CTC Single tracking of B&M and Maine Central Main Lines?

[cu29640]

When were the B&M and Maine Central Lines converted to single track with CTC controlled sidings? Did each RR undertake the project themselves in the 60's..or did Guildford actually spend the money to do that after they took over?

Also, related to above...when were most of the B&M and Maine Central secondary mains abandoned..like the Mountain Div and the Route from Concord to Lebanon?

Also..up to when Guilford bought B&M...B&M was an efficient railroad with good track that made a profit. How did this deteriorate under Guilford?

[F-line to Dudley via Park]

Most of the single-tracking was done in the 60's long before Guilford came around. That first 10 years after the end of steam is when the faltering RR's really looked to CTC to increase their efficiency and lower track maint costs by trading in DT for higher-capacity ST signaling. With passenger traffic gone and freight traffic undergoing major upheaval, it was the right decision at the time and did make ops a lot more efficient than unidirectional DT with much more staff-intensive local-tower signaling. You can't fault the reasoning too much because for 50 years it was right-sized for traffic levels. It's only now where the passenger traffic has swelled back in-force and the surge in intermodal has tapped out capacity. 50 years--pretty much the lifespan of the infrastructure before it needs a complete refresh--of that postwar rebuild being fully adequate for capacity is success by any measure. It may have been shortsighted some places, but as writ-large philosophy it was the correct modernization decision that served needs for the whole 2nd half of the 20th century.


1983 was when Guilford got off the Mountain. MEC had severed most of its combined ops with B&M during B&M's bankruptcy in the 50's, and so this was their best solo thru route to the west from Portland. They spent quite a lot of money in track upgrades in the 70's to boost their sagging fortunes. When Guilford bought the MEC in 1980 (3+ years before they bought B&M), it was likewise their main gateway to the west. So the thru traffic was as healthy as not-very-healthy 1970's MEC could possibly get in terms of traffic on that line, but it was 90%+ thru traffic because the line was nearly devoid of any on-line customers. The only stuff that could sustain a local job was at the extreme east end Portland-Westbrook still under PAR and the extreme west end in VT that stayed longer under Guilford longer than any other segment and was most recently in service under defunct Twin State RR.

The big change happened when Guilford got B&M. Once B&M and MEC were under common ownership Guilford had the far, far superior B&M route west and the direct connection with D&H, who they bought 1 year later and were already scheming to buy at the time of the B&M purchase. So the Mountain was the very first strategic cut of the newly merged RR and all of the thru traffic instantly got yanked off the Mountain, leaving just the Westbrook-east and the St. Johnsbury ends where the locals still had enough biz to make ends meet. To be fair to much-maligned Guilford, there was no sandbagging of local traffic here like so many other places, because there was virtually nil local traffic to begin with. The cut was the correct strategic decision for them, because there was simply no way to re-fashion the line to non-redundant use (and as MEDOT is finding out now...there still isn't). It was completely, totally, utterly redundant once Portland-Mechanicville was theirs.


Others can detail the tales-of-woe that were Guilford-being-Guilford. But basically the future was looking bright until the strikes of '87-88 murdered everything and the 20 years don't-give-a-crap era began in earnest. Mellon's ideology towards labor drove him to extremes, enough that he was willing to do a pyrrhic victory (or outright loss) driving his own railroad into the ground if that was the cost of breaking his employees' unions. Being a private RR with only a couple--and like-minded--shareholders meant he didn't have to answer to any shareholders who...you know...would've set business limits to how much they were willing to destroy to prove a point. But that's why Guilford was such a strange, strange railroad. No Class I or almost-Class I like them had such consolidated power at the top where one guy had no checks and balances from other shareholders. And that was the primary means that things got so ridiculously out-of-hand in the late-80's...never to recover.

