Trailing tonnage behind a tow truck.

[greyhounds]

SD70Dude

We get it, you hate employees and unions.

I really don’t. I try to keep hate out of my life. Sometimes that’s difficult. Vladimir Putin for example.

 

But if I hate it does nothing productive and is much more harmful to me than it is to the person I might hate. It also goes against my religious beliefs. I hope you’ll respect those beliefs even if you don’t share them.

 

But I’m also not a Luddite. If it’s more economically efficient to automate something, such as switching a facility, that automation should, and will happen.

 

People on this forum complain that the railroads don’t want to serve customers with switching. Well, why would the railroads not want to do that? I’ll reason that it’s because they see the costs of the switching as exceeding the benefits of the switching. They’re making a rational decision based on a cost/benefit analysis. The decision and analysis may be wrong, but they’re rational.

 

Reducing the cost of switching through automation will change the cost/benefit analysis in favor of more switching services.

 

   

 

[Euclid]

My point in posting this excerpt from U.P. description of what PSR is on the previous page was not to clarify what it is, or to agree with the article.  Instead my point was to demonstrate how vacuous the entire explanation is.  All it does is cite various operational problems and say that PSR focuses attention on those problems with the aim of fixing those problems.  In my opinion, this piece from U.P. is the most bloated and platitudinous explanation I have ever seen.   

 

Since the beginning of railroads, everybody has known about the operational problems that the PSR explanation cites.  But what the article completely ignores is how PSR actually accomplishes goals such as a reduction in dwell time or an increase in fluidity.  There is a complete disconnect between making these improvements and the method of doing so. 

 

Consider this gem from the article:

 

“Where railroads previously focused on moving trains, PSR shifts that focus to moving cars. So, instead of waiting for a long train to be built, trains are always moving and cars are picked up on schedule, regardless of train length. Velocity and train length are still important to railroads, but now, the focus on moving cars takes precedence.”

 

How do you shift the focus from moving trains to moving cars?  It seems like the way to do that is by highway trucking.  The main point of railroads is to shift the focus from pulling individual carrying devices to ganging the carrying devices together and pulling many as though they were one.  That was the whole point of inventing railroads as a self-guiding roadway. 

 

Every pro-PSR explanation I have seen is just like this one from U.P.  It does not explain anything.  It just lists a bunch of pie-in-the-sky goals and claims PSR delivers those goals.  It makes me wonder if PSR is even a thing.  Maybe it is just a goal that has always been there.

[tree68]

jeffhergert

I will say that parts of PSR have always been around.  It's when things are taken to the extreme ONLY to cut costs, lower the operating ratio and keep the stock price high that the system collapses.

I have a 1963 New York Central ETT which includes a page concerning making connections.  The page is entitled "Oeration Sunset" "Protected connections pay off - let's roll as advertised."  The chart includes times.

Sounds a lot like "precision scheduled railroading..."

I agree that the impression I've gotten of PSR is that the emphasis is chiefly on cutting costs.  All too often it seems that potential consequences are either not considered, or ignored.

[greyhounds]

BaltACD

how do the empty cars get to a position to be loaded?  Do they just magically appear?

I'll say you just take them back the other way.  Kind of like an empty coal train returning to a mine.

For example, if the railroads moved a load of Joslin origin beef to Tampa, they’re not going to get a load out of Tampa back to Joslin. But…

 

They could get a revenue load of orange juice, bananas, whatever, out of the Tampa Bay area going to the Chicago/Milwaukee metro area.

 

The IAIS would have to move the empty trailers/containers from Chicago back to the Quad Cities and then turn things over to the automated Brandt to move them to Tyson at Joslin.

 

It’ll be all covered by the freight charges. If that's not possible the whole thing won't happen.

 

 

 

 

 

[jeffhergert]

I will say that parts of PSR have always been around.  It's when things are taken to the extreme ONLY to cut costs, lower the operating ratio and keep the stock price high that the system collapses.

