Interchange mentality of Class I's

[sps]

Has eliminating massive amounts of interchange locations between Class I's made the systems more or less efficient?

[ndbprr]

Probably more efficient due to mergers causing reduction in interchange locations but it is a reduction in paperwork. The same trip to the customer still has to be made and may involve dropping cars for locals or branchlines.

[dehusman]

sps

Has eliminating massive amounts of interchange locations between Class I's made the systems more or less efficient?

 

More.  The multiple small interchange locations were not terribly efficient to begin with.  As mentioned, most of the small locations were made moot by mergers, where there were interchanges it was now one road, one set of paperwork.

[PNWRMNM]

More effecient for two big reasons.

First, there are transaction costs at interchange. Revenue divisions, change of car hire liability, freight claim allocation. The things ndbprr called paperwork.

Second is that the system had built up many "out of route" or "backwoods" interchanges. These were very handy for lumber brokers trying to sell carloads of lumber enroute but absorbed power, crew, fuel, clerical effort, and lengthened car cycle time. Viewed as a transportation offering they were very ineffecient. With the Staggers Act the carrieres gained the right to either close these gateways OR price discriminate against them which they did very quickly.

Mac McCulloch 

[oltmannd]

dehusman

 

 

sps

Has eliminating massive amounts of interchange locations between Class I's made the systems more or less efficient?

 

 

 

 

More.  The multiple small interchange locations were not terribly efficient to begin with.  As mentioned, most of the small locations were made moot by mergers, where there were interchanges it was now one road, one set of paperwork.

 

+1