Great Lakes Transportation Holdings, Inc.

Sub forum for Paper Railroads
User avatar
Saturnalia
Authority on Cat
Posts: 15396
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:54 pm
Location: Michigan City, IN
Contact:

Re: Marquette Rail

Unread post by Saturnalia »

59caddy wrote:What's Oak Yard? Is it the yard in Livonia? :? :oops:

Also, when do your intermodal trains typically run? We'd like to run autorack trains to Toledo in competition against GR&P and DSR. We plan on loading in the afternoons/evenings, when the Ford plant is about done making cars for the day, switch while that's happening, and running them to Toledo by midnight. BTW, how much is 8,000 tons on a loaded autorack train?

We are, however, not sure if we will win a contract from Ford. If we don't, we probably will very few trains down the Toledo Sub. If we do win them as customer, it will be lots of trains down the Toledo Sub, and inevitably lots of $$$$$ for you! :P
The line south of Plymouth is still the Saginaw Sub, though management is considering splitting the Saginaw sub into north of Plymouth (Saginaw Sub) and south of plymouth (Toledo Sub) to more effectively budget operations.

Anyway, a 100-car intermodal train should tip the scales around 8,000 tons.

The distance passed by trains from your limits at CH 23.0 to Alexis at CC 130.1, is a distance of 50 miles. Your fee will be .5 cents per ton-mile. So 8,000 tons over the free 8,000 would cost you $2,000. BTW, the baseline price for passage is $400, whether or not you weigh the tonnage for an ordinary 400 dollar fee. If you're over $400, it is simply by ton-miles.

Trains entering MQT limits from the Detroit Sub should call MQT's Plymouth Tower, who will after passage of Plymouth hand you over to the MQT Saginaw Sub dispatcher. When northbound off the CSX Toledo Terminal at Alexis, you do not need to call the dispatcher to enter MQT trackage, because you will appear on the computer already, but will need to confirm your routing to Detroit BEFORE passing Carleton, MP 105.0, so they can be sure to route you correctly to Plymouth.

Any questions, just ask :)
Thornapple River Rail Series - YouTube
Safety today is your investment for tomorrow

59caddy
bag of holding
Posts: 848
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 6:55 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: Marquette Rail

Unread post by 59caddy »

MQT3001 wrote:
59caddy wrote:What's Oak Yard? Is it the yard in Livonia? :?

Also, when do your intermodal trains typically run? We'd like to run autorack trains to Toledo in competition against GR&P and DSR. We plan on loading in the afternoons/evenings, when the Ford plant is about done making cars for the day, switch while that's happening, and running them to Toledo by midnight. BTW, how much is 8,000 tons on a loaded autorack train?

We are, however, not sure if we will win a contract from Ford. If we don't, we probably will very few trains down the Toledo Sub. If we do win them as customer, it will be lots of trains down the Toledo Sub, and inevitably lots of $$$$$ for you! :P
The line south of Plymouth is still the Saginaw Sub, though management is considering splitting the Saginaw sub into north of Plymouth (Saginaw Sub) and south of plymouth (Toledo Sub) to more effectively budget operations.

Anyway, a 100-car intermodal train should tip the scales around 8,000 tons.

The distance passed by trains from your limits at CH 23.0 to Alexis at CC 130.1, is a distance of 50 miles. Your fee will be .5 cents per ton-mile. So 8,000 tons over the free 8,000 would cost you $2,000. BTW, the baseline price for passage is $400, whether or not you weigh the tonnage for an ordinary 400 dollar fee. If you're over $400, it is simply by ton-miles.

Trains entering MQT limits from the Detroit Sub should call MQT's Plymouth Tower, who will after passage of Plymouth hand you over to the MQT Saginaw Sub dispatcher. When northbound off the CSX Toledo Terminal at Alexis, you do not need to call the dispatcher to enter MQT trackage, because you will appear on the computer already, but will need to confirm your routing to Detroit BEFORE passing Carleton, MP 105.0, so they can be sure to route you correctly to Plymouth.

Any questions, just ask :)
Do you own the Lincoln Secondary? Unless that is off-limits, I'd like to purchase that line, it would save me some time (and money :wink: ) to get to Detroit. :idea:

User avatar
Saturnalia
Authority on Cat
Posts: 15396
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:54 pm
Location: Michigan City, IN
Contact:

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by Saturnalia »

IDK if anyone owns the Secondary. If you can wait a bit, I wanna post a Detroit map to make sure everything is straight before moving more stuff around.
Thornapple River Rail Series - YouTube
Safety today is your investment for tomorrow

User avatar
Saturnalia
Authority on Cat
Posts: 15396
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:54 pm
Location: Michigan City, IN
Contact:

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by Saturnalia »

Detroit Sub is yours.

But, I just realized a huge mistake on my part. I forgot to mention the CP Trackage Rights Trains. They come from the NE side of Rougemere from the Tunnel to Canada and head down the Detroit sub to Plymouth and onto Chicago via the MQT. They have rights for up to 10 in each direction per day, but it is usually around 5. 4 Scheduled, but usually an extra or two. Sorries about that. You shouldn't have too much of a problem with the whole route being double track though. Our dispatchers will talk to yours about the best line-ups for these.
Thornapple River Rail Series - YouTube
Safety today is your investment for tomorrow

59caddy
bag of holding
Posts: 848
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 6:55 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by 59caddy »

Update:


Our trackage rights agreement with MQT on their Detroit Sub goes into effect today, and we begin by switching an autorack train from Ford, which will be starting in about an hour, then we take them down to Toledo.

We are in talks with several companies in the Great Lakes region about purchasing them. These include Algoma Central Corporation, Escanaba and Lake Superior RR, Lake Superior and Ishpeming RR, and Transtar Inc. Another company we are looking at that is not centered in the Great Lakes region is US Rail Corp., a relatively small shortline railroad holding company, but this is in a long-term plan.

We are doing well financially, we made an unexpectedly high profit this week of $89,457, which makes us quite happy that our company is already profitable. This does mean, however, that CN is done loaning space to us for HQ and railroad and office staff. But it's okay, we've already gotten an adequate number of people, and we are moving into a new HQ building in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

That's it for now, next post should be a locomotive roster :D

User avatar
Saturnalia
Authority on Cat
Posts: 15396
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:54 pm
Location: Michigan City, IN
Contact:

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by Saturnalia »

The Algoma Central is already a subsidiary of Marquette Rail.

Be careful with the UP, the STB shot down MQT's proposed Michigan Northern that took many of the same routes over monopoly infringement.
Thornapple River Rail Series - YouTube
Safety today is your investment for tomorrow

59caddy
bag of holding
Posts: 848
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 6:55 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by 59caddy »

MQT3001 wrote:The Algoma Central is already a subsidiary of Marquette Rail.
I had a feeling you wouldn't know what I'm talking about. Here's what happened:

The Algoma Central Railway, in the 70's, started to branch out into other businesses besides the railroad. After going through a corporate reorganization, the Algoma Central Corporation put the Algoma Central Railway up for sale, and the Wisconsin Central bought it. In this scenario, however, we would say you purchased the railroad instead of WC.

The Corporation still exists today as the operator of a fleet of tankers and bulk freighters on the Great Lakes, a ship repair service at Port Colborne, near the Welland Canal, and commercial real estate. It is currently headquartered in St. Catharines, Ontario.
MQT3001 wrote:Be careful with the UP, the STB shot down MQT's proposed Michigan Northern that took many of the same routes over monopoly infringement.
If we do purchase those railroads, it would not be a monopoly, as CN owns nearly half of all trackage in the UP as a result of their acquisition of WC, and in paper railroads, we'll say this is so. Don't know how you were planning to get all that CN track as well as E&LS and LS&I. :lol: :wink:

User avatar
Saturnalia
Authority on Cat
Posts: 15396
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:54 pm
Location: Michigan City, IN
Contact:

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by Saturnalia »

I was, at one point, going to add tracks to the Mackinac Bridge. In the scenario, the STB shot it down. In my brain, I realized how stupid it was. :lol:
Thornapple River Rail Series - YouTube
Safety today is your investment for tomorrow

59caddy
bag of holding
Posts: 848
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 6:55 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by 59caddy »

MQT3001 wrote:I was, at one point, going to add tracks to the Mackinac Bridge. In the scenario, the STB shot it down. In my brain, I realized how stupid it was. :lol:
Being in the know about bridges, the Mackinac Bridge is physically unable to hold the weight of a train, no matter how you modify the existing bridge.

