Trains VS. Trucks

[Anonymous]

I agree. Truckers supply the rail lines with loads that otherwise wouldn't meet the rails.

[Anonymous]

Great point, we do need them all to have a successful national economy. The railroads cannot deliver to every business establishment. Trucks will always deliver to the final destination for most freight moving in this country, except for bulk freight such as coal, ore, grain, and chemicals.

[Anonymous]

we need trains trucks airplanes barges pipelines and our two feet to get around

[jsanchez]

The truck situation in the Northeast is out of hand. Thanks to Conrail driving and scaring away carload business and running a limited Intermodal operation, we are saturated with trucks and are paying a terrible price. Every other day I-81,I-78 or I-80 are shutdown because of a jack knifed truck or some other semi accident. Look at the costs, 6,000 dead every year from semi-truck, accidents, folks late to work and appointments(lost productivity), a truck does the damage of 20,000+ automobiles to road surfaces at taxpayer expense, excessive pollution, the list goes on and on. I'm really glad that CSX is re-emphazing box car and car-load freight and Norfolk Southern has gotten some customers to switch back. Shortlines have helped out greatly also, but should be helped out to capture more business from trucks. The state of Pennsylvania has an excellent program for helping shortlines finance and build new industrial spurs and lines to reach none rail using businesses.(dozens have been built or re-activated) I think as long as the congestion continues to worsen more, businesses, railroads, and communities(New York City for example) are going to demand freight move entirely by rail as much as possible. Boxcars were a pretty good idea after all!!!It's time to cut the weeds and put some shine back on those sidings....

[Anonymous]

let me give you some facts Bob.

Fact: 70% of all auto/truck collisions are caused by the small car

Fact: for every truck wreck there are more than 10 involving cars

Fact: for every truck wreck resulting in a fatality, there are more than 5 automobile wrecks resulting in fatalities

As for the overspeeding, tailgating, and and cutting off smaller vehicles, this does happen, but tell me, have you ever cut off anyone, tailgated, or speeded?

We are supposed to be professionals out there on the road and I admit that there are some truckers that think they own the road and the small cars should get out of their way, but dont lump us all together in the same bunch.

"(truckers) keep going in conditions that jeopardize everyone on the road except themselves"
gimme a break. so you are saying that if a truck wrecks in bad conditions that the driver is not at risk? what about the cars that are driving in those same conditions? are they not also jeopardizing their own lives and the lives of others on the road?

About those truck wrecks on I-70. have you checked the police reports to see who was at fault for causing those wrecks? if not, dont go blaming the truckers if you dont have the facts.

As for eperate highways for cars and trucks. belive me, I am all for that. seems people think "it has 18 wheels, it must be able to stop 18 times faster right?" seems hard to belive, but that seems to be the only explination for some of the bonehead moves I see out there on the road.

And before you think that all the good truckers are gone, look at the next wreck you see out there in the middle of nowhere. who do you see stopping to give assistance? an 18 wheeler. I have been the first one to stop and give help and call for emergency assistance many times. while at the same time, many cars just slow down to gawk, and then keep on going.

I'll get off my soapbox now. it just gets to me when I see/hear people putting down truckers like that. we just need the railroad to get their act together and get some of these trucks off the road, and maybe that will get the trucking rates back up.

If you feel I have made any errors here, feel free to let me know and I will correct them.

[Anonymous]

I travel the interstates in the South frequently, I-40 in particular, and I have far more problems with cars and suv's than I have ever had with 18 wheelers. I guess it is different in some areas.
If I see a bad truck driver, I will report them to the truck company. I am familar with most truckers as I have been in the transportation business for 30 years. I have made only one call
to report a driver in the past 7-8 years.

I am very pleased that trucks are diverting to trains for long hauls. I think this trend will continue to grow rapidly, especially in the west where the BNSF wrote the book on how to run intermodal trains. The UP has also much improved intermodal service in the West. I spent 3 full days in Kansas City in May watching the intermodal trains roll and the show was fantastic.
Thanks rob5ert, I guess we drive on some different roads. Have a Merry Christmas,,

[Anonymous]

Jim: I don't know which highways you travel, but I don't see much "professionalism" by truckers. The old "knights of the road" are long gone.
To the contrary, many truckers consistently overspeed, tailgate, cut off smaller vehicles and keep going in conditions that jeopardize everyone on the road except themselves. i.e. every year on I-70 between Denver and Salt Lake, dozens of autoists are killed, injured or disaccommodated by jack-knifing rigs in bad weather. And that's the tip of the casualty iceberg
I suspect the day will come when trucks and cars will have either or both separate highways or lanes - brought about by the above and by the already critical gridlock on many interstates...

