Re: (erielack) Re: CNJ Interchange

["Paul Brezicki" <doctorpb_@_bellsouth.net>]

Jim, I'm not sure what you mean here. SE-98 was made up of cars consigned to 
customers on the CNJ, not EL. Lake Jct replaced the interchange at Taylor 
when CNJ quit PA. Both locations were logical interchange points since they 
were (more or less) end points of CNJ at their respective times. If you're 
arguing that CNJ shouldn't have existed at all in the EL era, I can't agree 
more, but that's another topic and Conrail took care of that redundancy.

Paul B

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?

Cheers,
Jim


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

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