RailRoadFan.com

I was going thru an old copy of "Trains" from October 1987, which was the "Michigan Issue". It covers all of the shortline operations after Conrail Day. It covers all the shortlines as well as trackage sales from PC/CR to MN, Lenawee County, H&E (NOT HESR Yet), and the newly established CMGN.

Reading the article its states about the "Toledo Eight", the 8 AA GP35's taken hostage by Michigan Interstate during a court battle with the State of Michigan. It does not go into great detail about why the GP35's were taken hostage or even how they managed to do that without anyone noticing. Can anyone shed some more light on this story?

Also, it mentions the N&W had trackage rights over the AA from Milan to Toledo. Does NS still retain these rights today even though they now run down the Detroit Line? It also mentions GTW trackage rights which I presume the CN M383/M384 uses to get to CP 286 on the Chicago Line to head to Bellevue.

Last I read NS still had trackage rights between Milan and Toledo, they do not need to use it much but they can

Michigan Interstate held the state-owned locomotives out of the state during a subsidy dispute with the state. That's why the Ann Arbor is split between multiple operators today. The locomotives were returned to the state in December 1982.

I have the entire story in one of the recent AARRT&HA newsletters. I will dig it up and print cliffnotes for you. If I don't answer in a few days bump this thread to remind me, TW.

AARR wrote:I have the entire story in one of the recent AARRT&HA newsletters. I will dig it up and print cliffnotes for you. If I don't answer in a few days bump this thread to remind me, TW.

Thanks Don, I appreciate it.

I'll try to look it up this weekend. Fortunately its in a recent edition so I don't have to search through 30 something years of news letters.

I'll try to look it up this weekend. Fortunately its in a recent edition so I don't have to search through 30 something years of news letters.

A fellow packrat. Put er there bro!

hoborich wrote:

I'll try to look it up this weekend. Fortunately its in a recent edition so I don't have to search through 30 something years of news letters.

A fellow packrat. Put er there bro!

Completely forgot to look TW - send me a reminder again. Thanks.

This is the very short version from AARRT&HA's Spring/Summer "The Double A", 2012.

At the end of March 1981 Michigan Interstate's (MIRY) contract to operate the AA came to an end and efforts to renew with the state of MI became adversarial. MIRY believed MI owed them money for the track rehab projects and MI declined to pay for what they thought were valid reasons. After several short term continuations MIRY finally had enough and stopped service north of Ann Arbor. The state stepped in and AA was divided into 3 sections (AA = Toledo-Ann Arbor, TSBY = Ann Arbor-Alma, and MIGN = Alma-Frankfort). MIRY was leasing the GP35's from the state whom optioned the leases to TSBY. As MIRY was removing their equipment from Owosso they grabbed the 8 operable GP35's (2 were inoperable) and took them to Toledo and held them hostage for the money owed them by the state of MI. After a lawsuit the 8 GP35's were returned to TSBY but only 6 were found to be functioning.

Again, this is the very short version and I left our many details. If you have any questions feel free to ask away.

AARR wrote:This is the very short version from AARRT&HA's Spring/Summer "The Double A", 2012.

At the end of March 1981 Michigan Interstate's (MIRY) contract to operate the AA came to an end and efforts to renew with the state of MI became adversarial. MIRY believed MI owed them money for the track rehab projects and MI declined to pay for what they thought were valid reasons. After several short term continuations MIRY finally had enough and stopped service north of Ann Arbor. The state stepped in and AA was divided into 3 sections (AA = Toledo-Ann Arbor, TSBY = Ann Arbor-Alma, and MIGN = Alma-Frankfort). MIRY was leasing the GP35's from the state whom optioned the leases to TSBY. As MIRY was removing their equipment from Owosso they grabbed the 8 operable GP35's (2 were inoperable) and took them to Toledo and held them hostage for the money owed them by the state of MI. After a lawsuit the 8 GP35's were returned to TSBY but only 6 were found to be functioning.

Again, this is the very short version and I left our many details. If you have any questions feel free to ask away.

So it's begs to ask the question that NO ONE noticed 8 units just disappear overnight?

TrainWatcher wrote:So it's begs to ask the question that NO ONE noticed 8 units just disappear overnight?

It was noticed right away. Of course MIRY was asked to return them and they said pay us what you owe us and we will. So then threatening letters were sent and so forth ultimately resulting in the law suit that led to the units eventually being returned.

In the meantime TSBY was using a leased GTW unit to switch Ann Arbor to Alma. Soon after they got GP35 394 running. When the other 8 GP35's returned 3 or 4 of the 10 were inoperable. ONe was sent to Vassar, another one or two leased to MIGN, and the rest served TSBY's Ann Arbor-Alma line which was way more than they needed. Keep in mind MIGN had the sand traffic at that time and was shipping it down to Grand Rapids rather than to Alma-Toledo. Sand did not return to the former AA lines until after the state took away Alma-Frankfort from MIGN and assigned it to TSBY.

Sorry for bumping an old thread, though it's certainly an interesting one. Is this why there can be some...hostility is the wrong word...miscommunication between GLC and AA? I've heard that mentioned before.

Bumping a really old thread based on something mentioned from Facebook.

Which units made up the Toledo 8 and which units ramained in Owosso? An earlier post references TSBY getting 394 working again, so I assume that was one of them. What was the other?

Also, the reason the Michigan Interstate retained control of the Ann Arbor to Toledo section of the railroad (as I understand it), had to do with an an ownership issue. Unlike the lines north of Toledo, which were purchased by the State of Michigan on "Conrail Day" to retain service to said lines, the AA to Toledo section was to be included in Conrail. The State of Michigan worked out an agreement and Conrail continued to operate the AA trackage under a subsidy from Conrail Day until October 1st 1977, at which time Michigan Interstate took over operations of the entire line. I think at this point the Michigan Interstate had purchased the line from AA to Toledo and as a result couldn't have operations pulled back off the line by the State of Michigan, as was done north of Ann Arbor.

385 and 388-394. 386 was OOS and 387 was either OOS or assigned to TSB’s thumb lines. I’m guessing from my memory so I’ll check my notes when I get a chance.

chapmaja wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 14, 2023 9:09 am

Bumping a really old thread based on something mentioned from Facebook.

Which units made up the Toledo 8 and which units ramained in Owosso? An earlier post references TSBY getting 394 working again, so I assume that was one of them. What was the other?

In his Morning Sun Book, The Ann Arbor Railroad in Color on page 123 author Robert Warrick it explains Michigan Interstate's ownership of the Toledo to Ann Arbor portion. I will paraphrase it:

As we all know the state fired MI from operating north of Ann Arbor(actually Whitmore Lake) on September 30, 1982. MI retained operating the Toledo to Ann Arbor portion under contract with the state. However, MI filed for bankruptcy around then because of the contract issues it had with the state for running the northern portion. A receiver was appointed and negotiated a settlement with the state and, as part of the settlement, the receiver (W. Clark Durant III) purchased the section from Toledo to Ann Arbor on September 19, 1985. Part of the bankruptcy agreement mandated that the railroad be sold within five years so on October 5, 1988 it was sold by Durant as receiver to the MI management group and shortly thereafter MI emerged from bankruptcy. Warrick states that the Toledo to Ann Arbor portion "was always viable and was run without state subsidy and therefore was not part of the contract controversies" that put MI into bankruptcy.

I show 386 was retired in the early 1980's and scrapped in 1984 while 387 was retired in the mid 1980's but not scrapped until the late 2000's.

AARR wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 14, 2023 9:30 am

385 and 388-394. 386 was OOS and 387 was either OOS or assigned to TSB’s thumb lines. I’m guessing from my memory so I’ll check my notes when I get a chance.

AARR wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 14, 2023 9:30 am

385 and 388-394. 386 was OOS and 387 was either OOS or assigned to TSB’s thumb lines. I’m guessing from my memory so I’ll check my notes when I get a chance.

chapmaja wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 14, 2023 9:09 am

Bumping a really old thread based on something mentioned from Facebook.

Which units made up the Toledo 8 and which units ramained in Owosso? An earlier post references TSBY getting 394 working again, so I assume that was one of them. What was the other?

Interestingly, from another source, it appears 394 was not one of the Toledo 8. It apparently was OOS at the time and did not go south to Toledo. I have seen picture of the Toledo 8, but don't recall the units. I will need to see if I can find them again.

Also, it appears 386 did remain in service with the AA / TSBY until at least the mid-1980's, as there are pictures online from 1985 with 386 and 387 in service.

One other thing I do recall was that at one point in the early 1980's, maybe at the same time the Toledo 8 were being held captive, Michigan Interstate stashed a long line of cars on the mainline just north of the Barton Drive crossing. I don't recall how long they were there, but I remember a lot of AA boxcars blocking the line.