the L&HR train of the same symbol. About an hour later 700 feet of the east end bridge deck (crossing among other things the former NYC mainline) was on fire. The fire was extremely difficult to put out due to the winds and the height of the structure. The only wood in it was the ties and deck walkway. This is somewhat paraphrased right out of the Winter 1974 issue of Railfan Magazine. It also notes that due to many years of deferred maintenance water lines were broken or inoperative - and it also goes on to note that the ICC ended up forcing the PC to pay the same division rate to the L&HR as they got for hauling to Maybrook, but interchanging at Phillipsburg.

Let's get back to the topic: Conrail and its track rationalization program between 1976-1981.

-otto-

I just read the books "The Men Who Loved Trains" and "Erie Lackawanna, The Death of an American Railroad". I suggest these books, in order to further this discussion.

Conrail had to make the cuts because of the redundancy of lines. Reagan was going to cut the purse strings to Conrail. It all comes down to keeping the lines that made the most money. In one of the books mentioned above, there was a statistic that some small percentage of the lines made the majority of profits. I think this sums it all up.

Based on the reading, EL and some of the smaller companies were going to go their own way, as a separate company. The use of D&H as the competition was last ditch, after EL failed. I do think that the D&H expansion could have been better thought out. On that thought I agree with Noel. NYC especially had the best facilities and served the most lucrative markets. Former PRR had other big markets too. They just hadn't modernized their plant like Pearlman did with NYC. Therefor, I feel that any Conrail company competing with Conrail would have been at a disadvantage, even If they had their own lines. The onely way the Conrail alternative company would have made it would be if a railroad form another region bought it. The fact remains that no one really did (I know that someone will throw ATSF-EL in my face). N&W didn't want the Northeast problem (in the 1970s, before Elizabeth Dole wanted NS to get it).
All worked out in the end. The proposed N&W-PRR and C&O-B&O-NYC mergers of the early sixties ended up happening, just in a round about way. The NS and CSX both got their brides after Uncle Sam paid of the face lift.

lvrr325 wrote:

Pacobell73 wrote:Oh, I know it was not an actual bomb: that was just my way of saying the PC allegedy felt the Poughkeepsie Bridge was something of an albatross, so they sent a train over it to purposely burn the bridge down. I know nothing has been proven, but after reading all the details over the years, I would not put it past the financially put-upon PC to literally "burn their own bridges."

That has to be the most asinine thing I've ever read here. And that's saying something. It's quite common and easy for a fire to be caused unintentionally by a train - one reason for mufflers and spark arrestors added to steam, and some diesel, locomotives. Hot spark + dry grass, dry wood, etc. = fire.

I agree - it is pretty asinine. I have ready much commentary that PC was trying to get rid of that Poughkeepsie Bridge, so they quietly tried to eliminate it. I do not really believe that theory myself, so please do not take it that it is my own.

Now, back to the Erie...