I guess they just could cut out the UP and BN to get to the midwest.
massive-container-ship-bigger-than-a-football-field-sets-record-under-bayonne-bridge.html
An "expensive model collector"
Convicted One SD60MAC9500 . Seattle has been slapped with a surcharge as well. $500 to force boxes to Sou Cal. That could have very well increased.. I wonder if that has anything to do with the infestation of public insurrection that has gripped the Seattle area?
SD60MAC9500 . Seattle has been slapped with a surcharge as well. $500 to force boxes to Sou Cal. That could have very well increased..
I wonder if that has anything to do with the infestation of public insurrection that has gripped the Seattle area?
UMAX and EMP pools are running tight on capacity right now. They need as many boxes in Sou Cal as possible. The reason for the surcharge.
Question. Do the RRs have access to the container ships that are arriving at a port with the ships load and ETA ? If they do ? ? ? ?
Well said Greyhounds. Always like to hear from those who have been there - done that.
It's a problem, but not a crisis. Nobody saw it coming, not even the truckers. The carriers will work through the problem and solve it.
Should the carriers have seen this coming? I don't know. They're not clairvoyant. Hell, you can make a case that the US should have seen Pearl Harbor coming. But they kind of missed that one. Same thing with the Battle of the Bulge. Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future.
I did intermodal business forecasting for a railroad. It ain't easy and you're gonna' get surprised. Then you're gonna' have to explain why you got surprised. Nobody can see the future.
On top of that this COVID-19 thing has everything totally out of whack. No carrier, neither truck, rail, air, sea, whatever wants one way loading. Sometimes it can't be avoided such as with grain, coal, crude oil, etc. There's just nothing going back that will fit in to the equipment nor moving in the volume needed to balance the freight flow. So then the one way freight flow has to bear the entire cost of the round trip. The equipment and crews do have to go back for the next load.
But... With general freight and perishables the carriers try to achieve balance. This splits the necessary costs of the round trip over two, or more, revenue loads. The carriers can't do this perfectly, but they try to get as close as they can.
COVID-19 has disrupted consumption patterns. So normal freight flows are also disrupted. Normal costs and revenues are out the window. The carriers have to figure out how to deal with this.
They're doing so and this will all get worked out. Meanwhile, don't imagine a short term problem in to an unsolvable crisis.
Meanwhile things are really congested up here, laid off employees are being recalled left and right, and CN is laughing all the way to the bank.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
SD60MAC9500 jeffhergert Convicted One With the alleged $3,500 per container surcharge mentioned in the story, I wonder if Norfolk Southern can put a trans-pacific container in Chicago cheaper than UP can? It's not alleged. https://www.joc.com/rail-intermodal/class-i-railroads/union-pacific-railroad/levying-3500-surcharge-small-shippers-out-la_20200820.html Jeff The surcharge has since increased to $5K. Seattle has been slapped with a surcharge as well. $500 to force boxes to Sou Cal. That could have very well increased..
jeffhergert Convicted One With the alleged $3,500 per container surcharge mentioned in the story, I wonder if Norfolk Southern can put a trans-pacific container in Chicago cheaper than UP can? It's not alleged. https://www.joc.com/rail-intermodal/class-i-railroads/union-pacific-railroad/levying-3500-surcharge-small-shippers-out-la_20200820.html Jeff
Convicted One With the alleged $3,500 per container surcharge mentioned in the story, I wonder if Norfolk Southern can put a trans-pacific container in Chicago cheaper than UP can?
With the alleged $3,500 per container surcharge mentioned in the story, I wonder if Norfolk Southern can put a trans-pacific container in Chicago cheaper than UP can?
It's not alleged.
https://www.joc.com/rail-intermodal/class-i-railroads/union-pacific-railroad/levying-3500-surcharge-small-shippers-out-la_20200820.html
Jeff
The surcharge has since increased to $5K. Seattle has been slapped with a surcharge as well. $500 to force boxes to Sou Cal. That could have very well increased..
I also thought the surcharge went to $5000, but I think it's still $3500. Reading the article is talks about another $1500 surcharge, but I think it was to bring the total up to $3500 for customers or locations that weren't already at the $3500 level.
Although I wouldn't put it past them to raise it to $5000 or more.
BaltACD GERALD L MCFARLANE JR charlie hebdo York1 So who is to be believed? The unnamed source who said containers could not be run by trains, or BNSF who said they have cars and crews ready to move containers? It sounds like the UP response is worse than BNSF's because of PSR. What I found interestin was the response of Vina from UP...lost money on deadhead moves and repositioning of equipment and railroaders? Not sure about him, but last time I was involved in the logistics business and the railroads moved equipment west to handle the fall peak, those crews didn't deadhead for nothing(most didn't dead head at all, they brought the baretables out west and then took loaded trains east, that doesn't sound imbalanced to me). Traffic has always been imbalanced going east vs coming west for at least the last 50 years, you'd think they would've figured that out by now(but that would require marketing and a sales force). From the UP's PSR response it sounds as if they are acknowleding the imbalance and imposing the surcharge because of it - just not eating the expense of it as they have in the past.
GERALD L MCFARLANE JR charlie hebdo York1 So who is to be believed? The unnamed source who said containers could not be run by trains, or BNSF who said they have cars and crews ready to move containers? It sounds like the UP response is worse than BNSF's because of PSR. What I found interestin was the response of Vina from UP...lost money on deadhead moves and repositioning of equipment and railroaders? Not sure about him, but last time I was involved in the logistics business and the railroads moved equipment west to handle the fall peak, those crews didn't deadhead for nothing(most didn't dead head at all, they brought the baretables out west and then took loaded trains east, that doesn't sound imbalanced to me). Traffic has always been imbalanced going east vs coming west for at least the last 50 years, you'd think they would've figured that out by now(but that would require marketing and a sales force).
charlie hebdo York1 So who is to be believed? The unnamed source who said containers could not be run by trains, or BNSF who said they have cars and crews ready to move containers? It sounds like the UP response is worse than BNSF's because of PSR.
York1 So who is to be believed? The unnamed source who said containers could not be run by trains, or BNSF who said they have cars and crews ready to move containers?
So who is to be believed?
The unnamed source who said containers could not be run by trains, or BNSF who said they have cars and crews ready to move containers?
It sounds like the UP response is worse than BNSF's because of PSR.
What I found interestin was the response of Vina from UP...lost money on deadhead moves and repositioning of equipment and railroaders? Not sure about him, but last time I was involved in the logistics business and the railroads moved equipment west to handle the fall peak, those crews didn't deadhead for nothing(most didn't dead head at all, they brought the baretables out west and then took loaded trains east, that doesn't sound imbalanced to me). Traffic has always been imbalanced going east vs coming west for at least the last 50 years, you'd think they would've figured that out by now(but that would require marketing and a sales force).
From the UP's PSR response it sounds as if they are acknowleding the imbalance and imposing the surcharge because of it - just not eating the expense of it as they have in the past.
It's to discourge the extra business altogether. There more worried about a slight rise in the OR than extra net money in the company's pocket.
SD60MAC9500. Seattle has been slapped with a surcharge as well. $500 to force boxes to Sou Cal. That could have very well increased..
I have seen a lot of intermodal equipment being pulled out of storage over the last month or so.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Saw a whole lot of empty wells, etc headed west through Deshler this afternoon...
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...
Lack of well cars? Have noted last few days that containers are even on some old TOFC cars.
I suspect the article is more about the increase in truck rates than it is about rail capacity. West Coast to Mid-West at $1k per container the trucker is losing his ass.
Maybe look at EB stack trains along the BNSF southern transcon, through Barstow, Flagstaff, Belen, La Plata, etc., for an idea?
York1 John
See http://cs.trains.com/trn/b/observation-tower/archive/2020/08/27/a-tale-of-two-railroads-bnsf-union-pacific-and-the-california-intermodal-surge.aspx
Or just go to the BLOGS & FORUMS tab above for the entry.
This seems at odds with layoffs. Or is a consequence of PSR layoffs.
https://ajot.com/insights/full/ai-consultant-says-shippers-using-u.s-west-coast-ports-cant-book-rail-on-bnsf-and-up
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.