Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by dehusman Futuremodal said: If FEC, KCS, or NS provided service to some mill in the Pacific Northwest, why would this be a bad thing? No matter how you analyze it, it suggests nothing but benefits for all involved. Back to the original premise : doubling CAPACITY If you now have the BNSF, the UP, the NS, the FEC and your shortline operating on the same line, you haven't doubled the capacity, youv'e doubled the load and possibly even worse you now have more trains dividing up the same pie of carloadings. So now all the roads are less profitable since they haul fewer loads for the same operating costs. Reducing the profits of the home road doesn't appear to be a benefit. Yes you might have underutilized capacity on less efficient routes, but If I am going to get open access I don't want to run on the branch, if I'm going to LA I want to be on the BNSF's transcon (where there is less available capacity). I fail to see how putting more trains carrying the same busines on the same tracks increases capacity. Open access might have some positive arguements for it, but I can't see how enhancing capacity could be one of them. Dave H. [/quote] If we take your example one step further, if all the Class I's are competing for cargo at all available railheads, then something has happened to drastically increase the rail industry's share of intercity freight. Of course, logic would dictate that FEC or NS would only get a shot at traffic from the PNW if BNSF or UP first turned it down, and if BNSF and UP couldn't provide the service at an agreeable price for the shipper, then it is unlikely a traditional Eastern road could trump them. Then again, maybe the shipper requested a different modal approach (such as RoadRailer or RailRunner) that UP or BNSF didn't want to deal with, but NS with it's background in Triple Crown decided it was right for them. Yes, if you wanted to ship from LA to Chicago, you'd first want to use the BNSF transcon, but if you are the late player in the scenario and BNSF or UPS has priority over this line, are you going to shift to trucks or take advantage of an available secondary line? Are you willing to run trains during non-peak hours, or offer a premium to the track owner to get more prime access? Open Access provides new variables to current market forces that suggest innovative introductions of new market techniques that are otherwise suppressed under monopolistic practices. The point of this exercise is to give theoretical insights to current capacity issues, sans new track construction. If there is still congestion over the prime mainlines due to open access, but also a corresponding increase in rail's share of intercity freight, then you certainly have increased capacity for a given amount of total freight haulage.
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