NEW YORK — Norfolk Southern will flip the switch on its new operating plan over the Fourth of July weekend and is preparing for the change by training crews and holding two dozen town hall meetings with employees and shippers at locations acros...
http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2019/06/05-norfolk-southern-gearing-up-for-major-operational-changes-greater-use-of-distributed-power
Brian Schmidt, Editor, Classic Trains magazine
Will it work? Impossible to know. There should be several canaries in the mine field. That will be some on the routes Amtrak operates on. Crescent, Capitol, LSL. A big question is does NS have enough long sidings to pass other trains and yards with long leads to keep from tying up mains near those yards.
Isn't this reversion to the past? Instead of "waiting for tonnage", it's "waiting for train length"?
Norfolk Southern seems to be taking a more reasonable approach to PSR, perhaps because they've been smart enough to learn a few lessons from CN, CP, and CSX. Notice how they're not shutting down all their hump yards.. instead they're taking a more measured approach to rolling out PSR that will avoid "shocking the system" and a bunch of angry customers.
Gramp Isn't this reversion to the past? Instead of "waiting for tonnage", it's "waiting for train length"?
I've been thinking the same thing. It's like a replay of the drag era of freight operations of about 100 years.
Jeff
jeffhergert Gramp Isn't this reversion to the past? Instead of "waiting for tonnage", it's "waiting for train length"? I've been thinking the same thing. It's like a replay of the drag era of freight operations of about 100 years. Jeff
I have been thinking that too. I am not quite sure what PSR actually is, but it seems to be about a more nimble operation that can offer flexibility and quick thinking to better please the customer and make money for the railroad. That does not seem like if fits monster trains. I remember when M.U. diesels entered an age where the concept was exploited to run longer trains with maybe 6-10 units all on the head end. Then in the middle of that era, Trains ran an article on a new ground breaking paradigm on the D&RGW. The title of the article was "Fast and Frequent." It was about running more trains, more often, and running them faster.
I still have the magazine, so I think I will dig it up and read the article again. In any case, it seemed sort of PSR-like in terms of attitude. It was definitely an idea that seemed to be going against the grain, almost being counter-intuitive at that time.
Today, DPU has revived the old M.U. offering of longer trains, and with DPU, the sky is the limit. But it does seem like an old fashioned panacea that offers lots of costly problems while offering only one plus side of getting more train out of each crew. I get the impression that railroads are suddenly very passionate about this potential, and so they call it PSR only because they want to portray monster trains as a big breakthrough.
Euclid, I remember that Rio Grande article, too. Also, I recall the Rock Island wanted to try running many, very short trains (around 10 cars long) in Iowa to gather grain from elevators. It would require two or three man crews to do it, but the union wouldn't agree to it, so the idea died.
Euclid... I am not quite sure what PSR actually is...
I don't think you're alone there. Despite books, etc, about the concept, I've said before that I think the term was tainted by the hedge funds and their desire for rapid payouts.
Many of the concepts within PSR are hardly new - increasing velocity, decreasing dwell time, using DPU to increase train lengths and improve handling.
It remains to be seen if a measured move to the concepts of PSR actually proves fruitful, or if the concepts are implemented, then quietly discarded. And we've already seen some of the changes brought on by PSR backed out by the railroads.
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...
As a 40 year rail shipper who has now experienced PSR with five different Class 1’s I will assure you the last thing PSR is intended to accomplish is please customers. Next to last would be making the railroad more nimble and responsive.
PSR attempts to force customers to alter their way of doing things to comply with the manner in which the railroad has now decided they want it done. If this results in significant additional costs for the customer - tough luck. Ample evidence of this was presented in several days of shipper testimony before the STB last month.
PSR is almost entirely about cost reduction and rationalizing the business. PSR railroads will always willingly lose business if doing so improves the railroad‘s overall margin results.
Additionally, PSR serves as a siphon to vacuum money from customer pockets and move it to the shareholders.
While service does sometimes become more predictable under PSR; I have never seen it actually result in a meaningful improvement in service levels.
I have great confidence that NS can build an efficient operating plan. Have almost no confidence that the "flip the switch" approach is prudent. I think it could be a recipe for disaster. There is no way to effectively model all the transients that occur when you change the plan.
An example. Lets say you have traffic from interchange that normally takes two days to get to a certain classification location. The new plan, it takes one. Now you have a double bump of that traffic at that location. If you have these ripples and bumps occurring all over the place, it can get hard to manage.
When the original TOP was rolled out, it was done in pieces over several months. That way, staff could help deal with the lumps and bumps as they occurred.
Given that there are fewer staff folk around these days, a "switch flip" is just asking for trouble.
The only way I can see it working out fairly well is if the new plan really isn't too different from the current plan. There is a good chance that is the case as the current plan is actually pretty efficient. (What's been lacking is execution over the past several years)
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
There's a pretty good news item by Bill Stephens that describes the PSR relationship to hump yards. As any good railroad planner would tell you, you should do block swapping as much as possible. A PSR principle is to do as much "pre blocking" as possible at traffic origins (and along the way) to allow block swaps en route to replace humping or flat switching individual cars.
A good bit of this has always been part of the NS's plan, but I suspect the plan has gotten raggedy as poor timekeeping has killed a lot of block swaps in the plan.
Not counting the origin or destination serving yard, a typical car load on NS is handled about 1-3/4 times in a typical trip of 500 miles. (That counts block swaps, humps, flat switching all as a "handling") There isn't a lot of room to push that number down, but you could increase the fraction of block swap handlings....
That's a problem I have seen with CSX trying to yard a 290 plus car train into Oak Island Yard NJ most of the recieving tracks can only hold 60 to 70 cars, the conductor could not comunicate with the engineer for some of the cuts, other trains were blocked and delayed, because the yard and railroad were not designed for this type of operation,(the train outlawed before being completley yarded.) The other issue I've seen is the DP power dying 70 cars deep, now the engineer has to walk back there trying to figure out what is wrong, very good maintenance of locomotives is needed to make DP power work (BNSF and CN are good at that). Unfortunately with PSR engine maintenance has been cut back. The other problem on running DP trains in say New Jersey, is the dense network, your 250 plus car train goes into emergency you can have 3 or 4 interlockings blocked, delaying everyone elses freight and commuter trains. It gets ugly fast!
James Sanchez
Gramp Euclid, I remember that Rio Grande article, too. Also, I recall the Rock Island wanted to try running many, very short trains (around 10 cars long) in Iowa to gather grain from elevators. It would require two or three man crews to do it, but the union wouldn't agree to it, so the idea died.
oltmanndThere's a pretty good news item by Bill Stephens that describes the PSR relationship to hump yards. As any good railroad planner would tell you, you should do block swapping as much as possible. A PSR principle is to do as much "pre blocking" as possible at traffic origins (and along the way) to allow block swaps en route to replace humping or flat switching individual cars. A good bit of this has always been part of the NS's plan, but I suspect the plan has gotten raggedy as poor timekeeping has killed a lot of block swaps in the plan. Not counting the origin or destination serving yard, a typical car load on NS is handled about 1-3/4 times in a typical trip of 500 miles. (That counts block swaps, humps, flat switching all as a "handling") There isn't a lot of room to push that number down, but you could increase the fraction of block swap handlings....
Railroads have all sorts of 'operating plans' that they have used over the years - some work - some work well - some look great on paper and gridlock in action.
To be effective any operating plan must take into consideration the origination of traffic and the volumes that are involved in origination. Additionally the operating plan must take into consideration the destination of traffic and the volumes involved - with the understanding the origination and termination at terminals are interlocked.
The next part of the operating plan has to take into consideration the switching capabliities of the terminals (yards) that are involved in originating and terminating traffic. That switching boils down to how many (or few) blocks can be created from the traffic being handled; how many crews and how many tracks are available to do the switching; or conversely how little switching the company wants to perform at the given location.
Block swapping is a fine tactic - IF the origin location can create a sufficient block size to make it worthwhile and IF there is a location where block swapping can be accomplished without harming other aspects of the railroad in the area where it is taking place.
Before I retired, CSX in Baltimore was switching two blocks - Selkirk and Cumberland. Cars in the Cumberland Block were destined to all locations geographically West of Cumberland as well as Philadelphia, Brunswick, Richmond, Rocky Mount and all Southern destinations. Cumberland humped the cars into blocks destined to the appropriate destinations. Selkirk humped the cars destined to locations between Selkirk and Philadelphia as well as destinations North and West of Selkirk as wll as locations toward Boston. It was a company decision to limit the switching performed in Baltimore in order to limit the crew starts of Baltimore Yard Crews.
Beyond closing Cumberland as a hump yard, I have no hard facts as to what other switching is taking place in Baltimore and what if any block swapping is taking place or where that may be happening.
