611 and NS - filing for divorce?

10624 views
40 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January, 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,226 posts
611 and NS - filing for divorce?
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, December 20, 2017 3:55 PM

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    August, 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,873 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Wednesday, December 20, 2017 4:53 PM

Well, I'll take 611 with an Amtrak "panic diesel" tucked in behind her romping on the mainline than no 611 at all.

Who knows?  With an Amtrak partnership there's no telling where 611 may run.

Anyway, Amtrak could use some positive press right now.

  • Member since
    January, 2015
  • 1,271 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Wednesday, December 20, 2017 5:12 PM

NKP 765 has continued to run with diesel protection on Norfolk Southern over the last several years, so hopefully 611 will be afforded similar access on lines that are not at capacity for freight.

  • Member since
    September, 2014
  • 193 posts
Posted by GERALD L MCFARLANE JR on Wednesday, December 20, 2017 5:56 PM

NS is full of BS...they wouldn't be any more liable the the UP is for running their steam engines, it's just a piss ant way to get out of exursions.

  • Member since
    May, 2003
  • From: US
  • 14,970 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, December 20, 2017 6:02 PM

How many single engine trains does NS operate on a daily basis conducting their own business????  I suspect quite a few.

         

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

  • Member since
    January, 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,226 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Friday, December 22, 2017 7:22 AM

BaltACD

How many single engine trains does NS operate on a daily basis conducting their own business????  I suspect quite a few.

 

You would be correct!

The issue isn't whether there is a diesel tucked in behind, it's whether excursions can be arranges as "Amtrak special moves".  

Allowing special Amtrak trains is written into the contracts Amtrak has with the host roads, usually a fixed rate per train mile.  

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    April, 2016
  • 714 posts
Posted by Shadow the Cats owner on Friday, December 22, 2017 7:46 AM

If they are worried about needing protective power behind her then let them use the F-units NS has for their business train instead of keeping them at Altoona all the time.

  • Member since
    October, 2008
  • From: Calgary
  • 1,768 posts
Posted by cx500 on Friday, December 22, 2017 11:04 AM

As raised in the Flying Yankee thread, PTC requirements could threaten any mainline steam operation, at least with the steam locomotive in the lead and controlling position.  While a partial PTC installation may be feasible, probably at considerable cost, that will still not satisfy the present mandate.

  • Member since
    September, 2014
  • 1,144 posts
Posted by ROBERT WILLISON on Friday, December 22, 2017 12:57 PM

[quote user="GERALD L MCFARLANE JR"]

NS is full of BS...they wouldn't be any more liable the the UP is for running their steam engines, it's just a piss ant way to get out of exursions.

 

[/quote. Well said!!!

  • Member since
    May, 2003
  • From: US
  • 14,970 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Friday, December 22, 2017 1:16 PM

cx500
As raised in the Flying Yankee thread, PTC requirements could threaten any mainline steam operation, at least with the steam locomotive in the lead and controlling position.  While a partial PTC installation may be feasible, probably at considerable cost, that will still not satisfy the present mandate.

One thing to remember about PTC - it IS NOT required on ALL railroad mileage.  In fact the majority of railroad mileage does not require the use of PTC.  There are rules that define which lines must have PTC and which lines don't require PTC.

         

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

  • Member since
    September, 2010
  • From: Parma Heights Ohio
  • 2,508 posts
Posted by Penny Trains on Friday, December 22, 2017 6:38 PM

Shadow the Cats owner

If they are worried about needing protective power behind her then let them use the F-units NS has for their business train instead of keeping them at Altoona all the time.

 

I'd take any first gen diesel over a modern unit.  At least that way it would LOOK plausible.

Big Smile  I'm Cuckoo For Choo Choo Stuffs!  Big Smile

  • Member since
    December, 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 974 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Friday, December 22, 2017 6:47 PM

Penny Trains

I'd take any first gen diesel over a modern unit.  At least that way it would LOOK plausible.

Just pretend the dismals have died enroute and the 611 is rescuing them!

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    June, 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 6,222 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Saturday, December 23, 2017 1:03 PM

Firelock76

Well, I'll take 611 with an Amtrak "panic diesel" tucked in behind her romping on the mainline than no 611 at all.

Who knows?  With an Amtrak partnership there's no telling where 611 may run.

Anyway, Amtrak could use some positive press right now.

 

FTA:"... As a practical matter, it means the museum must partner with Amtrak for any future excursions, and even then, Norfolk Southern would have to permit the steam locomotive on its tracks..."

 With all due respect to Bev Fitzpatrick, I don't think that such a situation is  necessarily, the "end of the world as we have come to know it".  To work within the current railroad environment and with AMTRAK, might just open a bigger window onto the future of 'Fan Trips' (?).  

