I live off the beaten path off container traffic. Last weekend, we went on another college tour, which sent us through Omaha. North of Omaha, I saw a double stack train of perhaps 30-40 cars, going north on UP with 2 locomotives. There was a grain/tank train about 10-15 minutes ahead of it, and a mixed train about 10-15 minutes behind it. All seemed to be going about the same speed.
I always envision a double stack train as being very long, in order to maximize the economy of the setup. Was this train something out of the ordinary?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
With the economy like it is that may be all they had for that train or it could be a train for a specific customer .
When you say 30-40 cars, do you mean car = articulated multi-platform or car = one platform (or well). There is a difference if you mean 60-80 containers or 350 containers. 60 containers is a slow day, 350 is an average day in some traffic lanes. (like by my house)
rrnut282 When you say 30-40 cars, do you mean car = articulated multi-platform or car = one platform (or well). There is a difference if you mean 60-80 containers or 350 containers. 60 containers is a slow day, 350 is an average day in some traffic lanes. (like by my house)
Murphy Siding I live off the beaten path off container traffic. Last weekend, we went on another college tour, which sent us through Omaha. North of Omaha, I saw a double stack train of perhaps 30-40 cars, going north on UP with 2 locomotives. There was a grain/tank train about 10-15 minutes ahead of it, and a mixed train about 10-15 minutes behind it. All seemed to be going about the same speed. I always envision a double stack train as being very long, in order to maximize the economy of the setup. Was this train something out of the ordinary?
You say north from Omaha. Do you mean the Chicago- North Platte line or a UP line between Omaha and the Twin Cities? If it was going to, or coming from the Twin Cities then it would probably bel a smaller train than an east-west train like LA to Chicago.
diningcar You say north from Omaha. Do you mean the Chicago- North Platte line or a UP line between Omaha and the Twin Cities? If it was going to, or coming from the Twin Cities then it would probably bel a smaller train than an east-west train like LA to Chicago.
The Union Pacific doesn't offer container or trailer intermodal in either Minnesota or Wisconsin. I regard this as bad marketing because they have underutilized lines in those states and they could use intermodal to fill up their network. However, the Union Paciic doesn't much care what I think.
They do operate a RoadRailer train between Chicago and the Twin Cities as a Triple Crown extension service.
I'm in agreement with carknocker1. Traffic decline is severe.
It might also be completely normal for this train. Or, abnormal for this train and due to a light day at the dock -- traffic presented to the railroad will fluctuate quite a bit for numerous reasons, but the schedule still has to be protected for the customers to whom committments have been made. Container traffic "ordinary" fluctuations include weather that delayed a ship, port interruptions for a broad variety of reasons at any place on a ship's string, track maintenance windows, and day of the week. "Extraordinary" fluctuations include maintenance downtimes at a major customer's plant (like a product changeover at an auto assembly plant), inventory periods at a major distribution center, and the like.
It's pretty hard to see one train and make much out of it.
RWM
You see the same thing on the Montreal, Maine and Atlantic...only more so. Quite often you will see a general freight consist with two or three double stack container well cars thrown in. I guess the port of Saint John isn't what it once was.
Railway Man I'm in agreement with carknocker1. Traffic decline is severe. It might also be completely normal for this train. Or, abnormal for this train and due to a light day at the dock -- traffic presented to the railroad will fluctuate quite a bit for numerous reasons, but the schedule still has to be protected for the customers to whom committments have been made. Container traffic "ordinary" fluctuations include weather that delayed a ship, port interruptions for a broad variety of reasons at any place on a ship's string, track maintenance windows, and day of the week. "Extraordinary" fluctuations include maintenance downtimes at a major customer's plant (like a product changeover at an auto assembly plant), inventory periods at a major distribution center, and the like. It's pretty hard to see one train and make much out of it. RWM
greyhoundsThe Union Pacific doesn't offer container or trailer intermodal in either Minnesota or Wisconsin. I regard this as bad marketing because they have underutilized lines in those states and they could use intermodal to fill up their network. However, the Union Paciic doesn't much care what I think. They do operate a RoadRailer train between Chicago and the Twin Cities as a Triple Crown extension service.
I'm pretty sure part of it is that the Adams Sub (Butler-Adams) doesn't have double-stack clearances. Auto racks fit. The Adams line is also some of the last mainline stick rail anywhere on the UP system. To think they used to go 100 mph on it in the 1950s. Might be some of the same rail yet.
