Pere Marquette still in GR

[PM1946]

Driving West on Ann Street around two this afternoon I spotted the Pere Marquette (5 Superliners and head end power) still on its overnight siding. Apparently it never left this morning. Anyone know what happened?

[Raildudes dad]

Annulled today due to a hazmat issue that closed the tracks in Gary IN

[Expo]

Bad day for a glitch. Spring break starts this weekend; hence the PM having 5 Superliners. Wonder how many buses were called to cover?

[J T]

That would be cool if they ran another trainset back tonight instead of buses and then doubled them up tomorrow on 371.

[tadman]

It sounds like a sad but un-solvable problem. That hazmat situation closed down everything within sight in that part of Gary, meaning CSS, CSX, CN, and NS. Ergo, there's no reroute even if they wanted to. Everything in parallel was at a stop.

Funny thing is, I got through that afternoon on NICTD EB # 505 and knew nothing of it until the following morning.

[Saturnalia]

It sounds like a sad but un-solvable problem. That hazmat situation closed down everything within sight in that part of Gary, meaning CSS, BNSF, CN, and NS. Ergo, there's no reroute even if they wanted to. Everything in parallel was at a stop.

Funny thing is, I got through that afternoon on NICTD EB # 505 and knew nothing of it until the following morning.

NS was using the CSX Porter Branch to get down to the IHB and around for some of they're really hot trains. IDK if any Amtraks transferred. 371 would have had a backup move if they wanted to though. Makes a diamond there sound rather interesting...

[CSX_CO]

NS was using the CSX Porter Branch to get down to the IHB and around for some of they're really hot trains. IDK if any Amtraks transferred. 371 would have had a backup move if they wanted to though. Makes a diamond there sound rather interesting...

Why? For the round-a-bout route to get back to the Chicago line somewhere up by Hick? If Hick isn't an option, then you have to run to Dolton on the IHB and up the UP to 21st St. This isn't paper railroads, you have to justify the expense of something in the real world.

You should realize running a train isn't like driving your car around a detour. They'd need pilots for the AMTRAK crew, new paperwork (CSX bulletins for a different subdivision, IHB daily bulletin, etc). NS isn't going to want diamonds on their busiest route that aren't going to get used with any frequency. Also, Porter Branch has NO sidings after Willow Creek and until you get to Ivanhoe. Even then, IHB stores cars on the old Gary and Western, and you really only have a main and a glorified siding (if its not blocked) before reaching GIbson.

I can remember many days sitting at Willow Creek on Q209 for 3 to 4 hrs because IHB Gibson couldn't handle us, and there was no other place to park us on the Branch without being in the way. I think CSX had plans at one time to put a siding in at a place called "The Marsh" but money doesn't grow on trees and it never happened. That, and I don't think CSX uses the Porter Branch for that many of its moves (unless going to IHB at Gibson, Michigan Ave, etc).

Cheaper to rent a couple buses and bus around the problem when it occurs. Mag would argue its cheaper just to bus the people every day.

Practice Safe CSX

[Patriot]

My position entails a tremendous amount of risk management, although not in an industry that is any where near as capital intensive as a railroad (thankfully!). But the apparent proximity of the railroads in the Gary area whereby one incident had a dramatic impact on so many lines....Yikes! Just the nature of things I guess, like when a snow storm hits the Chicago or New York metropolitan areas. Clean it up, and do the best you can getting things back to "normal".

There certainly is nothing cheap about having to build redundancies/work-arounds into any business, especially a railroad, but they are definitely nice to have when an adverse event does take place.

[Saturnalia]

NS was using the CSX Porter Branch to get down to the IHB and around for some of they're really hot trains. IDK if any Amtraks transferred. 371 would have had a backup move if they wanted to though. Makes a diamond there sound rather interesting...