One other component of PSR hadn't been mentioned.  It's telling the customer when and how they will be serviced.  I have to disagree with Balt on the switching aspect.  PSR actually means MORE switching.  Switching because you are block swapping, which isn't always in proper blocks.  Cars tend to be shotgunned out of yards, set out at intermediate yards to be further sorted.  Switching also happens because some traffic that used to move in unit trains, generally from customers that may only build one every week or two.  That traffic now moves in smaller blocks in the manifest network.  Cars being picked up/delivered on the railroad's schedule.

Jeff     

[BaltACD]

SD70Dude

We get it, you hate employees and unions.

If you can get a robot truck to connect and disconnect air lines (both on the trailers and railcars), take itself on and off the track (human operated hi-rails have enough trouble with this), do air tests, line switches, get the railroad's managment to support you AND get the nasty FRA to approve this type of operation then have at it.  

As for timekeeping, it's not the distance or theoretical run time that eats up hours, it's congestion from having to work around other trains, especially in yards.  That's why it often takes us 7 to 10 hours to make a 100 mile run on 50 or 60 mph mainline track.  Most of the extra hours are eaten up waiting in yards or sidings.

If you can convince IAIS and whatever other railroads you deal with in Chicago to give you a clear path each and every day you can do this.  We have a couple branchline runs on 25 mph track that cover 180 to 200 miles in one shift, but they are normally the only train on the line and if anything happens (meets, heat/cold slow orders*) the crew runs out of time and either gets rescued or put to bed online, to come back and finish the trip 8 to 12 hours later.  

*A lot of our branchlines are restricted to 15 mph or less when it gets too hot or too cold.  Those restrictions are created by the Engineering department, Transportation would be quite happy to see them go away.  

BTW - if you left ICG while it was still called Illinois Central Gulf then you left at least a year before Hunter Harrison came there, which means you have zero personal experience with what PSR actually does.

Beyond everything else - how do the empty cars get to a position to be loaded?  Do they just magically appear?

[SD70Dude]

We get it, you hate employees and unions.

If you can get a robot truck to connect and disconnect air lines (both on the trailers and railcars), take itself on and off the track (human operated hi-rails have enough trouble with this), do air tests, line switches, get the railroad's managment to support you AND get the nasty FRA to approve this type of operation then have at it.  

As for timekeeping, it's not the distance or theoretical run time that eats up hours, it's congestion from having to work around other trains, especially in yards.  That's why it often takes us 7 to 10 hours to make a 100 mile run on 50 or 60 mph mainline track.  Most of the extra hours are eaten up waiting in yards or sidings.

If you can convince IAIS and whatever other railroads you deal with in Chicago to give you a clear path each and every day you can do this.  We have a couple branchline runs on 25 mph track that cover 180 to 200 miles in one shift, but they are normally the only train on the line and if anything happens (meets, heat/cold slow orders*) the crew runs out of time and either gets rescued or put to bed online, to come back and finish the trip 8 to 12 hours later.  

*A lot of our branchlines are restricted to 15 mph or less when it gets too hot or too cold.  Those restrictions are created by the Engineering department, Transportation would be quite happy to see them go away.  

BTW - if you left ICG while it was still called Illinois Central Gulf then you left at least a year before Hunter Harrison came there, which means you have zero personal experience with what PSR actually does.

[greyhounds]

OK, we’ve seen a whole lot here. Such as:

 

 

1)      I’m beating a dead horse. The railroads should just leave the money and business to the truckers. Nothing to do here. Move along.

 

2)      The BNSF would have to send a switch crew/engine out to the Tyson facility. There’s no other way to do it. Quit thinking. This extremely limited mentality is a part of the problem.

 

3)      It would be problematic for a train to run the 180 miles on a low-density rail line in one shift. This is pure BS, but the operating jerks will throw anything against the wall and hope it sticks. They don’t want to be bothered.

 

So, I’m going to take it to another level. And I’ll propose using a Brandt power unit with a 5^th wheel to do it.

 

It’s typical for facilities, such as Tyson, to have yard tractors and employees to move trailers/containers around. They bring empty trailers/containers to loading docks as needed and remove the loads as needed. The loaded trailers/containers are moved to parking spots where an over the road driver hooks up and goes. No railroad involvement.

 

Let’s involve the railroad.

 

1)      Instead of an over the road driver hooking to the load, use an automated Brandt (as in no driver) to put the load on a railcar. Yes, I’m talking circus loading with automation.

 

2)      When done loading the Brandt can put itself on the rails and move the equipment to the IAIS yard. No employees directly involved in the process.

 

3)      At the yard, the IAIS can hook up and go with a one-person crew using any type of power.

 

4)      Steadily work to remove tasks from the one-person crew and automate them. The goal would be to have a fully automated system from Joslin to Chicago interchange.

 

You got a problem with this?

 

BTW, I left the ICG because it was falling apart. I had a wife and mortgage. You know, the whole responsibility thing. I also had a good job offer to do market research in transportation. I accepted the offer.

 

I left the railroad voluntarily. A lot of people who stayed got put out on the street and suffered for that. I did push people and promote changes. I didn't accept the 1st "NO". That made me unpopular with some folks. I didn’t care. But I left voluntarily for a better future.

 

 

 

[zugmann]

Euclid

The Industry advocates defining PSR would say that PSR improves juggling. 

I mean, they're industry advocates.  That's their job.   

Unless they're not being paid.  Then they're just part of the fandom. The worst part.

Edit to add: check out the newswire.  Grain shippers don't think PSR is such a hot thing.  But BNSF says their draconian attendance policy is helping.  Isn't that special?  

[BaltACD]

Euclid

The Industry advocates defining PSR would say that PSR improves juggling. 

Industry advocates would be lying with every breath they take.

[Euclid]

The Industry advocates defining PSR would say that PSR improves juggling. 

[zugmann]

PSR is going to a juggler that is juggling 5 bowling pins, and throwing a Chevy Silverado at them. 

 

 

...

 

 

And then blaming the juggler for not trying hard enough. 

[BaltACD]

PSR overlooks the fact that a near capacity railroad is a juggling act.

The juggler on stage has more objects in the air than he has two hands to manipulate the objects with.  Each object can only occupy the jugglers hands for a fraction of a second before being released to make way for the next object.

Rail facilities don't have the capacity to 'hold' all the traffic on the railroad any more than the jugglers two hands do.  Keeping traffic moving - keeps a rail facility current; dispatched trains free up tracks that arriving trains need to yard their trains.  Where you have situations such as Jeff described, you have a inept juggler that isn't keeping all objects in the air and dispatching traffic in time to make room for the arriving traffic.

[SD70Dude]

Euclid

here is what PSR is on the U.P.

 

https://www.up.com/customers/track-record/tr091019-precision-scheduled-railroading.htm

 

How Does Freight Rail Service Work with PSR?

Where railroads previously focused on moving trains, PSR shifts that focus to moving cars. So, instead of waiting for a long train to be built, trains are always moving and cars are picked up on schedule, regardless of train length. Velocity and train length are still important to railroads, but now, the focus on moving cars takes precedence.

What railroads found is that the focus on moving trains was actually slowing down the network overall and causing cars to sit for long periods of time in yards (a measurement railroaders call “dwell”) — and that’s inefficient for both railroads and their customers. And when overall rail network velocity slows, equipment does not cycle (return to its owner) as fast, meaning more unproductive cars are on the network. The result? Cars aren’t always available when needed, the network is congested and service isn’t as dependable.

In addition to promoting network fluidity and more reliable service, this shift in focus also yields another important advantage: As trains continually move through the network, it becomes more balanced — meaning the right resources, like crews, cars and locomotives, are in place when they are needed. For railroads, that means more effective use of resources. For customers, it means service is more reliable And they may not have to purchase as many rail cars for their private fleet. As rail cars go out then come back faster, greater rail car availability means fewer cars are needed overall.

 

That sure sounds great.  Too bad they're lying.

[jeffhergert]

PSR, a.k.a. Pickup-Setout-Recrew. 

Many manifest trains regularly die on HOS because of waiting their turn to work at a yard.  Yards get plugged, meaning cars destined for them have to go somewhere else to hold until they can be taken.  (Tonight there are two Chicago - Council Bluffs manifests from previous days tied down on line, with another train on the way.  And I don't expect CB to take that one, either.)  When I get a manifest that works at certain yards, I expect tp either not make it in, or make it in just in time to tie the train down where yard crews can reach it and then expire on HOS.

I've read that even North Platte is at times having troubles processing trains.

Our latest plan cut out all the yard to yard (Talking about yards 50 or more miles apart, not those within a metro area.) transfer trains.  Let the through trains do that work.  In a couple of weeks everything has fallen apart.  Today I heard those jobs are coming back.  I almost think the latest plan was adopted by those who knew it would lead to chaos, just to prove there's nothing more to cut. 

Jeff

[BaltACD]

Euclid

here is what PSR is on the U.P. 

https://www.up.com/customers/track-record/tr091019-precision-scheduled-railroading.htm

How Does Freight Rail Service Work with PSR?

Where railroads previously focused on moving trains, PSR shifts that focus to moving cars. So, instead of waiting for a long train to be built, trains are always moving and cars are picked up on schedule, regardless of train length. Velocity and train length are still important to railroads, but now, the focus on moving cars takes precedence.

What railroads found is that the focus on moving trains was actually slowing down the network overall and causing cars to sit for long periods of time in yards (a measurement railroaders call “dwell”) — and that’s inefficient for both railroads and their customers. And when overall rail network velocity slows, equipment does not cycle (return to its owner) as fast, meaning more unproductive cars are on the network. The result? Cars aren’t always available when needed, the network is congested and service isn’t as dependable.

In addition to promoting network fluidity and more reliable service, this shift in focus also yields another important advantage: As trains continually move through the network, it becomes more balanced — meaning the right resources, like crews, cars and locomotives, are in place when they are needed. For railroads, that means more effective use of resources. For customers, it means service is more reliable And they may not have to purchase as many rail cars for their private fleet. As rail cars go out then come back faster, greater rail car availability means fewer cars are needed overall.

No more than PR Lipstick.

[Euclid]

here is what PSR is on the U.P.

 

https://www.up.com/customers/track-record/tr091019-precision-scheduled-railroading.htm

 

How Does Freight Rail Service Work with PSR?

Where railroads previously focused on moving trains, PSR shifts that focus to moving cars. So, instead of waiting for a long train to be built, trains are always moving and cars are picked up on schedule, regardless of train length. Velocity and train length are still important to railroads, but now, the focus on moving cars takes precedence.

What railroads found is that the focus on moving trains was actually slowing down the network overall and causing cars to sit for long periods of time in yards (a measurement railroaders call “dwell”) — and that’s inefficient for both railroads and their customers. And when overall rail network velocity slows, equipment does not cycle (return to its owner) as fast, meaning more unproductive cars are on the network. The result? Cars aren’t always available when needed, the network is congested and service isn’t as dependable.

In addition to promoting network fluidity and more reliable service, this shift in focus also yields another important advantage: As trains continually move through the network, it becomes more balanced — meaning the right resources, like crews, cars and locomotives, are in place when they are needed. For railroads, that means more effective use of resources. For customers, it means service is more reliable And they may not have to purchase as many rail cars for their private fleet. As rail cars go out then come back faster, greater rail car availability means fewer cars are needed overall.

[SD70Dude]

The name "Precision Scheduled Railroading" sounds nice but it's nothing more than lipstick on a pig.  The real purpose is to make the stock price go up and funnel money to the shareholders and executives, with no regard for the long-term future of the business. 

