Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH I think that I just might toss in the towel at this point since in FM's opinion I am making the mistake of seeing the world as it is rather than as he feels it ought to be. I have a friend who was a traffic manager, and most of their traffic went by truck, even on long hauls, because they provided better service for the rate they charged. This may not fit with FM's view of the world, but it IS reality. [/quote] You're looking at the world as you think it is rather than as it really is. It is a facile conclusion to say that your friend's firm shipped by truck because the truck rates were the best rates. As has been discussed elsewhere, railroads are now infamous for their refusal to provide carload service, and it is this refusal to provide carload service that has created a whole new market for trucks. If you had read my post carefully, I pointed out that trucks are only taking up the business railroads have rejected, or business for which railroad service simply does not exist. This is hardly the type of example you should be using to extoll the claim that trucks are railroads' competition. Tell me this if you have the information: Did your friend's firm ship out 100's of truckloads from the plant to the same specific destination every few days? If so, then your claim of trucks being competition for trains would be legitimate, because then the trucks would be vying for something for which railroads are superior. But I doubt that's what your friend's firm did. Did they formerly ship out a few carloads by long haul rail, only to have a trucking firm or two come in and offer lower rates or more expedient service to the same destinations? If so, then my ascertion would be faulty, because then you'd have an example of an established long haul rail carload service being replaced by long haul truckload service. But I doubt that's what happened, more than likely such an example would only come about by a change in railroad service levels. In every single instance of trucks taking over traffic that formerly moved by rail, it only came about because the railroad stopped providing the service for some reason, e.g. no longer wanting to provide the service at the logical rate, change in operating priorities, "pre-abandonment" tactics used to oust traffic from lesser used lines, actual abandonments that end up increasing the rail mileage between two points to the effect of negating the rail efficiency advantage, aging equipment that the railroad did not wi***o replace, or simply no longer wanting the "hassle" of dealing with small lot customers. If you can provide me with an example of a situation in which both a railroad(s) and trucking firm(s) bid competitively for a service between two long distance points (at the same relative mileage for both the railroad and highways), and the trucking firm won out, I'd appreciate the information. Then and only then will I grant you a nod of legitimacy regarding the claim of trucks being the competition for railroads.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag