If cheap electric trucks do come about then what's stopping CSX or any other railroad from buying them? So freight that no longer moves over the raiload still generates revenue for the carrier, albeit using trucks that travel on subsidized roads. And where it makes sense to ship rail then by all means continue to do so. Use the tool that's most appropriate for the job.. what a concept.
Overmod All sarcasm aside, the promise of both individual and relatively small-scale autonomous aircraft is an interesting one. There is no fundamental reason why the technologies cannot be made reasonably safe and, to an extent, cost-effective; it is likewise almost childishly simple to implement a combination of technological and procedural safeguards to make full safety compliance effective. Most of the control requirements for autonomous flight are much less rigorous and much more amenable to being 'algorithmized' than those for all-weather driving in a non-walled-garden environment. A combination of hybrid-electric small-place aircraft easily spans the gap right from bus/regional rail right up to long-distance providers (turbofan or similar aircraft or HSR depending on provision) and of course seamlessly works with a 'fair' version of rideshare jitney provision. Were the FAA to build out the second-tier network of regional airports with an analogue of the tower function Zunum rolled into their business model, it becomes theoretically practical to coordinate 'precision-scheduled' ground transportation with JIT-addressed efficient air. And in most cases, a combination of reasonable ICS/RCS with a slightly glorified BRS safety paravane takes care of disasters... Personal rotorcraft (think big octos or larger numbers of individual motors) become much more of a 'thing' when you can autonomously dispatch them on a share model just at the time and to the place needed, and redispatch them afterward. I would not be surprised to find an aftermarket for components of these things, as well as older but still capable systems. I'm surprised there hasn't been a bazaar-style open-systems development of a low-supersonic business-size airframe: the tools and widespread knowledge to set up and accomplish that have existed for many years. What you won't see is toys for the idle rich who often can't drive, let alone pilot. That's where most of the 'flying cars' have foundered. Modern autonomous design is already far beyond dependence on insanely complicated hardware or expensive operations.
All sarcasm aside, the promise of both individual and relatively small-scale autonomous aircraft is an interesting one. There is no fundamental reason why the technologies cannot be made reasonably safe and, to an extent, cost-effective; it is likewise almost childishly simple to implement a combination of technological and procedural safeguards to make full safety compliance effective.
Most of the control requirements for autonomous flight are much less rigorous and much more amenable to being 'algorithmized' than those for all-weather driving in a non-walled-garden environment. A combination of hybrid-electric small-place aircraft easily spans the gap right from bus/regional rail right up to long-distance providers (turbofan or similar aircraft or HSR depending on provision) and of course seamlessly works with a 'fair' version of rideshare jitney provision. Were the FAA to build out the second-tier network of regional airports with an analogue of the tower function Zunum rolled into their business model, it becomes theoretically practical to coordinate 'precision-scheduled' ground transportation with JIT-addressed efficient air. And in most cases, a combination of reasonable ICS/RCS with a slightly glorified BRS safety paravane takes care of disasters...
Personal rotorcraft (think big octos or larger numbers of individual motors) become much more of a 'thing' when you can autonomously dispatch them on a share model just at the time and to the place needed, and redispatch them afterward. I would not be surprised to find an aftermarket for components of these things, as well as older but still capable systems. I'm surprised there hasn't been a bazaar-style open-systems development of a low-supersonic business-size airframe: the tools and widespread knowledge to set up and accomplish that have existed for many years.
What you won't see is toys for the idle rich who often can't drive, let alone pilot. That's where most of the 'flying cars' have foundered. Modern autonomous design is already far beyond dependence on insanely complicated hardware or expensive operations.
The main issue with personal aviation, is eliminating the layperson from any aspect of piloting and cost. I have more confidence in the future of autonomous aircraft than I do in ground based vehicles. The key to aviation is battery technology advancing to the point where the weight of a human can be lifted and propelled forward. This is key to the cost aspect. The navigation technology is already here.
The issue with ground transportation, is that they still rely on the current road structure, and will have to be shared with conventional vehicles, with human drivers of often less than optimum driving skills. This can only be obtained by attrition over decades. Americans are not going to give up their current vehicles easily. It would take a considerable government financial incentive to do so.
Juniata ManWhen Musk starts building personal hovercraft in another decade, his electric autonomous trucks will be obsolete too as these new vehicles will simply fly themselves to dearlerships around the country.
It dawned on me the other day to wonder when Musk will buy up a large regional, tear out the tracks, and pave a two lane dedicated road for his autonomous trucks... Proof of concept, you know.
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...
NorthWest That requires enough assets to meet commitments.
The very antithesis of PSR.
Bruce D Gillings If the railroads want to be moving autoparts where the vendors/suppliers are not within a relatively short distance from the plants, and moving finished autos, they will need to up their game on service. Management is increasingly focused on moving parts and finished autos in long, unreliable trains that cannot meet schedules. They view the world from a rail-centric paradigm and focus on THEIR costs, rather than a customer-centric paradigm wherein they understand their role in minimizing supply chain costs for the auto industry.
An "expensive model collector"
Aside from the roadgoing safety of hydrogen carrier fuel at the required volume, this is obviously a better proposal than Musk's in any practical operating sense apart from, perhaps, custom critical. On the other hand it is precisely parallel to iLINT in the importance of providing a high-integrity hydrogen infrastructure, which for much prospective American OTR likely involves a distributed hydrogen-generation architecture coupled with reiable third-party sourcing and delivery. The issue is vasty complicated, however, unless there is government buy-in and support of the supply infrastructure (as there is where I've seen iLINT-type alternative fueling successful). I doubt there is room in this space for two full supply infrastructures, and far too many common DoS methods to make large investments abruptly nonprofitable or even effectively unusable. Note that a bound is imposed, no matter how silly in the long run, by Megacharger buildout and provision for EV traction-battery recharge (or other forms of electrically-driven recharge or reforming). We already see a number of 'electric' race teams relying on relatively large gensets for their real-time charging, and I expect this is often going to be the model for truckstop charging-intrastructure buildout (as opposed to large 'supposed' electricity-fairy pixie-dust sprinkling with renewables that don't source nearly enough and distribution architecture with enormous straned cost and little alternative usefulness).
One might argue that the renewable liquid fuel used in those large generators might equally or better be used in small sustainer engines (or reforming plants) on electric-drivetrain Class 8 tractors, for far better flexibility while retaining the ability to use supplemental power for grades or special environmental conditions...
BaltACD Car movement data is available to all customers through the AAR. There are a number of 3rd party vendors who market data packages to fit each the needs of each customer. Those that are data blind are so because they want to be.
Car movement data is available to all customers through the AAR. There are a number of 3rd party vendors who market data packages to fit each the needs of each customer. Those that are data blind are so because they want to be.
Shhhh, don't tell them that. What would they say when they see all these cars bouncing back and forth between terminals for no apparent reason!?
While I disagree with Ttrraaffiicc and Bruce on the current state of auto transport by rail, I agree that the Class I's need to up their game if they want to keep this traffic in the future. And they are heading in the wrong direction.
This focus on ultra-long trains and the operating ratio at the expense of everything and everyone else needs to end.
Despite my mistrust of management in general, I know that there are good individual folks in the marketing, customer service, and operations departments of all the big railroads. I hope that some of them eventually rise to positions where they can create some real change.
As a T&E service employee, I would not be listened to if I ever dared to suggest any improvements.
"Y'all 'l speak when spoken to"......
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
NorthWest SD60MAC9500 The main problem facing the RR's are transparency. Customers would like to know car arrival/departure to better plan production, etc. This simple addition alone will increase traffic on the rails by giving customers assurance of car availability, schedules,etc. I think the bigger challenge is actually committing to meeting such a schedule, which is likely a big part of the reason car tracking AEI data is not shared with most customers. Right now, travel times and schedule compliance metrics are erratic and subject to gamesmanship on the part of those in the field. Future success will depend on establishing that kind of schedule transparency and sticking to it. Operational discipline is key. That requires enough assets to meet commitments.
SD60MAC9500 The main problem facing the RR's are transparency. Customers would like to know car arrival/departure to better plan production, etc. This simple addition alone will increase traffic on the rails by giving customers assurance of car availability, schedules,etc.
