NS Peavine talk

Anything pertaining to railfanning in Ohio.
northstar16
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 306
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:25 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by northstar16 »

At least the Peavine is working some abandon rails are rusting away. If the line only has a few customers and most is used for storage that works. I guess the CET is fine with it and storage generates income with little overhead. Its a win win for everyone as long as the storage business doesn't dry up.

northstar16
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 306
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:25 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by northstar16 »

Another question with the Peavine and the extended trackage. How many crossing along the new route has crossing signals that work or gates? Some of the signals and gates don't work very well on the existing line. Some have been repaired other gates are delayed after the train passes.

heypal6878
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 361
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2015 7:34 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by heypal6878 »

From what I read today on the CCET Facebook site it now appears that the CCET will never go out to Portsmouth over the Vera bridge. There is too many washed out areas that need to be maintained and the bridge may have some structural damage underneath due to past flooding of the river. I have heard this from my buddy as well as that line has been inspected a few months back. Also the tires on the bridge will need to be replaced. The price tag on this is in the Millions I would think. The CCET isn't going to spend the money and neither Is the State of Ohio. Any stone shipments will go west to Clare.

So it appears that the CET does have a contract with Plum Road gravel pit. If that is the case expect several trips a week back and forth to Clare. This could generate serious money for the CET going forward as well as for NS. Chris Edwards has the break down on the money. So Northstar you best watch where you walk your dog as there will be several cars down on the siding if and when the shipments start up a Plum Road. Not to forget about the tankers on the storage business.

midland sub
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 2096
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 10:10 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by midland sub »

How many times have I said that Les? So it's bs if I say it, but funny it's the same stuff he says. Again as usual it's the foamers like yourself that think you know more than the people who actually talk to the people that know the score.

bdconrail29
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 1351
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:43 pm
Location: Wadsworth, OH

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by bdconrail29 »

When did they pull off 217/218? I caught them on the Peavine in 2001. It couldn't have been long after could it?
Brett

TC Man
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 1090
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 11:25 am

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by TC Man »

"So it appears that the CET does have a contract with Plum Road gravel pit. If that is the case expect several trips a week back and forth to Clare. "

So you have firsthand information that this pit will be shipping??
CEO of the Waving Institute- teaching great wave forms.

heypal6878
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 361
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2015 7:34 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by heypal6878 »

I saw a post from Chris Edwards who knows more about the Peavine than most as he worked for the CET and still has some affiliation with the rail company. He was figuring how much NS and the CET would make on a train load of stone. So since he was figuring the price out I would assume yes they must have a contract with the site at plum road.

heypal6878
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 361
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2015 7:34 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by heypal6878 »

Christopher Edwards "So at the last market price I had for stone out there was $40 a ton, so you figure with 286k cars, that is about 120 tons of capacity. So that is $4,800 of product per car. 105 cars gets you to $504,000 of just product. The CCET handling rate that will be billed through NS will say will be $400 per car, is $42,000 to ship 105 cars just to NS"

So he didn't say there was a contract but Chris didn't figure out the market price on stone. I would suspect there will be a contract of some sort in the next month or so. I really don't think NS opened up all that track for storage but then again what do I know! I don't work for any railroad but I hope they do get a contract. I'm just a foamer as Midland says!

northstar16
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 306
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:25 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by northstar16 »

Heypal, I like to agree with you but I can't. I been reading the Facebook posts today and I don't think but the way Chris Edwards has been posting there is going to be a contract with the gravel pit. Now what he knows he is not liberty to say. I would say Chris Edwards doesn't know something at this point. NS wouldn't give all that track to the CET for the heck of it. The CET requested the track maybe just for more storage. We shall see but I wouldn't get all excited about Plum Road and the gravel pit as It appears nothing is going to happen there. Trucking it out is less expensive them railing it out. They have been trucking it out up there for years so I don't see them signing a contract for daily transportation by rail. That is how I see it!

northstar16
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 306
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:25 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by northstar16 »

Heypal, I like to agree with you but I can't. I been reading the Facebook posts today and I don't think but the way Chris Edwards has been posting there is going to be a contract with the gravel pit. Now what he knows he is not liberty to say. I would say Chris Edwards doesn't know something at this point. NS wouldn't give all that track to the CET for the heck of it. The CET requested the track maybe just for more storage. We shall see but I wouldn't get all excited about Plum Road and the gravel pit as It appears nothing is going to happen there. Trucking it out is less expensive them railing it out. They have been trucking it out up there for years so I don't see them signing a contract for daily transportation by rail. That is how I see it!