UPRR utilizes, not only their corporate 'Heritage Diesel' fleet in conjunction with their Steam Locomotive powered trips, in a very successful manner; their Steam locomotives are apparently, also equipped with a control stand for their engineers to operate their trailing diesel power(?).

Remember, when #3985 running as Clinchfield #676, operated in foreign territory, without a trailing diesel,with only minor problems(?).    It[a trailing diesel] seems like a positive for 'insurance', if something does go wrong.   Witness the problems #844 had on its 'Missouri River Rambler' excusrion; they were able adapt, and cope with those problems; with ultimately, only slight delays(?).        

  NS has their own fleet of Heritage Diesels, working in regular train service, it does not seem unlikely, they could put an appropriate diesel on a trip with #611 ?  

 

 

Sam

 

 


 

  • Member since
    December, 2007
  • 1,103 posts
Posted by Falcon48 on Sunday, December 24, 2017 2:54 PM

oltmannd
 
BaltACD

How many single engine trains does NS operate on a daily basis conducting their own business????  I suspect quite a few.

 

 

 

You would be correct!

The issue isn't whether there is a diesel tucked in behind, it's whether excursions can be arranges as "Amtrak special moves".  

Allowing special Amtrak trains is written into the contracts Amtrak has with the host roads, usually a fixed rate per train mile.  

 

  Also, if the move is an "Amtrak" train, then the liability limitations applicable to Amtrak under its governing statute apply (both to Amtrak and to the "host" railroad handling the train).  Not a small matter if you are a host railroad.

  • Member since
    December, 2007
  • 1,103 posts
Posted by Falcon48 on Sunday, December 24, 2017 3:10 PM

BaltACD

One thing to remember about PTC - it IS NOT required on ALL railroad mileage.  In fact the majority of railroad mileage does not require the use of PTC.  There are rules that define which lines must have PTC and which lines don't require PTC.

 

    As a practical matter, it would be pretty difficult to operate a marketable "mainline" steam excursion on a Class I railroad without using PTC equipped mainline trackage.  PTC is generally required on Class I "main line" trackage which (i) handles regularly scheduled intercity or commuter passenger trains; OR (ii) has 5,000,000 gross annual ton miles AND is used for PIH (TIH) haz mat traffic (including anhydrous ammonia), see 49 CFR 236.1003 (definition of "main line")  and 236.1005(b).

  • Member since
    August, 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,873 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Sunday, December 24, 2017 7:17 PM

Well, this is one thing we have to remember, although I'm sure most of us know it already.

Steam excursions on the big mainline 'roads exist solely on the sufference of those 'roads.  One change of who's fanny is in the CEO's seat and it can all come to an end overnight with the stroke of a pen, an e-mail, or a phone call.

Hopefully 611 won't be put away for another 20 year sleep, but we'll just have to see how it plays out.  Personally I think it'd be a gas to see her roaring up the Northeast Corridor. 

  • Member since
    September, 2014
  • 1,144 posts
Posted by ROBERT WILLISON on Tuesday, December 26, 2017 10:59 AM

Firelock76

Well, this is one thing we have to remember, although I'm sure most of us know it already.

Steam excursions on the big mainline 'roads exist solely on the sufference of those 'roads.  One change of who's fanny is in the CEO's seat and it can all come to an end overnight with the stroke of a pen, an e-mail, or a phone call.

Hopefully 611 won't be put away for another 20 year sleep, but we'll just have to see how it plays out.  Personally I think it'd be a gas to see her roaring up the Northeast Corridor. 

 

v very true fire lock. Probably one of the reasons that the  765 frequents the Cuyahoga scenic railroad which have different insurance requirements and operating rules. Probably the same goes for the  1225 up in Michigan. That group has a good relationship with thier host railroad the lake state railway.

I wonder why Steamtown doesn't sponcer or host visiting mainline steam locomotives and excursions. That portion of pa is rich in railroad history and would dove tail with thier mission statement. I have fond memories of steamtown excusuion thru the Delaware water gap. Be great to see excursion return to the Poconos.

  • Member since
    September, 2010
  • From: Parma Heights Ohio
  • 2,508 posts
Posted by Penny Trains on Thursday, December 28, 2017 6:58 PM

ROBERT WILLISON
Cuyahoga scenic railroad which have different insurance requirements and operating rules.

The Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad operates inside the Cuyahoga Valley National Park so I assume their under the same rules and regs as other national park railroads such as the Grand Canyon Railway and Steamtown.