[Anonymous]

Yes. Alex,
good point, most of the slow trucks, LTL, Hunt, Schneider, Swift, are all good railroad customers. That does make driving easier for the other trucks on the road. The trucks and the railroads can be both competitors and good business partners, that is what makes the US a great country.
I had rather drive on a road with 20 trucks than 20 cars, as most truck drivers are professional drivers and do not create the problems that the 4 wheelers do.

[Anonymous]

I dont take anything personally. actually, i would much rather be working for a railroad than in the trucking industry :) I know Prime, i work for a company just down the road from them here in Springfield. it would be excellent if the railroads could get their acts together so some of these trucks can be taken off the road. i love seeing a long string of TOFC cars loaded with JB Hunt and Schneider trailers. those are all the slow trucks! hehe. i always get on the CB radio and say "thank god for the railroads, look at all the slow trucks they are keeping off the road" :) that usually makes a few people mad.

i think this is the thread that just wont die

God Bless The USA, Pass The Ammo.

Union Pacific "We Will Devour"

[Anonymous]

Nightcrawler: I hope you don't take those attacks personally as I truly believe this country could not thrive without the use of trucks or trains. I used to drive for PRIME INC. and I now work for,at least until I was furloughed, Union Pacific RR. I'm employed in the engineering dept. (TRACK) as a machine operator or laborer. Both Industries need each other to survive. The trucking companys are always looking for drivers and the railroads have nearly reached capacity in terms of available main lines. Both industries MUST work together for the common good of this great country. I hope I haven't offended anyone as this is just my opinion. GOD BLESS THE U.S.

[Anonymous]

The interesting part of this debate is that UPS is the largest intermodal customer of the US railroads. UPS is also the largest trucking company in the US in terms of revenue. Also, J B Hunt, Schneider, Swift, Roadway, Yellow, CF, ABF, are all major customers of the railroads for many years. New trucking companies continue to try intermodal each month. Covenant Trucking is a new example. Truckload truckers such as J B Hunt, Schneider offer extra incentives to sales people to find loads that will move over the railroad.
In spite of this debate, the truckers are great customers for every railroad in the US and Canada..

[Anonymous]

Yeah I hear that by next year lots of truck traffic will be taken off of I-81 in virginia to be put on trains by the Norfolk Southern to decrease truck traffic and fatal accidents on that interstate. I hope it does because I love trains, especially intermodal.

[jsanchez]

About airline subsidies. It was estimated in the 1970's. If the Airlines had to pay for the Dallas/Ft. Worth airport alone, it would take them 700 years to pay off the mortgage.

James

[mnwestern]

Good scary thought, Larry. As someone whose father, brother, brother-in-law and two nephews have been truckers, both short and long-haul, I realize the value of trucking. But I also realize that the taxes truckers complain about don't come close to covering the costs of the damage they do to the highways. Engineers (the Highway variety) have told me that except for frost damage in the northern climates, you would not have to rebuild roads very often if they were traveled by just cars and pickups. Also, the trucking industry was basically handed the interstate system as a gift in the 1950s. Railroads are the only transportation industry even coming close to having to pave for its own infrastructure. Not Air, barge or trucks.

The bigger issue might be, what is it worth to our society to have a cheap transportation policy essentially like our cheap food policy. If transportation companies really could charge the cost of doing business and showing a return on investment, airline tickets would be much higher, the cost of transporting goods would be much higher, and the prices we pay for them would be much higher. Like our subsidy of farmers that keeps the percentage of our income spent on food, our public dollars in transportation keeps those costs down, too. When was the last time airlines actually covered the full cost of building and operating airports — probably never. Railroads benefit, too, from the public larder, especially, shortlines and Amtrak, but to nowhere near the extent of other modes of transportation.
T

[BRAKIE]

TRAIN OF THOUGHT (SORRY T.K) YOU EVER WONDER WHAT IT WOULD BE LIKE ON THE HI-WAYS WITH-OUT TRAINS? JUST A THOUGHT.

