Ok this is pretty significant. UP has landed the Schneider Intermodal contract. As an IMC (Intermodal Marketing Company) Schneider has one of the largest domestic fleets of 53's at over 25,000 containers. The contract will make UP the primary mover of western lanes beginning in Jan of 2023.
This is the third IM contract UP has landed in a year. First SWIFT Intermodal, then APL Logistics both of those contracts have begun as of this month.
UP seems to be getting pretty competitive in the IM space if that's the case. This is nice to see someone finally challenge BNSF. With the Schneider contract CSX handles this traffic primarily in the east. Exisitng UP-CSX interline will streamline this service vs. BNSF.
I looked at both Swift Schneider intermodal traffic revenue then compared it to JB Hunt for the same time frame as in quarterly basis. Their combined revenue is less than half of JB Hunts revenue for the same time. I get the impression that BNSF is not going to be hurting for traffic and it will still be able to increase the amount of traffic it's getting from companies like Amazon or Walmart or FedEx even more.
Shadow the Cats owner I looked at both Swift Schneider intermodal traffic revenue then compared it to JB Hunt for the same time frame as in quarterly basis. Their combined revenue is less than half of JB Hunts revenue for the same time. I get the impression that BNSF is not going to be hurting for traffic and it will still be able to increase the amount of traffic it's getting from companies like Amazon or Walmart or FedEx even more.
Losing SCHNL, KNX, and APL will knock out 15% of BNSF's intermodal traffic. That's fairly large. Yes Amazon, Walmart, and FedEx can put more traffic online yet it won't fill that gap. While JBH commands BNSF capacity for obvious reasons they only plan on an additonal 12,000 boxes coming online this year.
Your forgetting the biggest elephant in the room. For the last 3 years UPS has been forced to run OTR teams on west coast runs due to lack of space on BNSF trains. They need the extra space for them also. JB Hunt is adding 12K more to their fleet that is half of what Schneider alone has. Walmart wants to double their fleet Amazon is adding containers as fast as they can. Trust me the loss of these customers is not going to be felt long term. Short term they may feel it but with the free space they will have for their trains someone will be wanting it.
SD60MAC9500 Well 12,000 boxes is half of Schnieder's entire fleet so sounds fairly significant to me. That said I think BNSF will struggle to replace Schneider's revenue with additional loads from other carriers. Losing the contract has to hurt. Shadow the Cats owner I looked at both Swift Schneider intermodal traffic revenue then compared it to JB Hunt for the same time frame as in quarterly basis. Their combined revenue is less than half of JB Hunts revenue for the same time. I get the impression that BNSF is not going to be hurting for traffic and it will still be able to increase the amount of traffic it's getting from companies like Amazon or Walmart or FedEx even more. Losing SCHNL, KNX, and APL will knock out 15% of BNSF's intermodal traffic. That's fairly large. Yes Amazon, Walmart, and FedEx can put more traffic online yet it won't fill that gap. While JBH commands BNSF capacity for obvious reasons they only plan on an additonal 12,000 boxes coming online this year.
Well 12,000 boxes is half of Schnieder's entire fleet so sounds fairly significant to me. That said I think BNSF will struggle to replace Schneider's revenue with additional loads from other carriers. Losing the contract has to hurt.
Union Pacific will be the first railroad in the world to begin autonomous drayage. TuSimple will provide L4 fully autonomous (No Driver on board) drayage on an 80 mile trip between Phoenix and Tucso, AZ. Service begins this spring.
https://www.up.com/media/releases/tusimple-tucson-phoenix-nr-220202.htm
SD60MAC9500 Union Pacific will be the first railroad in the world to begin autonomous drayage. TuSimple will provide L4 fully autonomous (No Driver on board) drayage on an 80 mile trip between Phoenix and Tucso, AZ. Service begins this spring. https://www.up.com/media/releases/tusimple-tucson-phoenix-nr-220202.htm
I looked at one of the short videos. I noticed on the back of the trailer that they were hiring.
Jeff
550 miles in real test service- what a joke. I would have expected 5,500+ miles in real testing before putting this on the road. AZ driver's better check your rear view mirror.
I have a feeling that there may not be anyone in the cab, but that there will be an entourage of technicians close at hand. At least in the beginning.
jeffhergertI have a feeling that there may not be anyone in the cab, but that there will be an entourage of technicians close at hand. At least in the beginning. Jeff
To document and spin any incident that happens.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go......
I hope the Fail Safe design is thoughly thought out.
