Trains.com

I Hate Hunter Harrison

41508 views
105 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: Libertyville, IL
  • 372 posts
I Hate Hunter Harrison
Posted by Mr. Railman on Saturday, September 1, 2012 12:20 AM

At first it was a distaste for Canadian National, but now it sounds like the CN is making a turnaround, working vigorously on completing construction of the EJ&E improvements, and reinstating old IC and GTW SD40s into service, saving them from the Scrap pile that E. Hunter Harrison wanted to take them to.

The Wisconsin Central had about three intermodal terminals on their system, if I'm correct. One was in Green Bay, another in Minneapolis, and a third somewhere else on their system. They also operated parts of Schiller Park for their container shipments. The WC was growing into a powerful railroad empire. Then the CN took acquired them. Harrison got rid of the Intermodal load station in Green bay AND in Minneapolis, basically killing what seemed to be a growing buiness for the regional.He was also quick about getting rid of the WCs EMD power too, including what was left of the GBW (but that's only a minor reason to hate him) One final thing is the employment. This is from an actual dispatcher of the CN, nee WC. He said that he works at one location for thirty days, and then they transfer him to another location for thirty days...which can be understandable so they can learn the system.

Now that He is the head of rival Canadian Pacific, He is getting rid of things here. The Sprinter service between Chicago and St Paul, the premeire service through those subdivisions, is now gone. 484 and its counterpart hasbeen mreged with 282s consist, and 282 has been operating with 3-4 variants some days recently.

Another thing is the elimination of the Milwaukee Intermodal operations, effective tomorrow. Train 277, a CP train that makes intermediate stops, has been, in the past month or so, carrying at least one set of well cars...

...well cars destined for MILWAUKEE

The city might file a lawsuit because of this action, seeing that UP can't transport double stacks due to height restrictions. if Anything, I'd try and find a way to add TOFC to the facility in Milwaukee before deciding to delete it.

Also, there is a line of old IC&E/DM&E/CP locomotives ready to go to scrap.

OH! One final thing. Amtrak does not have Top Authority anymore through Wisconsin. Looks like we'll be seeing more delays for the Empire Builder.

I think this man should look at the quality company he is demolishing. And no, I'm not just mad about demolition of equipment.

I am ready for any refutes that come from the rail community.

  • Member since
    March 2002
  • From: Harrisburg PA / Dover AFB DE
  • 1,482 posts
Posted by adrianspeeder on Saturday, September 1, 2012 1:04 AM

Why would you want ole SD-40s with lots of better power stored everywhere else?

 

Adrianspeeder

USAF TSgt C-17 Aircraft Maintenance Flying Crew Chief & Flightline Avionics Craftsman

  • Member since
    March 2002
  • 9,265 posts
Posted by edblysard on Saturday, September 1, 2012 5:43 AM

Seriously Mr. Railman,, how old are you?

 

23 17 46 11

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Saturday, September 1, 2012 6:54 AM

If my memory serves me correctly, the WC-CN merger was initiated by WC shareholders, who were getting restless over the fact that WC's share price was stagnant, even though the corporation was well-managed.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Saturday, September 1, 2012 7:06 AM

edblysard

Seriously Mr. Railman,, how old are you?

 

Is that relevant?  Mr. Railman may be totally off-base, but one would think you could actually comment on the substance of even one of his points, such as the d/cing of intermodal services. 

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: Libertyville, IL
  • 372 posts
Posted by Mr. Railman on Saturday, September 1, 2012 7:13 AM

adrianspeeder

Why would you want ole SD-40s with lots of better power stored everywhere else?

 

Adrianspeeder

If they have better power stored elsewhere, then why do they use many leased locomotives, GE and EMD alike?

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: Libertyville, IL
  • 372 posts
Posted by Mr. Railman on Saturday, September 1, 2012 7:16 AM

Old enough to know that there will be long term economic impacts, as well as a raise in transportation costs, for all customers related to the cancellation of rail movement to Milwaukee, forcing them to move to the highway instead.

...19 going on 20...

