Can someone with the right connections report on just how the traffic in all three lanes is handled?
I find it difficult to believe they would use rubber-tired drayage for the Chicago connections.
But I do not believe dedicated trains are employed.
daveklepper Can someone with the right connections report on just how the traffic in all three lanes is handled? I find it difficult to believe they would use rubber-tired drayage for the Chicago connections. But I do not believe dedicated trains are employed.
According to their website, it is via a haulage agreement with CSX
https://www.bnsf.com/news-media/news-releases/bnsf-intermodal-service-southern-california-to-ohio.html
It is touted as "direct rail" service with 127-129 hour transit times end to end.
Here is an interesting discussion:
https://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2019/09/27-bnsf-increases-intermodal-service-to-northwest-ohio-via-csx
daveklepperI find it difficult to believe they would use rubber-tired drayage for the Chicago connections. But I do not believe dedicated trains are employed.
Probably a run through at Clearing Yard in Chicago with just a change of crews; power remains with train.
diningcar daveklepper I find it difficult to believe they would use rubber-tired drayage for the Chicago connections. But I do not believe dedicated trains are employed.
daveklepper I find it difficult to believe they would use rubber-tired drayage for the Chicago connections. But I do not believe dedicated trains are employed.
IF Chicago is so problematic, why not use another point to route those trains; either thru St. Louis, or maybe, Memphis? I think mileage might be an issue, but woukld not problems with traffic through thpse two points relieve the time in transit?
Current BNSF traffic out of the Southern California areas..Here at a possible point on their system[BNSF's] where the traffic an either go thru Wichita and on to Chicago or turn it [EB or NB?] via the Flint Hills to the Topeka/Kansas City area.
I see a lot of COFC traffic that I suppose would origiate at s facility like North Baltimore on CSX; I suspect that because of the number of blocks of Schneider cans and Swift cans, not to mention CSX cans which coukd origin at NBOH which used to be used to be a big transfer spot for those carriers.
Of course, JBH cans are omnipresent in large numbers in either direction! Here the BNSF line splits (@Mulvane) off of what is the Southern T-con. The switch here takes the traffic in a more or less, northeasterly direction towards their big IM yard at Gardner,Ks. and then into Kansas City. and beyond.
The curious part of this is we have no point in the Wichita area, currently, where there is an IM 'lift'; any IM freight for this area of SC Kansas comes down the Kansas Turnpike out of the Topeka/Kansas City area.
The local fish wrapper carried a story about a week ago that Amazon plans to build a D.C. aroun d here [it is supposed to be a point for handling 'large' freight'- their term(?).
My question is, just looking at the container makeup on the passing trains; they seem to originate out on the west coast or midwest. Are there any points where is there an IM 'lift' further west on BNSF? { I'm pretty sure that the facility at Gardner, is where the blocks are seperated out for local' P&D in that area} ; then the blocks for eastern locations are reassembled to go on trains for those eastern or midwestern points?
samfp1943 IF Chicago is so problematic,
BNSF has very direct access to Clearing Yard on Chicago's southwest side and CXS has access there from the east; so Chicago is not a huge problem for this concept. As mentioned above, I think there can be run throughs in Chicago for this business.
samfp1943 It won't happen, nor should it. Transit times over the single track BN St.Louis-Avard is horrible plus any shifts would cut the boards @ Wellks. We are down to 28 pool condrs as is is now diningcar daveklepper I find it difficult to believe they would use rubber-tired drayage for the Chicago connections. But I do not believe dedicated trains are employed. IF Chicago is so problematic, why not use another point to route those trains; either thru St. Louis, or maybe, Memphis? I think mileage might be an issue, but woukld not problems with traffic through thpse two points relieve the time in transit? Current BNSF traffic out of the Southern California areas..Here at a possible point on their system[BNSF's] where the traffic an either go thru Wichita and on to Chicago or turn it [EB or NB?] via the Flint Hills to the Topeka/Kansas City area. I see a lot of COFC traffic that I suppose would origiate at s facility like North Baltimore on CSX; I suspect that because of the number of blocks of Schneider cans and Swift cans, not to mention CSX cans which coukd origin at NBOH which used to be used to be a big transfer spot for those carriers. Of course, JBH cans are omnipresent in large numbers in either direction! Here the BNSF line splits (@Mulvane) off of what is the Southern T-con. The switch here takes the traffic in a more or less, northeasterly direction towards their big IM yard at Gardner,Ks. and then into Kansas City. and beyond. The curious part of this is we have no point in the Wichita area, currently, where there is an IM 'lift'; any IM freight for this area of SC Kansas comes down the Kansas Turnpike out of the Topeka/Kansas City area. The local fish wrapper carried a story about a week ago that Amazon plans to build a D.C. aroun d here [it is supposed to be a point for handling 'large' freight'- their term(?). My question is, just looking at the container makeup on the passing trains; they seem to originate out on the west coast or midwest. Are there any points where is there an IM 'lift' further west on BNSF? { I'm pretty sure that the facility at Gardner, is where the blocks are seperated out for local' P&D in that area} ; then the blocks for eastern locations are reassembled to go on trains for those eastern or midwestern points?
