• PAR Business Train (ST 100, 101, 102 & 103; PAR 1 & 2)

  • 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

  • 1311 posts
  • 1
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 88
  by johnpbarlow
 
PAR 2 led OCS dead head move from E Deerfield to Portsmouth NH on Tuesday 8/13/19. Don't know what is next for the OCS...
  by Dick H
 
PAR OCS was likely in Portsmouth yesterday to pick up a check for $5 Million for the former Hampton Branch, that will become a rail trail.
From indepthnh.org Scroll about 2/3 down the page for the details
http://indepthnh.org/2019/08/14/council ... ail-trail/

Thursday, the OCS was approaching Rockingham on the Portsmouth Branch witn PAR 1 leading at 9:15AM.
  by eustis22
 
"Advocates for the Seacoast Greenway told Seacoast Online that the former rail-trail could be used to access downtowns like in Portsmouth and Hampton, as well as Seabrook’s shopping centers on Route 1."

lmao. bevcause nothing says biking like a quick stop at Lowes for some paneling.
  by shadyjay
 
eustis22 wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2019 9:32 am "Advocates for the Seacoast Greenway told Seacoast Online that the former rail-trail could be used to access downtowns like in Portsmouth and Hampton, as well as Seabrook’s shopping centers on Route 1."
Yeah, that's a good one!

Too bad the line couldn't have been kept for future rail service. At one point there was talk of an excursion operation IIRC. The plus side is this doesn't completely knock Portsmouth out of the running for any future commuter rail service... it could be done, via the branch to the main at Rockingham Jct, and probably for a lot cheaper, too.
  by RenegadeMonster
 
Wait, what?

Is that saying that the Eastern could never be reactivated for rail service? I hope that isn't the case.
  by Hux
 
Build a bridge over the Merrimack, placate a likely hostile cadre of condo owners in Newburyport, traverse the neighborhood of a nuke plant and convince the environmental set that no critters or marshland (where water levels are rising) were harmed in the reactivation of a railroad right of way. Oh, and find a source of funding to do all of it.
Last edited by MEC407 on Fri Aug 16, 2019 7:45 am, edited 1 time in total. Reason: unnecessary quoting
  by gokeefe
 
Environmental review of right of way reactivation is minimal. With regards to all the other points, "My thoughts exactly".

So, "Yes", the Eastern is now "never again".
  by RenegadeMonster
 
When it comes to the nuclear power plant. I would expect it to be decommissioned in the next 20 years as is the trend with many aging nuclear plants closing. So, it may not be a problem whenever they decide to reactivate the tracks.

As for the bridge. It could be done. One bridge isn't a show stopper.

The biggest threat may be those condo owners or future conversion to rail trail.
  by MEC407
 
RenegadeMonster wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:48 pm When it comes to the nuclear power plant. I would expect it to be decommissioned in the next 20 years as is the trend with many aging nuclear plants closing. So, it may not be a problem whenever they decide to reactivate the tracks.
Depends on what remains onsite after the plant is decommissioned. Maine Yankee shut down in 1996 and was completely dismantled by 2005, but there's still nuclear waste stored there (and thus a perimeter that must be kept secure) because there's nowhere else to store it. So if Seabrook shuts down in 2040, they could potentially still be storing waste there in 2060 or beyond. I'd like to think that we'll have better storage or reuse options for spent fuel by 2060, but the federal government moves very slowly, and with changes in leadership every 4-8 years, priorities frequently shift.
  by gokeefe
 
True however if they follow the same plan as Maine Yankee the footprint will be significantly smaller. Interesting thought.
  by newpylong
 
The spent fuel storage facility at Seabrook is also literally the closest thing on the site to the old Eastern. So they could decommission and make the rest a field and it could still be an issue.
  • 1
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 88