April '04 Trains; Mtn. RRs: Where's the New Haven???

[Paul3]

erikthered wrote:

QUOTE: The ride to New York was, as he put it, like being on a destroyer in a rough sea. (Not surprising, since some of the data plates on the ties read "36" meaning they were laid in 1936- and you could literally pull a spike out of a tie in some spots by hand.) Breakdowns were commonplace.

Yep, that's the 1960's New Haven. [:)] Remember this: the NH last made a profit in 1957 and was in bankruptcy in 1961. Railroad's that are broke don't have the money to spend on replacing ties all that often or on preventive maintenance on equipment. The most amazing thing is not that it got so bad, it's that the NH and it's people were able to struggle through it without falling off the face of the earth (like NYO&W, RI, etc.). The 1960's was a cruel era in southern New England, but it doesn't seem so bad when you consider the 1970's, which was infinitely worse.

jchnhtfd wrote:

QUOTE: The New Haven was -- as a railroad -- a great railroad; as a financial affair, it was a disaster; read a complete history of the financial shenanigans which were involved and it only proves that a)there's nothing new under the sun in terms of crooked dealing and b)some folks will do anything for cash...

Well, it was only a financial disaster in certain circumstances. Like the Great Depression, or the 1960's. [:D] Even during the worst of the Robber Baron era, the NH still made lots of money. Heck, the NH made so much money in pre-WWI days that they maxed out on the amount of dividends they could pay. At this time, the NH invested in new station buildings and other infrastructure like crazy. This would come back to haunt them with the high taxes of the post-WWII era. IOW, the NH was a very profitable enterprise before the Great Depression.

QUOTE: I myself would not be too sure just how useful it would be in today's rail network, much as I'd like to see trains on it again someday: both sides were single track, and the New Haven line through Brewster, Danbury and Waterbury is a crooked SOB, to put it mildly. And not much room anywhere to double track, or put in sidings, either.

About the only thing is that the NS could use it as a way to get into New England, but the real question is: what would they haul? Answer: not much. BTW, the Maybrook Line was all double track, including the Poughkeepsie Bridge before WWI. When the L-1 Class 2-10-2's were delivered in 1918, the bridge was gauntleted, but the double track remained. When the line was dieselized, some CTC was added west of the Hudson and the Bridge was single tracked. So, there should be plenty of room for double track, the real problem is clearances. Also, the Maybrook Line did not go through Waterbury, although it did go through Brewster and Danbury.

QUOTE: But... with regard to the ostensible topic here... the New Haven was not, in its main lines, a 'mountain' railroad. Not that there weren't and aren't some short grades, but not to compare -- and the main lines (Shore Line, Maybrook Line) have no real grades.

Well, certainly not the Shore Line (although, there used to be pushers up 0.91%Sharon Hill in the 1800's), and I could say the same about the D&H's line from Montreal to Schenectady (look at the Trains article, that's a pretty flat line for over 200 miles).

But the Maybrook Line? Now, there I must disagree, at least in comparison to some of the other New England lines mentioned in the Trains article. The worst grade was a stretch of 14 miles that rose 800 feet (average of 1%), with a maximum grade of 1.2%. That's a stiffer grade than the Grand Trunk or the B&M. And that wasn't the only grade on the line, just the ruling grade.

Oh, and BTW, CV was mentioned in the article, although it did not get a grade profile. The NH was totally ignored. Every Class 1 RR in New England is mentioned in that article except the New Haven. It's enough to give a NH fan a complex... [:)]

And notice the title on the page: "New England Gateway Routes". You know, I'd be willing to bet that the NH had more "Gateway" traffic into New England than the Rutland, the MEC, or the B&M. Something about 52 symbol freights a day over the Maybrook line during WWII...

Finally, I agree that, when compared to the great mountain railroads out west like the PRR, the D&RGW or the SP, the NH is just a speed bump. But compared to other New England lines... I'm sorry, but I just can't figure it out why the NH has been ignored in this issue.

Paul A. Cutler III
*****************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
*****************

[jchnhtfd]

The New Haven was -- as a railroad -- a great railroad[:)]; as a financial affair, it was a disaster[xx(]; read a complete history of the financial shenanigans which were involved and it only proves that a)there's nothing new under the sun in terms of crooked dealing[8] and b)some folks will do anything for cash...[:p]

The Poughkeepsie bridge fire was, without doubt, arson -- but whodunit (it may have been an accident, but it was lit, fer sure) was never proved. I myself would not be too sure just how useful it would be in today's rail network, much as I'd like to see trains on it again someday: both sides were single track, and the New Haven line through Brewster, Danbury and Waterbury is a crooked SOB, to put it mildly[:D]. And not much room anywhere to double track, or put in sidings, either.

But... with regard to the ostensible topic here... the New Haven was not, in its main lines, a 'mountain' railroad. Not that there weren't and aren't some short grades, but not to compare -- and the main lines (Shore Line, Maybrook Line) have no real grades. For what it's worth, one should note that the Central Vermont division (my old stomping grounds), although it has a couple of rather nasty grades (State Line Hill between Palmer and Willimantic and over the summit at Roxbury) isn't in the article either -- and, in my humble opinion, rightly so. We used some pretty decent power on those grades, but mountain railroading? no, not really...[:)]

[Anonymous]

speaking of the NH and the maybrook area..... if you havent been, you MUST stop by the TA truckstop in Maybrook NY (exit 5 on I-84) they have TONS of old photographs of the NH and NYC on the walls of the restaurant and in that area.

there are some very good old pictures there. they even have a picture of the bridge burning.

[Anonymous]

I remember the New Haven well. I hung around their depots often. My dad was a commuter on the NH. He would take "The Rocket" from my home town (it was a Budd Car, as I recall) at sometime around 6AM, and then another train from New Haven to NY City. He would arrive at Penn Station around 8:45 and take the subway to his office. The local service got discontinued. The ride to New York was, as he put it, like being on a destroyer in a rough sea. (Not surprising, since some of the data plates on the ties read "36" meaning they were laid in 1936- and you could literally pull a spike out of a tie in some spots by hand.) Breakdowns were commonplace. At my home town, you could watch "express" trains rock from side to side going by at 40 miles per hour, which must have scared the crew (it sure scared me when I first saw it). I saw one freight train a day, and it was a way freight. PC taking over may have been a god send to the stockholders, but it was just "more of the same" for the commuters.

Erik

[Paul3]

AntonioFP45 wrote:

QUOTE: Is the bridge open and used for any type of service today?

There has not been any rail service over the brdige since 1974 and the fire. However, there is a group of people trying to turn the bridge into a rail trail, believe it or not. So far they have been unsuccessful, but they are fighting their way through it, last I heard. They are calling it "Walkway Over the Hudson", IIRC.

Limitedclear wrote:

QUOTE: NYNH &H a proud route. Had a number of connections on the west end of that line too. not just L&HR...

Oh, sure. However, the other roads that interchanged with the NH in or near Maybrook were Erie, NYO&W, LNE, etc. These lines were not dependant on Maybrook to survie like the L&HR was. The NYO&W was long gone, and the Erie was the Erie-Lackawanna by then. The LNE had other places to go, but the L&HR was a through bridge route from Penn. to New England.

Without the L&HR, that traffic now had to go via Albany and the PC... It may not have been arson, but let's just say that it was very helpful to the PC for the Maybrook line to disappear.

Paul A. Cutler III
*****************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
*****************

[Anonymous]

NYNH &H a proud route. Had a number of connections on the west end of that line too. not just L&HR...

LC

[AntonioFP45]

Thank you Paul3, great info!

Is the bridge open and used for any type of service today?

[Paul3]

AntonioFP45 wrote:

QUOTE: I rode the NH as a kid during the Penn Central era, before the NH eventually was made part of it (major mistake).

That wouldn't have been for too long. [:)] The PC existed for maybe a year before the NH was merged into it at 12:01AM on 1/1/69. And while it was a big mistake for the region's transportation needs and for the PC, it was a great move for the NH's creditors and stockholders. The PC was required to pay off about $150 Million (in 1969 dollars!) in debts that the NH racked up, and NH stockholders did pretty well for themselves.

QUOTE: I know that government highway development, and the loss of the U.S Mail contract help play a role in this once proud rail line's demise.

Well, that's what did in the passenger trains for sure. Also, Eastern Air Lines (IIRC) started the air shuttle business, which didn't help. The New Haven carried about 1.7 million people between BOS and NYC in the mid-1950's. By 1968, it was down to about 300,000. Ouch. Not too many business can survive that kind of drop off, and the NH was no exception.

Oh, and the major reason why the NH went under is because the New England manufacturing business went elsewhere, mostly to the south for the cheap labor (which is why I don't have all that much sympathy for those complaining about jobs going elsewhere, since they had no sympathy for New England).

QUOTE: I also remember reading that a tall, major NH railroad bridge in the Maybrook area caught fire and was destroyed. It was an important freight only route to the New England area, from what I remember.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

That would be the Poughkeepsie bridge. In 1974, about 100' or so of bridge deck burned under mysterious circumstances. The bridge itself was not damaged, but PC instantly put in for abandonment. Hmmm.... Strangely enough, the PC's Maybrook switcher was removed the night before and towed across the bridge for "routine" maintenance (and therefore was not cut off by the bridge fire). Some rumors state that an inspection Hi-Rail truck was seen in the area shortly before the fire began.

After the fire, the L&HR was done for (a PC competitor) and that the PC could now charge for more miles to haul all cars up to Albany to get into New England, and they could abandon the entire Maybrook line. What's that old saw... Who benefits?

Also, consider that my neighbor was a civil engineer on the NH/PC/CR, and I have been told of certain "dirty tricks" by other civil engineers during that time... Well, it wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that the Poughkeepsie Bridge was an arson job. Not saying it was (I have no proof), but it wouldn't surprise me.

Oh, and BTW, the bridge was not destroyed, it stands there today. Again, only a few feet of bridge deck actually burned...

Paul A. Cutler III
*****************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
*****************

[AntonioFP45]

The New Haven! It should not have been slighted!

It absolutely played an important economic roll in the New England area. I rode the NH as a kid during the Penn Central era, before the NH eventually was made part of it (major mistake). The commuter trains were often full.

I know that government highway development, and the loss of the U.S Mail contract help play a role in this once proud rail line's demise. I also remember reading that a tall, major NH railroad bridge in the Maybrook area caught fire and was destroyed. It was an important freight only route to the New England area, from what I remember.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Hopefully Trains Magazine will be willing to address this in a future issue.

Peace out!

[Paul3]

Folks, It's been a looong time since I posted here, but this, IMHO, deserves to be asked...

In the new April '04 edition of Trains Magazine, mention is made of several New England "gateway" railroads like the MEC, D&H, B&A, B&M, Rutland, GTW, etc., complete with grade profiles and short descriptive paragraphs.

However, no mention is made at all of the New York, New Haven & Hartford's Maybrook Line. There were several through trains to Boston over this route, like BO-1, BO-3, OB-2, & OB-4, making it one of the longer freight runs in New England. There was also, before the Hell Gate Bridge, through passenger service from Boston to Washington, D.C. (the Federal).

Why is the New Haven not considered worthy of mention? It was the territory of big 2-10-2's and three-cylinder 4-8-2's, both pushing and pulling. Then it became a place for matching A-B-B-A FA/FB's, which also needed pushers from time to time on rainy days (in fact, see the latest "Classic Trains" to see this in action). All of which went over the mile long, 212' high Poughkeepsie Bridge, which still stands today.

So, what's the story, Trains Mag.? Sure, the Maybrook doesn't compare to Saluda or Horseshoe Curve, but it is certainly on par with the Rutland or the B&M. I'm sure thousands of New Haven fans want to know...

Paul A. Cutler III
*****************
Weather Or No Go New Haven
*****************