I think the bigger challenge is actually committing to meeting such a schedule, which is likely a big part of the reason car tracking AEI data is not shared with most customers.
Right now, travel times and schedule compliance metrics are erratic and subject to gamesmanship on the part of those in the field. Future success will depend on establishing that kind of schedule transparency and sticking to it.
Operational discipline is key. That requires enough assets to meet commitments.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
SD60MAC9500The main problem facing the RR's are transparency. Customers would like to know car arrival/departure to better plan production, etc. This simple addition alone will increase traffic on the rails by giving customers assurance of car availability, schedules,etc.
Anyone have thoughts regarding the Nikola startup in Arizona which will make hydrogen-powered semis for long distance OTR travel? I think they have some German backing. https://nikolamotor.com/motor
A good discussion so far. I am interested to hear what CMQ_9017 has to say about this, though I definitely agree with Bruce here.
Bruce D Gillings If the railroads want to be moving autoparts where the vendors/suppliers are not within a relatively short distance from the plants, and moving finished autos, they will need to up their game on service. Management is increasingly focused on moving parts and finished autos in long, unreliable trains that cannot meet schedules. They view the world from a rail-centric paradigm and focus on THEIR costs, rather than a customer-centric paradigm wherein they understand their role in minimizing supply chain costs for the auto industry. The probable end result over the next decade does not bode well for railroading. PSR (an oxymoron if ever there was one, at least as practiced in today’s railroad world), will not cut it. Kudos to ttrraaffiicc who continues calling this out. The shots back at him are disappointing, though not entirely unexpected. He is calling them as he sees them. My experiences as an “outsider” who deals with the end users of transportation services are consistent with virtually everything I have seen him post. Railroads ARE on the path to becoming irrelevant and losing market share to trucks. The dramatic changes in information technology, AI, and automation occurring within manufacturing, processing, and distribution facilities continue their spread throughout the entire supply chain network. Failure to adjust to that – and the failure is confounding within railroading – will equate to irrelevance that will reach a critical mass and doom the industry. There will likely remain a much smaller network of heavy-haul and bulk operations for rail, but that’s about it. Whether or not one agrees with autonomous trucking (I see it phasing in within the next 10 to 15 years), the changes in trucking, the huge investments coming in road networks (that is coming – the people with money are making sure of it), the overall increases in the efficiencies in trucking, and the information integration of trucking will make most non-heavy-haul and bulk railroading non-competitive in the value metrics of supply chains. My hat is off to ttrraaffiicc for not being discouraged by all the naysayers in each of his posts. What is needed is a rethinking of how railroading can become relevant again for what fits in a trailer or container, which is MOST of what is out there. It is in the voices of the decision makers in most industries, it is in the communications of trade publications and organizations. The direction of evolution is not where railroading is going. Change is needed; ttrraaffiicc and a few others on these posts realize it and need to be listened to.
To counter your first paragraph.. The big 3 and other AM's find the railroads service meeting their needs. If this were the case, RR's would not still handle a large volume of auto parts via intermodal these days, with some still moving in 86' boxcars.. Example of the former. CSX Q150/151 Livernois YD-UP Salem, IL. Auto parts to Mexico. Intermodal can cover indirect access to plant's. As can finished auto's. Finished auto's are moving faster in exisitng trains instead of waiting to build enough volume for a dedicated train. Still waiting on hearing complaints about this.
One other item about customer service. When NS announced it was shutting down Triple Crown. Ford sat down with NS to maintain trains 255/256 Oakwood YD(Melvindale, MI)-Voltz YD KC, MO moving parts for F-150 production to Fords Claycomo plant in KC, MO. The plan to follow if TC were to end serivce in this lane called for. Building an IM block loaded with EMP boxes of auto parts at Livernois YD(Detroit, MI) to KC, MO. Ford wanted the quicker trailer availability vs chassis. NS kept the service for Ford. Unreliable you say? Hardly..TC provides the JIT for Ford on schedule.
