NS Peavine talk

Anything pertaining to railfanning in Ohio.

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby Y@ » Mon Nov 17, 2014 11:12 pm

It's not hard telling what they're going to do. The Peavine isn't coming back.
Bottom text.
User avatar
Y@
Ass. Janitor
 
Posts: 5578
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 8:37 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby redside20 » Tue Nov 18, 2014 1:47 am

Plus you get that traffic away from Bellevue. Which is a cluster already. And they just started using the New class yard last week. And it's going to get worse. I know everyone keeps talking about the cincy to Columbus route. Yea it is an easier route to run on. But I think they're wanting some of the slower stuff off If it as well. Because they're planning on sending darn near everything they can send to Bellevue to get classed.

Well lets hope NS's put all their eggs in one basket mentality bodes well for their future. If not, someone in the front office will end up with the egg on their face and start the finger pointing and excuses and present another half assed absurd idea to move trains efficiently. What is going on with Watkins Yard and the West Virginia Secondary? and we all know about the present state of Buckeye Yard..I'm the kind of guy that believes in the the glass is half full/half empty adage on some things, never say never and when it's a lost cause I keep my mouth shut and move on.
Exit stage left
redside20
i don't give a fark about your PM
 
Posts: 3383
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:44 am
Location: Columbus Ohio

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby bdconrail29 » Tue Nov 18, 2014 11:10 am

Put the connection in at Colsan and use the Fort Wayne Line dang it.
Brett
bdconrail29
Railroadfan...fan
 
Posts: 1346
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:43 am
Location: Wadsworth, OH

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby Standard Railfan » Tue Nov 18, 2014 1:19 pm

bdconrail29 wrote:Put the connection in at Colsan and use the Fort Wayne Line dang it.


Run right on through to Crestline and avoid Bellevue completely. Just as God and the PRR intended.
User avatar
Standard Railfan
Railroadfan...fan
 
Posts: 1496
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 8:25 pm
Location: Marquette, MI

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby Conrailfan1999 » Tue Nov 18, 2014 9:27 pm

I think there are two solutions to the problem....
1. Complete the double track between Waldo to south marion, Harvey, to Colsan, and Benson to Chattfield. This would completely double track the Sandusky line between Bellevue as Columbus which has been seeing 40-45 trains a day now. About 15 use the dayton district and 25-30 go south to the pokey. Extend a few siding between Bellevue and Chicago on the NKP which has been seeing upwards of 30 trains a day, and you have a second corridor to Chicago.

2. As stated earlier, ultilize the CF&E! I believe NS has trackage rights to run 8 trains a day. I know crestline to lima the track isn't the best but Lima to Chicago you can run mostly 40mph which actually pretty good. NS could fleet trains or just send trains in one direction reducing the needs for meets on the nkp between Bellevue and Chicago. Although a sw wye may be needed at colsan for this to work.
Conrailfan1999
Railroadfan...fan
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 6:29 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby redside20 » Tue Nov 18, 2014 10:03 pm

Extend a few siding between Bellevue and Chicago on the NKP which has been seeing upwards of 30 trains a day, and you have a second corridor to Chicago.

NS tore out the second main from Colby to Ilers in 1989, with the excuse being a downturn in traffic in the latter half of the 80's. Leaving in a really big siding at Old Fort for train meets, NS has kept the ROW where the second track was, in very exceptional condition. maybe for relaying the second main perhaps? Also where on the Fostoria District west of Fostoria would be a good place to extend a siding for the potential double main? Would the lap sidings at Continental and Mortimer remain or would NS get rid of them?
Exit stage left
redside20
i don't give a fark about your PM
 
Posts: 3383
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:44 am
Location: Columbus Ohio

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby bdconrail29 » Tue Nov 18, 2014 10:11 pm

NKP still gets 30/day? Boy when I was at Oak Harbor last an awful lot of symbols ran via Sandusky.
Brett
bdconrail29
Railroadfan...fan
 
Posts: 1346
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:43 am
Location: Wadsworth, OH

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby Y@ » Tue Nov 18, 2014 10:15 pm

Since we're now going to talk about something that makes more sense...

If they were to move traffic to the NKP, re-installing the second main from Colby to Ilers is a good place to start. That would give them double track from Arcadia into Bellevue, but doesn't help the major congestion problem in Fostoria at all. I've always found it odd that there is no crossover in the middle of the double track from Townwood to Leipsic Junction, so that's something that could definitely help. Relaying the siding at Oakwood wouldn't be a bad idea either since the ROW is still there. Hell, why not just extend the west siding at Continental all the way to where the west end of Oakwood siding used to be? It could easily be done. Lap sidings at Continental and Mortimer likely wouldn't go anywhere since they're already in place and are both long enough to meet just about anything they run down there.

Just my thoughts on the Fostoria District as I don't know much about the Chicago District west of Fort Wayne.
Bottom text.
User avatar
Y@
Ass. Janitor
 
Posts: 5578
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 8:37 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby Y@ » Tue Nov 18, 2014 10:16 pm

bdconrail29 wrote:NKP still gets 30/day? Boy when I was at Oak Harbor last an awful lot of symbols ran via Sandusky.


Crew availability has been an issue in Bellevue and Fort Wayne (and Elkhart, Toledo, Cleveland, Conway, etc...) lately, so some things have been running totally off the wall as far as routing goes. I would say 24-30 movements a day is a good estimation.
Bottom text.
User avatar
Y@
Ass. Janitor
 
Posts: 5578
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 8:37 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby Conrailfan1999 » Tue Nov 18, 2014 10:40 pm

Also west of Fort Wayne, a lot of traffic is added from the New Castle District Eb and even more WB. Also, moving traffic from Bellevue to Elkhart is also now often routed via the marion branch at clay pool so west of fort wayne traffic is about 30 a day with little double track. A lot of these trains run at night therefore the line may seem very slow during the day. A little more double track around Fort Wayne, especially double tracking the siding in new haven west to the yard may come in handy. I could also see a need for double track between Fostoria and Bellevue being a major priority. Trains stack up for three major reasons in this section.... waiting for CSX in Fostoria, waiting to get into Bellevue and locals are working all over the place in this stretch. Once you get west of Fostoria there are enough sidings to handle 30 trains because trains move at a decent pace along the line although many sidings are too short for rolling meets so I think if a few sidings are extended a mile or two rolling meets become a lot more possible and efficient.
Conrailfan1999
Railroadfan...fan
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 6:29 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby cbehr91 » Tue Nov 18, 2014 11:28 pm

Y@ wrote:
bdconrail29 wrote:NKP still gets 30/day? Boy when I was at Oak Harbor last an awful lot of symbols ran via Sandusky.


Crew availability has been an issue in Bellevue and Fort Wayne (and Elkhart, Toledo, Cleveland, Conway, etc...) lately, so some things have been running totally off the wall as far as routing goes. I would say 24-30 movements a day is a good estimation.


Which side of Bellevue?
User avatar
cbehr91
Chairman of the Bored
 
Posts: 1168
Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 9:29 pm
Location: Stella Ct

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby brc0227 » Wed Nov 19, 2014 12:14 am

They're actually talking about double tracking the fostoria line. Not sure exactly how much of it though.
brc0227
Railroadfan...fan
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 7:25 am

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby Conrailfan1999 » Wed Nov 19, 2014 9:15 am

[quote="cbehr91"][quote="Y@"][quote="bdconrail29"]NKP still gets 30/day? Boy when I was at Oak Harbor last an awful lot of symbols ran via Sandusky.[/quote]

Crew availability has been an issue in Bellevue and Fort Wayne (and Elkhart, Toledo, Cleveland, Conway, etc...) lately, so some things have been running totally off the wall as far as routing goes. I would say 24-30 movements a day is a good estimation.[/quote]

Which side of Bellevue?[/quote] From Bellvue west to Fort Wayne, it's called the Fostoria district.
Conrailfan1999
Railroadfan...fan
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 6:29 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby Conrailfan1999 » Wed Nov 19, 2014 9:17 am

As for double tracking the fostoria district, that seems like quite a big challenge and it's very expensive to put rail in.
Conrailfan1999
Railroadfan...fan
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 6:29 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby brc0227 » Wed Nov 19, 2014 4:51 pm

Conrailfan1999 wrote:As for double tracking the fostoria district, that seems like quite a big challenge and it's very expensive to put rail in.



Yes it would be. But it is being talked about.
brc0227
Railroadfan...fan
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 7:25 am

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby JohnnyO » Thu Nov 20, 2014 12:37 am

Because the Nickel Plate intended to double track more of today's Fostoria District, there are plenty of spots where the roadbed is wide and bridges were built to hold two tracks. The Depression came and the double track project was never completed. You used to be able to pick it out by seeing how far away the pole line was away from the main but today, little or no pole line remains.

The Yellow Creek Running Track, as it was once called, ran between Townwood and Leipsic Jct., and the Leipsic passing track extended on out past West Leipsic, with crossovers at Leipsic Junction. NS, naturally, ripped out the Leipsic passing track.
JohnnyO
Railroadfan...fan
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:47 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby brc0227 » Thu Nov 20, 2014 3:26 am

JohnnyO wrote:Because the Nickel Plate intended to double track more of today's Fostoria District, there are plenty of spots where the roadbed is wide and bridges were built to hold two tracks. The Depression came and the double track project was never completed. You used to be able to pick it out by seeing how far away the pole line was away from the main but today, little or no pole line remains.

The Yellow Creek Running Track, as it was once called, ran between Townwood and Leipsic Jct., and the Leipsic passing track extended on out past West Leipsic, with crossovers at Leipsic Junction. NS, naturally, ripped out the Leipsic passing track.