Do they ever get ice or snow on that route?
Well here's some clever thinking. CMA-CGM and Union Pacific are teaming up to move California's almond crop via the Ports of LA/LB. Current capacity limitations out the Port of Oakland have led to this new service.
Two new IM services were created in the process. Empty boxes at the Port of Oakland are drayed to the Central Valley. There they get stuffed with almonds for export via POLA/POLB. The boxes are then drayed back to POO for loading on a new IM service UP has started.
Also a second service from the Central Valley. The same scenario with draying empties from POO happens as well. This generates matchback loads of export Califronia dairy products via POLA/POLB. This serivce has added containers stuffed with almond to its service. Both trains operate once a week. In total 400 boxes/week between both trains are moved south for export.
https://ajot.com/insights/full/ai-blue-diamond-almond-growers-spearhead-almond-express-rail-service-to-ports-of-la-and-lb
UP will be running a trial using one man crews in certain territories with ground based "expeditors". Video below details the position and a typical day.. Per say...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hr15dtWwGU
SD60MAC9500UP will be running a trial using one man crews in certain territories with ground based "expeditiors". Video below details the position and a typical day.. Per say... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hr15dtWwGU
Better hope their signal system is FAIL PROOF. Lets hear Defect Detector finding Defects.
Sam is going on duty at the Missouri Valley IA depot. Sam is looking at a PTC screen that is not active, still cut out. County Road 24 looks a lot like the depot crossing at Missouri Valley. It looks like the engineer dropped off an E knuckle, but Sam's replacement knuckle was an F. Which is what that car would need.
Driving the train is great. One problem, much of the main tracks on the exCNW lines don't have trackside roads. Even paralleling public roads are sometimes far from the tracks. A train will still have to wait the time, probably hours-especially if numerous trains are having problems, for the "expediter" to arrive and then walk the train.
How many "expediters" will they have? One every 50 miles? Every 100 miles? After the first slow day they will want to increase their territories and reduce the number of them available.
Reading the recrew report, a train at Sydney NE had mechanical problems with a locomotive. Sydney was once the crew change between North Platte and Cheyenne. There had been a roving mechanical department person (Called a Foreman General on the original UP side, MIC-Mechanic In Charge on exCNW side.) assigned there until they needed more cuts. That FG's position, along with others was cut. The train waited 3 hours for the FG out of South Morrill NE to show up.
I noticed the comments were turned off.
P.S. Even E Hunter Harrison didn't want single person crews.
According to the video: Sam is busy with a variety of "planned activities" when a train has an unexpected event.
So, what are the planned activities? Yard utility? Crew transporter? And are these activities one Sam can leave at the drop of a hat to go help a road train?
And if these positions do get implemented, are us people who have been with the railroad for several years going to have the chance to hold these jobs?
I don't know how it is with other places - but our utilities are always the first jobs they cut when things get slightly tight. Or when a new supervisor comes in.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
What percentage of conductors go on to become engineers?
If a conductor who aspired to be an engineer worked on the ground, as opposed to the cab, would it lengthen the amount of training he/she would need to qualify as an engineer?
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
PJS1What percentage of conductors go on to become engineers? If a conductor who aspired to be an engineer worked on the ground, as opposed to the cab, would it lengthen the amount of training he/she would need to qualify as an engineer?
I may be mistaken.
At the present time anyone that is hired on as a Conductor is required to go into Engineer training 'when their seniority is called'. If they don't they are terminated. If they start Engineer training and FAIL, they are terminated.
The Carriers over the recent decades have eliminated the positions that once provided 'on the job training' for employees to progress from 'off the street' to becoming knowledgable, productive and safe employees in positions of responsibility.
BaltACDAt the present time anyone that is hired on as a Conductor is required to go into Engineer training...
Kinda reminds me of the military, as well as the "Peter Principal." In both cases, someone who is perfectly competent at a given job ends up with a promotion into a position they are clearly incapable of holding. In the military, if you want more pay, you have to get promoted, which can change you from a worker bee to a supervisor, whether you want to or not.
Those interested in the Peter Principle are invited to seek out a copy of Laurence Peter's book. The "percussive sublimation" is an interesting practice...
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...
I believe it was the 1972 agreement that required trainmen to be offered any slots for engine service that opened up. The 1985 agreement calls for all trainmen hired after that date would be subject to going to engine service. After 1985 you had to start as a trainman first, generally speaking. I know of some engineers who hired on in the early 1990s who went through conductor training but never worked as one. They were promoted on a Friday and started engineer training the next Monday.
Currently for us, as long as there are enough junior people willing to go to engine service they won't force someone to go. There's 4 out of my 1998 trainmen's class still working and 2 of them never went to engine service.
Other railroads may do it differently.
The theory sounds fine until one comes against the real world. What about weather? How does a utility condr. access a disabled train if the roads are impassable or weather warnings preclude travel, much less the aforementioned difficulty in accessing remote locations? Multiple events that staffing will most surely not accommodate may quickly snarl a railroad. I suspect trains will just have to be tied down until there are adequate dogctach crews and dogcatch utility persons or available vehicles. After all, that seems to be the modus operandi nowadays - tie trains down and complain about "congestion". On a good day the remote conductor theory works. There are good days but enough that aren't so good. Management discloses its naivety and insulation from the ebb and flow of its operation to an extent that it is staggering. It is tempting to suggest letting the carriers economize themselves into oblivion, but that would be wrong.
Also wanted to ad the obvious safety factor. There is no equivalent between an OTR truck with one or two trailers and a tonnage consist of a hundred or more trailers or cars. Moreover, who ties a train down if the engr. runs out of time but there's no utility man nearby? PTC sounds great, but my impression is that the majority of events since the advent of PTC have been circumstances where restricted speed was called for and PTC of little use - but a second crew member arguably essential. The accessibility problem for reaching a train in remote locations might be addressed by adding a small car at the rear of a train in which a utility condr. could travel as sort of an occupied rear-end device.
PennsyBoomerThe accessibility problem for reaching a train in remote locations might be addressed by adding a small car at the rear of a train in which a utility condr. could travel as sort of an occupied rear-end device.
There's probably still a few cabeese around...
PennsyBoomer The accessibility problem for reaching a train in remote locations might be addressed by adding a small car at the rear of a train in which a utility condr. could travel as sort of an occupied rear-end device.
The accessibility problem for reaching a train in remote locations might be addressed by adding a small car at the rear of a train in which a utility condr. could travel as sort of an occupied rear-end device.
Well played sir...
Could access to a remote rail location be handled by a ground based conductor in a high-rail vehicle gaining rail access at a nearby road crossing?
MidlandMikeCould access to a remote rail location be handled by a ground based conductor in a high-rail vehicle gaining rail access at a nearby road crossing?
Getting hi-rail vehicles in the same track segment with trains becomes a very ticklish from a rules and Dispatching standpoint, at this point in time Utility Trainmen ARE NOT trained to be able operate under Track Car Authorities. Yes the can be trained, however, you will be dealing, most likely, with the youngest most inexperienced on the roster. I can see nothing but safety issues, for all concerned.
What follows is a video that is representative of the kind of locations where access is gained to the track. Imagine this location on a dark rainy night.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCyecX4hIW8
BaltACD What follows is a video that is representative of the kind of locations where access is gained to the track. Imagine this location on a dark rainy night. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCyecX4hIW8
And now add just a few inches of snow, especially with wind blowing.
In fact I have seen some actual public roads that are similar to this farm track, where the farmer is farming a substantial part of the road allowance width.
MidlandMike Could access to a remote rail location be handled by a ground based conductor in a high-rail vehicle gaining rail access at a nearby road crossing?
On multiple tracked segments it would save time, if they want to give the track away adjacent to the train that is stopped. On single track lines the utility will be able to reach either the front or back, and still have to walk the train. (Best to approach from the back in this case. Can't pull the train ahead to pick up the knuckle if the hi-rail truck is in front of the engine.)
Often on multiple tracked lines other trains can give a ride and/or drop off tools or knuckles. It's also possible under specific conditions to back up to get the conductor on the head end.
I noticed the track side access road they put in when they restored the second main in western Iowa years ago was snowed in. Some spots looked like it might be hard for a 4WD vehicle to transit.
As to the person riding on the rear end. I'm not sure anyone would want to ride the end of a 3 mile long whip. We're not allowed to deadhead on distributed power units because of the potential slack action.
As an outsider looking in, I wonder if the railroads' immediate plans are to replace two higher trained (and higher paid) people in the cab with one higher trained & paid and one lesser trained & paid? You'd still have those two sets of eyes in the cab. You'd still have somebody to walk the train. It would probably be easier to find someone for the position. Those that showed promise could still become engineers, they just wouldn't have to be forced to. You coul give the position a new name. Maybe fireman?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.