RailRoadFan.com

Earlier today, I heard M326 asking permission to pass the Coastal Containers switch with the track master/supervisor/personal authorization. Track person said something about 10/10, which I was assume was the speed for the train, go 10mph over the switch

Ben Higdon wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 13, 2023 12:26 pm

GRHC wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 05, 2023 7:49 am

kd_1014 wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 05, 2023 7:38 am

Try saying that in 2025 after a very important customer that receives a unit train every day closes

It’s like life in general you pick up the pieces and move on. You can be as negative as you want but I’m not gonna let you piss on my parade I am still gonna look at it in a positive light.

Looks like this spur is being built on the alignment of an older spur, laid somewhere between 1969 and 1981 based on historicaerials

My bet is CSX will take a page out of the NS Michigan Line playbook, and let the GR Sub go to seed once Consumers is done, until the state buys it for Amtrak service. It would be more financially responsible to reroute the Pere Marquette via Kalamazoo and terminate at Holland, and abandon the GR Sub south of Holland. But if/when taxpayers are the primary supporter of this trackage, I won't hold my breath for responsible use of funding to determine the decision-making.

Why terminate at Holland?

Ben Higdon wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 13, 2023 12:26 pm

My bet is CSX will take a page out of the NS Michigan Line playbook, and let the GR Sub go to seed once Consumers is done, until the state buys it for Amtrak service. It would be more financially responsible to reroute the Pere Marquette via Kalamazoo and terminate at Holland, and abandon the GR Sub south of Holland. But if/when taxpayers are the primary supporter of this trackage, I won't hold my breath for responsible use of funding to determine the decision-making.

Bro this is some of the best trolling I’ve ever seen on this board.

Bravo!

Ben Higdon wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 13, 2023 12:26 pm

[

My bet is CSX will take a page out of the NS Michigan Line playbook, and let the GR Sub go to seed once Consumers is done, until the state buys it for Amtrak service. It would be more financially responsible to reroute the Pere Marquette via Kalamazoo and terminate at Holland, and abandon the GR Sub south of Holland. But if/when taxpayers are the primary supporter of this trackage, I won't hold my breath for responsible use of funding to determine the decision-making.

If that was the plan, you would see the line east of the west leg of the wye at Holland going to "seed". Yet, you don't.

King Milling my become 3rd behind CE and Padnos. Should keep CSX interested to some degree.

kd_1014 wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:26 pm

Ben Higdon wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 13, 2023 12:26 pm

GRHC wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 05, 2023 7:49 am

It’s like life in general you pick up the pieces and move on. You can be as negative as you want but I’m not gonna let you piss on my parade I am still gonna look at it in a positive light.

Looks like this spur is being built on the alignment of an older spur, laid somewhere between 1969 and 1981 based on historicaerials

My bet is CSX will take a page out of the NS Michigan Line playbook, and let the GR Sub go to seed once Consumers is done, until the state buys it for Amtrak service. It would be more financially responsible to reroute the Pere Marquette via Kalamazoo and terminate at Holland, and abandon the GR Sub south of Holland. But if/when taxpayers are the primary supporter of this trackage, I won't hold my breath for responsible use of funding to determine the decision-making.

Why terminate at Holland?

So they don't lose ridership, and in theory using the Amtrak Line between Porter and Kalamazoo would free up some time in the schedule to accomodate the more roundabout routing to reach Holland.

Typhoon wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 14, 2023 7:05 pm

Ben Higdon wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 13, 2023 12:26 pm

[My bet is CSX will take a page out of the NS Michigan Line playbook, and let the GR Sub go to seed once Consumers is done, until the state buys it for Amtrak service. It would be more financially responsible to reroute the Pere Marquette via Kalamazoo and terminate at Holland, and abandon the GR Sub south of Holland. But if/when taxpayers are the primary supporter of this trackage, I won't hold my breath for responsible use of funding to determine the decision-making.

If that was the plan, you would see the line east of the west leg of the wye at Holland going to "seed". Yet, you don't.

Once the coal trains are done, why would CSX keep a 100 mile high quality main line that generates a handful of carloads a day? Because they care about traffic to/from the west moving in a timely fashion? That's a good one!

Ben Higdon wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 15, 2023 10:12 am

kd_1014 wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:26 pm

Ben Higdon wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 13, 2023 12:26 pm

Looks like this spur is being built on the alignment of an older spur, laid somewhere between 1969 and 1981 based on historicaerials

My bet is CSX will take a page out of the NS Michigan Line playbook, and let the GR Sub go to seed once Consumers is done, until the state buys it for Amtrak service. It would be more financially responsible to reroute the Pere Marquette via Kalamazoo and terminate at Holland, and abandon the GR Sub south of Holland. But if/when taxpayers are the primary supporter of this trackage, I won't hold my breath for responsible use of funding to determine the decision-making.

Why terminate at Holland?

So they don't lose ridership, and in theory using the Amtrak Line between Porter and Kalamazoo would free up some time in the schedule to accomodate the more roundabout routing to reach Holland.

Well that would make no sense at all to run a train from Holland through Grand Rapids to Kalamazoo and then to Chicago. Could you imagine how long that would take. Why in the hell would you bother to even take the train.
I would like to hear what the railfan from Lansing thinks because he has an opinion on almost everything.

What is fascinating is the fact, that other than Typhoon and SD80mac, none of you really have a clue as to what you are even talking about. You are all guessing and uneducated guessing at best.

Doktor No wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 15, 2023 10:21 am

What is fascinating is the fact, that other than Typhoon and SD80mac, none of you really have a clue as to what you are even talking about. You are all guessing and uneducated guessing at best.

I'm not arguing about the guessing!
I'll check back on this thread in four years and see where we're at.

Doktor No wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 15, 2023 10:21 am

What is fascinating is the fact, that other than Typhoon and SD80mac, none of you really have a clue as to what you are even talking about. You are all guessing and uneducated guessing at best.

Get um Doc...

Sure hope the GR and Plymouth subs stay in regular service for years to come... My livelihood relies on it...

Doktor No wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 15, 2023 10:21 am

What is fascinating is the fact, that other than Typhoon and SD80mac, none of you really have a clue as to what you are even talking about. You are all guessing and uneducated guessing at best.

Are you including yourself when you say no one has a clue as to what you’re even talking about because I’ve been told you do.
I for one do not know what I’m talking about and never claimed to have known what I’m talking about and have publicly stated I do not know what I’m talking about.
Many things have changed over the years on the Grand Rapids sub I know this because I’ve lived next to the line for 46+ years. CSX runs less manifest freight trains than what they at one time did and there’s no longer the Canadian Pacific trains. And yes the the coal trains will be leaving soon however you have to remember up until about 20 years ago the coal trains barely ran on the Grand Rapids subdivision they all came from the east.
I’m sorry I’m not gonna let anybody piss on my parade as for the Grand Rapids subdivision I believe it will live on whether it be owned by CSX or some other owner.

Doktor No wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 15, 2023 10:21 am

What is fascinating is the fact, that other than Typhoon and SD80mac, none of you really have a clue as to what you are even talking about. You are all guessing and uneducated guessing at best.

They're all making statements as if the GR and Plymouth Subs aren't among CSX's densest local traffic lines, in addition to the GLC, JAIL, GRE, GDLK, C&M, MQT, MS, HNW and WMI all feeding them traffic.

Coal makes money, sure, but there's a lot more going on beyond that, too. There is also usually a decent amount of overhead traffic to and from Detroit also.

Remove coal from the picture, at worst, the line gets a more realistic price to be sold off to someone else. It still generates 40-70 cars of traffic daily, with some customers wanting more service than they currently get. Just the traffic going up to the MQT is substantial, add in the online customers and seasonal grain east of GR, it's not going anywhere. It's also still a great option for a certain red railroad to consider as a direct route that needs very little upgrade to handle traffic...

After the recent CEO visit to Grand Rapids a couple of weeks ago, it is now my understanding that all or nearly all of the DET-CHI traffic is moving via Grand Rapids on 326/327 and 302/303. Should be an extra 20-30 cars a day.

Ben Higdon wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 13, 2023 12:26 pm

My bet is CSX will take a page out of the NS Michigan Line playbook, and let the GR Sub go to seed once Consumers is done, until the state buys it for Amtrak service. It would be more financially responsible to reroute the Pere Marquette via Kalamazoo and terminate at Holland, and abandon the GR Sub south of Holland.

No one in their right mind living along the lakeshore would ride Amtrak if it meant the train left Holland only to go through Grand Rapids and Kzoo first.

I see some of you are an exception to my statement but others still fit it. So be it. Other than BEING THERE for 35 years and attending union meetings on occasion and conversing with people STILL IN the trenches, I stand by my assessment. Many of you are whistling in the dark or succumb to sand house talk from people that don't even know what a sand house is.
Speculate as you will but remember, that's all it is..a wild guess.
Thanks to SD Mac for more about the Heinreich talk here in GRP. Bring it on cause one thing can be said...we DO have the room!

Saturnalia wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 15, 2023 12:16 pm

Doktor No wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 15, 2023 10:21 am

What is fascinating is the fact, that other than Typhoon and SD80mac, none of you really have a clue as to what you are even talking about. You are all guessing and uneducated guessing at best.

They're all making statements as if the GR and Plymouth Subs aren't among CSX's densest local traffic lines, in addition to the GLC, JAIL, GRE, GDLK, C&M, MQT, MS, HNW and WMI all feeding them traffic.

Coal makes money, sure, but there's a lot more going on beyond that, too. There is also usually a decent amount of overhead traffic to and from Detroit also.

Sorry I took some benzo’s and have been out for days but I absolutely love the “CSX should sell the GR and Plymouth subs” people because

Ben Higdon wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 15, 2023 10:26 am

Doktor No wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 15, 2023 10:21 am

What is fascinating is the fact, that other than Typhoon and SD80mac, none of you really have a clue as to what you are even talking about. You are all guessing and uneducated guessing at best.

I'm not arguing about the guessing!
I'll check back on this thread in four years and see where we're at.

Lmao double down on the most outrageous railfoam claims of Q3 2023. Bless you

SD80MAC wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 20, 2023 9:04 am

With the way the spur will be facing, I would guess it will end up being L301 work. Y121 would either have to shove out there or go out to East Saugatuck to run around and come back.

I spoke with somebody with first-hand knowledge about who will be working the new Coastal Container siding and it will be Y121. So I guess I was right and your guess was wrong lol happy new year SD80MAC