• Worcester Main Derailment In Lancaster

  • 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

  by SpiderHill
 
19 cars derailed including 1 propane not leaking according to the fire chief.
  by neman2
 
From WCVB news,includes video and pictures-
LANCASTER, Mass. —Residents in Lancaster were awakened early Saturday morning by the sound of a train derailing in their backyards "My whole room shook," homeowner Monique Cormier said. "It's bad, it's scary. We're lucky."

Fire officials say there’s no cause for concern after 19 cars derailed at about 1 a.m. near Whitcomb Drive. Most of the cars were empty but two contained canola cooking oil and propane, Lancaster Fire Chief Michael Hanson said.

The propane tank was not leaking, Hanson said. The railroad company told the chief that the train will be cleaned up by Sunday night, but the tracks will take much longer to repair.
Read more: http://www.wcvb.com/news/train-derails- ... z39wAkkWbE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
  by mdamico23
 
With the Worcester Main out of commission for the next 3-4 days, is there a contingency plan to run SEPO/POSE? Can they run on the Boston & Albany to Beacon Park, then over the Grand Junction to the area around Boston Engine Terminal and then up the Lowell Line/Wildcat Branch? Not sure what the freight car clearances on this route, including whether it would allow "Plate F" boxcars. Then also, you would have to deal with MBTA Worcester and Lowell Line Passenger Traffic, plus the many grade crossings on the Grand Junction.

Or, would another alternative be through Worcester, over the P&W to Gardner and then the B&M main line west? I think this would involve a run around move in Gardner, as I think I've heard there is no east wye off the P&W to the B&M in Gardner.

The only other alternative that I can think of is CSXT to Rotterdam Junction, NY and then run east end to end over the Pan Am mainline. Out of the three alternatives, this is probably what we will see... What does everyone think?

-mike
  by rovetherr
 
The video from the TV news has an interesting clue. At 00:46 in the video, there is a shot of a rail, with very clear Sperry markings on it. The point marked as the location of a 20% Detail Fracture (TDD 20%) is right where the rail is broken. Not being on the scene I can't say that it is what caused the wreck, but it is one heck of a coincidence if it wasn't.
  by GP40MC1118
 
The Grand Jct wouldn't be worth it.
You couldn't directly go up the Lowell mainline from there without a runaround move.
Clearances are an issue AND Cambridge would go absolutely nuts.

More importantly, its a moot point now that CSX derailed in Framingham, blocking both
mainlines at CP22.

PAR would be better off detouring over the Knowledge Conn River mainline!

D
  by newpylong
 
CR not a preferred option without a reverse move through the Amtrak station and the mainline still all 10 and going in and out of service all day.

Gardner is also not an option those trains are too long to runaround there.

I think RJ is their best bet. Anything but Barbers requires another RR (PAS) might as well take it the whole way.
  by Lmiller
 
I remember one they had there when I was knee high to a grass hopper, had to be around 1970, couple hundred yards south of there, south of the High St. bridge in Clinton,,, if I remember right , I think a box car went into a house !!!
  by boatsmate
 
They have done Barbers to Gardner a few years ago, problem is no 6 axles allowed so CSX power would have to be cut off and either P&W or Pan AM engines would have to be used. that would be a lot of power,..... not sure that will happen.
  by Lmiller
 
Lmiller wrote:I remember one they had there when I was knee high to a grass hopper, had to be around 1970, couple hundred yards south of there, south of the High St. bridge in Clinton,,, if I remember right , I think a box car went into a house !!!
I stand corrected, that is the Main st bridge
  by frrc
 
Noticed this afternoon a NS locomotive and some cars parked on the siding near Hanaford's in Clinton, engine was facing South. Is this related to the track work ?

J
  by SpiderHill
 
frrc wrote:Noticed this afternoon a NS locomotive and some cars parked on the siding near Hanaford's in Clinton, engine was facing South. Is this related to the track work ?

