Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by DTomajko Another thing to think about,how would all those international containers be handled by Roadrailers? The advantage of traditional intermodal is that any standard container or even road trailer can be handled on the present types of intermodal equipment. Even Roadrailer Reefers are regularly shipped into the Pittsburgh terminal on flatcars and spine cars.With the steamship companies long standardized on 20' to 45' containers, it doesn't seem feasible at this time to accommodate all those boxes traveling in stack trains,(how about a roadrailer container chassis?). Would you transfer the container freight into roadrailers? That seems like a step backwards. Another advantage of T/COFC is the ability for a packer to unload from anywhere in a cut of cars on the pad to expedite the "hot" loads such as UPS,USPS, Hunt or Schneider, while leaving the less time-sensitive,(but still important),freight to be handled throughout the shift. This scenario is played out everyday in Pittsburgh with trucks lining the tracks to recieve their assigned loads. UPS will even call in advance of the trains arrival with the trailers they want off first. I believe that a roadrailer train is worked from one or both ends but is dificult to pull a unit from the middle. I think that each type of intermodal service will continue to have its place in operations and service. By the way, the intermodal ramps I have seen are really nothing more than large parking lots, with one to five packers and a bunch of jockey trucks to handle trailers on the ground. I will grant that roadrailers require a little less initial terminal investment but the number of employees is about the same overall. I do know that about 50 trailers and containers can be unloaded by a single person in a shift, where it takes at least three to handle a roadrailer,(forklift,jockey, & groundman).By the way, a little trivia, there is no single piece of intermodal equipment presently available that will accommodate every possible loading configuration,(ie; 20',40',45',48',53' COFC; 28',45',48',53' TOFC, or COFC on chassis).Good luck and stay safe. [/quote] Yes, there is. RailRunner <www.railrunner.com> can handle every size of container, domestic or ocean, and the bi-modal RailRunner chassis can be handled by a straddlecrane the same as a standard Z-trailer. You are correct in that it becomes somewhat of a logistical hassle to pull a trailer from the middle of a consist, but it is possible if the yardman can forklift the extra bogey out of the way. The RailRunner people still are exploring the possibility of using handheld connectors between the bogies in lieu of the chassis, an innovation that could allow mid-train removal of trailers without gumming up the works. The real reason bi-modal hasn't caught on like it should is that railroads are very conservative when it comes to doling out cash for new untried capital expenditures. Why purchase new units of state-of-the-art bi-modal equipment when TTX can simply weld a few more sheets of steel onto a 48' spine car and convert it into a 53' spine car to handle the 53' standard truck trailer?
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag