TOFC vs COFC; which classification do RoadRailer and RailRunner fit in?

[Anonymous]

I see where the TOFC numbers are double those of COFC in the latest AAR stats. Although the common wisdom is that TOFC is passe and most new intermodal growth will be in containerization, I am wondering if the market potential for TOFC is actually greater than that for COFC (possibly due to a growing shortage of ocean containers, new markets for roll on/roll off type trailers i.e. trailers not reinforced for lift on lift off handling which are something like 70% of the trailers out there).

Also, how are RoadRailers and/or RailRunner trailers counted? I would think RoadRailers would be counted in the TOFC stats, but since RailRunner is a container on bi-modal chassis operation would it be counted as COFC or TOFC? For that matter, how are containers on chassis on flatcars counted?

[Anonymous]

COFC is COntainer on Flat Cars

DOGGY

[pmsteamman]

leftlimp, they are in a class all by them selfs as for the waythey are coupled im not sure but they are very close when they do. Trains ran a article on them a few years back.

[Big_Boy_4005]

My guess would be neither, because they spend much of their time away from the rails. I would think that those classifications only apply to the rail cars that carry those items. With railrunners and roadrailers there is no flat car involved.

My understanding is that the heavy walled containers are primarily used for international shipments, and the lightweight semi trailers are for domestic. TOFC's are still in heavy use, even if containers out number them. Perhaps if oil prices stay high, we will see more trailers riding the rails, and semi tractors sitting idle. We can only hope.

[Anonymous]

Hey LL,
VERY interesting question. [?] I have a freind who helps compile that data. I'll have to ask him that. I'm guessing it will count as TOFC, but that's just a guess. I truly doesn't fit because of the "on-flat-car" definition of either.

In terms of the volumes, there are really about 4 major market sections within intermodal.

Within container, there is domestic and international. International moves in 20', 40' and 45' corrugated steel containers. A portion of freight that is imported on steamships gets transloaded "on-dock" from the ship right to a train (i.e. companies like K-Line, Evergreen, Maersk, Sealand) The double stacks run to a container yard somewhere inland from the dock and are then unloaded and delivered to the customers. If you think about the big steamships, Maersk has several boats that will haul 6,500 twenty foot equivalent containers. I've heard that there are also new super ships that will haul 8000 twenty foot equivalent. So, picture this.... 8000 twenties = 4000 forties. A full train can carry about 240 forty footers... so a single ship of 40 footers could load up about 17 trains. One problem with this is, what do you do with all these 40' boxes once you get to somewhere like Chicago? Ultimately you want to get them back to the boat. However, you don't want to pay the RR to haul 17 train-loads of empties back to the boat. Many shippers want a container with more cube space than a 40' box offers, but not all. If you have heavy product, you will hit max legal weight before you'd ever fill-up a 48' or 53' domestic container, so a 40' or 45' may work fine. For instance, customers that do canned goods (ie. veggies, beer, etc.) can use the smaller box because their product is heavy. Stuff like heavy metal stampings and even dog food is heavy enough to go into a 40' box. The steamship companies offer discounted rates if you can load their boxes back toward the docks. By the way, that is largely the only direction you can load them. You won't see 40' boxes just running around on the rail networks. They are basically running from the ship to a delivery point and back toward the ship (whether loaded or empty on the return leg.) There are import tax issues on the box itself that mandate how they can be used.

The next big block is domestic containers (mostly 48' and 53' equipment.) This breaks down to free running equipment ( the North American Container System (NACS) which runs on BNSF, CSX, NS) the EMP Container program (UP, NS, CP), Pacer Stacktrain (UP, CSX), and then a number of private container fleets. These bigger boxes can be used much like their 48' and 53' trailer bretheren in terms of what product goes into them. The stacking frames that give the box the strength to withstand another load to sit on top of them intrude a few inches into the box which takes away a little cube space and interior dimension which makes them a little less desirable if you have a customer who is VERY cube space sensitive. Some customers have their cartons and pallet stacking designs set up to exactly match a high-cube trailer and won't load containers. ... but then again, many customers will. Typically container trains move a little slower (have lower max speeds on the RR due to weight-per-operative brake restrictions) and are often treated as a lower priority train. That means it might take a day longer than a TOFC shipment, but then again, you often see mixed TOFC, COFC trains, so your trailer might get there at the same time.

Going from memory, it seems like the AAR number is about 211,000 containers shipped per week. This includes domestic and Intl boxes riding on the rail.

As far as TOFC, the two big groups there are the LTL / Package guys (Roadway, Yellow, UPS) and then the truckload guys (Schneider National, others).

The LTL and Package guys typically use 28' - 40' trailers. Some larger as well, but often smaller units. They often run on expedited trains due to high service requirements. They bring a lot of TOFC units to the rail. They've been pretty stable on unit count for a long while.

The truckload guys are where the growth has been as of late. TTX (the car supplier) is actually buying new cars to handle trailers for the first time. The overall TOFC market has shrunk for a while as the RR's were trying to incent people to shift to containers. The way they "incented" this was by selling their rail-owned trailer fleets (ie. UP, BNSF, NS pretty much sold their entire fleet) and basically forcing you to take a container. Hower, the private fleet trailer owners who have 48' and 53' trailers are bringing a growing volume to the RR's and this segment is growing pretty nicely. The 53' boxes are the particularly big portion.

The TOFC numbers that AAR has are smaller than the COFC, but don't count TOFC out. It meets the customers needs in a lot of instances and I think it will be around in the long term. Some RR's are absolutely bent on getting containerized and others with shorter length-of-haul aren't so big on that idea.

Well, that's everything I know. Hope that helps clarify some stuff. [:D]
- Stack.

[greyhounds]

An intermodal rail "load" is one container/trailer that the railroad company is paid to move. It doesn't matter what type of car it is placed on.

Generally, the container/trailer is full of freight, but if someone decides to pay to move an empty then that movement is counted as a "load".

In the distant past, when IM was suffocated under Federal economic regulation for 50 years, a shipper needing empty equipment at an origin where no equipment was available would place one can of dog food in a trailer and ship it to themselves. They had to pay the full rate on the dog food move, but they got a trailer to load where they needed it.

I've seen RoadRailer business counted seperately from TOFC/COFC, but it's such a small portion of the total business that it really doesn't matter. And RoadRailer business is only of any significance on one railroad - so it's basically a non issue.

Ken Strawbridge

[Big_Boy_4005]

QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds

Generally, the container/trailer is full of freight, but if someone decides to pay to move an empty then that movement is counted as a "load".

In the distant past, when IM was suffocated under Federal economic regulation for 50 years, a shipper needing empty equipment at an origin where no equipment was available would place one can of dog food in a trailer and ship it to themselves. They had to pay the full rate on the dog food move, but they got a trailer to load where they needed it.

I love that story Ken. See, we don't break stupid rules, we just bend them, REALLY FAR.
What a clever solution to a big problem.[banghead][X-)][:-,][:O][}:)][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][tup][tup]