The main problem facing the RR's are transparency. Customers would like to know car arrival/departure to better plan production, etc. This simple addition alone will increase traffic on the rails by giving customers assurance of car availability, schedules,etc. You say RR's are falling out of favor? .. Well two of the worlds largest retailers; Walmart, and Amazon purchasing 53' boxes speaks volumes to me. That says they have confidence in the rail network going forward. So as much as some like to write off the rail service they must be doing something right. Most freight is not time sensitive anyway and most in logistics (such as yourself Bruce) know this.. It's about arrival and departure on schedule. Not how fast you can get there.
Not sure what today's counts are - when I was working CSX was moving 90 racks a day to the Twin Oaks TDSI Distribution Center (Philadelphia), 90 racks a day to the Jessup TDSI Center and 60 a day to the Baltimore TDSI Center. Trucks would then move the 12 to 18 vehicle per rail car from the TDSI Centers to the automobile dealers in the areas served. I think there are something like 24 TDSI Centers on the CSX property.
Overmod What's amusing is that it's like 'deja vu all over again' with the William H. Vanderbilts wanting to run as slow and self-convenient as the traffic will bear and everyone wanting assured service going to private express lines that can collectively obtain faster service and better QoS from those Vanderbilts. Here we see rail-savvy shippers expanding the potential number of wells or platforms that would be used for a given move... right up into guaranteed-block traffic and size that interest lazy coupon-cutting hedge-fund-manipulated investors who manage the men that manage things. Will be interesting to see the degree to which this unlocks quicker blocking through intermediate points, better use of peak notch restriction, etc. If I were younger I would be sending resumes around angling for interest; there is a turning-point opportunity here that the wide swath of PSR-crazed railroads can't or won't exploit.
What's amusing is that it's like 'deja vu all over again' with the William H. Vanderbilts wanting to run as slow and self-convenient as the traffic will bear and everyone wanting assured service going to private express lines that can collectively obtain faster service and better QoS from those Vanderbilts.
Here we see rail-savvy shippers expanding the potential number of wells or platforms that would be used for a given move... right up into guaranteed-block traffic and size that interest lazy coupon-cutting hedge-fund-manipulated investors who manage the men that manage things. Will be interesting to see the degree to which this unlocks quicker blocking through intermediate points, better use of peak notch restriction, etc. If I were younger I would be sending resumes around angling for interest; there is a turning-point opportunity here that the wide swath of PSR-crazed railroads can't or won't exploit.
Hey, you should get a regular column in Trains writing about such ideas. You could call yourself, I don't know, the Professional Iconoclast?
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
The world of logistics is moving towards a world where transparency, reliability and service are imperative for success.
After building out their own shipping network to reduce reliance on others, Amazon announced last week that they will offer up to full-truckload service for small and medium businesses in their trucking network.
J.B. Hunt announced they had put together a freight brokerage website ensuring customers were matched with the lowest cost truck, regardless of whether or not it is Hunt or another provider.
Shippers want a box to show up at the scheduled time, have it depart at the scheduled time, and want it to arrive at the scheduled time, all for the lowest cost. They don't want to have to deal with service failures or the consequences.
That's what these new platforms, a step towards Freight Mobility as a Service, are offering.
This, however, is the antithesis of current railroad behavior, which is all about adapting the customer to the needs of the railroad. This only works for captive customers and commodities, so the emphasis is on price discipline, as bragged about in earnings calls. At the moment, rates are up, service quality and traffic are down, and customers are unhappy.
In the long run, this is no strategy, particularly with coal declining, manufacturing likely to onshore or move to geographies favoring East Coast ports, and the general decline in industrial shipments in the US.
To grow in the future, consumer traffic will need to be a focus, and it largely moves in truck and container boxes. As long as it leaves on a truck and arrives on a truck, the customer doesn't care what it does in the mean time, provided it shows up on time.
Therein lies an opportunity. But it's going to take a complete alteration of railroad thinking to thrive in this space. It's going to require terminal and dray cost reductions to make modal switching cheap enough that the overal cost is lower than OTR trucking. It's going to require more, speedier terminals.
Overall, it's going to require a recongition that the landscape of freight is shifting, and money will have to be spent adapting to it.
