Re: (erielack) Re: CNJ Interchange

["Jim Guthrie" <jguthrie_@_pipeline.com>]

> Why would the Waldo connection disrupt EL operations at Hoboken? The 
> ex-Erie line and NYC are shown as separate through there. If in fact the 
> route was

The connection disrupted the interchange of trains between the CNJ -- which 
was south of it, and the EL -- which was north of it.

The PC would also receive a switching charge for use of the National 
Docks -- so one might suggest that the CNJ/EL interchage would (1) see a 
surcharge on overy car (2) be delayed for days on the National Docks, (3) 
require switching at the north end of Hoboken, only to be hauled back to 
Croxton for delivery elsewhere.

If you think about it, once there were trains running like SE-98, Lake Jct 
is a much better interchange point. But then a haul right from Scranton 
cutting out the CNJ makes even better sense. The CNJ/EL operation -- at 
least to the extent that freight would be handed back to the EL for any 
reason at Weehawken was always reminiscent of the NYS&W/DL&W deal 90 years 
earlier: It existed to "keep the peace" among railroads but made no good 
economic sense.

In that sense, one also has the question the sanity of EL's management --  
did they have **THAT** much extra cash hanging around that it made sense to 
subsidize the CNJ by dirverting freight that way?

[I realize that subsidizing other lines through various interesting rate 
divisions was an old and honorable practice, witness Maybrook freight 
diverted to the O&W at Scranton, but still . . .]

Cheers,
Jim 


	The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
	http://EL-List.railfan.net/
	To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html

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