"disposable" freight cars

[John WR]

carnej1

MOW trucks equipped with hirail gear are ubiquitous in the RR industry. Just about every RR operator in the North America from small shortlines on up uses them and all the Class1s,Amtrak and the various transit agencies have sizeable fleets.

Thanks for the pictures of trucks and the bus, the information and for teaching me a new word, "hirail."  I noticed that one truck had a cube in back with a section over the cab.  It strikes me it might be redesigned as a camper.  If I did that do you think the railroad companies would allow me to run it on their tracks?

[carnej1]

John WR

 New Jersey Transit has fitted some trucks with railroad wheels.  I've seen them at Broad Street in Trenton where the Riverline crosses.  The driver parks on top of the rails (there is space to do this).  Then the flanged wheels are hand cranked down and engage the tracks.  The tires are still in top of the tracks to provide power.  They start the truck and off they go.  These are trucks used to maintain the way; they don't pull anything.  

I have wondered if the same thing might be done with buses but I've never seen it done.  

 MOW trucks equipped with hirail gear are ubiquitous in the RR industry. Just about every RR operator in the North America from small shortlines on up uses them and all the Class1s,Amtrak and the various transit agencies have sizeable fleets. There are some large hirail trucks used for switching in a manner similiar to  trackmobiles. There have even been attempts to use hirail power units as locomotives for Branchline freight service (hauling roadrailers in a couple of experiments in the US and moving grain hoppers in Australia) but none of these applications proved economical.

http://www.railroadforums.com/photos/showphoto.php/photo/49395/title/georgetown-rail-slot-machine-with-brandt-power-unit/cat/514

There have also been some experiments with hirail equipped busses. There was an operation in Germany that ran one for a number of years.

http://damncoolcars.blogspot.com/2011/05/road-rail-bus.html

[BaltACD]

John WR

 New Jersey Transit has fitted some trucks with railroad wheels.  I've seen them at Broad Street in Trenton where the Riverline crosses.  The driver parks on top of the rails (there is space to do this).  Then the flanged wheels are hand cranked down and engage the tracks.  The tires are still in top of the tracks to provide power.  They start the truck and off they go.  These are trucks used to maintain the way; they don't pull anything.  

I have wondered if the same thing might be done with buses but I've never seen it done.  

You are looking at Hi-Rail vehicles - all railroads have many of their Maintenance of Way trucks fitted with Hi-Rail wheels so the trucks can get to where they are needed ON track, as there are more places on a railroad that are not accessible by highway than are.  Their operation on track is governed by a set of rules that cover on track equipment that are not trains.

[Murphy Siding]

     In a similar vein,  I've always wondered if it was possible to build a double stack train that *folded up* for return to the west coast and Asia.

       For example, if the empty containers could be sent back west in *knocked down* form, you could put what?  6-8 or more(?) on a double stack trailer? 

     The baretables themselves:  Could they be made to *stack up* 4-5 high, for the trip back west?  I'm guessing, that 6 full double stacks going east, could be converted to one foldable, stackable, empty, train going west. 

      Even if the containers aren't worth the effort to return to Asia,  the baretables still have to be hauled back to the west coast.

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

I concur with carnej1's comment above that this was one of John Kneiling's recurring themes. It appeared in many of his articles and columns in Trains as well.   

I too thought of the Eco-Rail similarity, but had not seen that comprehensive website before.  Glad someone found and wrote up that history - thanks for sharing that link !

- Paul North.  

[dakotafred]

Lighter equipment would be nice -- but I don't get the drastically shorter trains. Means many more train starts, crews and congestion, I would think. 

[John WR]

 New Jersey Transit has fitted some trucks with railroad wheels.  I've seen them at Broad Street in Trenton where the Riverline crosses.  The driver parks on top of the rails (there is space to do this).  Then the flanged wheels are hand cranked down and engage the tracks.  The tires are still in top of the tracks to provide power.  They start the truck and off they go.  These are trucks used to maintain the way; they don't pull anything.  

I have wondered if the same thing might be done with buses but I've never seen it done.  

[carnej1]

Back in the early 90's Canadian National tested a system called "Ecorail" which operated much like what is being proposed in this thread. It was supposed to enable ordinary, unreinforced highway trailers to be transported on a roadrailer type bogie by using distributed power modules(basically a single genset with an attached traction motor/axle unit) to distribute the buff forces. They weren't able to get the bugs worked out of it but here's a link:

http://tracksidetreasure.blogspot.com/2012/04/cns-ecorail.html

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Rio Grande tried the short, fast and frequent concept in the late 1960's as a way of getting more traffic from connections.  It wasn't a panacea in and of itself but it did point the way to the optimization of freight schedules for various types of service.

[John WR]

Don,  

Isn't your "what if" at least partially here today?

Right now we have long trains of containers moving across the country.  If the freight were not in containers it would be in freight cars or on trucks.  Because of the containers in use many fewer freight cars are needs.  

I don't know about the issue of more frequent shorter trains.  

However, it seems railroads are having success in two ways:  They have expensive specialized cars such as "big John" grainers.  Or they have inexpensive flat cars that carry containers.  And a lot of things in between.  

John

[CShaveRR]

That would be murder on us carchaeologists!

(closest I could come to blood red!)

[carnej1]

I'm sometimes surprised by the amount of "reinventing the wheel" type thinking we engage in on this forum..

That said what you describe is very similiar to the "Integral Train" concept promoted by former Trains columnist John Kneiling. His book of the same name (long out of print but easy to find online at low prices) is an interesting read...

Here's a link to a patent for a system somewhat like you describe

http://www.google.com/patents/US6474242?dq=%22rail+vehicle+system%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q5DTUKfZN5S60AG3xoD4Dg&ved=0CEoQ6AEwBg

 

[oltmannd]

jrbernier

Don,

  I think you know the answers:

• Cost of Locomotives - building 3 smaller ones with the same capability as a single current day locomotive will be quite expensive(3 sets of DPU for one).
• Flexibility - This low buff capability cars will not 'mix' with other equipment.  We have that situation with RoadRailer today - dedicated trains need enough traffic to justify crew costs.  RoadRailer and container appear to fill that manufactured good transport scenario.
• Cargo - Most rail hauled cargo is bulk stuff.  The cost advantages go to the larger capacity rail cars that drive down the cost of moving a bulk product.

Jim

The biggest problem is your second bullet.  How to get from "now" to "then"?  

The first bullet - I'd be looking for smaller, cheaper, lower HP locomotive.  Think "trackmobile on steroids".  Maybe 1000 HP on two axles?  They'd have to have a standard electronics package that would include PTC, ECP, DPU and RCL.  Perhaps in quantities, it wouldn't  so terribly expensive.

The third bullet - bulk commodities would benefit from improved load/tare, but that's about it.

[jrbernier]

Don,

  I think you know the answers:

• Cost of Locomotives - building 3 smaller ones with the same capability as a single current day locomotive will be quite expensive(3 sets of DPU for one).
• Flexibility - This low buff capability cars will not 'mix' with other equipment.  We have that situation with RoadRailer today - dedicated trains need enough traffic to justify crew costs.  RoadRailer and container appear to fill that manufactured good transport scenario.
• Cargo - Most rail hauled cargo is bulk stuff.  The cost advantages go to the larger capacity rail cars that drive down the cost of moving a bulk product.

Jim

[BroadwayLion]

Interesting. Won't fly, but interesting.

Try what WILL fly: containers like airplanes use, that can be shifted quickly from train to train and from train to truck without heavy cranes and lifts. Zip in Zip out.

Look at the auto carriers. Very light weight. Use these to carry your little boxes. From ship to train, from plane to truck. All ready and waiting for when High Speed Rail becomes a reality. The front end traffic will be waiting for the train right there on the platform.

Of course rail freight is not like shipboard freight. That is fairly light. It has to be to run on roads once it gets to a civilized place with roads and weight restrictions. What we carry on a freight car will not pass muster on the road.  It takes three or four trailers of grain to load one grain car. Same thing for coal. We also transport oil. Weight is indeed the limiting factor, and our trains do some heavy stuff.

And of course, containers do not (or SHOULD) not be going back to Asia empty! Think of our poor deficit and balance of trade issues! We usually send them back full of grain or coal.

ROAR

[oltmannd]

Today's random thought - a "what if".

The shipping container used by steamship companies is so cheap to build, that it's hardly worth sending from the East Coast of the US back to Asia empty to load with more stuff.  It's almost cheaper to build a new one in Asia!

So, it's practically "disposable" - or at least has a short economic life.

RR freight cars have long lives.  40-50 years.  Why?  Part of it is because they have to be built to withstand the forces they encounter operating in long, heavy trains on grades.  It's fairly costly to build freight cars like this, so they have to last a good while to pay their way.  Lots of bad things happen along the way - try to find a box car where the roof is much more than shade, for example....

But, "what if"...

What if RRs finally got ECP and DPU rolled out?  What if locomotives came in smaller "chunks of TE and HP?  Perhaps you could build trains where you wouldn't need 800,000 buff strength.  A loco, 10-20 cars, repeat as necessary.  The carbodies could be much lighter.  Couplers could be lighter.  Draft gear done away with, or made lighter.  Perhaps box cars with full length sliding doors?  Gons with working covers?

Greater load to tare ratio = fuel savings.  

Shorter economic life = greater ability to react to market innovations.  

So, "what if"?