As Balt said, what actually happens in reality is cut, cut, cut.  

Cut maintenance on everything, track, cars and locomotives.  

Cut track capacity, both in yards and out on the road.  

Cut train starts and therefore crews, this also results in an expanded version of the good old 'hold for tonnage' style of operation, which a truly scheduled railroad would try to avoid.

Cut local crews and service, and move the remaining ones around so it best suits your railroad operation, not what the customers want.  

Do not ask the customers what they want or what type of service will work for them.  TELL them what they are going to get, and they can take it or leave it.  Also hike their freight rates while you're at it.  

And since you will now have fewer trains and fewer customers you will also need fewer locomotives, so get rid of so many that you now have no recovery capability when one of the remaining poorly maintained units fails, screwing up the railroad and delaying the remaining freight even more.  

The operating ratio is your God, and every operation must meet the pre-planned numbers.  Short trains are bad, extra trains are bad (even if they are tonnaged out), and anything outside the plan is bad, even if it's an extra switch that the customer is willing to pay good money for (if you even have a locomotive and a crew to do it).  

How is any new or unconventional idea supposed to gain traction in this business environment?  

P.S:  Low or mid-level railroad managers are just 'yes men' these days, though I suspect this is a problem at many companies.  There are a surprising number of good ones out there, but their ideas are not taken seriously and the best ones never seem to last long before leaving for another job.  

[BaltACD]

tree68

Longer trains generally equates to fewer crews, which is definitely a tenet of PSR...

The primary tenant of PSR is FEWER - Fewer trains, Fewer people, Fewer crew starts, Fewer managers, Fewer behind the scenes personnel (trackmen, signalmen, carmen, locomotive maintenance men, 'back office' clerks etc.)  Chop the head count any way possible.

[tree68]

Longer trains generally equates to fewer crews, which is definitely a tenet of PSR...

[zugmann]

greyhounds

PSR seems to work quite well on the class 1 railroads. I don’t see larger trains as necessarily being part of PSR. I see them as a concurrent development to PSR.

Ah yes, just merely coincidental that RRs are operating larger trains as they implement the PSR operating plans. 

What convenience.

 

greyhounds

you buy a car from a Ford dealer who functions as a middleman. Middlemen do not add unnecessary costs to a channel of distribution. If they added costs, they wouldn’t be there. They make things more efficient, or they’d be eliminated.

Have you seen the dealer markups over the past 2 years? In this day and age - I'm wondering how much longer the dealer system will last.  I don't think many will miss it. 

 

[greyhounds]

zugmann

But PSR is the polar opposite of every idea you promote on here. Smaller trains, smaller engines, smaller yards, switching, smaller customers? It's the antiPSR.

 

AFAIK, the Iowa Interstate has not implemented PSR.

 

PSR seems to work quite well on the class 1 railroads. I don’t see larger trains as necessarily being part of PSR. I see them as a concurrent development to PSR.

 

There are phases to adoption of new technologies.

1)      The technology must be created

2)      People must figure out how to use it to the best advantage

 

What’s relatively new is the widespread use of DPU and AC traction. Both these facilitate the operation of larger trains. Companies are managed by cost and revenue numbers. The numbers being generated are telling the class 1 railroads that they’re more efficient if they run longer trains. It just took a while, which is normal, for them to get to the point where they were comfortable putting two 110 car coal trains together into a 220-car train with six locomotives spaced throughout the train.

 

This increased efficiency is good for the overall economy and benefits the general population. But, if a person loses their desired employment due to the efficiency gain, they’re not going to like it. Got that.

 

Back to the Iowa Interstate.

