Alternative mergers in the Northeast:

[JCitron]

Yup. All that concentration of track in that region didn't help matters much, and neither did the abandonments which now the state authorities are kicking themselves for allowing to happen. The states such as New Jersey and Ohio, were not rail friendly at all. New Jersey taxed the railroads very heavily which forced many of them to abandon lines. The D&LW Cutoff existed right into Conrail into the mid-1980s when they decided to abandon it. I think it was a bit of corruption and payola by the contractor who wanted the ROW for construction materials, but of course there's no way to prove that. Today as you know that line is being rebuilt at least in part for commuter service.

I forgot about that merger proposal you mentioned. That would have been the answer to the railroad connections. It is sad they didn't make it into fruition as that would have created a northeastern rail system similar to what we have today after the split up of Conrail. The poor BAR. I remember vaguely when the PC did that to them. The BAR used to run long potato trains via the MEC, B&M, and NH for many years before. This was big business for them in the harvest season. Prior to the abandonment of the WNR&P, the trains used to go directly from Portland all the way to Worcester where they connected to the New Haven's Providence and Worcester line. In the summer months this was a major passenger route for vacation goers who came up from New York City and vicinity to New Hampshire and Maine for their summers away from the city.

There was a mixed relationship of the Lehigh and Susquehanna, the PA subsidiary of the CNJ and it's ownership and relationship with the LC&N

http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=130&t=66517

The Lehigh Valley RR never had any ownership in the company it was CNJ and later RDG. Very confusing.

John

 

[jacksonbarno]

That is pretty confusing. The funniest part about the Lackawanna cutoff is that it was the fastest route between Buffalo and New Jersey/New York. When Conrail abandoned it, they had to route all of their TOFC trains around the NYC and PRR routes. That meant that the schedules were slowed down, etc... Another ironic part is that the consolidation of railroads actually made the rail network more confusing for a while, and schedules became less competitive, which furthered the vicious cycle until government action had to take place.

I think that the final straw in the minds of New Jersey and Ohio politicians was when PC refused to upgrade and restore service to cities like Cleveland because they knew that they were going to go under. One example was just after PC was created in 1968, when most of the US thought PC was going to be profitable, Cleveland asked PC to upgrade their Cleveland ore yards and passenger station. Instead, they canceled passenger service to Cleveland and shut down most of their ore operations. If service towards the end hadn't been so bad, maybe the state governments wouldn't have been so hostile. Had the PC not been created, the story might have been vastly different. They wouldn't have put the LNE and the BAR out of business, and they wouldn't have sucked business away from the Anthracite roads.

When railroads started abandoning lines en masse, there was lot of confusion over what lines were abandoned, etc... The ICC didn't help much either. The ICC is another reason why the railroad industry went under in the 70's, because they were using old rules meant for the era of monopolies with new markets and competition. That's the reason why the RI was obliterated, the MILW thought they had to abandon their Pacific extension, the NYC and C&O merger was not allowed, and allowing PC to go through. Then again, they were probably the saving grace of the SP and ATSF, as the SPSF merger would have been awful for that region. That and they preserved passenger service long enough for Amtrak to be created. But even then, they are the reason why passenger traffic left a bad taste in the mouthes of the travelers: because int eh late 60's, passenger service was increasingly getting worse and worse, and by the time Amtrak was created, some trains didn't even have diners.

 

[AdvancedApproach]

That and they preserved passenger service long enough for Amtrak to be created. But even then, they are the reason why passenger traffic left a bad taste in the mouthes of the travelers: because int eh late 60's, passenger service was increasingly getting worse and worse, and by the time Amtrak was created, some trains didn't even have diners.

It’s not like travelers really cared for trains at that time anyway. Airports and roads were all the rave.

 

[RetroRails12]

It’s not like travelers really cared for trains at that time anyway. Airports and roads were all the rave.

your not old enough to know what it was like back in the 1960's and 1970's when Amtrak just started.....

 

[AdvancedApproach]

your not old enough to know what it was like back in the 1960's and 1970's when Amtrak just started.....

Neither are you but still comment on it so what's your point?

 

[AdvancedApproach]

A nice alternative merger would've been an ATSF-NYC combination. A coast-to-coast merger would have worked wonders. Especially with the southern transcon being rich in intermodal traffic nowadays. The New York Central would've benefited greatly from this merger. Much better than that cataclysmic failure of a merger with the Pennsy.

 

[JCitron]

A nice alternative merger would've been an ATSF-NYC combination. A coast-to-coast merger would have worked wonders. Especially with the southern transcon being rich in intermodal traffic nowadays. The New York Central would've benefited greatly from this merger. Much better than that cataclysmic failure of a merger with the Pennsy.

The Erie, later Erie Lackawanna, was actually better for intermodal traffic due to its wide flat route across New York State and Ohio. They were running 70 mph freights on their jointed-rail line while the NYC and Pennsy were running over convoluted routes.

 

[AdvancedApproach]

The Erie, later Erie Lackawanna, was actually better for intermodal traffic due to its wide flat route across New York State and Ohio. They were running 70 mph freights on their jointed-rail line while the NYC and Pennsy were running over convoluted routes.

Only problem was getting into New York. Plus the Erie Lackawanna had serious problems with mismanagement. This was actually covered in Charles Smiley Hard Coal Roads What Went Wrong video. NYC had by the 1960s streamlined their operations and their over convoluted route structure problems had gone away thanks to Alfred Pearlman's awesome work.

 

[JCitron]

Only problem was getting into New York. Plus the Erie Lackawanna had serious problems with mismanagement. This was actually covered in Charles Smiley Hard Coal Roads What Went Wrong video. NYC had by the 1960s streamlined their operations and their over convoluted route structure problems had gone away thanks to Alfred Pearlman's awesome work.

That's right. Pearlman was a real railroad man who moved up the ranks unlike what we have today and knew how to make a railroad tick. His Selkirk yard is a testament to his skill and operations foresight. There were plans under H. H. Harrison to do away with Selkirk but that never transpired and that yard is still viable today as it was when it was first opened. The EL's problem was Erie's bad management. The Lackawanna was still profitable right through until the merger. The EL squandered its resources and ended up becoming a weight around the Lackawanna bringing down the company. It didn't help that a big portion of their line got hit by Hurricane Gloria. I remember that hurricane and the damage it did here in the Northeast.

The EL did have an alternate connection to New York City via the New Haven, but that got nixed by the Penn Central when the bridge burned. Taking out the Poughkeepsie bridge not only hurt the EL, but also the LVNE, and LV. PC did what NYC wanted to do, and that was to remove the competition.

 

[AdvancedApproach]

That's right. Pearlman was a real railroad man who moved up the ranks unlike what we have today and knew how to make a railroad tick. His Selkirk yard is a testament to his skill and operations foresight. There were plans under H. H. Harrison to do away with Selkirk but that never transpired and that yard is still viable today as it was when it was first opened. The EL's problem was Erie's bad management. The Lackawanna was still profitable right through until the merger. The EL squandered its resources and ended up becoming a weight around the Lackawanna bringing down the company. It didn't help that a big portion of their line got hit by Hurricane Gloria. I remember that hurricane and the damage it did here in the Northeast.

The EL did have an alternate connection to New York City via the New Haven, but that got nixed by the Penn Central when the bridge burned. Taking out the Poughkeepsie bridge not only hurt the EL, but also the LVNE, and LV. PC did what NYC wanted to do, and that was to remove the competition.

I think you meant Hurricane Agnes back in June 1972. Erie engaged in cronyism, mismanagement, partying and everything BUT competent railroading.

 

[JCitron]

I think you meant Hurricane Agnes back in June 1972. Erie engaged in cronyism, mismanagement, partying and everything BUT competent railroading.

Yeah, it was Agnes. I forgot the name as I was typing it. It didn't feel right but I left it anyway. I was 13 when Agnes hit. The storm took down some trees in my yard and knocked one into our back porch. The storm also lifted a green ash tree out of the ground leaving behind an... ash hole.

Erie's operation sounds like many modern companies today. Look at the mess we're in now with the big investors buying up the railroads so they can suck the money out of them before selling off the shells at a large profit.