Why? For the round-a-bout route to get back to the Chicago line somewhere up by Hick? If Hick isn't an option, then you have to run to Dolton on the IHB and up the UP to 21st St. This isn't paper railroads, you have to justify the expense of something in the real world.

I did not say it was a good idea or what they should do, but the idea itself is interesting to explore. You've pointed out some downsides, and there are upsides too.

We know CSX toyed with a direct connection from the PM to the Porter Branch at 482. They obviously had it pretty far when it was eventually dumped.

To name some upsides, CSX now has no trackage rights to deal with, and control everything. Crews only need to know CSX rules, etc. Now I'm not going to argue that it is worth it or not, that is Jacksonville's decision. But as a railfan, I find it interesting to discuss "what if" events.

[CSX_CO]

I did not say it was a good idea or what they should do, but the idea itself is interesting to explore. You've pointed out some downsides, and there are upsides too.

We know CSX toyed with a direct connection from the PM to the Porter Branch at 482. They obviously had it pretty far when it was eventually dumped.

To name some upsides, CSX now has no trackage rights to deal with, and control everything. Crews only need to know CSX rules, etc. Now I'm not going to argue that it is worth it or not, that is Jacksonville's decision. But as a railfan, I find it interesting to discuss "what if" events.

Your post didn't mention CSX at all. YOUR post mentioned AMTRAK using the Porter Branch. You're trying to come back and make your post have merit by skewing what you've said. Who's rules is a moot point as crews who go into Chicago are usually qualified over the railroads in Chicago. Hence, the CORA guides, a quick reference to the major rules on the members of the CORA.

CSX has explored the idea of completely reconfiguring the PM coming into Porter. Not sure what you mean by 'pretty far'? They never broke ground, and while idea has been toyed with I doubt it has gone much past the 'it would be great if...' stage. Thus far the use of NS trackage rights is offers a better ROI then the massive engineering project it would entail to tie the PM into the MC or NYC and then across to the Porter Branch. CSX wouldn't control 'everything' as the CSX trains would still be at the mercy of NS trying to go across the NS at Porter. With the 130 trains a day you purport to go through Porter it would be nearly impossible for CSX to get across the diamonds, especially considering anything going to/from the NS for the Porter Branch is going to take NS priority. So the previously mentioned lack of capacity on the Porter Branch between Porter and Gibson is really going to come into play. Unless someone comes up with a large source of traffic on the PM (which I'm not holding my breath for) for what traffic CSX runs to/from Chicago via the PM will suffice on the NS trackage rights. Its what? 1 freight a day each way, 1 AMTRAK each way (which would need to go via the NS anyway for the best access to CUS), and 1 loaded and empty coal train a day? Outside of the coal to West Olive, simply changing the car routing on CSX you could really avoid Chicago-Detroit traffic going via GR completely. Just route via Toledo, which CSX has done in the past.

IMHO making a connection between the PM at MC on the west side of Michigan City, and a stretch of double track to Porter, would involve less engineering work then trying to cram it all in at Porter. But, still the sticky problem of a diamond across the NYC, which I doubt NS will be very keen on wanting installed.

In so far as a diamond is concerned, it makes absolutely 0 sense for AMTRAK to have diamonds when it would never be used. Just bus in the event of a service interuption. That is what your post referenced, no mention of CSX what-so-ever in it. Quit trying to go back and skew what you say in an effort to avoid being 'wrong'. While you have improved in some areas, that hasn't changed since the first day you came on here...

Practice Safe CSX

[Y@]

Quit trying to go back and skew what you say in an effort to avoid being 'wrong'. While you have improved in some areas, that hasn't changed since the first day you came on here...

Russ for the win.

MQT is wrong, and that's why.

[Saturnalia]

Quit trying to go back and skew what you say in an effort to avoid being 'wrong'. While you have improved in some areas, that hasn't changed since the first day you came on here...

Russ for the win.

MQT is wrong, and that's why.

If you are so confident that I am wrong, then prove it.

