Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Trouble in open access paradise?
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
<P>[quote user="beaulieu"][quote user="daveklepper"]Are not their any ports with tracks on the docks allowing direct to rail movement of containers? It would seem the a ship unloading to a dock filled with flat cars and locomotives to pull one string out and replace with additional empties anbd then to replace it with the loads intended for the ship would be a great way to reduce port time for ships. Is anybody doing this outside of one port in Israel?[/quote]<BR><BR>Let's take a large 6,000 TEU container ship arriving at Rotterdam Maasvlakte terminal. It left Asia with a full load, stopped at Antwerp and unloaded 1000 containers, and loaded 500 empties. Lets say it plans on unloading 2,000 of those containers here at Rotterdam. Of those containers 300 are for various destinations in the Netherlands, 800 for locations in Germany, 200 for Poland, 300, for Austria, 100 for Switzerland, and 300 for Italy. Lightest containers are on top, heaviest on the bottom,some of the Antwerp empties will have to be unloaded then reloaded. The container train can take 80 TEU, and you have 4 tracks holding 4 such trains under the cranes. The 4 trains will serve say 6 inland terminals. What are the odds that the first 320 loaded containers off the ship will fill any of the trains, near zero, and since the trains belong to different companies you can't sort the cars, takes too long anyway, much easier to sort the containers. The ship has to be kept in balance so it must be unloaded evenly, also some containers will have to be unloaded and then reloaded to reach the lower containers remember 3,500 containers are not getting off here, but lightest must be on top, very embarassing if the ship capsizes. The cranes movements are carefully planned, even the pile of containers stacked on the ground must be planned so that they can be reloaded in the right order and of course the opportunity is taken to load some containers while others are being unloaded. So even a large port like this does not load directly to train. They use unmanned robots to haul the containers away from the port cranes to holding piles, which correspond to the correct train load or for the trucking companies. In the case of the trains, they use dedicated road-trains consisting of a special tractor pulling 5 trailers each capable of handling 1 40ft. or 2 20ft. containers to get the containers from the holding area to the rail loading terminal. These run over dedicated roadways to the rail terminal, where two Portal cranes load the trains. The ground storage is also necessary because ships are frequently late, and time for the ship alongside the quay is more precious than loading tracks for the trains.<BR>[/quote]</P> <P>So are you saying you are opposed to the concept of direct ship to rail unloading? That's fine. But if you are insinuating that it's logistically impossible, guess again. This concept has been discussed in recent times in JOC, LT, TW, et al.......</P> <P>"<STRONG>Direct discharge</STRONG> from vessel onto railroad car, road vehicle or barge with the purpose of immediate transport from the port area." </P> <P>.....and like all new ideas will probably eventually find a modification that is applicable in practice.</P> <P>In your example, how long are the 4 dock side tracks? Are they loops or spurs? If each single stack container train is 80 containers max, that's no more than 4,000 ft of train, so if the loop tracks are at least 16,000 ft, you can actually load 8 trains at a time, with two trains sharing each track. And even if you are loading direct from ship to rail, that doesn't preclude standard dockside operations to move around all the containers <EM>not</EM> bound for immediate outbound rail, e.g. it's not an all or none proposition.</P> <P>Not sure what your "sulk" comment relates to, but if you think direct container discharge is incompatible as a subject matter for an OA discussion, well it is my belief that direct discharge is one area where competition between rail transporters would spark innovation, and direct discharge is one logical avenue by which a transporter can get a leg up on a competitor.</P>
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
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
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
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy