RE: (erielack) Erie & B & O

[ELRRco_@_aol.com]

Speaking of the CH&D/PM, why did the Erie give up on these two, after they were acquired via J.P. Morgan? It seems the Erie would have become more competitive with the NYC and PRR if it had the access those railroads would have accorded it, as well as those aforementioned "hard" connections to the L&N and Southern at the Cincinnati gatweway.

Phillip Bell


>Ken - Yes, the Erie/EL's access to Cincinnati and Indianapolis from Dayton 
>was somewhat unique.  I understand that it basicly involved the traffic 
>moving in B&O trains but on an Erie/EL waybill for which the B&O got a 
>percent of the revenue.  One of the many down sides to the arrangement was 
>that it let the B&O see the waybills and solicit for a B&O instead of 
>Erie/EL move.  Why the Erie/EL settled for this "half baked" trackage rights 
>I don't know.  Certainly direct Trackage Rights to Cincinnati with Erie/EL 
>power and crews terminating either on an "island" of Erie track in 
>somebody's Cincinnati yard or direct to the SOU, L&N, or C&O yards (these 
>being the "friendly" Cincinnati connections would have been superior 
>(similar to how the PM and WAB terminated in Buffalo at the Erie and DL&W 
>yards, respectively).
>       The Erie/EL had a similar situation in regard to its connection with 
>the RDG at Newberry Junction.  Erie trains, complete with power, were handed 
>over to NYC crews at Corning (later Gang Mills) and operated by the NYC to  
>Newberry Junction.   The NYC received a percentage division of the Erie's 
>earnings on the traffic so again the NYC got to see the Erie's waybills.  
>Additionally, IIRC, the Erie was not permitted to handle traffic to/from 
>certain territories that the NYC viewed as competitive.
>      With the merger of the DL&W and Erie on 17 Oct 1960 the new EL 
>solicited its RDG traffic via Rupert (the former DL&W-RDG interchange) which 
>gave the EL a longer haul and therefore a slightly better interline division 
>and prevented the NYC from seeing the Erie's waybills.  I believe the 
>Newberry Junction service had effectively evaporated through the '60's -- 
>the principal symbol had been RDG 98.
>      Both the Cinti/Indpls and Newberry Junction access arrangements make 
>me question the efficacy of the Erie's senior management in the late 19th 
>and early 20th century when some of these deals were put together.  The Erie 
>obviously didn't have the NYC's checkbook in a fight for the Fall Brook (the 
>former independent railroad that originally granted the Newberry Junction 
>trackage rights) but I think straight Trackage Rights might have been 
>possible if the Erie had rattled the possibility of constructing through to 
>the RDG.  Interest what if.
>      As to Cinti/Indpls the Cincinnati, Hamilton & Dayton, which controlled 
>this trackage, was a on again off again ecionomic basket case (thriough some 
>poor management) and possibly coukld have been pushed a lot harder.  Some 
>thing or some one (possibly the J P Morgan "community of interest" control) 
>certainly hobbled the Erie in some years when it should have been putting 
>together some better deals.
>      I won't even go to the lost opportunities of the 20th Century!  M. J. 
>Connor
>
>>From: Hoboken <hoboken_@_vfemail.net>
>>Reply-To: Hoboken <hoboken_@_vfemail.net>
>>To: erielack_@_lists.railfan.net
>>Subject: (erielack) Erie & B & O
>>Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:19:52 -0500
>>
>>My Erie Railroad map of the early 1950's shows that the Dayton Branch 
>>continuing on south and then west to Indianapolis, via trackage rights over 
>>the B & O.  It also shows the Bradford Division continuing on south via 
>>trackage rights over the B & O.  Curiously, this allowed the Erie to call 
>>its Indianapolis office an "on-line" office.
>>
>>My question is whether the Erie had a unique relationship with the B & O to 
>>allow the Erie to incorporate these two sections of B & O line into its own 
>>system.  The second question is whether there were any other sections of B 
>>& O track over which the Erie had trackage rights.  Third, did the Erie 
>>have this kind of relationship with any other railroad?
>>
>>Thanks.
>>
>>
>>Ken Bush
>
>
>

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