 

In the proposed service the IAIS would be basically serving as a “Middleman” linking a smaller customer with a large class 1. (CSX or NS.)  This is a normal function for a middleman. The class 1’s do not do well serving small customers on short hauls. There’s a valid reason for this, it’s called “Discrepancy of Size.”  I am not making this up. I learned it in a course at the Northwestern University Graduate School of Management. Discrepancy of Size is why you don’t buy a car from Ford; you buy a car from a Ford dealer who functions as a middleman. Middlemen do not add unnecessary costs to a channel of distribution. If they added costs, they wouldn’t be there. They make things more efficient, or they’d be eliminated.

 

The smaller middleman can serve individual smaller customers better and more efficiently than the large organization.  And that’s why I think this freight should move to Chicago on the IAIS.

 

I also reason that the class 1’s should turn as much switching and local service over to short lines and regionals as they can.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Backshop]

I wonder why greyhounds left railroading?  I remember him saying in another thread that he worked quite a few years at Allstate. Maybe the railroad called the Humane Society on him because he kept beating a dead horse...

[BaltACD]

greyhounds

 

BaltACD

Switching is not in the PSR Operating plans. 

Oh, this predates PSR. By a long time.

 

I remember R. L. Rushing, VP of Sales for the ICG, complaining about a division superintendent who didn’t want some offered business because it would create more paperwork.

 

I took to calling them the non-operating department because it seemed like their goal was to not operate.

 

I personally like the concept of PSR.

Glad you like PSR since it promotes everything you dislike.

Yes switching predates PSR - however, very little of it has survived PSR.

[zugmann]

greyhounds

I personally like the concept of PSR.

But PSR is the polar opposite of every idea you promote on here.  

Smaller trains, smaller engines, smaller yards, switching, smaller customers?  It's the antiPSR. 

 

 

[tree68]

Backshop

Because if it was a great idea, it would still be happening because it would be profitable.

I've gotten the impression over time that there's another word that needs to be added to that:  "enough."  Something may be profitable, but if it's not profitable enough, it's not going to fly.

[Backshop]

greyhounds

 

If it's a "Dumb Idea" but it works, it's not a "Dumb Idea."

You have provided absolutely no evidence or reason why this won’t work. It may not work. But if a person or company never fails, they’re not trying hard enough.

 

If a man is to be judged by the enemies he makes, and I believe that to be so, then I’m proud to have you as a foe.

First, thinking anyone is your "enemy" is taking your self-importance way too far.  You're way too wrapped up in this.  This is a hobby site.  Maybe you should take your ideas to a professional railroader site.

Second, you're in marketing.  That means you think of things to do.  The Operations Department has to make them work.  Not all ideas, good or bad, translate to something that works in the real world.

If this was such a great idea, someone would've done it by now.  How do I know?  Because if it was a great idea, it would still be happening because it would be profitable.  But it isn't, so it's not.

For a train to make it 180 miles, into Chicago, on one crew, would require it to have special treatment.  That equates to a higher rate, that few shippers want to pay.

[greyhounds]

dpeltier

If you keep repeating variations on the same dumb ideas over and over again, of course you'll get the same response.   I'm sorry I got sucked into it this time. I try to only participate when I think I have something non-obvious to add. I thought some people might be interested to know a little more about how the Brandt Roadrailer does and doesn't operate like a locomotive. I should have stopped there.   You've shown over and over again that you are the one who doesn't want to listen to what anyone else has to say. I will not respond to any more of your posts, just like I don't respond to Euclid.   Dan

If it's a "Dumb Idea" but it works, it's not a "Dumb Idea."

You have provided absolutely no evidence or reason why this won’t work. It may not work. But if a person or company never fails, they’re not trying hard enough.

 

If a man is to be judged by the enemies he makes, and I believe that to be so, then I’m proud to have you as a foe.

 

Focusing on the Brandt is a Red Herring. The Brandt is in no way a “RoadRailer” as you falsely call it. The essence here is to get small, efficient motive power for a small train. I think a Brandt would work, but a small Republic locomotive might be better.

 

Get the freight and revenue on the railroad. At a profit.

 

 

[SD70Dude]

greyhounds

I personally like the concept of PSR.

Then you've obviously never worked under it.