Keep in mind how Hunters moves when he was in the CN had their customers flaring, especially the WC business partners.

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: Libertyville, IL
  • 372 posts
Posted by Mr. Railman on Saturday, September 1, 2012 7:22 AM

schlimm

edblysard

Seriously Mr. Railman,, how old are you?

 

Is that relevant?  Mr. Railman may be totally off-base, but one would think you could actually comment on the substance of even one of his points, such as the d/cing of intermodal services. 

I guess you could make a pun out of it and say that Hunter Harrison is thinking outside the box...the metal intermdal box Laugh

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Saturday, September 1, 2012 7:43 AM

     You may hate Hunter Harrison.  He may hate you.  Your way of phrasing things make you sound immature.  That's your option.  It detracts from how serious folks take your thoughts and ideas.  ...Just sayin....

      Are you a CP stockholder?  Harrison is doing what he thinks is best for the business- something he was asked to do, when he was put in that position.  The results might not be things you like in the part of the little world that you live, but he isn't doing it to please you.  Is he doing what's right?  Or what's wrong?  I don't know.  You don't know.  I'd have to lean towards his perspective over yours.  He's run a couple more railroads than you have.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Saturday, September 1, 2012 8:00 AM

Murphy Siding
Are you a CP stockholder?  Harrison is doing what he thinks is best for the business- something he was asked to do, when he was put in that position.  The results might not be things you like in the part of the little world that you live, but he isn't doing it to please you.  Is he doing what's right?  Or what's wrong?  I don't know.  You don't know.  I'd have to lean towards his perspective over yours.  He's run a couple more railroads than you have.

So, according to you, unless one is a shareholder or a railroad CEO, and is not immature, nobody can  raise questions about the effectiveness of Harrison's business strategy from various perspectives, including from the little world in which the poster may reside?   If so, few of the folks who participate in these threads are in a position to do so.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, September 1, 2012 8:03 AM

Mr. Railman

Old enough to know that there will be long term economic impacts, as well as a raise in transportation costs, for all customers related to the cancellation of rail movement to Milwaukee, forcing them to move to the highway instead.

...19 going on 20...

Keep in mind how Hunters moves when he was in the CN had their customers flaring, especially the WC business partners.

Ah Ha! Old enough to have all the answers without knowing any of the questions.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: Libertyville, IL
  • 372 posts
Posted by Mr. Railman on Saturday, September 1, 2012 8:15 AM

Yes, he has run a few more railroads, but keep in mind that when he operated the CN, customers were not satisfied with the service. Just because CP stock goes up doesn't mean customers are satisfied.

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: Libertyville, IL
  • 372 posts
Posted by Mr. Railman on Saturday, September 1, 2012 8:19 AM

Old enough to know that the WSOR has seen positive customer feedback, which is leading to an increase in carloads as well as industrial and economic growth for the state of Wisconsin. I think of my statements as biased information, not answers...

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Saturday, September 1, 2012 8:27 AM

Interesting the sort of responses generated by Mr. Railman raising questions about HH.  Other than the responses concerning locomotives, all the other points are ignored.  instead it's "Kill the messenger" or in this case, belittle the questioner.  You'd think HH was El Supremo Commandante in some banana republic in the 1930's.  No criticism allowed.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Saturday, September 1, 2012 10:28 AM

Mr. Railman, 19 going on 20?  Love your youthful passion, don't lose it. And that's whether we agree or disagree.  I just turned 59, and my passion only gets going after 3-4 cups of high-octane coffee.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, September 1, 2012 10:28 AM

schlimm

Interesting the sort of responses generated by Mr. Railman raising questions about HH.  Other than the responses concerning locomotives, all the other points are ignored.  instead it's "Kill the messenger" or in this case, belittle the questioner.  You'd think HH was El Supremo Commandante in some banana republic in the 1930's.  No criticism allowed.

Business is tough!  The railroad business is tougher than many. HH did develop at track record for financial success in his terms with IC and then CN.  Running of a railroad is not about making decisions that are idendified as black and white - the decisions are about deciphering the varying shades of gray to come to the best possible outcome.

Short haul inter-modal is a very high cost service for a carrier.  The services Mr. Railman identified are short haul services.  When looking at cost, not only do you have the costs associated with running the terminals themselves, you have the associated costs with setting your overall operating plan to give the trains associated with these services the priority handling that their rate structure and customer expectations demand.

Decisions made at the top levels of a corporation are made based on data that is not available to the general public.  While those on the ground and outside the company may not agree with the decisions, the decisions are not theirs to make.

Like or dislike HH, his prior track record for success demands that he be given the benefit of the doubt at this early juncture in the running of the CP.  Culture change is a hard pill to swallow, and HH is bringing culture change to CP - like it or not.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, September 1, 2012 11:08 AM

Its not nice to say "hate."

 

 

  • Member since
    March 2002
  • From: Spring, TX
  • 334 posts
Posted by nordique72 on Saturday, September 1, 2012 1:19 PM

Mr. Railman

At first it was a distaste for Canadian National, but now it sounds like the CN is making a turnaround, working vigorously on completing construction of the EJ&E improvements, and reinstating old IC and GTW SD40s into service, saving them from the Scrap pile that E. Hunter Harrison wanted to take them to.

The improvements that you are lauding CN on the old EJE for were initated by Hunter Harrison before he left CN. They didn't dream up those improvements overnight- those were all drawn up at the time of the EJE purchase. As for a couple SD40s returned to service- there were a couple brought back, but not exactly a large number.

The Wisconsin Central had about three intermodal terminals on their system, if I'm correct. One was in Green Bay, another in Minneapolis, and a third somewhere else on their system.

WC had intermodal ramps at New Brighton (Twin Cities), Stevens Point, Neenah, Chippewa Falls and Green Bay (which was a Schneider ramp operated by WC). The intermodal out of the Twin Cities was never run in a dedicated train (in fact most of it was Ashley Furniture containers received from the BNSF at Minneapolis), the Schneider service out of Green Bay was two pairs of trains a day to Chicago by the time of the CN merger. The ramps at Chippewa Falls, Neenah and Point were all small potatoes- in fact the Chippewa Falls ramp never handled a single load. The reasons for why CN ditched the Schneider trains was due to the short haul to Chicago where the traffic was interchanged to other roads- for the WC this was a good mid-range haul to an endpoint on their system. Not so for the CN.

They also operated parts of Schiller Park for their container shipments.

Soo/CP owned Schiller Park - that was not a WC ramp. WC had no ramp in the Chicagoland area. WC intermodal mostly went to the IC IMT ramp along I-55. WC did have some leased yard tracks at Schiller Park and ran a pair on manifests out of there, but other than that they did not have much at Schiller Park.

The WC was growing into a powerful railroad empire.

WC had grown as much as it could in it's region- they were doing well, but the stockholders did not see much in the way of potential growth so they decided to oust Burkhardt and sell out to CN.

He was also quick about getting rid of the WCs EMD power too, including what was left of the GBW (but that's only a minor reason to hate him)

All of the ex-GBW power was long gone by the time Hunter took over WC- there was some old Fox River Valley junk still running. But a fleet of SD45s- while romantic for railfans was not so much for management. One SD75I could do the job of two SD45s.

One final thing is the employment. This is from an actual dispatcher of the CN, nee WC. He said that he works at one location for thirty days, and then they transfer him to another location for thirty days...which can be understandable so they can learn the system.

There is nothing odd about that- dispatchers can be moved from one desk to another as needed. They are all stationed at Homewood- so it's not like they are getting sent all over the country. 

Now that He is the head of rival Canadian Pacific, He is getting rid of things here. The Sprinter service between Chicago and St Paul, the premeire service through those subdivisions, is now gone. 484 and its counterpart hasbeen mreged with 282s consist, and 282 has been operating with 3-4 variants some days recently.

That's called efficiency- he saw you could combine the short haul Sprint 182/183 trains with  the other Twin Cities trains and save on crews/locomotive use... that's a good business decision. You can always run a second section as needed on the days when the container business is strong instead of pointlessly 7 times a week. Same thing with 282/484- saves on crews/locomotives/etc.  I'm sorry if that's one less train for you to photograph.

Another thing is the elimination of the Milwaukee Intermodal operations, effective tomorrow. Train 277, a CP train that makes intermediate stops, has been, in the past month or so, carrying at least one set of well cars......well cars destined for MILWAUKEE. The city might file a lawsuit because of this action, seeing that UP can't transport double stacks due to height restrictions. if Anything, I'd try and find a way to add TOFC to the facility in Milwaukee before deciding to delete it.

Yes, a small carload short haul intermodal service that most likely barely breaks even for the CP. Why would they keep something like this? That's like ignoring a leaky faucet because it's only dripping. 

Also, there is a line of old IC&E/DM&E/CP locomotives ready to go to scrap.

The leases are coming due on these engines- CP is buying brand new GEs... there is no reason to keep this old junk around. They don't keep engines around just so you can take pictures of them.`

I think this man should look at the quality company he is demolishing. And no, I'm not just mad about demolition of equipment.

You need to get your facts straight- you can't see all of the ledger sheets showing loss and gain from certain services and operations. All the things he is doing are to SAVE the CP- save them money, crews, time, efficiency.... and looking at his previous companies he ran, CN isn't exactly in ruins, nor was the IC after he was done with it. In fact they both became highly efficient systems with low operating ratios that was the envy of the industry. Now the one thing that does make a black mark on Hunter's report card is his past treatment of employees and some captive customers- time will only tell if he brings that part of his attitude to the CP. 

x

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Saturday, September 1, 2012 3:41 PM

schlimm

Murphy Siding
Are you a CP stockholder?  Harrison is doing what he thinks is best for the business- something he was asked to do, when he was put in that position.  The results might not be things you like in the part of the little world that you live, but he isn't doing it to please you.  Is he doing what's right?  Or what's wrong?  I don't know.  You don't know.  I'd have to lean towards his perspective over yours.  He's run a couple more railroads than you have.

So, according to you, unless one is a shareholder or a railroad CEO, and is not immature, nobody can  raise questions about the effectiveness of Harrison's business strategy from various perspectives, including from the little world in which the poster may reside?   If so, few of the folks who participate in these threads are in a position to do so.

   You miss the whole point of my post schlimm.

      I asked if he was a stockholder, because HH is doing what the stockholders want him to do, not what an anonymous poster on a message board thinks he should do.

       Certainly, anybody can can raise questions about the effectiveness of Harrison's business strategy from various perspectives, including from the little world in which the poster may reside.  What I'm saying is, the tone "I hate HH......" is borderline trollish, and only one step above Beavis and Butthead saying "This sucks!.....". 

     The OP doesn't have to act immature, but it is certainly within his rights to do so.  I'm just saying, he might be better off to try a different approach, or syle, or something, if he's looking for people to care what he thinks.  That's all.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Saturday, September 1, 2012 3:43 PM

Mr. Railman

Yes, he has run a few more railroads, but keep in mind that when he operated the CN, customers were not satisfied with the service. Just because CP stock goes up doesn't mean customers are satisfied.

  Not to be cynical, but maybe raising the  value of CP stock is probably why he was hired. 

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: Libertyville, IL
  • 372 posts
Posted by Mr. Railman on Saturday, September 1, 2012 5:33 PM

Yes, it is a high cost service, even higher when put on the road and not the rails...I wonder if that's why ZIM began shipping containers to and from Milwaukee not too long ago?

  • Member since
    March 2002
  • 9,265 posts
Posted by edblysard on Saturday, September 1, 2012 6:36 PM

Schlimn,

The question was a serious one, because how I was going to word my next response depended on whether I was dealing with an adult or a teenage railfan mad because his favorite train no longer runs…his original post reads like a kids rant about a paint scheme change,

Had he been say, 14 or 15 I would have referred him to several excellent Trains articles about Harrison and suggested he re-word his post to highlight the concerns he has, as opposed to his dislike of Harrison.

At 19, he should be old enough to temper his anger with the knowledge that “I Hate” in a title immediately relegates his post to the PO’ed  foamer category.