User avatar
Saturnalia
Authority on Cat
Posts: 15396
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:54 pm
Location: Michigan City, IN
Contact:

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by Saturnalia »

59caddy wrote:
MQT3001 wrote:I was, at one point, going to add tracks to the Mackinac Bridge. In the scenario, the STB shot it down. In my brain, I realized how stupid it was. :lol:
Being in the know about bridges, the Mackinac Bridge is physically unable to hold the weight of a train, no matter how you modify the existing bridge.
I might have been re-reading "Miracle Bridge at Mackinac" at the time :wink: :lol:

BTW, if you've never read it, and are interesting in bridges or the Mighty Mac, it should be on your reading bucket list. Written by Steinman and Nevill, published in '57 by the Wm. B. Eerrdmans Publishing Company of Grand Rapids, there is no words to describe how truly awesome it is to read.

http://www.amazon.com/Miracle-Bridge-Ma ... B000OAKTUW
Thornapple River Rail Series - YouTube
Safety today is your investment for tomorrow

59caddy
bag of holding
Posts: 848
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 6:55 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by 59caddy »

MQT3001 wrote:BTW, if you've never read it, and are interesting in bridges or the Mighty Mac, it should be on your reading bucket list. Written by Steinman and Nevill, published in '57 by the Wm. B. Eerrdmans Publishing Company of Grand Rapids, there is no words to describe how truly awesome it is to read.

http://www.amazon.com/Miracle-Bridge-Ma ... B000OAKTUW
I'll see if I can get it, thanks for the link.

We've added another company to our medium-term list of "victims": Oakwood Medical Center. Yes, I know it is not a railroad, but trust me, it's for our own capitalistic purposes, and where does it say in our corporate name that this company is limited to only railroads? :mrgreen: :D

User avatar
Saturnalia
Authority on Cat
Posts: 15396
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:54 pm
Location: Michigan City, IN
Contact:

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by Saturnalia »

59caddy wrote:
MQT3001 wrote:BTW, if you've never read it, and are interesting in bridges or the Mighty Mac, it should be on your reading bucket list. Written by Steinman and Nevill, published in '57 by the Wm. B. Eerrdmans Publishing Company of Grand Rapids, there is no words to describe how truly awesome it is to read.

http://www.amazon.com/Miracle-Bridge-Ma ... B000OAKTUW
I'll see if I can get it, thanks for the link.
I have a copy from the second printing (1957), and it was signed by Steinman sometime shortly thereafter.
Thornapple River Rail Series - YouTube
Safety today is your investment for tomorrow

59caddy
bag of holding
Posts: 848
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 6:55 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by 59caddy »

MQT3001 wrote:I have a copy from the second printing (1957), and it was signed by Steinman sometime shortly thereafter.
WOW!!! :shock: :o I'M SO JEALOUS :evil: :lol:

59caddy
bag of holding
Posts: 848
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 6:55 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by 59caddy »

We are channeling our finances towards purchasing the Algoma Central Corp., as we feel that this will give us immediate widespread access to the entire Great Lakes Region. The AC Corporation is composed of four subsidiaries:
  • Algoma Central Properties-a commercial real estate company
  • Frasier Marine and Industrial-a ship repair company in Port Colborne
  • Algoma Tankers-an operator of 8 tankers on the Great Lakes
  • Algoma Central Marine-an operator of 27 bulk carriers on the Great Lakes
The company claims assets of CA$400 million, so we're a ways away yet from being able to purchase the corporation, but we'll do it.