The physical characteristics of the yards in Baltimore (Bayview, Mt.Clare, Locust Point and Curtis Bay) do not support the creation of a large number of blocks. Cumberland, when it was humping, did create blocks for each of the serving yards in Baltimore.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
jeffhergert The RI ran some mini-train experiements, with the agreement of the unions. The feasibility was mixed. It worked under the right circumstances of shipper/receiver combinations. There were 4 or 5 experimental trains at different locations within the RI system, not just Iowa. It was late in the day for the RI, which is why it wasn't pursued. Jeff
The RI ran some mini-train experiements, with the agreement of the unions. The feasibility was mixed. It worked under the right circumstances of shipper/receiver combinations. There were 4 or 5 experimental trains at different locations within the RI system, not just Iowa. It was late in the day for the RI, which is why it wasn't pursued.
Thanks Jeff
Balt: What happens when a block swapping plan works for a while and then traffic changes enough that the plan is no longer feasible ? Thinking of seasonal traffic or worse still semi long term traffic blockages ? Weather such as what is going on with flooding all over the country ?
blue streak 1 Balt: What happens when a block swapping plan works for a while and then traffic changes enough that the plan is no longer feasible ? Thinking of seasonal traffic or worse still semi long term traffic blockages ? Weather such as what is going on with flooding all over the country ?
That's what the service design groups do on a daily basis. The operating plan is always getting analyzed and tweaked for changes in customers, volumes and circumstances. They often work up "disaster plans" that can be rolled out quickly should a disater occur.
BaltACD oltmannd There's a pretty good news item by Bill Stephens that describes the PSR relationship to hump yards. As any good railroad planner would tell you, you should do block swapping as much as possible. A PSR principle is to do as much "pre blocking" as possible at traffic origins (and along the way) to allow block swaps en route to replace humping or flat switching individual cars. A good bit of this has always been part of the NS's plan, but I suspect the plan has gotten raggedy as poor timekeeping has killed a lot of block swaps in the plan. Not counting the origin or destination serving yard, a typical car load on NS is handled about 1-3/4 times in a typical trip of 500 miles. (That counts block swaps, humps, flat switching all as a "handling") There isn't a lot of room to push that number down, but you could increase the fraction of block swap handlings.... Railroads have all sorts of 'operating plans' that they have used over the years - some work - some work well - some look great on paper and gridlock in action. To be effective any operating plan must take into consideration the origination of traffic and the volumes that are involved in origination. Additionally the operating plan must take into consideration the destination of traffic and the volumes involved - with the understanding the origination and termination at terminals are interlocked. The next part of the operating plan has to take into consideration the switching capabliities of the terminals (yards) that are involved in originating and terminating traffic. That switching boils down to how many (or few) blocks can be created from the traffic being handled; how many crews and how many tracks are available to do the switching; or conversely how little switching the company wants to perform at the given location. Block swapping is a fine tactic - IF the origin location can create a sufficient block size to make it worthwhile and IF there is a location where block swapping can be accomplished without harming other aspects of the railroad in the area where it is taking place. Before I retired, CSX in Baltimore was switching two blocks - Selkirk and Cumberland. Cars in the Cumberland Block were destined to all locations geographically West of Cumberland as well as Philadelphia, Brunswick, Richmond, Rocky Mount and all Southern destinations. Cumberland humped the cars into blocks destined to the appropriate destinations. Selkirk humped the cars destined to locations between Selkirk and Philadelphia as well as destinations North and West of Selkirk as wll as locations toward Boston. It was a company decision to limit the switching performed in Baltimore in order to limit the crew starts of Baltimore Yard Crews. Beyond closing Cumberland as a hump yard, I have no hard facts as to what other switching is taking place in Baltimore and what if any block swapping is taking place or where that may be happening. The physical characteristics of the yards in Baltimore (Bayview, Mt.Clare, Locust Point and Curtis Bay) do not support the creation of a large number of blocks. Cumberland, when it was humping, did create blocks for each of the serving yards in Baltimore.
oltmannd There's a pretty good news item by Bill Stephens that describes the PSR relationship to hump yards. As any good railroad planner would tell you, you should do block swapping as much as possible. A PSR principle is to do as much "pre blocking" as possible at traffic origins (and along the way) to allow block swaps en route to replace humping or flat switching individual cars. A good bit of this has always been part of the NS's plan, but I suspect the plan has gotten raggedy as poor timekeeping has killed a lot of block swaps in the plan. Not counting the origin or destination serving yard, a typical car load on NS is handled about 1-3/4 times in a typical trip of 500 miles. (That counts block swaps, humps, flat switching all as a "handling") There isn't a lot of room to push that number down, but you could increase the fraction of block swap handlings....
Good post!
The devil is in the detail, always...
The service design guys don't always know the "on the ground" stuff for the places they are designing work.
The field guys don't always understand the bigger pictutre.
The management often over focuses on one metric rather than a complete set resulting in sub-obtimization of operations. e.g. crew starts, train length, train speed, terminal dwell, handlings per trip, etc. etc.
A railroad operating plan is built by organizing traffic flows into blocks and then building a train plan to carry those blocks.
The most efficient, fastest and cheapest plan will minimize the number of handlings.
At high volumes, hump yards are much cheaper than flat switching.
Block swapping can result in less activity and faster connections than loose car switching, particularly if you have a place and yard air and a well-oiled, reliable train plan.
"Pre blocking" at serving yards can replace a "downstream" handling if you have underutilized capacity (people, time and tracks) there.
Longer trains can have better labor productivity if you the space and time to build it.
Terminals and mainlines laid out 100 years ago may not be all that flexible for today's operating plans. Management is not all that keen on spending big bucks to reconfigure things.
All of these things are dependent on a myriad of details.
Your job is to build the most efficient operating plan you can given all these constraints.
Ready, set, GO!
I think the article in the latest Trains that arrived a few days ago that interviews I think a higher up BNSF official (I only just briefly scanned it while waiting to pick up someone yesterday in a parking lot), describes PSR well. And it wasn't in a flattering way.
I'm curious what this will do for their motive power fleet, Altoona, and Roanoke. And while the motive power happenings are just because it's interesting to see what gets parked, what gets rebuilt, and so on, I worry about the assets of Altoona and Roanoke. Especially the employees that have made Norfolk Southern so much money through the years in savings.
Sadly with the short-term quarterly thinking of PSR, that doesn't gel with what Altoona and Roanoke are all about. The major rebuilding programs of these shops are all about the medium to even long-term as they prepare locomotives for decades more of service. So some clueless executive that sees current locomotive reliablity and decides to shutter these and defer all the "unneeded" rebuilding to improve the almighty operating margin for a year or two, is a real threat to these assets.
And at best under that scenario, these shops that Norfolk Southern keeps busy will get spun off and sold rather than closed. Then if Norfolk Southern wants to undertake a major rebuild program, they get the privilege of paying a markup since the 3rd party operator expects to make a profit.
So I hope the realization of just how valuable these two facilities are is well understood by the current executive team. Spinning these off to a 3rd party only makes sense if NS was underutilizing them for their own needs and failing to attract enough outside business to keep them humming.
blue streak 1Balt: What happens when a block swapping plan works for a while and then traffic changes enough that the plan is no longer feasible ? Thinking of seasonal traffic or worse still semi long term traffic blockages ? Weather such as what is going on with flooding all over the country ?
Before I retired the Operating Plan would be adjusted on a weekly basis - to account for specific changes in traffic levels of specific customers, to account for MofW Curfews starting, ending or continuing on specific line segments and/or terminals or yards, responding to severe weather conditions that have affected specific line segments. The adjustments to the plan would include creating or eliminating specific trains, the combining of specific trains because of reduced volumes and nominally the same origins and destinations. Block swaps and where they were to happen would also be adjusted, if and when necessary for the same variety of reasons that the overall plan itself was being adjusted.
During 'Holiday Season' (the holidays the company would 'actually observe') a holiday shut down plan would be formulated so the system could be shut down in a organized manner that would facilitate a organized start up.
The wild card in all this planning and Precision Scheduling (BEFORE EHH) was the operation of bulk commodity trains (coal, oil, ethanol, ore, grain, aggretates, frac sand etc.) as these trains operate on the customers timetable in being able to originate and terminate the trains.
A part of Precision Scheduling of the Operaing Plan is also to create 'windows' on appropriate line segments for the On Time operation of passenger trains and the operation of line of road Road Switchers (local freights) that require main track occupancy to perform their duties.
I cannot speak to what is taking place post EHH.
Leo -
Your fears are being realized. About a week ago the Juniata Locomotive Shop at Alttoona laid off about 30 employees, mostly electricians as I recall.
- PDN .
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.