[dnelson]

It's important to remember that Maine Central (including after being bought by Guilford) was operating the equivalent of a double track railroad from Royal Junction (14 miles east of Rigby) to Waterville because of the Lower Road and Back Road main lines. General practice was for eastbounds on the Back Road and westbounds on the Lower Road. It was only after the first strike began in March 1986 that main line service on the Lower Road was discontinued. This was despite the Lower Road being flatter and shorter than the Back Road, and at the time maintained to for 40MPH track speed.

[EDFLD Bill]

FYI To All: Guilford purchased the MEC on June 16th, 1981, B&M on June 30th, 1983, and D&H on January 4th, 1984....

[newpylong]

For historical references, the strikes were in '86 (the BMWE initiated strike on the MEC) and the '87 (the ST initiated safety violation strike), not '87 and '88.

The B&M pre- Guilford did get rid of the double track railroad - that is literally two tracks from Rotterdam to Boston- but Guilford drastically reduced this further in the late 80s and early 90s.

Just on the Fitchburg:

-The double track and CTC was pulled up on the Rotterdam branch
-The double track was reduced from Snyders down to Ferry Street just outside Mechanicville
-The double iron was killed from North Pownal to Williamstown
-The double iron was killed from Rices to Shelburne Falls - later to be reinstated as the slow track between Buckland and Shelburne.
-The double iron was killed between West Deerfield and Greenfield.
-The double iron was killed between Gardner and Westminster.

By my quick math that is a reduction of 42 miles of double track there alone.

[690]

It's important to remember that Maine Central (including after being bought by Guilford) was operating the equivalent of a double track railroad from Royal Junction (14 miles east of Rigby) to Waterville because of the Lower Road and Back Road main lines. General practice was for eastbounds on the Back Road and westbounds on the Lower Road. It was only after the first strike began in March 1986 that main line service on the Lower Road was discontinued. This was despite the Lower Road being flatter and shorter than the Back Road, and at the time maintained to for 40MPH track speed.

Keep in mind that there really weren't any customers on the Lower Road, while the Back Road still had (has) several important customers. Guilford (and now Pan Am) retained ownership into North Augusta, where the few remaining customers are still located, and continues to go down there about twice a week. For a little while around the year 2000, the Maine Coast would operate into Augusta to serve Pine State, and they would hand the cars off to Guilford by the old tissue mill on the east side of the Kennebec.

Edit: Also, at the time, the Back Road wasn't in nearly as bad of shape as it is now. For example, see this video of a westbound Guilford freight practically flying through Leeds Junction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvQQMDW ... _gWJTHalLD" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And mostly unrelated, but check out this video of a local at Winthrop:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReP8M9F ... D&index=29" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[KSmitty]

Also remember the important connections on the back road: Danville Junction (I realize there is Yarmouth Jct that could have served the same purpose.) Leeds Junction and the Rumford branch, and Oakland and the Madison Branch. Plus the aforementioned smattering of customers that the lower rd didn't have.

Many of the reductions made in the 80's and 90's were neccessary and could be made in a post-1980 Staggers Acts world. They no longer needed direct connection to CP over the Mountain, the B&M with a bigger share of the linehaul and a direct connection at Mohawk was a less expensive option. The Calais Br. surely wouldn't have survived long, can you imagine running 200 round trip miles for maybe 50 cars/week? I know there is lots of bitterness between esp. former employees and GTI, following the strikes. And I'm not going to say GRS/PAR is an example of efficient railroading. I'm just saying the changes they made might not necessarilly be all bad or even unaviodable, but the draconian manner in which they were executed certainly was.

Your notion that the B&M was healthy, efficient and profitable leading to its sale to GTI is incorrect. B&M danced the line with bankruptcy from the 50's on. The sale to GTI in 1983 was approved by the bankruptcy court, and was what brought the B&M out of its last bankruptcy case. It was becoming more efficient, had rebuilt much of the system to conditions better than today, and was making strides in the right direction, but was still in bankruptcy dealings. Of the 3 railroads, only Maine Central was a successful railroad, having avoided bankruptcy and showing profit (thanks in large part to the paper mills). The D&H avoided bankruptcy in 1984 by selling to GTI. You know when a railroad sells for $500,000 its not healthy.