User avatar
AARR
Ann Arbor RR Nerd
Posts: 38035
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 7:39 pm
Location: Washington, MI

Re: Marquette Rail

Unread post by AARR »

59caddy wrote:What's Oak Yard? Is it the yard in Livonia? :? :oops:
[/quote]
Oak Yard is technically in Detroit on the border of Redford. Two main cross roads are I-96 and M-39.
PatC created a monster, 'cause nobody wants to see Don Simon no more they want AARR I'm chopped liver, well if you want AARR this is what I'll give ya, bad humor mixed with irrelevant info that'll make you roll your eyes quicker than a ~Z~ banhammer...

59caddy
bag of holding
Posts: 848
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 6:55 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: Marquette Rail

Unread post by 59caddy »

AARR wrote:
59caddy wrote:What's Oak Yard? Is it the yard in Livonia? :? :oops:
Oak Yard is technically in Detroit on the border of Redford. Two main cross roads are I-96 and M-39.[/quote]

Okay, thanks :)

59caddy
bag of holding
Posts: 848
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 6:55 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by 59caddy »

We have begun the process of moving into our new corporate HQ in Ann Arbor, MI. Construction contractors are finishing up on construction, when they're done, moving offices in should be pretty quick and easy. If all goes as planned, it could open by next week. :D

59caddy
bag of holding
Posts: 848
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 6:55 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by 59caddy »

Our new HQ building is now fully completed and we have finished moving into it!! :D :D It is located in the office building at Liberty and Division in Downtown Ann Arbor (except in this scenario, the complex, known as the 'Renaissance Center', is not occupied by other businesses like it is in real life).

On another important note, we are undergoing somewhat a corporate restructuring. We will operate all of our trackage under one subsidiary, and its corporate identity will be Great Lakes Central Railroad [Yes, it's a reference to the real-life railroad, I'm giving it this name because it doesn't exist in paper railroads :mrgreen: ].

For this week's financial report, we have already nearly doubled our profit from last week! :D After completing the calculations, we made a profit of $162,437, and we made expenditures of $23,573, so we have made $138,864 this week. This means we have a total corporate balance of $200,228,321, which is pretty good for a start-up holding company!

We are continuing talks with Escanaba and Lake Superior RR and Lake Superior and Ishpeming RR about acquiring them, and their respective managements seem to have overall positive reactions about acqisition; LS&I is especially positive, as they're having some friction with their customers, who are threatening to convert to truck. We are also looking at US Rail Corporation and Anacostia and Pacific Company, owners and operators of several strategic shortlines in and out of the Great Lakes Region. We have also added Oakwood Hospital and Medical Center, a hospital system in Southeast Michigan based in Dearborn, to our long-term list of potential negotiations, as well as the MLive Media Group, which has just about every major newspaper in Michigan under its belt.

Our locomotive roster consists of all former GTW and BC Rail engines that CN did not paint over yet. [If anybody could tell me how many of these are left in real life, that would be great, that way I know how many I have on here]

That's all for now, remember, we are always open for business :)

59caddy
bag of holding
Posts: 848
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 6:55 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by 59caddy »

We are having some sort of issue with our signals in the Flint/Lapeer area, we've had 4 near-misses in the past 3 days. Signal maintainers have been checking it out, they figure that the 3 or so blocks in that area were put off-kilter somehow, and are now mis-communicating. For now, trains must contact the dispatcher to pass through. An update should come tonight of what the exact problem is and what's being done.

59caddy
bag of holding
Posts: 848
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 6:55 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: Great Lakes Company Holdings, LLC

Unread post by 59caddy »

Well, the signal maintainers gave their report to HQ just minutes ago about this signal problem. Basically, they've traced it to our new computer-controlled signalling system. They say it is an error in the programming. Makes sense, for we've just heard of a minor problem involving signals at Battle Creek yard about a half-hour ago.

Our computer engineers are looking at the computer's system logs and looking at every command and execution they have made (a command would be, for example, when the computer detects a train clearing a signal, and the proper execution would be to change the appropriate signals according to the computer's programming and command it just received). Their hypothesis is that the programming isn't giving proper executions for certain commands from the signal network. Either that, or the computer is receiving commands incorrectly, in which case, we'd have a BIG job for the signal maintainers.

Post Reply