RE: (erielack) Re: Seatrain

["Paul R. Tupaczewski" <paultup_@_optonline.net>]

Paul B. asks:

> I'd like to know how those Seatrain boxes were handled on 
> NY-97, with or without chassis. You're right about the 
> sideloaders: Cx and Co had 3 each, and the others were all 
> circus-loading, so the latter couldn't handle them "on the 
> deck". They may also have been empties, which were generally 
> handled in non-priority trains as we discussed with SF-100. I 
> think the most likely scenario was as you outlined: forwarded 
> from Marion on a runthrough. EL did handle containers other 
> than Seatrain; the Diamond article on 51st Street has photos 
> of SeaLand and Polish Ocean Lines boxes, and there were others.
> The article mentions that the trend was to handle an 
> increasing portion as COFC, but one of the reasons they 
> didn't like this was because of limited parking space at the 
> facility: when they loaded a container, they still had to 
> park the chassis. (Later on, larger terminals used vertical 
> chassis stacking racks.) The earlier REA boxes I believe were 
> loaded with a side-transfer device such as the Steadman. I'd 
> bet Paul T has a photo of one he can post.

No photos of a side transfer device, sorry :(

The NY-98 Seatrain containers were unloaded on the Hoboken Shore's north end
in Weehawken (thanks for the info, Gordon Smith!), so the EL really didn't
have to handle this in Croxton. How they got loaded at the other end... What
WAS the other end? Chicago? Or West Coast, transferred to EL in Chicago?

	- Paul

- -- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.361 / Virus Database: 267.12.6/151 - Release Date: 10/28/2005
 


	The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
	Sponsored by the ELH&TS
	http://www.elhts.org

------------------------------