Mike WSOR engineer | HO scale since 1988 | Visit our club www.WCGandyDancers.com
I am guessing you saw this train from I-29 on the Iowa side, just north of Council Bluffs. If correct, the train you saw was an eastbound by time table, although physically it's headed north. There are a few stack trains that regularly set out cars at Council Bluffs. Usually they set out between 5 to 15 cars (counting each platform as a car) but once in a while one sets out quite a few more. I would bet that the one you saw had set out at CB.
Jeff
Most class 1's try to run point pairs as a dedicated train set to improve service and eliminate work events en route. In Omaha you could have seen a train going Chicago to/from Seattle, Portland, Lathrop, CA; Oakland; or LA. Depending on the day you saw it, if it was a WB train, it might have been Saturday's traffic, headed to say Lathrop. Probably a small train.
The RR publishes what days of week they have cut-offs for each origin-destination pair. They try to depart trains on that day (within approx 6-12 hrs of cut-off) in order to provide predictable service to the customer.
Here's a link to UP trailer service matrix.
http://www.uprr.com/customers/intermodal/attachments/dom_trailer_matrix.pdf
The website for skedz.com has intermodal schedules for most US cities (day of week, time of day for depature and availabililty.)
http://www.skedz.com/scripts/select_schedule_city.asp
WSOR 3801 greyhounds The Union Pacific doesn't offer container or trailer intermodal in either Minnesota or Wisconsin. I regard this as bad marketing because they have underutilized lines in those states and they could use intermodal to fill up their network. However, the Union Paciic doesn't much care what I think. They do operate a RoadRailer train between Chicago and the Twin Cities as a Triple Crown extension service. I'm pretty sure part of it is that the Adams Sub (Butler-Adams) doesn't have double-stack clearances. Auto racks fit. The Adams line is also some of the last mainline stick rail anywhere on the UP system. To think they used to go 100 mph on it in the 1950s. Might be some of the same rail yet.
greyhounds The Union Pacific doesn't offer container or trailer intermodal in either Minnesota or Wisconsin. I regard this as bad marketing because they have underutilized lines in those states and they could use intermodal to fill up their network. However, the Union Paciic doesn't much care what I think. They do operate a RoadRailer train between Chicago and the Twin Cities as a Triple Crown extension service.
OK, this is further proof that railroads are not marketing companies. One size, or type of service, does not fit all customers.
I can see the 8:00 AM meeting.
Q. What should we do about intermodal service to the Twin Cities?
A. We can't do anything, we can't run double stacks up there.
Q. Well, that's settled. Where should we go for lunch?
It's a rail line with excess capacity on a system otherwise strained for capacity. That makes it an opportunity that can be exploited quickly. It doesn't need to handle double stacks. Single the containers on spine cars or T 'em up. (Meaning: Put them on a chassis and run as TOFC) Find a way to use the asset (underutilized line) to make money.
Other companies understand market segmentation. Railroads seem to only want to do one thing and make their customers fit into their "one size fits all" concept.
OK, I'll get down off this tall horse now.
greyhounds OK, this is further proof that railroads are not marketing companies. One size, or type of service, does not fit all customers. [snip] It's a rail line with excess capacity on a system otherwise strained for capacity. That makes it an opportunity that can be exploited quickly. It doesn't need to handle double stacks. Single the containers on spine cars or T 'em up. (Meaning: Put them on a chassis and run as TOFC) Find a way to use the asset (underutilized line) to make money. Other companies understand market segmentation. Railroads seem to only want to do one thing and make their customers fit into their "one size fits all" concept.
[snip]
Nothing new here. "We have the boxcar, and you can just make your traffic fit it." (or simillar) - John G. Kneiling, Jr., M.E., P.E., the Professional Iconoclast, in various columns and articles in Trains in the 1960s, and the 1970s, and the 1980s . . .
Your first paragraph that I've quoted above also sounds like vintage JGK. You sure you haven't been possessed by his supernatural spirit and are now "channeling" him ?
Which is why the 3rd party logistics ("3PL") companies such as Pacer International / Stacktrain - http://www.pacer.com/ - can exist & make out OK - not great at the moment, but OK.
- Paul North.
With respect to the comments on UP running stack trains to/from the Twin Cities and Wisconsin points, the implication of some of the notes is that there is a market there that UP is simply (and ignorantly) ignoring.
I don't know what UP has looked at in this corridor, but it strikes me that this is not a place where customers would necessarily be beating a path to their doorstep if they did offer the service. UP's routings between the West Coast to the Twin Cities and Wisconsin are circuitous and (in the case of the Mankato sub) slow. BNSF's route structure undoubtedly permits it to offer a much superior service between this area from the West Coast than anything UP could offer, particularly from ports in the PNW. And both BNSF and CP probably have superior lines from the east as well. While UP could conceivably upgrade its own Chicago-Twin Cities line to be a competitive stack train routing to/from the east (after all, it was a very competitive passenger routing), the question for UP would be whether the revenue they would gain warrants the investment. I suspect they feel that it wouldn't generate enough additional traffic to justify the investment. They may also feel that, from the standpoint of their bottom line, it's better for any Twin Cities or Wisconsin stack traffic they handle to go by highway to/from their existing container terminals rather than make the investment needed to allow it to move by rail to/from the Twin Cities area.
Falcon48 With respect to the comments on UP running stack trains to/from the Twin Cities and Wisconsin points, the implication of some of the notes is that there is a market there that UP is simply (and ignorantly) ignoring. I don't know what UP has looked at in this corridor, but it strikes me that this is not a place where customers would necessarily be beating a path to their doorstep if they did offer the service. UP's routings between the West Coast to the Twin Cities and Wisconsin are circuitous and (in the case of the Mankato sub) slow. BNSF's route structure undoubtedly permits it to offer a much superior service between this area from the West Coast than anything UP could offer, particularly from ports in the PNW. And both BNSF and CP probably have superior lines from the east as well. While UP could conceivably upgrade its own Chicago-Twin Cities line to be a competitive stack train routing to/from the east (after all, it was a very competitive passenger routing), the question for UP would be whether the revenue they would gain warrants the investment. I suspect they feel that it wouldn't generate enough additional traffic to justify the investment. They may also feel that, from the standpoint of their bottom line, it's better for any Twin Cities or Wisconsin stack traffic they handle to go by highway to/from their existing container terminals rather than make the investment needed to allow it to move by rail to/from the Twin Cities area.
I'd like to agree with you here Falcon48. I'd like to believe that the UP has made a thorough study of the Twin Cities intermodal market, keeps the study up to date, and has inteligently decided to take a pass. Unfortunately, my experience tells me that isn't so. (I don't know first hand, I'm just going from my experience.)
First, customers beating a path to your door is nice. It happens every so often. But usually you have to compete for them. Part of that competition is actually knowing who the potential customers are, where they could use your services, how much you could charge, etc. I'll bet you $10 against a donut that the UP has none of this information. They don't have a clue as to how much truck business is moving into and out of the Twin Cities, where the business is comming from/going to, or what the truckers are charging. The customers aren't going to form a committee, storm Omaha, and beg the UP to haul their freight. You'll get that with a coal mine, a port, or a chemical plant. But with diverse manufacturing and distribution, it ain't gonna' happen.
Getting information on truck movements is difficult. But a good marketing department could do it. Railroads, at best, have skeleton marketing departments that work on what they know, not finding out what they don't know.
As to UP's route structure out of the Twin Cities not being competitive...I agree that they are out of the picture with respect to the Pacific Northwest ports. But other, larger, ports such as LA, Houston, New Jersey, are on competivie UP routes. Does the UP know what business it is not handling on these routes? I'll bet another $10 against another donut they don't. And domestic shipments will dwarf movements to/from ports.
A central problem is the operating department dominance of railroad corporate cultures. The operating folks are always going to seek to simplify the network. For the marketing folks to resist this they would need to be able to point out that further simplification will remove the railroad from a freight market of a certain size that will produce so much income. Since the railroad marketing departments don't have this information developed, the operating people get their way. This keeps the freight on the highway.
As to trucking to rail terminals...I've done the numbers and found that the excessive drayage costs caused by hundredes of miles of trucking to a rail terminal will readily negate any cost advantage intermodal has over direct trucking. The railroads have closed too many intermodal terminals in the operating people's desire to "simplify" the networks. There is a needed balance between simplification and "enough" terminals located near the customers. The dominance of railroad operating departments over railroad marketing departments has skewed this "balance" so that the railroads leave a lot of profitable freight on the highway.
And again, The UP doesn't need to serve the Twin Cities with double stack trains to have a competitive intermodal presence in that market.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.