Trains.com

The economics of shortlines and regionals..

9193 views
35 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, May 17, 2012 9:32 AM

henry6

Look at the geography of Switzerland!  It is mountainous and compact country....rail lines were built before motor vehicles became so prevelant...so they had and have little space to build super six lane highways like we know them.  Their best transportation asset is the railroads: improve upon them makes sense because there is no room to build highways and its so mounainous it is cheaper to use the railroads. 

We keep comparing foreign rail and transportation systems to what evolved here and it is actually like comparing apples to oranges to grapes.  Systems evolved in other countries because of the geography and economies and social structures; many of those countries are only as big as most of our states.  We keep comparing the differences but not understanding the whys of the differences.  Nor do we understand why US railroading would not fit the foreign roles and vice versa.

I wasn't the one making the comparison.  It was a pretty highly placed SBB manager himself.  There is more than geography and economics driving the "what" and "how" of Swiss rail.  There is a really large political and cultural thing going on.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, May 17, 2012 9:40 AM

Paul_D_North_Jr

What is the average length of haul, revenue tons per carload, cars and tons per train, and rate per ton-mile, on the SBB as compared to the US ? 

average length of haul - a lot shorter, about an order of magnitude.

revenue tons per carload - much less, about 1/2.

cars and tons per train - about half the cars per train. 

rate per ton-mile - much higher

You left some out:

ton miles per crew hour - about the same as here, surprisingly.

Revenue loads per car day - much higher than here.

Infrastructure cost per ton mile - higher

 

The SBB manager was of the opinion that if they could get out of the subsidized siding business and nudge those customers to transload, then the SBB could come close to breaking even on the car load business.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Thursday, May 17, 2012 10:05 AM

It's interesting that transload facilities get mentioned.  Unless I'm missing something, this seems to be one of the better ideas to come from shortlines/regionals, taking the concept of the team track and improving on it.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Friday, May 18, 2012 1:36 PM

...it's how you make a flow look like a batch.  We do batch in a world that flows.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    January 2008
  • 1,243 posts
Posted by Sunnyland on Saturday, May 19, 2012 3:14 PM

A classic example that comes to mind is the A&M RR. BN dropped that part of the Frisco line and A&M seems to be doing very well as a freight and excursion RR.  I took a trip on the line two years ago on a rare mileage trip that went from Springdale to Ft. Smith and return and also Springdale to near Monett, MO the following day. 

They now have a dome car that was recently refurbished. We rode in the caboose as a charter and it was a very enjoyable time.  I'm glad someone kept that line going because it was part of Frisco.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • 1,307 posts
Posted by Falcon48 on Monday, May 21, 2012 7:22 PM
I don't want to re-slice and re-dice the "open access" debate again either. I would simply point out, in connection with the analogy made by one of the posters, that electric utility "open access" is a very poor model for railroading. Utility "transportation" is nearly instantaneous and doesn't require that a particular generating company's power be delivered to a particular end user over particular routes. The user draws power from the grid regardless of where it is generated, and the provider feeds an equivalent amount of power to the grid. Train operations on heavy traffic main lines have to be very carefully coordinated, or else the lines will degenerate into gridlock. This coordination involves more than just finding slots for the trains moving on a particular line. It involves coordination of the traffic moving on the entire rail network that includes the lines, and devising transportation plans for particular traffic moves that make the best use of a railroad's facilities. The railroads learned this the hard way over the last two decades. Uncoordinated movements of traffic from multiple service providers would make any kind of network approach to operations impossible, and seriously degrade existing rail services.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy