Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
"toll" railroads
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="edbenton"] <P>FM the reason the Reefer Roadrailer train failed was simple no outbound trains. There was no outbound freight for the BNSF to haul out to the West coast to reload with produce to bring back to the midwest with.[/quote]</P> <P>Ed,</P> <P>Everyone in the biz knows that it is quite simple to fill a reefer like you would a dry van. California is the world's biggest consumer market, and there's still plenty of production from the Midwest that could have filled those "dry" reefers. In fact, that backhaul would have been the least expensive way to get consumer goods from the Midwest to California. The question is - who's fault was it that this backhaul opportunity was missed? Did BNSF not permit the necessary flexibility in the cycle to allow backhauls to reach the necessary docks? Or did the ReeferRailer folks just suffer from brain freeze? I honestly don't know. But given my experiences with BNSF, I suspect BNSF was principle in denying the backhaul logistics to fully function. At least that would be consistent with BNSF's other actions.</P> <P>[quote] As for your comment about the Swift roadrailer train. Swift themselves PULLED THE PLUG there lack of the ability to send those trailers anywhere all over the US that plus the loss of 1000 lbs of cargo limits what you can haul in a way.[/quote]</P> <P>This is not quite an honest description of why the Swift RoadRailer service ended. Swift was <STRONG>forced</STRONG> to pull out by BNSF. Everything was going smoothly, both parties were seemingly happy with the arrangement. There was (and is) more than enough truckload traffic both ways between the PNW and California to fill all the vans northbound and southbound. Then BNSF decided the jack up the rate to an unrealistic level, thereby putting the onus on Swift to either continue the service at a sudden loss, or cut their losses altogether (and never, ever invest at BNSF's behest again). For what it's worth, this is straight from the horse's mouth via the Swift rep down in Lewiston ID.</P> <P>BTW - The tare cost of a RoadRailer dry van is about 800 lbs over a conventional dry van, not 1000 lbs. Given the types of commmodities that move between SoCal and PNW, the vans were more likely to cube out rather than weigh out, so the extra tare was mostly superfluous. </P> <P>[quote] Out here in the IL the local elevators are building 110 car loaders as fast as they can to get service by the EVIL BNSF as you call it.</P> <P>[/quote]</P> <P>To reiterate for the millionth time, I have <STRONG>never</STRONG> called BNSF evil.[banghead] </P> <P>But if you care to do some fact checking around your area, I'll bet you there are dozens of 26-car and 52-car elevators barely a decade or so old that were constructed by some of those same entities at BNSF's behest, only to lose BNSF's service a few years later. Yep, nothing like having millions of dollars of investment go to waste! Ask <EM>them</EM> how <EM>they</EM> feel about BNSF, maybe then you'll find that elusive "evil BNSF" phrasology you so desire.</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