First things first. I have no problem with the upcoming CP/KCS merger. I actually own some CP stock (handed down from my dad)...and even lived in Canada for four years. What I have a problem with is the new name. It appears that Canadian Pacific Kansas City is the choice. How small-minded. Canadian Pacific has been a dominant name in transportation on this continent for well over a century. Kansas City Southern is relatively unknown outside it service area. So...why not think big and call the merged system CANADIAN PACIFIC CONTINENTAL? Any thoughts?
In a different thread here, I stated that I think it should be named Canada America Mexico Railroad, and be known as CAM.
Still in training.
The naming of railroads consolidated into new larger companies the last 40 years hasn't been the most important consideration. Or the most inspiring.
It'll probably end up being just initials like CSX or BNSF. The letters once meant something, but no longer do.
Jeff
Or
American & Pacific
Oh, thats right A&P is taken so
Atlantic, Pacific & Gulf.
APG RR
I believe CPKC is intended to be the name of Canadian Pacific's US subsidiary not the whole company
Doubt that CP will even mention KCS in there name, maybe they will go back to Canadian Pacific RailWAY, or Canadian Pacific & Panama Canal Railway.
tatans Doubt that CP will even mention KCS in there name, maybe they will go back to Canadian Pacific RailWAY, or Canadian Pacific & Panama Canal Railway.
Actually, they have already announced it's Canadian Pacific Kansas City, CPKC. We're just Monday-morning quarterbacking.
But what they chose is a lousy name.
Kansas Pacific is already taken, but resurrecting the Canada Southern name could work well. How about a few others.
Toronto, Hamilton & Mexico?
Calgary & Rio Grande Southern?
Kansas City, Mexico & Northern?
Mexico-Kansas-Canada?
International - Great Canadian?
The former TFM subsidiary could be renamed the International of Mexico, or perhaps Canadien Pacifique de Mexico (note spelling).
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
North American Railroad
Since we are discussing the merger, I will pivot slightly and hopefully not hijack the thread.
Has anyone read the 4400+ page application? Doubt it.
Has anyone read parts of the application? I made my way thru the first 1100 pages or so, not necessarily reading completely but skimming thru certain parts and carefully reading other sections.
Very interesting reading with considerable insite into the current operations for KCS and CP and the methodolgy for increasing business in 3 years. Can the marketing boys and girls pull this off? What will be the advantages of single line service? Will there be pushbacks from CN, UP, BNSF and others to retain business? How will the customer base react?
The application uses existing databases of freight movements, both rail and truck to identify potential conversions to the CPKC system and assigns probabilities of fulfilling those conversions.
This struck a chord with me as I have used that system in my 30 year sales career. As Dwight Eisenhower once said...something to the effect that 'plans are worthless, but planning is invaluable.' I found that to be true. Seldom did the plan workout exactly but the process usually result in a yearly sales number that was very accurate. Accurate results but inaccurate allocation.
What is extremely interesting is the data showing the train counts by subdivisions, traffic densities, and the maps. Current operations are outline, not by schedule but by scheduled trains. Projections were then built based on the sales and marketing projections along with new train symbols and origin/destinations/block operations.
Certain line segments will explode with new trains. For instance:
KCS south of KC (Pittsburg and Heavener subs) will increase from roughly 12 trains per day to 25 to 28 daily trains.
CP from Bensenville to Sabula from 2.9 trains to 11.1.
CP from Sabula to Davenport from 7.1 to 21.6.
CP thru Marquette, Iowa adjacent to the Mississippi River from 7.7 to 14.3.
CP Laredo (Missouri) will increase from 3 to 17 per day.
The Chicago - Milwaukee - Twin Cities line will remain stable with 12 trains increasing to 14, except for the River Sub which splits off to head south to Marquette which will see increases.
The KCS lines thru Texas and into Mexico will explode with trains if their plan is true. There will also be an increase of single line intermodal, particularly in the Toronto/Chicago/Twin Cities to Dallas and beyond to Mexico lane.
The application also outlines the plan for increasing capacity with new and extending sidings plus installation of CTC.
Past around page 1150 the application if pure letters of support, which I didnt read thru.
I am not an expert on CP nor KCS, but do know the Chicago - Sabula - Davenport line has not seen much traffic. I used to travel quite abit (pre Covid) out to Muscatine, Iowa and beyond...seldom saw trains. Perhaps that will change.
Has anyone else read or reviewed the application? Comments?
Ed
Lithonia OperatorActually, they have already announced it's Canadian Pacific Kansas City, CPKC.
My town sits on a double mainline BNSF route. BNSF doesn't exactly flow off the lips. That's why, after 15 years, it's still called Burlington around here.
For me, CPKC is the same. I can't believe it will become the common way to call it.
York1 John
York1 Lithonia Operator Actually, they have already announced it's Canadian Pacific Kansas City, CPKC. My town sits on a double mainline BNSF route. BNSF doesn't exactly flow off the lips. That's why, after 15 years, it's still called Burlington around here. For me, CPKC is the same. I can't believe it will become the common way to call it.
Lithonia Operator Actually, they have already announced it's Canadian Pacific Kansas City, CPKC.
And it is still the Santa Fe around Topeka.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
To: Ed (MP173); Since you seem to have access to some of the CP/KCS info: I am curious to see how some 'other' KCS Trackages will opssibly 'shake out'?
the 'Meridian Speedway' whoch is of course, Split with NS and KCS.. and then there is its " Northern extension" which became part of the KCS property; if IIRC about Nov. of 1993 or '94 (?). It was orig part of GM&O/ICRR that ran from approximately Shreveport(La) East to connect with NS (trackage rights?) into Birmingham (?) Alabama. ( AKA "Merridian Speedway"). The Northern leg was the MidSouth Railroad, and later was AKA the Corinth and Counce RR ; which terminated in the area of Counce, Tn. (at that time there was a large paper mill, and a welded steel pipe manufacturer. Adjacent to waterway's access of Pickwick Lake on the Tennessee River system ) ....
Not sure how much rail traffic there is for KCS in that market? Kind of interesting that CP/KCS will have a potential to posibly, access River traffic in an area that could be considered the "Deep South". Could s be a tie-in with the current activities at the Post of Savanah , Ga. and their pushing for 'Inland Ports' to break up the traffic blockages on the East Coast Ports? Just curious.
MP173:
I have been trying to download the full application to read it, but cannot find it. What is the link so I can download it or could you send me a copy at igoldberg1@earthlink.net. It will be greatly apprecitated.
Ira
York1 My town sits on a double mainline BNSF route. BNSF doesn't exactly flow off the lips. That's why, after 15 years, it's still called Burlington around here.
from the Far East of the Sunset Route
(In the shadow of the Huey P Long bridge)
York1 BNSF doesn't exactly flow off the lips. That's why, after 15 years, it's still called Burlington around here. For me, CPKC is the same.
I've never had a problem with BNSF; I just pronounce it something like "bunsuff".
Just now, when I saw CPKC, I saw the light: "cupcake".
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
How about, 'The Long Way'.
I do hope it's successful. I wonder if anyone thinks about what the customer thinks, though.
sampf
The application is showing similar "growth" trains and tonnage for Meridian Speedway and the line north of Meridian.
Meridian is showing a decrease from 12.6 to 11.3 trains per day and the sub going north is steady at 2 trains per day.
I have family in Columbus, Miss and have casually observed that line. Wow, it was really in great condition, if memory serves me well. CWR and high ballast. Interesting area with considerable industry. My BIL works at the big steel mill there.
I will try to find the link to the report. I tried to email it to Ira and it was too big to email.
Found it....
Bill Stephens excellent 2 page summary of the 4400 page report complete with map showing increases in trains. It was in teh Nov 4th News.
https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/analysis-canadian-pacific-kansas-city-southern-merger-has-all-the-right-stuff/
I would really like to have a discussion on this application and thoughts concerning several items including:
1. Projected volumes.
2. Train count increases.
3. Infrastructure investment.
4. Other stuff
It is big read but lots of good stuff contained including data on current operations.
ed
MP173 Since we are discussing the merger, I will pivot slightly and hopefully not hijack the thread. Has anyone read the 4400+ page application? Doubt it. Has anyone read parts of the application? I made my way thru the first 1100 pages or so, not necessarily reading completely but skimming thru certain parts and carefully reading other sections. Very interesting reading with considerable insite into the current operations for KCS and CP and the methodolgy for increasing business in 3 years. Can the marketing boys and girls pull this off? What will be the advantages of single line service? Will there be pushbacks from CN, UP, BNSF and others to retain business? How will the customer base react? The application uses existing databases of freight movements, both rail and truck to identify potential conversions to the CPKC system and assigns probabilities of fulfilling those conversions. This struck a chord with me as I have used that system in my 30 year sales career. As Dwight Eisenhower once said...something to the effect that 'plans are worthless, but planning is invaluable.' I found that to be true. Seldom did the plan workout exactly but the process usually result in a yearly sales number that was very accurate. Accurate results but inaccurate allocation. What is extremely interesting is the data showing the train counts by subdivisions, traffic densities, and the maps. Current operations are outline, not by schedule but by scheduled trains. Projections were then built based on the sales and marketing projections along with new train symbols and origin/destinations/block operations. Certain line segments will explode with new trains. For instance: KCS south of KC (Pittsburg and Heavener subs) will increase from roughly 12 trains per day to 25 to 28 daily trains. CP from Bensenville to Sabula from 2.9 trains to 11.1. CP from Sabula to Davenport from 7.1 to 21.6. CP thru Marquette, Iowa adjacent to the Mississippi River from 7.7 to 14.3. CP Laredo (Missouri) will increase from 3 to 17 per day. The Chicago - Milwaukee - Twin Cities line will remain stable with 12 trains increasing to 14, except for the River Sub which splits off to head south to Marquette which will see increases. The KCS lines thru Texas and into Mexico will explode with trains if their plan is true. There will also be an increase of single line intermodal, particularly in the Toronto/Chicago/Twin Cities to Dallas and beyond to Mexico lane. The application also outlines the plan for increasing capacity with new and extending sidings plus installation of CTC. Past around page 1150 the application if pure letters of support, which I didnt read thru. I am not an expert on CP nor KCS, but do know the Chicago - Sabula - Davenport line has not seen much traffic. I used to travel quite abit (pre Covid) out to Muscatine, Iowa and beyond...seldom saw trains. Perhaps that will change. Has anyone else read or reviewed the application? Comments? Ed
I'm at page 550 of the merger application.. I'll say I'm not impressed for the most part so far. The lack of any analysis on terminals which will be key going forward. Also CPKC will be a third wheel in the Midwest-Texas.. I don't think we need a 3rd player in that corridor. CPKC will shine with bulk, and manifest traffic from Western Canada to the Gulf Coast, and Mexico.
SD60MAC9500 I'm at page 550 of the merger application.. I'll say I'm not impressed for the most part so far. The lack of any analysis on terminals which will be key going forward. Also CPKC will be a third wheel in the Midwest-Texas.. I don't think we need a 3rd player in that corridor. CPKC will shine with bulk, and manifest traffic from Western Canada to the Gulf Coast, and Mexico.
The yards are discussed and those that are discusssed are listed in the tables.
The Operating Plan discussion begins in Volume 2 Page 256 of the filing, which translates to page 813 of the pdf.
One thing that struck is the diminishment of the importance of Knoche Yard in KC which will just handle KC interchange with other carriers and locals based out of there, zero classification work will be done there.
