I see three big issues; would the operator be an engineer or a truck driver? Any unionized railroad this will be an issue.There will also be a question of jurisdiction. Could states claim jurisdiction that they are motor vehicles and not trains I could see the state police wanting to enforce speed laws and motor vehicle laws on them. However, I see the big issue is shipper acceptance. The traditional shipping dock gives shippers a lot of advantages that they would lose using this.One of the biggest is that the shippers employees both load and unload the trailer. The trucker simply backs into the dock. Here, how would the shipper be benefited? You would have to build something else, and that is something most shippers simply won't do.
I agree that it seems like it would benefit engineers, rails and small industries as well as the general public. But, if this forum is representative of some sentiments, I would doubt it.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
As for the rail unions, come on! They are not stupid and they know where they stand today. So if a service oriented program came along by some railroad that said instead of running one 40, 50, 100 car train with two men, we want to run up to 10 trains, don't you think the union would cherish the eight more jobs and work with the railroad to develop the service and the business? Its up to both sides to make it happen, and if there are opportunities today I don't think either side is going to block it.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
The clip mentioned MUing, not not clear how many could be coupled. Technologically it sounds advanced, with true auto couplers, electronic disk brakes, etc. Compatibility with other equipment would seem to be irrelevant. One major, potentially fatal stumbling block would be crew size (1) and the rail unions.
First note in clip that the "driver" steps on rails to access the train....safety no, no!
But after that, there seems to be some merit in the idea. The Reading tried a service like that in its gasping days...call and they'd send an engine and crew to pick up your cars and move them anywhere on the Reading at that time...but crew size and lack of industry put the concept away.
After we get over the US heavy guage problems, there are quite a few marketing opportunities here. Without going into power details, etc, how about for coal/mineral hauls from less than unit train load mines; specific car parts from one plant to another as in "assemblyline" transportation. Wise planning shippers could actually own and specify for their own purposes.
A school of thought is that short trains are actually faster than long trains keeping traffic flowing at a profitable rate. Therefore, depending on how long is too long, a one or two man crew might actually work to move more freight faster over certain routes than is performed today. (DRGW used to successfully run short trains fast and often, keeping the line fluid and delivering the service. One hundred or more car trains with a two man crew may look good on paper, but on the road they don't prove the profitability nor reliabilty when service is on the line.).
Questions: Any chance these could be mu'd so that a bunch of these could be gathered together to make a longer train with each unit's power to be on line? Do these come in 2, 4, 6, etc, car length configurations? Can they be broken apart and remixed and redirected (without dropping back to box car mentality railroading)?
Kind of an interesting idea, but I would think that you railed a couple of potentially valid issues:
Could it interface with current equipment?
Would FRA rules and regulations preclude its operation in this country?
How would the regulators in Canada or Mexico view its operations?
And the potentially major issue- Third party operations on various railroads? Open Access?
At any rate the "Sprinter" seems to have a similar look as the MPM that Herzog Companies fields for RR MOW activities; Linked here: http://www.herzogcompanies.com/railroad_services_mpm.php
Looks good on paper initially, but, and here are some big buts.
1. Nothing in the way of crash protection for the crew(s).
2. It only needs one crew (driver) Gasp!
3. We need to change the oil so the whole unit comes out of service.
4. Not sure how well it would play with full size trains either.
5. And worst of all, it may make some sense.
John
It was brought up in a thread about how this German cargo sprinter http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yv4tIuIJzls can offer more flexible shipping options for smaller, direct to "shipping dock" loads.
It has not caught on in Europe, but here in the U.S. I am curious of what is keeping this from being successful or even recognized, besides possibly lobbyists.
Anyone think these could possibly work out in the eastern half of the country? I am not saying these are going to replace conventional Intermodal trains, but grab more customers that are looking for flexibility with larger shipments.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.