CSX Acquisition of Pan Am Railways

[Cosakita18]

Is the tunnel still not capable of handling stacks? I thought the new trash containers were running double stacked on 22/23k ?? Or is the tunnel just not capable of handling the slightly taller domestic containers?

[bostontrainguy]

If Hoosac Tunnel cannot clear "double dtacks", then how do they get the "Blue Bird" Dome through it?

I would presume that car is ex-Wabash RR and was acquired from NS.

Double Stacks are about 20' 2" feet high. Domes are only about 15' 6" - 15' 10" feet high.

PAS does actually run double stack containers through Hoosac but they are the lower height "international" version. Either two stacked together or a domestic box (9' 6" high) on top of an International box (8' 6" high).

[johnpbarlow]

The first photo is a capture of a domestic 53' JBHU container sitting on a 40' K Line international container on a westbound 23K in June 2017 passing through Shirley on its way to Hoosac Tunnel and points west, before NS stopped handling international cube containers on 22K/23K in either early 2018 or 2019.

To approach getting back on topic, the 2nd photo is a picture of Pan Am's newest and "freshest" intermodal business - double stacked open top international cube containers re-purposed to haul Boston area trash to a landfill in Alabama via NS. Photo #2 shows the AY-Relief crew shoving 20 or so empty containers across Sandy Pond Rd to the old Ford yard at Ayer. The loaded containers typically head west on the front of 23K to be dropped at Mechanicville for 11R to pick-up and empties come east on 16R/EDPO. Presumably the next owner of the property will try to expand upon hauling the region's #1 export.

[Gilbert B Norman]

This immediate discussion regarding container dimensions is quite "enlightening". Apparently the JB Hunt container that Mr. Barlow posted cannot travel over the European rail system and accordingly must be transloaded at a Port of Entry. The Maersk containers that Mr. Barlow also posted smelling sweet as honey (the Trainman shown surely agrees!!!!) can do so, and also "double stacked" through close clearances, e.g. Hoosac, on PAS.

Now I've been overseas "a bit" during the past six years, and even in my jet lagged stupor I guess I've never seen any American registry containers between Munich and Salzburg. There is an "Inland Port" at Salzburg, and I'd never noticed, "one way or the other", such passing there.

So apparently this 9ft 6in height container registered to Japanese shipping company K-Line can clear throughout Japan, albeit single level. So I must wonder, can the JB Hunt clear, single or double, through Mainland Asia?

"Meanwhile, back in The States", for all the years I have followed railroad industry affairs (I'm really not a fan anymore) both from within and without, this is my first knowledge that containers came with differing heights. I still have the capacity to learn even in my elder years - and this discussion has proven to be such an opportinity.

[CN9634]

All modern containers are built off ISO specifications.. if there wasnt a spec the system wouldn't work harmoniously. The domestic containers are all 'hi cubes', even though they have standardized to a bigger size. The posts and pins are all ISO so they can be hooked up with ICBs without worry of if you are on a 40, 45 or 2x20'. Also a 53' can be top loaded on ships, as a lot of boxes are made in China and sail into the west coast.

People have told me that oh you can't mount a JB Hunt box on a certain chassis or blah blah blah but I've seen Hunt boxes mounted on Schneider chassis by mistake in CSX yards and Schneider boxes on NS chassis ect... I think at one point some of these guys tried unique systems but it all ends up the same -- failure.

Have fun: https://www.iso.org/ics/55.180.10/x/

[Gilbert B Norman]

At my immediate posting, I noted the "Inland Port" at Salzburg. It appears that the Googlemobile has done some exploring around the site's perimeter. Should it aid in our discussion of containers that Pan Am can or cannot handle over its existing profile, great. If not, I accept if Mr. MEC 407 chooses to kill it.

[alcohh660]

I think that one of the big issues with a container facility in the old sp shipyard is road access. Broadway is pretty thick now with residential traffic. I don't think it would go over very well to suggest adding more truck traffic to the mix.
Maybe if the relocation, or elimination, of oil tanks is to be considered, Turner's Island might be a better location. There is already rail access, although upgrading would be a given. The distance for trucks traveling on Broadway would be decreased as well.
The tank farm owned by the Portland Pipe Line Corp (maybe now owned by Shell Canada) close to Turner Island is in mothballs and would certainly be capable in holding considerable more product than the Shipyard site, allowing the removal of the tanks in the Shipyard area and consolidating them at the tank farm near Turner's Island.
Of course, even though it would open up property in the shipyard area for more 'acceptable' uses-whatever that means -fill in the blank, the Turner's Island location has it's share of NIMBYs, and would I'm sure would present a huge hurdle, even though there are oil terminals already present in the area-Texaco and Global as well as the ones near the Veterans Bridge. Remember the propane terminal that was proposed on the Rigby site.

Actually, Phiney Sprague could be approached with a land swap for his shipyard-for the old shipyard site in South Portland might work. It would eliminate oil tanks and create a real waterfront industry. What goes around...

S

[gokeefe]

Should be interesting to see if we get an announcement on this transaction anytime soon. It could target a closing for December 31, 2020.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[newpylong]

They can't close before the STB approves it and that likely wouldn't happen this year even if they applied today.

[Gilbert B Norman]

Good point Mr. Newpylong.

So far as I know the Surfboard Members are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

Lest we forget, there could well be a new occupant @ 1600 come January. While in theory, the Board stays on. But some may choose to resign. Could this result in a change to the existing "competitive rail" philosophy? That certainly could affect which parties could get Pan Am.

[QB 52.32]

So when that does not happen do I get to say I told you so?

LOL, I'd generously say that we'd be even! Still waiting for that intermodal service connecting with CSX and NS into Maine that "deep throat" assured would start March, 2014. And, to be fair, with all the free passes over the years and odds in your favor since you're betting the entire field against my single pick, you should be offering something worthwhile in that deal.

Can you ask "deep throat" why GWI has had no showing in the zig zag rumor reporting, beyond matching your own wrong paradigm about STB regulation, when they are an important New England player?

Word on the street is that a case of Orange Crush was seen being loaded onto the OCS.

[QB 52.32]

Lol ... I remain open to the idea that a private equity fund such as Fortress would be interested and very much unconvinced that a bid from GWI could be taken seriously (if it were to even materialize) based on regulatory concerns. They are just as "out of it" as CSX. While it seems clear enough that NS thinks they stand a chance with the STB (which seems like a shift from times past in regards to BM/MEC) I have a hard time discounting potential interest from CN. The early signal in my opinion remains the choice to use Bank of Montreal (literally about 300 feet from CN's HQ) as the investment banker.

Right...GWI has serious regulatory issues but CN does not....tell that to the folks in Jacksonville, Atlanta and Darien.

[Gilbert B Norman]

Right...GWI has serious regulatory issues but CN does not....tell that to the folks in Jacksonville, Atlanta and Darien.

Mr. QB, did your captioned quote ever have me looking at the maps of the GWI roads in New England. If they get Pan Am, they will as good as have, save the branch free "spike" of the B&A, a virtual monopoly on anything moving on the rails in New England - and given the present Surfboard philosophy (subject to change Jan 20), that is a "naughty naughty".

Even if CN makes rates with Pan Am through the now-GWI former Grand Trunk, that still represents interline traffic. Delivering roads, compared with originating, get the "short stick" of the divisions. So I agree CN has no regulatory issues with the STB. But still, no physical "mano a mano" interchange.

All told, still holding my $2 on Topper; not holding my breath on a decision anytime soon.

[MEC407]

Word on the street is that a case of Orange Crush was seen being loaded onto the OCS.

That figures... too cheap to get the good stuff (Sunkist).

[bostontrainguy]

Well at least it wasn't Canada Dry!