John Beaulieu
(formerly posting as beaulieu)
JayBee SD60MAC9500 I'm at page 550 of the merger application.. I'll say I'm not impressed for the most part so far. The lack of any analysis on terminals which will be key going forward. Also CPKC will be a third wheel in the Midwest-Texas.. I don't think we need a 3rd player in that corridor. CPKC will shine with bulk, and manifest traffic from Western Canada to the Gulf Coast, and Mexico. The yards are discussed and those that are discusssed are listed in the tables. The Operating Plan discussion begins in Volume 2 Page 256 of the filing, which translates to page 813 of the pdf. One thing that struck is the diminishment of the importance of Knoche Yard in KC which will just handle KC interchange with other carriers and locals based out of there, zero classification work will be done there. John Beaulieu (formerly posting as beaulieu)
That's not the analysis listing the yards and their location and the few improvements recorded. CPKC is handicapped by limited terminal footprint in many areas here in the US, and going forward in Mexico. They have not provided many solutions in their merger application to new or expanded terminals in these constrained areas. Detroit's a prime example. CP's Detroit IM Terminal on the westside of the city is reached off CSX rights via Dearborn. It's off the beaten path. Not only that it can't grow with projected IM volumes over the next decade.
As well.. How will they handle the constrained yards in, San Luis Potosi? Monterrey? CP also has extremely limited to no auto capacity in the key Detroit area. Finished autos have to be "drayed" backward to Windsor with a customs inspection(s).
Knoche Yard is off the main located along the southside on the Missouri River. It can only thrive as a interchange yard. CPKC bypassing it is not surprising.
I felt the application was rather optomistic in the ability to gather new business. Yes, the market will open up for grain and Western Canada oil and commodities, but does anyone really expect CPKC to compete with BNSF or UP on Chicago to Texas intermodal? Perhaps on slow moving to or from the far northern suburbs of Chicago where there might be a drayage advantage.
Detroit intermodal? Addressed quite well by SD60MAC above. Their Eastern Canada - Chicago intermodal trains are small these days and use CSX for over 500 miles. Can "single line" service overcome that handicap when extending to KC, Texas, and beyond?
Their best bet would be to somehow gain haulage/trackage rights on ex Wabash to KC, but that would not allow the movement of the Eastern Canada intermodal now moving on CSX unless somesort of block swap would occur in Eastern Indiana between CSX and NS lines.
Major concern might be the trunk line from Sabula thru KC and down to Shreveport. Train count will jump dramatically with projected 10 to 15 more trains daily. Will the projected investment in expanded or new sidings allow the fluid movements of 17 to 28 trains daily? Perhaps more importantly will the growth be there? If not, there goes the plan.
Good stuff in the application.
MP173 Major concern might be the trunk line from Sabula thru KC and down to Shreveport. Train count will jump dramatically with projected 10 to 15 more trains daily. Will the projected investment in expanded or new sidings allow the fluid movements of 17 to 28 trains daily? Perhaps more importantly will the growth be there? If not, there goes the plan. Good stuff in the application. Ed
I get 363 miles between Sabula and Kansas City per 1956 Official Guide. 18 trains per day is 9 per day each way for an idealized departure separation of 2.5 hours. That means each train will meet another every 1.25 hours. Assuming Class III track and 40 MPH MAS, that implies a siding every 50 miles. Reduce that to 40 miles for slowing to enter and exit sidings. I count 9 intermediate sidings. Estimate cost per 10,000 foot siding at $10 million each assuming all new roadbed and no significant bridges. Not all roadbed will be new, reducing cost. Implies $90 million actual construction costs, say $100 million. CTC system will cost another few million.
That is not huge money by Class I railroad standards. I have no doubt about CP's ability to make that investment.
I too am curious about all this new traffic that will magically appear.
Mac
SD60MAC9500 That's not the analysis listing the yards and their location and the few improvements recorded. CPKC is handicapped by limited terminal footprint in many areas here in the US, and going forward in Mexico. They have not provided many solutions in their merger application to new or expanded terminals in these constrained areas. Detroit's a prime example. CP's Detroit IM Terminal on the westside of the city is reached off CSX rights via Dearborn. It's off the beaten path. Not only that it can't grow with projected IM volumes over the next decade. As well.. How will they handle the constrained yards in, San Luis Potosi? Monterrey? CP also has extremely limited to no auto capacity in the key Detroit area. Finished autos have to be "drayed" backward to Windsor with a customs inspection(s). Knoche Yard is off the main located along the southside on the Missouri River. It can only thrive as a interchange yard. CPKC bypassing it is not surprising.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.