I been reading this over and I see I left out some words. What I meant to say was I don't agree with Heypal. The post I read on Facebook yesterday Chris Edwards posted there most likely isn't going to be a contract with the gravel pit. I would say Chris Edwards doesn't know something at this point. NS wouldn't give all that track to the CET for the heck of it. The CET requested the track maybe just for more storage. We shall see but I wouldn't get all excited about Plum Road and the gravel pit as It appears nothing is going to happen there. Trucking it out is less expensive them railing it out. They have been trucking it out up there for years so I don't see them signing a contract for daily transportation by rail. That is how I see it!


User avatar
Muleskinner
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:28 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by Muleskinner »

heypal6878 wrote:I would assume yes they must have a contract with the site at plum road.

Haven't you heard? Assuming is the mother of all screw ups.

Just saying.

northstar16
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 306
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:25 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by northstar16 »

Yes never assume. May is a good word. May can't get one in a screw up as much as assume. Hillary assumed she won the election at 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday last week and at 2:00 a.m. on Wednesday morning the assumed wrong. Trump thought he may win the popular vote and may not win the electoral vote. He was wrong on the popular vote but was also wrong on the electoral vote as he won big but the bottom line is he won the presidency. When one assumes a railroad is going to do something chances are assuming is most of the time not the right decision. Heypal never use the word assume when it comes to an opinion use the word may.

Meanwhile more tankers sitting at Clare today. More gain cars as well.

CAPTAIN
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by CAPTAIN »

The Plum Run gravel is going to the Ready Mix concrete plant in Sardinia. CCET can charge their own rate, since it is not interchanging with NS. This is to start, hopefully, in the first quarter of 2017.

CGPRR
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 8:14 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by CGPRR »

CAPTAIN wrote:The Plum Run gravel is going to the Ready Mix concrete plant in Sardinia. CCET can charge their own rate, since it is not interchanging with NS. This is to start, hopefully, in the first quarter of 2017.
If this is true, how do they plan to offload? Sardinia Ready Mix doesn't have a spur.

Did that plant ever have one?

On that note, I am curious what will end up happening to the wye in Sardinia. The center area isn't being used for anything and there will never be another train to Mowrystown...

CAPTAIN
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2016 8:42 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by CAPTAIN »

I'm not sure how they're expecting to offload. I didn't ask that question.

User avatar
Muleskinner
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 7:28 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by Muleskinner »

CAPTAIN wrote:I'm not sure how they're expecting to offload. I didn't ask that question.

"If they build it, they will come".

It will take money to build/rebuild a spur and facility to off load. Who is going to come up with that money?

northstar16
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 306
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:25 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by northstar16 »

Nobody is coming up with the money because the Captain has the bad information. From what I have read on the CCET Facebook page this may be just a rumor and not fact. I appears the CCET needed more track to store tankers and Hanson has no desire to more stone by rail. I was up at Plum Road today just to look at the tracks. They look weather beaten rusty and not really sure if they can handle a heavy load. Storage most likely as the tankers are empty but there is no way a heavy load can be used on the tracks up there in the condition they are in. Most likely the CCET is going to need to do some track work and some signal work as well.

MSchwiebert
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 1611
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 1:43 pm
Location: Perrysburg Ohio

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by MSchwiebert »

Signal work for stored cars? why? Given the infrequency of the movements, for grade crossing protection just move under rusty rail rules (flagging every crossing) and be done with it.
northstar16 wrote:Nobody is coming up with the money because the Captain has the bad information. From what I have read on the CCET Facebook page this may be just a rumor and not fact. I appears the CCET needed more track to store tankers and Hanson has no desire to more stone by rail. I was up at Plum Road today just to look at the tracks. They look weather beaten rusty and not really sure if they can handle a heavy load. Storage most likely as the tankers are empty but there is no way a heavy load can be used on the tracks up there in the condition they are in. Most likely the CCET is going to need to do some track work and some signal work as well.

heypal6878
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 361
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2015 7:34 pm

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by heypal6878 »

Sure but what would happen if one car got away and rolled down hill pass a crossing and the gate didn't work? Happened before a few times to the CET

MSchwiebert
Railroadfan...fan
Posts: 1611
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 1:43 pm
Location: Perrysburg Ohio

Re: NS Peavine talk

Unread post by MSchwiebert »

If the rails are rusty, there will be activation issues - doesn't matter if the equipment is new or old.
heypal6878 wrote:Sure but what would happen if one car got away and rolled down hill pass a crossing and the gate didn't work? Happened before a few times to the CET

Post Reply