That sounds like something NS would do. And now they're kicking themselves for it. Back around the time of the conrail merger. They had plans of double tracking the remaining portions of the line from Portsmouth to Bellevue. I think they done around 30+ miles and then shelved the project due to all the complications and subsequent lost business from the conrail acquisition. They had also planned on putting a northbound approach to the Peavine as well. But that was also shelved. And then completely scrapped when they got the conrail line from Columbus to cincy
brc0227
Railroadfan...fan
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 7:25 am

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby CG Tower » Thu Nov 20, 2014 11:48 am

That passing track was removed in the late 1980's....it crossed both Chessie the B&O and the DT&I. It made sense if you think about it, 1980's recession and the elimination of three sets of diamonds (the Chessie crossing was double track) was enough of a financial incentive. The double track from Leipsic Jct eastward to Townwood does become a bit of a bottle neck if a train has to work Pro-Tec steel, which comes off the double track.



brc0227 wrote:
JohnnyO wrote:Because the Nickel Plate intended to double track more of today's Fostoria District, there are plenty of spots where the roadbed is wide and bridges were built to hold two tracks. The Depression came and the double track project was never completed. You used to be able to pick it out by seeing how far away the pole line was away from the main but today, little or no pole line remains.

The Yellow Creek Running Track, as it was once called, ran between Townwood and Leipsic Jct., and the Leipsic passing track extended on out past West Leipsic, with crossovers at Leipsic Junction. NS, naturally, ripped out the Leipsic passing track.



That sounds like something NS would do. And now they're kicking themselves for it. Back around the time of the conrail merger. They had plans of double tracking the remaining portions of the line from Portsmouth to Bellevue. I think they done around 30+ miles and then shelved the project due to all the complications and subsequent lost business from the conrail acquisition. They had also planned on putting a northbound approach to the Peavine as well. But that was also shelved. And then completely scrapped when they got the conrail line from Columbus to cincy
-You are speaking in nonsense. This troubles me.

See all of my photos at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cgtower/
User avatar
CG Tower
Railroadfan...fan
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 5:06 pm
Location: 40°44'33.18"N, 84° 6'18.81"W

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby midland sub » Fri Nov 21, 2014 8:20 pm

Sometimes it the perspective of someone without a "dog in this fight" to throw out something that has some true meaning to it. Post from another board really, really, really put it into perspective....

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Norfolk Southern recently filed for a Discontinuance of Service Exemption for the Peavine from Winchester MP 32.83 to Plum Run MP 74.5. In their filing, they claim that Plum Run to Vera (Portsmouth) will be subject to a separate Discontinuance application in near future. The Plum Run-Vera portion of track has been out of service since 2008 and is refuted to be in worse shape than the Winchester to Plum Run section, BEFORE taking into consideration the problems with the Scioto River bridge at the Vera end. With that in mind, NS sworn testimony states that the 40.67 miles of track between Winchester and Plum Run requires $5,588,058 in IMMEDIATE track work just to get to FRA Class 1 (10 MPH) standards. They then point out that 12.5 miles of rail will need replaced in the first year just to maintain Class 1 at a cost of $4,725,120, with another $1,580,000 in bridge work needed over next few years. This budgets nothing to restore crossing protection or signaling system.

In NS's own swore testimony to the Surface Transportation Board, the "easy" piece of this railroad needs $12,000,000 worth of work just to be able to run as a 10 MPH dark territory, flagging crossings railroad. Plum Run to Vera will need a lot more rail, then there's the Scioto River Bridge - some say it just needs decking for $350,000 or so - some say it needs pier work for $3,500,000. But in either case, it's still a small vertical clearance challenged bridge.

In short, it certainly would seem that if NS chooses to reopen the Peavine, it will not be a simple start running trains tomorrow type proposition. To be useful, line will need to be at least Class 3, and likely will need a new bridge over the Scioto. CSXT is wanting to spend nearly $100,000,000 increasing capacity and updating the LIRC, which is a line that is currently in service. Returning the similar length but worse condition mostly out or service Peavine to the same standards would easily surpass CSXT spend.
midland sub
Railroadfan...fan
 
Posts: 2079
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 10:10 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread postby brc0227 » Sat Nov 22, 2014 4:07 pm

It's odd that NS only filed the discontinuance from Williamsburg to Plum Run. And the timing of the filing is odd too. Considering the short line operating the peavine on the west end had been in negotiations with Plum Run when this was filed. I will say that NS is full of it If they say the line needs that much work to be class 1 10MPH standards. I've been down that line. They could run 20-25 on it right now with no track upgrades. Not saying it doesn't need work. But overall it isn't in bad shape other than the Vera bridge. And I honestly don't know what the Vera bridge needs.
brc0227
Railroadfan...fan
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 7:25 am

PreviousNext

Return to Ohio Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

x