It won't happen, nor should it. Transit times over the single track BN St.Louis-Avard is horrible plus any shifts would cut the boards @ Wellks. We are down to 28 pool condrs as is is now
One question answeered: Obviously no rubber-tired road transfers required. But run-through would mean dedicated trains. Unless BNSF itself consolidates traffic from the three lanes to one eastbound and splits them westbound, which may be the case, but where? Otherwise, consolidation into the single CSX haulage train and splitting westbound migiht be done in Clearing. Where else?
Hope for some real investigative reporting.
My records for Deshler (a few miles west of NWO) include:
Q172 (Chicago BNSF - NWO) Possible QLACNWH6 Saturday-Wednesday
Q170 (Chicago BNSF - NWO) Possible QFTMCXO. Passes through Deshler around noon. Daily
The CSX wiki doesn't list the specific yard for those two trains.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
This is very similar to the long-standing haulage agreement BNSF has for Atlanta-area IM service. They hand the trains off to CSX at Birmingham AL and CSX gets them in to Atlanta, and vice-versa for westbound IM.
This BNSF Intermodal Network Map highlights how these haulage agreements with CSX really extend the BNSF network
This BNSF Intermodal Network Map highlights how these haulage agreements with CSX really extend the BNSF network.
http://www.bnsf.com/ship-with-bnsf/maps-and-shipping-locations/pdf/small-intermodal-map.pdf
Would be interesting to compare with UP's.
kgbw49This BNSF Intermodal Network Map highlights how these haulage agreements with CSX really extend the BNSF network. http://www.bnsf.com/ship-with-bnsf/maps-and-shipping-locations/pdf/small-intermodal-map.pdf
- PDN.
This wknd I matched up a pair of lower non-priority intermodal runs in across the BNSF newtork. The corridor of traffic from the southeast U.S. goes on the BN side west to Avard, OK., where it joins the SF for the remainder of the trip to the West Coast. .For unknown reasons the Q-MEMRIC now has been rerouted on a regular basis and given to the SF @ Kancks for the trip to the West Coast. This is good for Wellks and we will take it as the pool boards have been cut to historic lows. The other schedule being compared is the Q-ATGLAC. The Richmond train was rerouted @ Springfield to go north to Kancks (in leiu of running west to Tulsa, Enid and Avard) while the Losang stacker stayed on the Frisco/BN to Avard. Departues are @ crew change stations on dates listed and if the train was late or ahead of schedule. I have only entered the times as far west as Amaril and these two trains are still plogging west towards their destinations as I am typing this. Q-MEMRIC (rerouted between Sprimo and Avard): .Memphs: dp 0140 on 6-11 (2:20 ahead), Thayer 1040 (15 min ahead), Sprimo 1910 (1:25 late), Kancks dp 0515 on 6-12 (2:40 late), Wellks 1230 (55 min late) and Amaril 2310 (45 min late) Q-ATGLAC (normal routing Memphis-Avard): .Memphis dp 0745 6-12 ( 3:50 ahead), Thayer 1550 (2 hr ahead), Sprimo 0100 on 6-13 (55 min ahead), Enid 1405 (1 hr ahead) and Amaril 0255 on 6-14 (2:55 late). This was combied w/a Q-CHISBD @ Waynoka creating an ugly silly 16,000 ft and will continue to fall off schedule for the remainder of the trip.
Paul_D_North_JrA few more such agreements with CSX (and perhaps NS?) and then BNSF would be functionally a transcontinental. Who has need of the complexities of a formal merger?
The discussion over at Newswire suggests that CSX told these customers "Dray from Chicago" and instead the customers went to BNSF and persuaded them to complete the transit to Ohio unassisted. Is this really what happened here? CSX just threw away the business and BNSF salvaged it?
Convicted One Paul_D_North_Jr A few more such agreements with CSX (and perhaps NS?) and then BNSF would be functionally a transcontinental. Who has need of the complexities of a formal merger? The discussion over at Newswire suggests that CSX told these customers "Dray from Chicago" and instead the customers went to BNSF and persuaded them to complete the transit to Ohio unassisted. Is this really what happened here? CSX just threw away the business and BNSF salvaged it?
Paul_D_North_Jr A few more such agreements with CSX (and perhaps NS?) and then BNSF would be functionally a transcontinental. Who has need of the complexities of a formal merger?
No, that is not what happened. There would be no reason for a truck to be drayed from Chicago to NWOH.
For those asking how the process works, the BNSF delivers the train to CSX at 71st Street via Corwith on the Blue Island sub. A CSX crew gets on and it goes east.
Westbounds are taken to 71st St on the IHB, just outside of Bedford Park. A BNSF Logistics Park crew gets on, and takes the train to Joliet over the CN ex GM&O line to Joliet.
An "expensive model collector"
n012944;
thanks for the info you share. It seems interesting that eastbounds are taken all the way to Corwith and then down when the 71st street connection could have been made by exiting the BNSF main at McCook and running through Clearing Yard. Probably I have been away from Chicago too long and don't know the newer operating deals and track changes that have occured.
n012944No, that is not what happened. There would be no reason for a truck to be drayed from Chicago to NWOH.
That really wasn't what I was thinking. Suppose there was an end user in Sandusky, or Lima, or Mansfield. And CSX was like "we don't think the haul from Chicago to NWO is worth the bother, go get it in Chicago yourselves".
But BNSF stepped up?
Wasn't CSX talking about cutting back service at North Baltimore just a few years ago?
https://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2017/10/13-north-baltimore
Convicted One n012944 No, that is not what happened. There would be no reason for a truck to be drayed from Chicago to NWOH. That really wasn't what I was thinking. Suppose there was an end user in Sandusky, or Lima, or Mansfield. And CSX was like "we don't think the haul from Chicago to NWO is worth the bother, go get it in Chicago yourselves". But BNSF stepped up?
n012944 No, that is not what happened. There would be no reason for a truck to be drayed from Chicago to NWOH.
Since CSX still runs Chicago to NWOH, you would be incorrect.
n012944Since CSX still runs Chicago to NWOH, you would be incorrect.
Since they appear to be run-through trains, all CSX has to do is throw a couple of switches and put a crew on board and away they go. Only one crew is needed Chicago-NWO.
If it was a matter of having to lift all of the containers and put them on a new train, that would be a different story.
tree68 If it was a matter of having to lift all of the containers and put them on a new train, that would be a different story.
Or they put them on an existing train. Q016, Q160, Q136, or Q020 all run Chicago and block swap at NWOH. Anyone of them would work.
n012944 tree68 If it was a matter of having to lift all of the containers and put them on a new train, that would be a different story. Or they put them on an existing train. Q016, Q160, Q136, or Q020 all run Chicago and block swap at NWOH. Anyone of them would work.
There you go! I have Q160 and Q020 listed as Bedford Park. How hard would it be to get trains off BNSF and over to Bedford Park?
When CSX, under Harrison, exited the Hu-and-Spoke concept, this drastically reduced traffic at North Baltimore, and closing poorly-performing end-pairs reduced it more. So they offered the use of the facility, on the basis of haulage trains, to both BNSF and UP, and so far only BNSF has taken up the opportunity.
Haulage trains do not involve local business for the tenant. If there is Chicago - North Baltimore intermodal business as end-points, rest assure it is CSX business, not BNSF business.
tree68 n012944 tree68 If it was a matter of having to lift all of the containers and put them on a new train, that would be a different story. Or they put them on an existing train. Q016, Q160, Q136, or Q020 all run Chicago and block swap at NWOH. Anyone of them would work. There you go! I have Q160 and Q020 listed as Bedford Park. How hard would it be to get trains off BNSF and over to Bedford Park?
Easy. In fact, Q002 the once a week UPS hotshot already does. It comes off of the Santa Fe at McCook and runs over the IHB/B&OCT to Bedford.
diningcar n012944; thanks for the info you share. It seems interesting that eastbounds are taken all the way to Corwith and then down when the 71st street connection could have been made by exiting the BNSF main at McCook and running through Clearing Yard.
thanks for the info you share. It seems interesting that eastbounds are taken all the way to Corwith and then down when the 71st street connection could have been made by exiting the BNSF main at McCook and running through Clearing Yard.
Using the BRC would add cost. The BRC does not let railroads use its mains for free.
BNSF and CSX are part-owners of BRC, BRC owners have historically had trackage rights over BRC.
CSSHEGEWISCH BNSF and CSX are part-owners of BRC, BRC owners have historically had trackage rights over BRC.
Yes, trackage rights are there. The railroads are still charged a per car fee to use the BRC.
http://www2.beltrailway.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/8002-K-2.pdf
Back in the days of Potomac Yard and the multiple Class 1's that used it - there were per car charges against each of the carriers that moved traffic through it.
Chessie System car distribution would route empty car movements around Pot Yard because of the charge.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.