[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: (erielack) 1963 Notes - early MARC-EL?

Jim,

I wouldn't read that much into this TOFC runthrough service. At that time 
TOFC was relatively new for many RR's; they were trying various things, many 
of which with the benefit of hindsight, had no chance of success. For CNJ 
and RDG, the EL, B&O and PRR were the three main trunk line connections that 
reached Chicago etc and they carried on substantial interchange with all 3. 
MARC-EL was no more attractive to EL in 1963 than in 1973. CNJ was already a 
"hopeless case" of the East (the other being the New Haven), while RDG was 
saddled with the hugely excess plant of the anthracite/passenger age. EL 
didn't want those millstones around its neck any more than N&W wanted EL. 
(Neither did C&O/B&O). EL could participate in the Elizabethport and Philly 
interchange without assuming the liabilities in a merger. I'm thinking now 
that the trains began running perhaps because the RDG was ready to begin 
TOFC service to Chicago before the B&O and Alphabet clearances were quite 
finished.

Paul B

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "JG at graytrainpix" <graytrainpix_@_hotmail.com>
To: <doctorpb_@_bellsouth.net>; <erielack@lists.railfan.net>
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: (erielack) 1963 Notes - early MARC-EL?


> Paul,
>
> Paul, you pointed out good reasons why a RDG-CNJ-EL TOFC service from 
> Philly was a non-starter.  Another reason that comes to mind was the 
> B&O/C&O.  IIRC, by mid-1963, the CNJ and RDG were looking to the B&O/C&O 
> for salvation (I believe that the Chessie had control of the B&O by then). 
> Why even try to steal TOFC revenue from your savior? (I believe that the 
> B&O's Chessie-funded clearance projects were done by then and that fast 
> TOFC service out of Philly East Side was thus available from the B&O).  I 
> can't help but wonder if some people on the RDG and CNJ were a bit 
> suspicious as to how far the Chessie would go for them.  Perhaps ditto for 
> the EL relative to the N&W.  The LV had similar false hopes regarding its 
> part in the upcoming PRR-NYC merger.
>
> I honestly wonder if this little, seemingly irrational (and obviously 
> unsuccessful) attempt at service coordination reflected a bit of "MARC-EL" 
> thinking way back in 1963.  Perhaps it was a 'trial balloon' for greater 
> cooperation.  With 20-20 hindsight, the EL, RDG and CNJ should have 
> pressed on with an "operation bootstraps" consolidation plan in 1963, 
> especially if they could have talked the Valley into joining.  Had the D&H 
> also joined by 1970 (they wouldn't have had much choice), and a lot of 
> ruthless consolidation were done (e.g., no more need for separate 
> backshops in Hornell, Scranton, Sayre, Reading, Colonie and Elizabethport) 
> I can't help but wonder if an early MARC-EL might have reached a "tipping 
> point" of profitability and viability that the EL alone just couldn't (and 
> didn't) achieve.  Another great "what might have been" (especially since 
> it would have brought Perry Shoemaker back into the fold! He was the CNJ's 
> leader at the time).
>
> This little scrap of evidence hints that some people on the relevant lines 
> (Perry Shoemaker?) might have been thinking this way in 1963, when there 
> still might have been enough time left to do something.  Perhaps William 
> White squashed whatever was happening in this regard (he was to come on 
> board in another month or so).  IIRC, he was very fixated on the N&W as 
> the EL's ultimate savior (and his protegee, Greg Maxwell, also gave the 
> MARC-EL concept a pass ten years later on the eve of Conrail).  Perhaps 
> that was White's one mistake.  And possibly a very big one.  A 
> consolidation like that would have left the N&W over a barrel regarding 
> the ex-NKP in Buffalo and the Chessie regarding the Royal Blue Route in 
> Philly (especially if the D&H were in the mix).
>
> Would the ICC have allowed such a merger in 1964?  My first instinct is to 
> say no, but then again, perhaps the lines in question could have traded 
> favors against the hearings for the pending N&W/NKP/Wabash and NYC/PRR 
> mergers.  We support your mergers, you support ours.  But it was just not 
> meant to be.
>
> Jim Gerofsky


	The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
	Sponsored by the ELH&TS
	http://www.elhts.org
	To Unsubscribe: http://lists.elhts.org/erielackunsub.html

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