J
I noticed this myself today. NS 3482 had a couple of cars (at least one covered hopper) and was on the south end of the siding. MEC 306 was on the north end of the same siding facing north with some MEC MOW hoppers. I know that last evening the CSX power was coupled to the rest of the train that was pulled back towards Clinton. Everything was sitting on the main but was gone this morning.
  by QB 52.32
 
Lmiller wrote:
Lmiller wrote:I remember one they had there when I was knee high to a grass hopper, had to be around 1970, couple hundred yards south of there, south of the High St. bridge in Clinton,,, if I remember right , I think a box car went into a house !!!
I stand corrected, that is the Main st bridge
The derailment occurred June 28, 1968 when a 128-car southbound "Bullet" derailed rolling a "State of Maine" car loaded with paper into the Morgan family's home, splitting the house into two and setting it on fire. It was later reported in the newspapers that Mrs. Morgan's "relationship with the railroad after the accident was "disappointing""! Puts into context the current state of affairs for all things Pan Am as does the following:

12/63 38 cars derailed in S. Roylston; 3/64 25 cars derailed in Orange; 7/66 26 cars derailed in Athol; 8/67 35 cars derailed in Westminster; 2/69 app. 50-60 total cars derailed in both Baldwinville and Clinton, with an additional 8 cars in Westminster, 3 cars at Barbers, 2 cars in Leominster (with one car on top of the 2nd on its side and crashed into a warehouse), 19 cars in S. Acton, 29 cars in Zoar/Charlemont, and, 11 cars in Athol reported derailed within that same time period heading toward 1970. During 1969 hearings the Massachusetts Dept. of Public Utilities reported that the B&M logged 36 derailments in the Commonwealth for that year alone.
  by newpylong
 
QB 52.32 wrote:
Lmiller wrote:
Lmiller wrote:I remember one they had there when I was knee high to a grass hopper, had to be around 1970, couple hundred yards south of there, south of the High St. bridge in Clinton,,, if I remember right , I think a box car went into a house !!!
I stand corrected, that is the Main st bridge
The derailment occurred June 28, 1968 when a 128-car southbound "Bullet" derailed rolling a "State of Maine" car loaded with paper into the Morgan family's home, splitting the house into two and setting it on fire. It was later reported in the newspapers that Mrs. Morgan's "relationship with the railroad after the accident was "disappointing""! Puts into context the current state of affairs for all things Pan Am as does the following:

12/63 38 cars derailed in S. Roylston; 3/64 25 cars derailed in Orange; 7/66 26 cars derailed in Athol; 8/67 35 cars derailed in Westminster; 2/69 app. 50-60 total cars derailed in both Baldwinville and Clinton, with an additional 8 cars in Westminster, 3 cars at Barbers, 2 cars in Leominster (with one car on top of the 2nd on its side and crashed into a warehouse), 19 cars in S. Acton, 29 cars in Zoar/Charlemont, and, 11 cars in Athol derailed within that same time period heading toward 1970. During 1969 hearings the Massachusetts Dept. of Public Utilities reported that the B&M logged 36 derailments in the Commonwealth for that year alone.
What is this supposed to prove? The B&M went a hell of a lot faster and put on more of a show when they left the rails than Pan Am? If so, that's true. At 10 MPH trucks are in the ballast. At 40 they're in someone's house.

36 derailments in 1969? The B&M went bankrupt the following year so that isn't surprising. Pan Am doesn't report minor derailments, but there have been around two dozen in Deerfield alone so far this year.
  by QB 52.32
 
newpylong wrote:What is this supposed to prove? The B&M went a hell of a lot faster and put on more of a show when they left the rails than Pan Am? If so, that's true. At 10 MPH trucks are in the ballast. At 40 they're in someone's house.

36 derailments in 1969? The B&M went bankrupt the following year so that isn't surprising. Pan Am doesn't report minor derailments, but there have been around two dozen in Deerfield alone so far this year.
Those 36 derailments in 1969 averaged $158,000 in 2014 dollars per incident and like today were reported only when above a threshold, so it makes you wonder how many "trucks in the ballast" occurred in East Deerfield and elsewhere during that same year.

What this tells you when you step back and look objectively, is that the same issues both seen and underlying, including their outward public relations image shortcomings, present today were also present 45+ years ago, leading one to conclude that the names may change but the story stays the same.