CSX Activity in New England

[roberttosh]

It will be interesting to see if they try to lengthen the unloading pad eastward, as they somewhat refer to that in the article. The present unloading pad is not nearly long enough to handle an entire train, which creates the need for very inefficient switching. Looking at Google maps, it appears that in order to build a wide enough unloading area eastward, they would need to remove some of the tracks and/or possibley build into the hillside along the south side of the tracks. Either way that is going to be a tight squeeze. On the upside, once they get full domestic doublestack clearances, train lengths should be a bit shorter. I am also wondering if they are talking about raising the south side of the yard up to the level of the unloading area. That would allow them to connect many of the stub end tracks to the mainline near the I-290 overpass giving them more runthrough tracks. This may be how they are going to be able to build a bridge across Franklin St as the whole yard will be built up. Will be interesting to see how this pans out.

[johnpbarlow]

Although growing container/trailer lifts by 20% daily isn't a lot, isn't the rail space at E Worcester already at max capacity? I've seen many bare table trains headed eb through Framingham that I'm guessing were used to clear tracks in E Worcester. Does this rail space constraint get resolved by extending the yard eastward from Fantasia Dr to Atlanta St?

[roberttosh]

There's actually quite a bit of room for flatcar storage in Worcester. Not only are their multiple tracks within the yard itself used for storage but there is also a very long siding just west of the yard that is used for overflow. Baretables heading to Boston were more than likley headed that way to be loaded. In addition to the need for more track space, they will certainly need more trailer parking spaces, which seems to be the reason they are expanding across Franklin street.

[QB 52.32]

I'm guessing that they won't go with the option to fill the southwest lower portion of the yard given the expense and inability to continue ops. during construction. Instead, I think they'll extend the un/loading pull-through tracks, TV-1 and 2, eastward to/toward CP-43. They should be able to get at least the lower specs. of 90' between track centers to support a packer operation between 2 un/loading tracks for a good deal of the way or without too much embankment excavation. However, this will require the removal of Leroy's Junkyard (he or his offspring will be happily counting their money somewhere else no doubt!), loss of track capacity to support Delaware Express (off to Westborough, E Brookfield or the G&U?) and ~1500' of lower yard un/loading track capy., probably 2 "short term" flatcar storage tracks in the yard (maybe not?), and, a couple of smaller tracks ('engine house" and "34 extension"). But, this would also facilitate parking expansion and/or the necessary "ramp" to bridge Franklin St.

I'm thinking the extension eastward to Fantasia St. involves the TV yard lead track to give some head-room for eastbounds or their power when spotting their trains or for switching from the east end without going out onto main Tk #2 at CP-43 (though not necessarily long enough to completely eliminate the need to enter the main at CP-43 for working the east end of the yard). Perhaps that extension would also serve to provide a place, east of Putnam Lane, for laying power over in the parcel occupied by the defunct golf driving range?

They may be able to hedge with flatcar storage for the time being because there will be fewer flatcars needed with the conversion of today's single-stack domestic container operation to doublestack. If they do have to add storage capacity, I'd guess it would be done with an extension of the third track west of CP-45. Those baretable moves to Beacon Park are generally part of the overall flatcar storage tactics for the weekly weekend inbound flatcar accumulation cycle with westbound re-loading occuring during the week once containers are delivered to customers and returned.

As Mr. Tosh notes, it'll be interesting to see how this pans out. And, I'm curious if CSX will shift their international doublestack business from the P&W over to E. Worcester once this project is complete.

[Teamdriver]

This the same yard that handles the UPS trailers?

[QB 52.32]

Yes, UPS...and plenty of general freight and truckload carrier traffic, too.

[frrc]

Perhaps a odd question, but with Beacon Park closed, where will the trailvan traffic that currently is setoff there go? To Worcester and trucked to Boston, or sent the usual way. Also saw some interesting NIMBY comments on the article in the Telegram. Then again, you can't please everyone....

[QB 52.32]

frrc, not too sure I understand your question...the Beacon Park intermodal (trailvan) business will be folded into the existing Worcester intermodal traffic at Worcester. Note what the CSX spokesman said in the article about how their customers want to be in Worcester and that traffic moving into Beacon Park is often trucked westward out of the city (probably to the Rt. 128, I-495 belts). Do you mean the bulk traffic moving via the "flexiflow" or "TDS" terminal at Beacon Park?

[Teamdriver]

Doesnt the chemical company next to the hotel at the Pike's Cambridge tolls get tank cars? How will this affect them?

[QB 52.32]

Yes, I think Houghton Chemical is still operating as well as a couple of other customers: Romar Warehousing and a small remnant of the waste hauling business is left. Don't think this deal directly affects Romar and Houghton, but, perhaps, somewhere along the way they'll move. I'd guess for the time being that their rail access and service will be preserved no matter what's going on with the yard.

[Tracer]

Looking at bing maps the spurs to both houghton and romar more or less follow the outside edges of the yard. I don't think it would be a be a big deal for them to save the spurs when they give up yard but who knows.

What i've been curious about is where are they going to move the transloading operations too? Everytime i look into the yard it always seems like theres 20-30 tank cars and covered hoppers in the yard(how much transloading do they do anyway?). I would love to see the yard in south boston used for this.

[roberttosh]

The Transload terminal is apparently moving to the old Westboro auto yard. It's too bad the state/town/DEP woudln't let CSXT expand at that site as it could have been a great spot for a mega-intermodal facility at the intersection of I-495 & I-90. There's more than enough room available there, just too many yellow spotted turtles I guess...

[QB 52.32]

Yeah, agreed regarding Westborough as a great intermodal terminal site. That's why the NYC purchased a bunch of land out there...anticipating the closure of Beacon Park one day (how's that for foresight!). But, nothing new coming from the state/DEP --- Conrail had to back away from Westborough late '80's for the same reason as they were attempting to close Beacon Park. Apparently The Great Cedar Swamp is a very important water source, and, consequently "untouchable". Conrail, like CSX, then turned their attention toward E. Worcester and even made some strategic real estate purchases which will now benefit CSX. Just wasn't the political will and funding source to pull it off so the whole thing went into hibernation for over 20 years.

[MBTA F40PH-2C 1050]

with all the local changes about final now, what jobs are where now?

I know B733 works Mansfield around 11am after 805 heads west, then there is another freight that works West Mansfield around 8pm, what local would this train be?

[Ironman]

QB 52.32, great post on the history of this whole deal. I had no idea they were thinking about leaving Beacon all the way back in the NYC's day.

I just hope the final layout in Worcester works out better than the East Brookfield auto site layout. That place is an operational nightmare.