Big Smile  I'm Cuckoo For Choo Choo Stuffs!  Big Smile

  • Member since
    August, 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,873 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Saturday, December 30, 2017 10:45 AM

Steamtown has hosted 765 in the past and I think 261 has been there as well, but I could be wrong on the latter.

No reason they couldn't host 611 as far as I know, unless there could be a problem with it getting there or clearance problems once it gets there.

  • Member since
    September, 2003
  • 6,366 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, December 30, 2017 12:22 PM

Some rumblings starting up on RyPN about Amtrak excursions on CSX; I raised the question whether Amtrak could 'compel' steam operation under their arrangement.  An interesting possibility, at least.

  • Member since
    August, 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,873 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Saturday, December 30, 2017 1:18 PM

Interesting certainly, but I doubt it could happen.  CSX has a hard-and-fast rule of no antique railroad equipment on their property at any time or for any reason and I doubt that's going to change anytime soon.  Maybe Amtrak could push the issue but I don't think Amtrak would believe it's worth the trouble.

From what I've read if CSX had their 'druthers they'd get Amtrak off their lines too.

  • Member since
    August, 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,873 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Saturday, December 30, 2017 5:00 PM

Thanks for jogging my memory!  If the Steamtown 261 excursion on the first video takes place on July 22, 1995 what you're hearing is the actual whistle of a Lackawanna "Pocono,"  courtesy of the collection of Lackawanna fan Henry Peterson.  Also mounted on 261 was a "Pocono" bell and air horns.

The excursion ran from Scranton PA to Binghamton NY, and it was the first time since 1953 that the sounds of a "Pocono" were heard in Scranton.

  • Member since
    September, 2010
  • From: Parma Heights Ohio
  • 2,508 posts
Posted by Penny Trains on Saturday, December 30, 2017 6:43 PM

Firelock76
CSX has a hard-and-fast rule of no antique railroad equipment on their property at any time or for any reason and I doubt that's going to change anytime soon.

Hard to say.  But at a CSX without E.H.H. many things are more possible today than they were a month ago.

Big Smile  I'm Cuckoo For Choo Choo Stuffs!  Big Smile

  • Member since
    August, 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,873 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Saturday, December 30, 2017 6:55 PM

Yeah Becky, anything's possible, but that "no antiques" rule pre-dates Hunter by quite a few years, so we can't blame him for that one.

That simmering hostility CSX has had for Amtrak goes back quite a few years as well, can't blame Hunter for that either.

We CAN blame Hunter for killing Canadian Pacific's steam program, which was a real class act. Hudson 2816 is one classy-looking locomotive, must have broken a lot of hearts up north when it was put away.

  • Member since
    March, 2016
  • 1,568 posts
Posted by CandOforprogress2 on Tuesday, January 02, 2018 8:55 AM

So is the NS Steam Program on the RIP Track? Nothing on their website

  • Member since
    August, 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,873 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Wednesday, January 03, 2018 5:27 PM

More like on the scrap track, if there's no mention of it.

What it means though is NS isn't going to sponsor any steam excursions.  This doesn't mean they won't allow them, depending on circumstances. 

We'll just have to wait and see.

  • Member since
    January, 2015
  • 1,271 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Wednesday, January 03, 2018 6:45 PM

I would suppose this will impact 765 and perhaps 2100, although there is the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic line right there at 2100's doorstep.

Of course, ferry moves to an excursion site are not excursions, so perhaps there will be other opportunities yet.

We'll keep our fingers crossed.

  • Member since
    January, 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,226 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, January 03, 2018 8:21 PM

I would think NS would be okay with ferry moves, provided the equipment passes mechanical inspection.  No passenger liability needed...

NS has quit the excursion sponsoring business and sold their excursion coaches.  

Amtrak excursions are covered over the host road according to the agreement with Amtrak - each road covers their own losses.   Amtrak would cover passenger liability - the big cost for excursions, otherwise.  

So, presumably, 611 could power an Amtrak excursion over NS lines.  It just adds one more party at the table.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    September, 2010
  • From: Parma Heights Ohio
  • 2,508 posts
Posted by Penny Trains on Friday, January 05, 2018 6:54 PM

kgbw49

I would suppose this will impact 765 and perhaps 2100, although there is the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic line right there at 2100's doorstep.

Of course, ferry moves to an excursion site are not excursions, so perhaps there will be other opportunities yet.

We'll keep our fingers crossed.

 

When the 765 comes to Cleveland it's CSX that usually does the hauling.  So.....no difference as far as the steam in the valley excursions go?  I mean, CSX and NS are just about as bad these days to steam, so.....

Big Smile  I'm Cuckoo For Choo Choo Stuffs!  Big Smile

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy