CSX "Water Level" Route vs. NS "Pittsburgh Line"

Are you talking about the CSX tracks running along the Ohio, Monongahela and Beaver Rivers?

 

Norfolk Southern has a much greater presence in southwestern PA. No surprise there since NS has a terminal here (Conway) and CSX does not, but the latter is still well represented.

I believe he is referring to the ex-New York Central Water Level Route and the Pennsy's Broad Way.

 

Both are busy, vital arteries, as they were for Conrail and before that, the Central and PRR.

 

The PRR is not a through route to Chicago anymore. Most trains turn northwest at Alliance, OH and head for Cleveland, where ownership of the ex-NYC changes hands. CSX owns it East of Cleveland and NS ownsthe old Lake Shore route west to Chicago.

 

CSX Traffic heads southwest from Cleveland to Willard, OH, using the historic CCC&Stl "Big Four" route, where it joins the former B&O main line to Chicago.

Thanks.  Please explain why the Pennsy isn't through to Chicago anymore?  I always thought this was a single main line from Philly...through the Keystone Corridor...Harrisburg, Altoona, etc..  

 

Originally, were the NYC and Pennsy mains 4 tracks all the way from Philly/NY to Chicago?  I assume the two NYC lines on either side of the Hudson would count as 4 + tracks.

 

Thanks for the background.  

You have to remember that Penn Central was the merger between the two rivals that brought these two routes into common ownership.

 

The former New York Central was deemed to be in better physical condition.

Centralized Traffic Control had been implemented on the Chicago line, whereas the PRR was still controlled by interlocking towers along its line. (A more labor intensive and expensive method of dispatching trains.)

 

West from Ohio to Chicago there was no need for two essentially parallel main lines. Indeed from Gary, IN to Chicago the two mains were adjacent to one another. 

 

The PRR was systematically downgraded, with preferred traffic being shifted to the NYC. The PRR west of Crestline was eventually whittled down to just one track.

 

The exception to the rule was west of Whiting, IN where the remaining main line shifted from the Central's alignment to the old Pennsy's so that passenger trains would serve Union Station instead of Lasalle Street. You can see the s-curve in this aerial view here. The Central's alignment is used at lower right and the Pennsy's at upper left. 

 

This is Norfolk Southern's today with the CSX using their former B&O route into Chicago.

 

I hope this answers some of your questions, Mike.

 

Here are some sites with their focuses on railfanning in Chicago. They may be useful in illustrating the redundancies of the merged railroads, with respect to the Chicago area.

 

Chicago Area Rail Junctions

 

Chicago Transit and Railfan

 

Note that the Chicago routes were not the only components of the merged systems that were deemed to be redundant. The St. Louis gateway also had to be rationalized, among others.

 

The reason that both railroads remain, virtually intact, on their eastern ends is that both serve large market areas with little to no overlap.

 

Nick, thanks for the info. If Penn Central had gotten too carried away with abandoning redundant PRR and NYC mains...there would have been nothing to split later by NS and CSX to make for proper competition.  I wonder if this was by accident with Penn Central being too out of control to start abandoning too much....was Conrail thinking ahead as to what might work if they were ever split?

Conrail simply made very rational decisions about what should be retained and what should be discarded to streamline and improve operations.

 

If you look at Conrail it was a giant X, with it's center in Cleveland. East of there you had the old NYC to the upper right, the PRR and Reading Routes to the lower right, the line to Chicago on the upper left and the line to St. Louis on the lower left. There was more to it, of course, but this was the core of the system.

PS: I have a nasty cold and can't sleep. What's your excuse, Mike? 

The P&LE is indeed the CSX's routing in the Pittsburgh area. The old B&O P&W Subdivision, with its hilly profile is operated by the Allegheny Valley and Buffalo and Pittsburgh railroads. It still provides an important alternate routing for CSX if something were to put the P&LE out of action. 

 

Local railfans would have a field day if heavy CSX traffic had to return to the P&W, even if only briefly.

If PC was allowed to do what a famous doctor did to BR in the UK, there might have been no need for CR.  PC just had too much of everything.  Except the most important thing.  TRAFFIC!  It took 12 years before dereg came to be.  Of course too late for PC.

Here are 2 webcams on the Curve and near the Curve, you can see the traffic yourself. Does anyone know of a webcam on the Waterlevel Route?

 

http://www.railstream.biz/live...free/cresson-pa-free

 

http://www.railroadcity.com/info/live-feed/

 I assume the two NYC lines on either side of the Hudson would count as 4 + tracks.

 

 

 

Not quite.  There was no way for NYC to get trains across the Hudson River south of Poughkeepsie.  The tracks on the west side, belonging to the West Shore RR, originated in a terminal in Weehawken NJ, down the hill from 48th Street.

The former PRR west of Bucyrus is not even owned by NS any more. It is the Chicago, Fort Wayne and Eastern, a regional railroad. NS has trackage rights on it between Bucyrus and Alliance.

 

In 2012 I ran the 765 from Columbus to Pittsburgh on that route via Bucyrus and Alliance.

The Pittsburgh Line handles approximately 60-70 trains per day, depending on the day of week.  Wednesday through Saturday tend to be the heaviest traffic periods.

We visit family in Lewistown, PA each summer and spend at least one full day railfanning.  Additionally, my youngest son and I will visit the station for an hour or two after supper several evenings during the week.  It is not at all unusual to catch periods where 5 trains will pass within an hour.  And meets seem to occur with enough regularity I no longer even consider them special.

Curt

no.......**** no...... in the early 1980's,the pittsburgh/chicago trains were diverted to the nyc to cleveland then southeast to alliance, much the way todays ns trains are run. main reason was to use elkhart yard in indiana as this became cr's major yard in the chicago area.i prefer to see the conrail/ csx-ns split as a take over-jim

 

So I assume the Water Level and Pittsburgh lines carry more freight now than ever...which can be verified by rail freight volume stats.  

 

The need to no longer have 4 main tracks is the result of tech (CTC), longer trains, much less passenger traffic (lots of short fast trains)???  Whereas the original need to reduce tracks was caused by declining volume

 

Having four tracks was never about volume - it was about speed and safety. Both NYC (CTC) and PRR (ABS) operated their 4-track territories as directional 'fast' and 'slow' tracks. Both could have upgrading signalling and operating practices to allow bi-directional operations (the N&W operated its main line bi-directionally in the 1950s) and removed one or more main tracks, but didn't.

 

When bi-directional operations were implemented west of Altoona, for example, one track on the grade to Gallitzin immediately became redundant and was removed.

 

Converting directional double-track to bi-directional single track with sidings often didn't reduce capacity, but lowered operating costs.

 

The impact of declining rail traffic (lost to trucks) was bigger on branch lines and secondary mains.

 

 

 

http://broadway.pennsyrr.com/Rail/Prr/

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadruple_track