But if the strategy is to downplay the threats rather than address them, the future loooks bleak. And the nice thing is, service improvements and reliability benefit everything that isn't moving in a box, too.
BLS53In the world these guys exist in, it's entirely feasible. The problem is that none of it's practical, because it requires too many changes with the existing transportation system, and the vehicles are too expensive to reach critical mass. If you can't reach critical mass in a short period of time, it requires a phase-in time encompassing decades, in which the new technology exist along with the old, and in this case the new and old aren't compatible. This isn't like going from steam to diesels, or props to jets, where large industries control the system. Everyone with a drivers license and owns a car is involved. We know the variety and age of cars on the road. This isn't going to change overnight. Hybrid vehicles have been around for awhile, and how much market share do they have? This isn't like buying a smartphone.
Quoting you because I completely agree with this. Side note, Smartphones at $1k each were a major fail--consumers didn't buy them and manufacturers had to come up with creative ways to get them sold, like leasing and special financing. Today, the average household cannot afford an average new ICE car, much less an EV or HEV. I can see EV and HEV coexisting with traditional ICE vehicles for a very long time. Completely different situation than steam and diesel on an individual railroad as you said. A better comparison would be steam vs diesel on different railroads, like Santa fe vs. Norfolk & Western.
zugmann Psychot The nasty things being said about Musk are much like the things that were said about virtually every visionary in the history of the world. Game-changers scare people. I've watched a few videos/read a few discussions about some of the scummy stuff they do with "unauthorized repairs" and supercharger access and the like.
Psychot The nasty things being said about Musk are much like the things that were said about virtually every visionary in the history of the world. Game-changers scare people.
I've watched a few videos/read a few discussions about some of the scummy stuff they do with "unauthorized repairs" and supercharger access and the like.
Yeah, they're just like Apple, Google and Facebook that way.
Musk certainly is a visionary and has really shaken up the auto industry and indeed the world in general (anyone here use PayPal?), but some of his actions make me view him as a reckless, self-serving egomaniac.
Kind of like a stoner version of Hunter Harrison......
PsychotThe nasty things being said about Musk are much like the things that were said about virtually every visionary in the history of the world. Game-changers scare people.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
The nasty things being said about Musk are much like the things that were said about virtually every visionary in the history of the world. Game-changers scare people.
Having said that, I hope he doesn't succeed in his promise to eliminate rail transportation--at least in my lifetime.
Inbound Shipments - JIT (Just In Time) manufacturing has reduced the number of parts deliveries by rail to auto plants. As stated previously, many parts are now produced nearby or at the plant. Some parts are still delivered by rail such as truck frames for the Texas Toyota Plant. Many auto companies have embraced the campus concept of manufacturing where both the suppliers and the main producer are located in one facility.
Outbound Shipments - Many auto plants built in the last 20 years have rail spurs for autoracks. Just look at the Toyota Texas Plant or the KIA plant built that is located in one of the other southern states.
As for Tesla Fremont, the plant is located off the UP mainline and was served by that railroad in previous incarnation as NUMMI. When Tesla took took over there were discussions between the two parties about shipping from the plant that went no where. The same thing happened a couple of years about shipping batteries from Nevada to Fremont.
n012944 One of the larger auto loading ramps in the Detroit area is in New Boston MI. It is miles from the nearest auto plant, cars are trucked in from all over the area. Telsa currently trucks cars from their CA plant to the BNSF in Richmond and the UP in Milpitas for transit. Direct rail access is no longer needed to ship by rail, as Tesla and the big 3 in the Detroit area are already doing. This is just another case of the OP trolling.
One of the larger auto loading ramps in the Detroit area is in New Boston MI. It is miles from the nearest auto plant, cars are trucked in from all over the area.
Telsa currently trucks cars from their CA plant to the BNSF in Richmond and the UP in Milpitas for transit. Direct rail access is no longer needed to ship by rail, as Tesla and the big 3 in the Detroit area are already doing. This is just another case of the OP trolling.
You're talking about TDSI a CSX subsidiary. Many moons ago I made drops and PU's at that facility. If I remember correctly they have room for 75+ racks. Not sure about today but once again many moons ago 4-6 Q200 series (Automotive) trains serviced the facility.
Erik_Mag ttrraaffiicc He is probably going to be right on this one. Numerous experts including Rod Case seem to agree that electric trucks will signifcantly reduce rail volumes as it will make trucks more economical in a lot of cases. I don't see battery technology advancing to the point where long distance hauling by electric trucks makes sense. A related issue is the charging infrastructure and the means to provide the on-demand electric power. Long distance electric haulage of freight is done better with rail.
ttrraaffiicc He is probably going to be right on this one. Numerous experts including Rod Case seem to agree that electric trucks will signifcantly reduce rail volumes as it will make trucks more economical in a lot of cases.
He is probably going to be right on this one. Numerous experts including Rod Case seem to agree that electric trucks will signifcantly reduce rail volumes as it will make trucks more economical in a lot of cases.
I don't see battery technology advancing to the point where long distance hauling by electric trucks makes sense. A related issue is the charging infrastructure and the means to provide the on-demand electric power.
Long distance electric haulage of freight is done better with rail.
I agree!
The only question is if the industry will wake up in time to get it done.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
ttrraaffiicc https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/22/21334860/tesla-cybertruck-factory-austin-texas-location-model-y Tesla is building a new plant in Austin. Unfortunately, it will not be served by any railroads. All the parts and all the finished cars and pickup trucks will leave the plant on trucks. This plant's central location will allow Tesla to eliminate the remaining rail shipments they use because it is much closer to the east coast. In addition, this plant will also produce the Tesla Semi. Tesla will use the Semi to deliver their cars, making truck delivery much more economical and cost competitive with rail. As Tesla sets the trend and others follow, it is likely that the mighty auto rack could fall into obscurity, just as the 86' boxcar already has. What do you think? Will railroads still participate in fulfilling the transport needs of the auto industry in the future?
https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/22/21334860/tesla-cybertruck-factory-austin-texas-location-model-y Tesla is building a new plant in Austin. Unfortunately, it will not be served by any railroads. All the parts and all the finished cars and pickup trucks will leave the plant on trucks. This plant's central location will allow Tesla to eliminate the remaining rail shipments they use because it is much closer to the east coast. In addition, this plant will also produce the Tesla Semi. Tesla will use the Semi to deliver their cars, making truck delivery much more economical and cost competitive with rail. As Tesla sets the trend and others follow, it is likely that the mighty auto rack could fall into obscurity, just as the 86' boxcar already has. What do you think? Will railroads still participate in fulfilling the transport needs of the auto industry in the future?
LOL..... I don't think ttrraaffiicc is in the lane of reality at this point.. You use Tesla as the benchmark of auto transport by rail? When Tesla last year only made up 1.1% of domestic vehicle sales (Sales dropped 1.21% for Tesla ending FY 2019). GM, Ford, Honda, Nissan, and Toyota dominate domestic vehicle sales per annum, and all are significant shippers of finished autos by rail. 75% of finished autos are transported by rail domestically. I'm curious to how you think Tesla which has a micro fraction of per annum DVS will shoot past the former to dominate auto sales. All the while eliminating auto transport by rail? Economies of scale will still apply when AV's hit the market FYI...
ttrraaffiicc SD70Dude FYI - much of the auto parts traffic that used to move in 86' boxcars still moves by rail for much of its journey, it just goes in intermodal containers. That's not entirely true. If it were, 86' boxcars would still be in service. In most cases, the parts traffic was lost to trucks or just doesn't exist at all anymore. The reason being that auto plants have become more centralized with parts being sourced from nearby or manufactured directly at the plant. SD70Dude Musk seems to think that his self-driving electric semi will one day replace railroads, so I am not surprised that he is planning for a non-rail supply chain. We'll see how realistic those cost comparisons actually are in the He is probably going to be right on this one. Numerous experts including Rod Case seem to agree that electric trucks will signifcantly reduce rail volumes as it will make trucks more economical in a lot of cases. As Tesla expands its share of the US market, we will see fewer cars transported by rail. tbh, rail delivery of cars doesn't make much sense anyway, given their high value and requirement of flexibility for deliver and inventory.
SD70Dude FYI - much of the auto parts traffic that used to move in 86' boxcars still moves by rail for much of its journey, it just goes in intermodal containers.
That's not entirely true. If it were, 86' boxcars would still be in service. In most cases, the parts traffic was lost to trucks or just doesn't exist at all anymore. The reason being that auto plants have become more centralized with parts being sourced from nearby or manufactured directly at the plant.
SD70Dude Musk seems to think that his self-driving electric semi will one day replace railroads, so I am not surprised that he is planning for a non-rail supply chain. We'll see how realistic those cost comparisons actually are in the
As Tesla expands its share of the US market, we will see fewer cars transported by rail. tbh, rail delivery of cars doesn't make much sense anyway, given their high value and requirement of flexibility for deliver and inventory.
What SD70 said is true. Stop trying to play semantics. Majority of autoparts move via 53' Contianers now, and 86' boxcars are still in service unless those ones I see at: Ford's Woodhaven stamping plant, Ford's Dearborn Truck plant, FCA's Sterling stamping plant, NS trains, CN trains, CSX trains, and CP trains are figments of my imagination... Conjecture doesn't win debates..
I still don't see that EV's are economical long term. I'm on my second gas-electric, and I find those make sense. I don't see myself going back to a gas vehicle. Mfrs are spending a pile on EVs. Seems very high risk to me.
54light15 I've read on You Tube I think that someone said, Elon Musk sounds like either a Star Wars character that everyone hated in a sequel that no one liked, or an aftershave lotion that smells really really bad. I laughed, anyway. I have heard that if you own a Tesla, you can only get it serviced at a Tesla dealer as everything in it is proprietary. A friend just bought a Chevrolet Bolt and it's made of conventional GM components and can be serviced at any GM dealer or local garage that is familiar with them. With a Tesla, you would be violating their intellectual property if you did that. Not to change the subject from the thread, but to me Musk is a charlatan. His stock prices are high yet the company is not profitable and he makes a stupid amount of money. How does that happen? OK rant over.
I've read on You Tube I think that someone said, Elon Musk sounds like either a Star Wars character that everyone hated in a sequel that no one liked, or an aftershave lotion that smells really really bad. I laughed, anyway.
I have heard that if you own a Tesla, you can only get it serviced at a Tesla dealer as everything in it is proprietary. A friend just bought a Chevrolet Bolt and it's made of conventional GM components and can be serviced at any GM dealer or local garage that is familiar with them. With a Tesla, you would be violating their intellectual property if you did that. Not to change the subject from the thread, but to me Musk is a charlatan. His stock prices are high yet the company is not profitable and he makes a stupid amount of money. How does that happen? OK rant over.
I don't think it's as much as Musk being a charlatan, as it is him not being a realist. The reason he's not a realist, is he's surrounded by like minded people, who all live in a bubble and don't understand the plight of the average consumer when it comes to personal transportation. He and his like, made their money innovating new communications technology, that revolutioned the world over a short period of time. This technology required relatively little investment at the consumer end, to the point that it was affordable for the masses. If you read or watch any presentations by Musk or other lesser known innovators in this arena, they always respond to naysayers by drawing an analogy with the rapid advances in communications, and that the same thing is on the brink of occuring in personal transportation. Whether it be electric and self-driving cars, or increasing battery technology such as exist today in small drones, to the point everyone has a personal helicopter.
In the world these guys exist in, it's entirely feasible. The problem is that none of it's practical, because it requires too many changes with the existing transportation system, and the vehicles are too expensive to reach critical mass. If you can't reach critical mass in a short period of time, it requires a phase-in time encompassing decades, in which the new technology exist along with the old, and in this case the new and old aren't compatible. This isn't like going from steam to diesels, or props to jets, where large industries control the system. Everyone with a drivers license and owns a car is involved. We know the variety and age of cars on the road. This isn't going to change overnight. Hybrid vehicles have been around for awhile, and how much market share do they have? This isn't like buying a smartphone.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.