[BostonUrbEx]

Edit: Also, at the time, the Back Road wasn't in nearly as bad of shape as it is now. For example, see this video of a westbound Guilford freight practically flying through Leeds Junction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvQQMDW ... _gWJTHalLD" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wow. That was glorious. :')

Ya' know, if speeds were 40MPH from Waterville (~ MP110) to Rigby (~ MP200), you could run a POWA or WAPO with one crew and in under 3 hours. I mean, hell, you could have one crew run POWA and have that same crew turn with WAPO and make it back! Currently it has been taking 2+ crews for each train.

I think two things are key right now: track speed and yarding. You can deal with single track and bad power if you have the speed to handle it.

[dnelson]

Ya' know, if speeds were 40MPH from Waterville (~ MP110) to Rigby (~ MP200), you could run a POWA or WAPO with one crew and in under 3 hours. I mean, hell, you could have one crew run POWA and have that same crew turn with WAPO and make it back! Currently it has been taking 2+ crews for each train.

I think two things are key right now: track speed and yarding. You can deal with single track and bad power if you have the speed to handle it.

In the early 80s, Guilford ran a piggyback train called the "East Wind" that ran from Rigby to Bangor, and then back to Rigby with a single crew in under 12 hours.

It's an oversimplification to say the Lower Road didn't really have any customers. There were plenty of customers on the Rockland Branch, Lewiston Lower Branch, and don't forget the Cobbosseecontee Branch in Gardiner that had eight customers back in the 60s despite being barely over one mile long.

Remember, the majority of the Lower Road is still in service, with Pan Am running trains from Rigby to Brunswick, and from Waterville to East Augusta. Only approx 30 miles are out of service and owned by the state.

Guilford could have kept the Lower Road as their main line and stopped using the 30 miles between Leeds Jct. and Oakland instead of the similar length stretch from Brunswick to Augusta. They would have still had access to the Rumford Branch, Madison Branch, and Danville, while being able to discontinue use of the longest grade on the entire railroad in Readfield, and have a shorter main line better suited for through traffic in the Lower Road.

[KSmitty]

While it might have been 6 miles shorter and a little flatter, it wasn't necessarily going to be easier to the railroad bi-directionally across the lower road. It also got them out of a few heavier population centers, (Augusta/Hallowell/Gardner) with great reduction in frequency through Freeport/Brunswick and Winslow.

I think there are several reasons they opted for the Back Rd.
Operationally, you had:
Back Rd: Oakland, Readfield, Winthrop (there was actually a ~64 car siding under 202 to Annebessacook Rd. Ties still in place), Leeds, Fairgrounds, Rumford Jct. New Gloucester, Walnut.
Low Rd: Augusta, Richmond, Cathance, Brunswick, Sodom
That's 8/5 for sidings over 50 cars (meet worthy), 9/5 is you count Danville.

The Back Rd option allowed them to rationalize the Kennebec River Br in Augusta, the Low Rd option would have required maintaining that bridge, as well as the one over the Androscoggin in Lewiston/Auburn.

It successfully withdrew them from downtown Augusta, Hallowell and Gardner and dramatically reduced train traffic in Freeport, Brunswick, Winslow. The last 3 especially but all 6 in general are, with apologies to anyone who lives there and would take offense, "yuppie." When you look at modern crossing protection these are the areas where quiet zones are put in place. Its an expense and a hassle to deal with this, even if the town pays for upgrades, the railroad has to maintain and pay a higher electric bill. Thats after you get through all the legal shennanigans of dealing with the town. No similar reductions would have been accomplished in ceasing service from Leeds to Oakland.

As for customers on the Lower Rd, they maintained contact with the Lewiston Branch and Rockland Branch. By '87 the Cobbosseecontee Branch was a thing of the past. It's not even listed as an RT by that point. The actual Lower Rd. Main had nadda for customers in the area no longer serviced. The Rockland (and Lewiston) Branch turned into a real winner, there's some big business there now...In the long run, I think the decision to retain the Freight Main was a good decision on an economic level, and 6 extra miles and a few grades doesn't make that big a difference, especially back when fuel prices were <$1.00/gallon. It might make a bigger difference now, but not in the late 80's.

[MEC407]

The Back Rd option allowed them to rationalize the Kennebec River Br in Augusta, the Low Rd option would have required maintaining that bridge, as well as the one over the Androscoggin in Lewiston/Auburn.

If the rumors I've heard about the Androscoggin River bridge in L/A are true, they'll either have to pour some substantial money into it in the near-ish future or start using the Lower Road again.

[dnelson]

It's not worth getting riled up about the Lower Road vs Back Road too much. The last through train on the Lower Road was in March 1986, coinciding with the beginning of the first strike, and obviously things were never going to be the same after that. I had thought it made sense to use the Back Road instead of the Lower Road as the main for a long time too, it was only after a long discussion with a Guilford dispatcher telling me about the countless stalled out trains he had to deal with in Readfield over the years I started to see the other side of the picture.

Regarding the "yuppie" town factor, obviously it's great to avoid towns and crossings whenever possible if you're running a freight railroad, but there are such a lot of high traffic grade crossings in Auburn and Lewiston on the Back Road, and those are relatively rough areas with a lot of issues with trespassing and vandalism. A while back a Pan Am conductor was assaulted by some random guy outside a train at Fairgrounds, and there are a lot of homeless camps along the tracks in Auburn. Ultimately you run trains where the tracks are, and can't really pick and choose the cities and towns you go through. It's not the yuppie towns that cause real problems, though. Sure, they'll whine and complain, but you won't find something in Brunswick (which actually isn't a quiet zone, FYI) like this: http://thebollard.com/2014/11/02/sherwood-forest/

You're correct about the Cobbosseecontee Branch, it was taken out of service in 1985. I mentioned it not to support the Lower Road's case as a better main line, but rather in the response to the notion that the Lower Road was a customer-less line. All the major Back Road customers are/were on branches too...

[690]

You're correct about the Cobbosseecontee Branch, it was taken out of service in 1985. I mentioned it not to support the Lower Road's case as a better main line, but rather in the response to the notion that the Lower Road was a customer-less line. All the major Back Road customers are/were on branches too...

They are now, but in the late '80s, there were quite a few customers directly on the Back Road. There were several in Oakland, several in Winthrop, several in the Lewiston/Auburn area, and so on.

[dnelson]

You're correct about the Cobbosseecontee Branch, it was taken out of service in 1985. I mentioned it not to support the Lower Road's case as a better main line, but rather in the response to the notion that the Lower Road was a customer-less line. All the major Back Road customers are/were on branches too...

They are now, but in the late '80s, there were quite a few customers directly on the Back Road. There were several in Oakland, several in Winthrop, several in the Lewiston/Auburn area, and so on.

There were a lot more customers on the Lower Road in the 80s too.

[690]

You're correct about the Cobbosseecontee Branch, it was taken out of service in 1985. I mentioned it not to support the Lower Road's case as a better main line, but rather in the response to the notion that the Lower Road was a customer-less line. All the major Back Road customers are/were on branches too...

They are now, but in the late '80s, there were quite a few customers directly on the Back Road. There were several in Oakland, several in Winthrop, several in the Lewiston/Auburn area, and so on.

There were a lot more customers on the Lower Road in the 80s too.

Which they retained access to... the ones in Augusta and the Brunswick area. The Cobbosseecontee Branch had been abandoned already (and was only down to a single customer anyway), and there really wasn't anything else between Augusta and Brunswick.