[andrewjonathon]

I may live in Washington now but I have had the opportunity to live in a number different parts of this country including those with Mexican drivers and I disagree with your analysis. I have also had the opportunity to drive in a number of various countries with different languages and know from personal experience you do not 'read' road signs as much as 'recognize' symbols. As far as truck standards are concerned, it is up to us to first set our standards and then apply them across the board to everyone. If we are not capable of enforcing them then it is our problem to correct. Also remember that in random safety checks a large percentage of American trucks fail to pass. The point is Mexicans don't have a monopoly on unsafe trucks. Indeed there is a need to increase the safety record of all trucks without singling out the Mexican trucks.

[ronsmith]

Well Andrew I thought someone may miss the point, and that is the trucking industry better do something to reduce the numbers of trucks on the road before someone like gore and the past head of the epa bring this plan up as being necessary.
You also enjoy living in a part of the country that does not have many of the mexicans, so you have not idea of how they drive or their not being able to read road signs or follow laws. You also live in a dream world if you thing the mexican truckers will adopt any of our standards.

[Anonymous]

Just wanted to add that a truck has to wait for a train at a grade crossing. also i never seen a truck in like a train can be 8 thousand feet. just a thought to ponder next time you see a truck go buy

[jamesedwbradley]

Note the recent remark in TRAINS by an NS official - (forgot the name)-who said in effect that the rails' technology has always prevented real customer service except in the 'old days', and then it was only good for a few crack passenger trains where top management bent all its efforts to see that everybody in the company ran that train on time! I think this is the crux of rail service problems - and lack of supervision; difficulty has always been thatcoupling up the long trains resulted in YOUR car being lost like a drop of water in a Great Lake; it took too much money to do the switching and local runs needed for just-in-time, so the 'loose-car' cargo went to trucks; rails do better with unit-trains. But after 22 years in freight traffic management (then to another field, since retired) I always wondered why rails didn't try TOFC each 2-4 hours to take (then) common-carrier trailers and give truck-competitive service, avoiding the rail-terminal pitfalls. Of course, that meant 'converting' the boxcar customers to using truck docks and TOFC, but most of them already had truck docks and were using them, daily! I think rails dropped the ball on getting even more TOFC, tried too hard to keep the boxcars and their big hump yards, and it's abundantly clear they tried to skimp on supervision and giving service. What's next/

[jsanchez]

There already is a lot of cooperation between truckers and railroads. Swift, Schneider, J.B Hunt all send tens of thousands of trailers everyday by rail. This traffic was hurt by the merger debacles, but now that things are getting smoother operational wise, this traffic seems to be growing again. The trucking companies, save on fuel, wear & tare on their trailers, and labor costs. The large trucking companies are well aware to the benefits of rail and have been hoping for the railroads to get their act together to give them more business. The key again is service quality.

[jsanchez]

There are many interesting points in this discussion, I agree the service issue is PARAMOUNT, look at all the shortline railroads that have tremendous growth on freight lines the class 1's were killing. I know of many companies that switched to using rail more, once the class 1's were out of the picture. The main reason being they like the service they get from the local shortline far better than an indifferent arrogant class 1. Most shortlines seem to really bend over backwards to make their customers happy, they also come up with great ideas to help shippers. I'm surprised more class 1's don't try harder to be like shortlines. There is a lot of money to be made in railroading if you do it right.

[andrewjonathon]

I must respond to the incredible ideas put forth by Ron Smith. First there is a name for the type of suggestions that you make in regards to limiting the distance trucks can travel and forcing companies to use rail service - it falls under the general term of 'central planning' which is typically associated with communism. If that is your idea of utopia its too bad that the old Soviet Union wasn't still around for you because I don't believe even Russia is that restictive today.

Secondly, your comments about Mexican truck drivers are outlandish. The only reason to limit Mexican truck drivers from US roads is 'job protection' - which is purpose of the unions existence. However, its interesting because it also sounds as if you don't like the unions even though you agree with them on this issue. As far as the language difference, first there is little reading of words involved in driving. Recognizing road symbols is the most important thing and most road signs meet international standards. The rest can be picked up very quickly. Secondly, there are many citizens of this country who do not speak English and yet drive on the roads with little problem everyday. If you have every travelled abroad you have likely experienced driving on roads where you did not know the language and would have found it is not difficult. Thousands of non-English speaking tourists already drive on the US roads on any given day without creating havoc. Finally, truck drivers are professional drivers, yes even Mexican truck drivers and don't under estimate their ability to read English road signs.

If there are any further safety concerns these can be taken care of by adopting universal standards for all trucks on the interstate regardless of where the truck comes from.

I am not sure how you force railroads to get their act together. But the real reason trucks dominate the freight transportation is not that they are subsidized or underregulated but in similar words used by a former president during an election campaign 'Its the service stupid'.

[Anonymous]

If there was to be real competition in the movement of freight out there, the trucking industry would pay their own way with their own "road-beds" just like the R.R.'s do. Then watch what would happen! This is not a direct response to Texpik6, just a thought...thank's...Hommie

[JonathanS]

CSX

[Anonymous]

FINALLY...A man after my own heart!!!
I agree 150%. For more details, see my comments under mergers. I'm getting really tired running around on unsafe roads,away from home for weeks at a time,because the railroads can't get their act together!!!!!

[Anonymous]

man...look what i started. i have been thinking that if the railroads would work with the trucking industry it would work to their advantage. one way i was thinking of is that the railroads could run a type of transfer terminal in each major city. there, trucks would do all the local pickups and bring the product to a terminal. from there it would be loaded onto boxcars etc. and shipped to another city to be offloaded onto more local trucks and delivered to its final destinations. we do this at my trucking company all the time. we will go to a transfer terminal on the east coast, pick up a loaded trailer that has freight for many different stores on it. from there we will take it to the west coast and deliver it to another terminal, where they put it on smaller trucks to deliver it to all the differet stores.

also, i was thinking that wouldnt a complete transcontenential railroad be much faster, and make it easier to transport goods across the country? i always wondered why they would waste the time to transfer cars from an east coast railroad to a west coast railroad. i wonder why the two never merged.

one more thing. the railroads need to build a big triple track, transcon railroad from the east coast to the west coast for all these cross country shipments that dont need to make very many stops in between (never will happen)

still truckin on down the road

Alex

[ronsmith]

You are right to say the railroads need to get it together and deliver; but the feds and states build the roads for the trucks and do nothing for the railraods. We must reduce the number of vehicles on the roads.
I think we should do what was proposed in 1950, which is, that any product, except what would be urgent delivers, being shipped over 300 miles will go via rail. This would all but take the coast to coast trucks off the raod and would mean they would work in less than a 3000 mile radius of there home base.
Well guess what happened to this plan; the Teamsters 'Junion' as they say in the north killed this plan. Now all you OTR's are suffering the ills of overloaded highways and delays at terminals.
Well we have another HUGH problem facing us now and that is all the Mexican truckers that cannot read or understand English, are going to join you on the highways.
Lets all expand the rail system to take as much traffic off the highways and do not let any mexican truckers in the USA.
Lets all insist the the railroads get it together and also increase passenger rail service and most certainly it is not done like by the dumb, slow developed light rail systems we have being constructed.
Ron Smith, Garland, TX

[Anonymous]

Jon,
What was the railroad you were dealing with?

[JonathanS]

I forgot one incident we had. We had a car of "starch" delivered to us by rail. The bill of lading had the car number scratched off and a different number hand written on it. This car was in the series that often came to us. We sampled it and it was positive for starch. We then unloaded it and released it back to the railroad.

Unknown to us the starch was modified and our identification test did not reveal that, it still identified as starch. The bill of lading we got was actually for the car whose number was typed on the form. The car that was delivereded to us was for a different customer and had gotten separated from its bill of lading. So the local clerk took it upon himself to make a bill by taking another car's bill and putting this car's number on it. The car he took the bill of lading from had also gotten separated from its bill. In this case the bill had arrived but the car had not.

To make it even better when the car was returned to the local yard its bill of lading finally showed up. So the clerk attached the bill to the car and off it went to its rightful owners. And when it got there it was empty. And the rail company could not explain why it was empty.

In the meantime we had several batches ruined (at several hundred thousand dollars lost each) and had to shut the plant down to try to find out why. We quickly found out that the starch was not correct and contacted our supplier. Their reaction was "So that is were it went." Between the supplier, us, and the other customer we figured out what had happened. We were out over a million dollars in ruined product and lost production and still had to dispose of the ruined product and the remaining starch in a hazardous landfill. The other customer had somewhat less of a loss than us, but still a significant amount. Would the rail company take any responsibility. No. It took a lawsuit to recover any damages.

Again I'll ask; do you honestly think that I am in any hurry to try rail service again?