|
Did this train get abolished in 1976 after ConRail and what replaced NE-84/NE-87 once it was abolished?
Thanks,
Mark
|
Mark,
The last entry for NE84/87 in Dad's time book is 9/20/81 so it ran at least to that date.
Ed
On Monday, January 20, 2020, 12:31:34 PM UTC, mmatt378@... <mmatt378@...> wrote:
Did this train get abolished in 1976 after ConRail and what replaced NE-84/NE-87 once it was abolished?
Thanks,
Mark
-- Ed Cox
|
Wow didn't realize it lasted that late.? I guess D&H paired up with Conrail pools....
|
I'm sure someone else (Gordon Smith?) can give you a better and more accurate timeline, but the D&H trains to and from Pot Yard moved with D&H crews all the way, moving via Harrisburg and down the Port Road.? I don't believe Conrail crews were involved - D&H had trackage rights and exercised them. If I remember correctly,? pre-Conrail, NE-84 and 87 originally moved to and from Pot Yard via Philadelphia/ Park Jct with Reading and B&O crews.
Wow didn't realize it lasted that late.? I guess D&H paired up with Conrail pools....
|
I often wonder that instead of trackage rights if they had received ownership to Buffalo, Allentown, Oak Island, and maybe even Harrisburg, and they didn't need to rely on Conrail traffic control if they would have had better odds.? But then again, I guess once you figure in track and ROW maintenance etc., maybe it wouldn't have helped.? Obviously Conrail was set up not to fail, so to add any type of real competition for it would have been counterproductive.? D&H probably would still have ended up under NS ownership by now anyway.
?- Mark
|
As Conrail was taking shape, I believe that option was looked at and the reason the trackage rights rout was taken was due to costs. If they were to take over lets say the old LV between Buffalo and Sayre, new agreements with labor would have to be negotiated, along with being responsible for track maintenance and taxes and purchase from whichever bankrupts estate. Running via trackage rights none of that was a issue, just whatever fee CR and D&H agreed upon. Remember, D&H wasn't in great financial shape either in the mid 70's, but at least they were solvent.
DTH
[Edited Message Follows]
I often wonder that instead of trackage rights if they had received ownership to Buffalo, Allentown, Oak Island, and maybe even Harrisburg, and they didn't need to rely on Conrail traffic control if they would have had better odds.? But then again, I guess once you figure in track and ROW maintenance etc., maybe it wouldn't have helped.? Obviously Conrail was set up not to fail, so to add any type of real competition for it would have been counterproductive.? D&H probably would still have ended up under NS ownership by now anyway.
?- Mark
|
As far as the LV line from Buffalo to Sayre, Conrail could not justify using the line as even a secondary as there were no customers between Romulus and Van Ettan. Therefore,? that part of the line was abandoned. The D&H was given trackage rights on the old EL between Binghamton and Buffalo.?
Jack Klapprodt
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020, 12:52 AM David Horree < dhorree@...> wrote: As Conrail was taking shape, I believe that option was looked at and the reason the trackage rights rout was taken was due to costs. If they were to take over lets say the old LV between Buffalo and Sayre, new agreements with labor would have to be negotiated, along with being responsible for track maintenance and taxes and purchase from whichever bankrupts estate. Running via trackage rights none of that was a issue, just whatever fee CR and D&H agreed upon. Remember, D&H wasn't in great financial shape either in the mid 70's, but at least they were solvent.
DTH
[Edited Message Follows]
I often wonder that instead of trackage rights if they had received ownership to Buffalo, Allentown, Oak Island, and maybe even Harrisburg, and they didn't need to rely on Conrail traffic control if they would have had better odds.? But then again, I guess once you figure in track and ROW maintenance etc., maybe it wouldn't have helped.? Obviously Conrail was set up not to fail, so to add any type of real competition for it would have been counterproductive.? D&H probably would still have ended up under NS ownership by now anyway.
?- Mark
|
Interestingly enough about the LV in far western NY, CR did give some thought to retaining a segment of it as a parallel main in the Batavia area I believe. That was stated in the Final System Plan.
Jim
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
As far as the LV line from Buffalo to Sayre, Conrail could not justify using the line as even a secondary as there were no customers between Romulus and Van Ettan. Therefore,? that part of the line was abandoned. The D&H was given trackage rights
on the old EL between Binghamton and Buffalo.?
Jack Klapprodt
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020, 12:52 AM David Horree < dhorree@...> wrote:
As Conrail was taking shape, I believe that option was looked at and the reason the trackage rights rout was taken was due to costs. If they were to take over lets say the old LV between Buffalo and Sayre, new agreements with labor would have
to be negotiated, along with being responsible for track maintenance and taxes and purchase from whichever bankrupts estate. Running via trackage rights none of that was a issue, just whatever fee CR and D&H agreed upon. Remember, D&H wasn't in great financial
shape either in the mid 70's, but at least they were solvent.
DTH
[Edited Message Follows]
I often wonder that instead of trackage rights if they had received ownership to Buffalo, Allentown, Oak Island, and maybe even Harrisburg, and they didn't need to rely on Conrail traffic control if they would have had better odds.? But then again, I guess
once you figure in track and ROW maintenance etc., maybe it wouldn't have helped.? Obviously Conrail was set up not to fail, so to add any type of real competition for it would have been counterproductive.? D&H probably would still have ended up under NS ownership
by now anyway.
?- Mark
|
Some notes on D&H operations on
Conrail after Conveyance (April 1, 1976)
Conrail did not create Conrail. On April 1, 1976, Conrail began
operating a system that was created by USRA under the 3-R Act.
Most of the trackage rights arrangements on Conrail were set by
USRA with the agreement of the existing railroads that would
operated over Conrail. Some of those had been set in place in the
original planning, but The D&H was added late in the game when
Chessie System could not get the needed labor agreements to set up
a "competitive" proposed MARC-EL system. MARC-EL would have given
The D&H and the B&M non-Conrail connections to the west
and south, but when Chessie pulled out at the last minute, The
D&H had to do it themselves by operating on Conrail.
Except, a little known point The D&H negotiated an agreement
with the Lehigh Valley where LV actually conveyed operating rights
on its then-existing railroad between Oak Island, NJ and Waverly,
NY (EL connection) to The D&H. Those operating rights (not
technically trackage rights) conveyed with the operating property
of the LV Estate to Conrail, and Conrail was obligated to honor
them.
I first learned of this when Conrail petitioned to abandon the
original LV line between Allentown and Lehighton to concentrate
its operations on the former CNJ. The D&H exercised its
operating right on the former LV, and obtained some concessions
from Conrail in return for moving to the CNJ. Around that time,
The D&H was still operating a vestige of the LV Apollo TOFC
service between Oak Island and Buffalo, via former LV to Jenkins,
D&H over Ararat to Lanesboro Jct, and EL to Buffalo. That was
the long way around, and the Apollos (AP-1 and AP-2) never set any
speed records.
- Gordon Davids
On 1/23/2020 12:37 PM, century430 wrote:
Interestingly enough about the LV in far western NY, CR
did give some thought to retaining a segment of it as a
parallel main in the Batavia area I believe. That was stated
in the Final System Plan.
Jim
As far as the LV line from Buffalo to Sayre,
Conrail could not justify using the line as even a secondary
as there were no customers between Romulus and Van Ettan.
Therefore,? that part of the line was abandoned. The D&H
was given trackage rights on the old EL between Binghamton
and Buffalo.?
Jack Klapprodt
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020,
12:52 AM David Horree < dhorree@...>
wrote:
As Conrail was taking shape, I believe that
option was looked at and the reason the trackage rights
rout was taken was due to costs. If they were to take
over lets say the old LV between Buffalo and Sayre, new
agreements with labor would have to be negotiated, along
with being responsible for track maintenance and taxes
and purchase from whichever bankrupts estate. Running
via trackage rights none of that was a issue, just
whatever fee CR and D&H agreed upon. Remember,
D&H wasn't in great financial shape either in the
mid 70's, but at least they were solvent.
DTH
[Edited Message Follows]
I often wonder that instead of trackage rights if they
had received ownership to Buffalo, Allentown, Oak
Island, and maybe even Harrisburg, and they didn't
need to rely on Conrail traffic control if they would
have had better odds.? But then again, I guess once
you figure in track and ROW maintenance etc., maybe it
wouldn't have helped.? Obviously Conrail was set up
not to fail, so to add any type of real competition
for it would have been counterproductive.? D&H
probably would still have ended up under NS ownership
by now anyway.
?- Mark
--
Gordon A. Davids, P.E.
201 Marie Ave
Severna Park MD 21146-3210
g.davids .at. verizon.net
Home (410) 647-2956
Mobile (410) 279-7144
|
Jack, the example I used with the LV from Sayre to Buffalo was just a "what if " or example of why the D&H didn't go after ownership of lines unwanted / abandoned by CR / USRA in the Final System Plan.
DTH
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 10:48 PM Gordon Davids via Groups.Io <g.davids= [email protected]> wrote:
Some notes on D&H operations on
Conrail after Conveyance (April 1, 1976)
Conrail did not create Conrail. On April 1, 1976, Conrail began
operating a system that was created by USRA under the 3-R Act.
Most of the trackage rights arrangements on Conrail were set by
USRA with the agreement of the existing railroads that would
operated over Conrail. Some of those had been set in place in the
original planning, but The D&H was added late in the game when
Chessie System could not get the needed labor agreements to set up
a "competitive" proposed MARC-EL system. MARC-EL would have given
The D&H and the B&M non-Conrail connections to the west
and south, but when Chessie pulled out at the last minute, The
D&H had to do it themselves by operating on Conrail.
Except, a little known point The D&H negotiated an agreement
with the Lehigh Valley where LV actually conveyed operating rights
on its then-existing railroad between Oak Island, NJ and Waverly,
NY (EL connection) to The D&H. Those operating rights (not
technically trackage rights) conveyed with the operating property
of the LV Estate to Conrail, and Conrail was obligated to honor
them.
I first learned of this when Conrail petitioned to abandon the
original LV line between Allentown and Lehighton to concentrate
its operations on the former CNJ. The D&H exercised its
operating right on the former LV, and obtained some concessions
from Conrail in return for moving to the CNJ. Around that time,
The D&H was still operating a vestige of the LV Apollo TOFC
service between Oak Island and Buffalo, via former LV to Jenkins,
D&H over Ararat to Lanesboro Jct, and EL to Buffalo. That was
the long way around, and the Apollos (AP-1 and AP-2) never set any
speed records.
- Gordon Davids
On 1/23/2020 12:37 PM, century430 wrote:
Interestingly enough about the LV in far western NY, CR
did give some thought to retaining a segment of it as a
parallel main in the Batavia area I believe. That was stated
in the Final System Plan.
Jim
As far as the LV line from Buffalo to Sayre,
Conrail could not justify using the line as even a secondary
as there were no customers between Romulus and Van Ettan.
Therefore,? that part of the line was abandoned. The D&H
was given trackage rights on the old EL between Binghamton
and Buffalo.?
Jack Klapprodt
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020,
12:52 AM David Horree < dhorree@...>
wrote:
As Conrail was taking shape, I believe that
option was looked at and the reason the trackage rights
rout was taken was due to costs. If they were to take
over lets say the old LV between Buffalo and Sayre, new
agreements with labor would have to be negotiated, along
with being responsible for track maintenance and taxes
and purchase from whichever bankrupts estate. Running
via trackage rights none of that was a issue, just
whatever fee CR and D&H agreed upon. Remember,
D&H wasn't in great financial shape either in the
mid 70's, but at least they were solvent.
DTH
[Edited Message Follows]
I often wonder that instead of trackage rights if they
had received ownership to Buffalo, Allentown, Oak
Island, and maybe even Harrisburg, and they didn't
need to rely on Conrail traffic control if they would
have had better odds.? But then again, I guess once
you figure in track and ROW maintenance etc., maybe it
wouldn't have helped.? Obviously Conrail was set up
not to fail, so to add any type of real competition
for it would have been counterproductive.? D&H
probably would still have ended up under NS ownership
by now anyway.
?- Mark
--
Gordon A. Davids, P.E.
201 Marie Ave
Severna Park MD 21146-3210
g.davids .at.
Home (410) 647-2956
Mobile (410) 279-7144
|
David,? I went back and re-read your post and I understand that it was an example.? Thanks for the clarification.?
Jack Klapprodt?
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 12:31 AM David Horree < dhorree@...> wrote: Jack, the example I used with the LV from Sayre to Buffalo was just a "what if " or example of why the D&H didn't go after ownership of lines unwanted / abandoned by CR / USRA in the Final System Plan.
DTH
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 10:48 PM Gordon Davids via Groups.Io <g.davids= [email protected]> wrote:
Some notes on D&H operations on
Conrail after Conveyance (April 1, 1976)
Conrail did not create Conrail. On April 1, 1976, Conrail began
operating a system that was created by USRA under the 3-R Act.
Most of the trackage rights arrangements on Conrail were set by
USRA with the agreement of the existing railroads that would
operated over Conrail. Some of those had been set in place in the
original planning, but The D&H was added late in the game when
Chessie System could not get the needed labor agreements to set up
a "competitive" proposed MARC-EL system. MARC-EL would have given
The D&H and the B&M non-Conrail connections to the west
and south, but when Chessie pulled out at the last minute, The
D&H had to do it themselves by operating on Conrail.
Except, a little known point The D&H negotiated an agreement
with the Lehigh Valley where LV actually conveyed operating rights
on its then-existing railroad between Oak Island, NJ and Waverly,
NY (EL connection) to The D&H. Those operating rights (not
technically trackage rights) conveyed with the operating property
of the LV Estate to Conrail, and Conrail was obligated to honor
them.
I first learned of this when Conrail petitioned to abandon the
original LV line between Allentown and Lehighton to concentrate
its operations on the former CNJ. The D&H exercised its
operating right on the former LV, and obtained some concessions
from Conrail in return for moving to the CNJ. Around that time,
The D&H was still operating a vestige of the LV Apollo TOFC
service between Oak Island and Buffalo, via former LV to Jenkins,
D&H over Ararat to Lanesboro Jct, and EL to Buffalo. That was
the long way around, and the Apollos (AP-1 and AP-2) never set any
speed records.
- Gordon Davids
On 1/23/2020 12:37 PM, century430 wrote:
Interestingly enough about the LV in far western NY, CR
did give some thought to retaining a segment of it as a
parallel main in the Batavia area I believe. That was stated
in the Final System Plan.
Jim
As far as the LV line from Buffalo to Sayre,
Conrail could not justify using the line as even a secondary
as there were no customers between Romulus and Van Ettan.
Therefore,? that part of the line was abandoned. The D&H
was given trackage rights on the old EL between Binghamton
and Buffalo.?
Jack Klapprodt
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020,
12:52 AM David Horree < dhorree@...>
wrote:
As Conrail was taking shape, I believe that
option was looked at and the reason the trackage rights
rout was taken was due to costs. If they were to take
over lets say the old LV between Buffalo and Sayre, new
agreements with labor would have to be negotiated, along
with being responsible for track maintenance and taxes
and purchase from whichever bankrupts estate. Running
via trackage rights none of that was a issue, just
whatever fee CR and D&H agreed upon. Remember,
D&H wasn't in great financial shape either in the
mid 70's, but at least they were solvent.
DTH
[Edited Message Follows]
I often wonder that instead of trackage rights if they
had received ownership to Buffalo, Allentown, Oak
Island, and maybe even Harrisburg, and they didn't
need to rely on Conrail traffic control if they would
have had better odds.? But then again, I guess once
you figure in track and ROW maintenance etc., maybe it
wouldn't have helped.? Obviously Conrail was set up
not to fail, so to add any type of real competition
for it would have been counterproductive.? D&H
probably would still have ended up under NS ownership
by now anyway.
?- Mark
--
Gordon A. Davids, P.E.
201 Marie Ave
Severna Park MD 21146-3210
g.davids .at.
Home (410) 647-2956
Mobile (410) 279-7144
|
What exactly was MARC-EL / Chessie ?
|
Really what i meant to ask is what did the MARC stand for ?
|
Ed Cox