Here are my two statements on the issue:

NS was using the CSX Porter Branch to get down to the IHB and around for some of their really hot trains. IDK if any Amtraks transferred. 371 would have had a backup move if they wanted to though. Makes a diamond there sound rather interesting...

I did not say it was a good idea or what they should do, but the idea itself is interesting to explore. You've pointed out some downsides, and there are upsides too.

We know CSX toyed with a direct connection from the PM to the Porter Branch at 482. They obviously had it pretty far when it was eventually dumped.

To name some upsides, CSX now has no trackage rights to deal with, and control everything. Crews only need to know CSX rules, etc. Now I'm not going to argue that it is worth it or not, that is Jacksonville's decision. But as a railfan, I find it interesting to discuss "what if" events.

I have found at least 2 specific inaccuracies on your end. Let's see if you can do better picking me apart.

[J T]

[atrainguy60]

[CSX_CO]

I have found at least 2 specific inaccuracies on your end. Let's see if you can do better picking me apart.

If the upsides out weighed the downsides, CSX would have done this 15 years ago when the CP traffic was still on CSX and freight traffic to Michigan amounted to more than just knocking rust off the rails. Obviously made little to no sense then, and even less now with the lack of traffic via Michigan. Again, outside of traffic to West Olive, the PM is a redundant route for anything going Chicago-Detroit Metro. Route to Stanley (which is running under capacity) and then to Detroit. Cut off any 'thru' traffic through GR, and make the PM a 40 mph railroad like the Monon.

I stand by my initial statement that your post had absolutely nothing to do with CSX using the Porter Branch from the PM. You reference NS, and then AMTRAK making a 'backing' move to get over to the Porter Branch, in order to get around a derailment. Again, bus is much cheaper then the stuff you propose. Again, this isn't paper railroads, and projects need an economic or operational justification to even make it past the proposal stage. You are like the Pigs in "Animal Farm" where you come back and 'change' what you said to give the appearance you were right. Not quite "Big Brother" in 1984, but you're still young. I thank God as a shareholder people like you and the 'railfan what ifs' aren't policy makers and in charge of capital expenditures.

Practice Safe CSX

[Patriot]

With industry "experts" predicting great things for railroads over at least the next few decades, the railroad industry must keep thinking and figuring out how to do things more efficiently and building capacity to handle the business that seems to be coming its way. Just what look intermodal has done, taking advantage of "clean coal out west, and now oil. It seems like the industry is very good at building capacity (e.g double lines, new yards) in rural areas, which is great for them, but they are still apparently hampered by choke points in urban areas and where railroads cross or share rail. They continue to spend billions of dollars, for which I applaud them, but I do find it somewhat surprising that they have what seems to me (far from being any expert --- just a fan and enjoy reading the posts in this forum) lots of issues with their power units. No power = no go in any industry.

[amtrak1007]

[tadman]

I'm with CSX, if they would've connected the PM at Porter they would've done it decades ago. That is one sleepy railroad these days.

Not that it has anything to do with Amtrak's annulment anyway...

[Saturnalia]

I'm with CSX, if they would've connected the PM at Porter they would've done it decades ago. That is one sleepy railroad these days.

Not that it has anything to do with Amtrak's annulment anyway...

I NEVER SAID IT MADE SENSE FOR CSX TO CONNECT THE PORTER BRANCH AND THE GR SUB!!!!

[tadman]

I NEVER SAID IT MADE SENSE FOR CSX TO CONNECT THE PORTER BRANCH AND THE GR SUB!!!!

Makes a diamond there sound rather interesting...

Bro, it's okay to be wrong. Last week I was wrong about some specs on the MP36, it just happens. With regard to your post, I can't imagine what other diamond would be "interesting" other than one connecting CSX-Porter with CSX-Grand Rapids.



Besides, it's not the worst idea - like using hotdogs as our currency or eating a moon made of spareribs...