As it is written, it doesn’t deserve a response beyond “whatever” and any other dismissive you can come up with,

But of course you had to jump in and stir the pot, so forget any response beyond this one.

Harrison is doing what he is paid to do, trim off the parts that don’t make a profitable return for the shareholders, cut the cost as far as he can, and redevelop the core business.

23 17 46 11

  • Member since
    July 2012
  • 71 posts
Posted by Vern Moore on Saturday, September 1, 2012 6:39 PM

Intermodal operations in Milwaukee will never be cost effective because Milwaukee is simply too close to the much larger and efficient intermodal facilities in Chicago.  Intermodal is designed to be cost effective by making up to the first 300 miles of a haul via road, then the rail segment and then a return to road for up to the last 300 miles.

That's why all major trucking companies (Schneider, JB Hunt, Swift, Werner) are all moving towards doing regional haul trucking and everything over 600 miles total transit being moved by rail. Gone are the days when as a Schneider driver I would regularly get 1500-mile dispatches. Only freight too time sensitive to accept rail terminal delay time or incompatible with rail (like bottled beer) are candidates for road-only haul these days, and competition for that market with smaller, lower costs carriers is getting cut-throat..

Now a "long-haul" driver feels lucky to get a 600 mile assignment and those old 1500 mile loads are very few and far between. Meanwhile companies like Schneider are marketting intermodal service at a fraction of what a driver hauling that 1500 mile load costs the customer.

If you look at the traffic base in and out of all the terminals that EHH has closed you will see that the freight is being re-directed to larger terminals somewhere within 300 miles of the closed terminal's location. For now that is the cost-effective service radius of an intermodal terminal and the railroads, container chassis suppliers and trucking companies are concentrating their efforts to build-out and refine that system.

CP and WC were examples of companies that had overbuilt their intermodal systems and that now have to pare down the un-needed facilities to remain cost-competitive with the companies that have already slimmed-down. EHH did not cause that situation to arise, management before him did and he is now charged with correcting that situation to make CP as profitable of a railroad as he can.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Saturday, September 1, 2012 7:11 PM

edblysard

As it is written, it doesn’t deserve a response beyond “whatever” and any other dismissive you can come up with,

But of course you had to jump in and stir the pot, so forget any response beyond this one.

"Stir the pot?"   There you go again, attacking the messenger.  You are the one who was so dismissive of his questions.  As I said, he may or may not be off the mark, but why not just try to deal with the substance rather than his wording, which you took offense at.  BTW,  HH doesn't need you to defend him.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    March 2002
  • From: Harrisburg PA / Dover AFB DE
  • 1,482 posts
Posted by adrianspeeder on Saturday, September 1, 2012 7:43 PM

Mr. Railman

If they have better power stored elsewhere, then why do they use many leased locomotives, GE and EMD alike?

That is the point, use nicer up to date lease power that isn't in short supply.  I wouldn't want to run around in ole garbage without AC and such.  NS is finally cuttin' up non -2 SD-40s as we speak.

Adrianspeeder

USAF TSgt C-17 Aircraft Maintenance Flying Crew Chief & Flightline Avionics Craftsman

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • From: Mason City, Iowa
  • 901 posts
Posted by RRKen on Saturday, September 1, 2012 9:54 PM

When I look at what CN did with the WC, the results were not surprising.  CN just wanted a route from their system in Western Canada to Chicago, as CN officials called it at the time "the missing link".  they did not care about local traffic.  They were not interested in growing new biz.   Of course one reasoning was, WC had some cost advantage, and were flexible enough to go out for the small potatoes.    And yes, customers I talked with were quite happy.   WC was easy to deal with, and shippers at the paper mills loved that.

As soon as CN took over, things fell apart.  Long term customers lost service.   One had to resort to trucking from Iowa as a result.  CN did not care, and did not have any advantage in labor or cost.   

Now I am not sure about the figures as they relate to car-loadings originated or terminated within the former WC territory, but I am sure willing to bet it has dropped drastically.  A few  here, a few there add up real quick.  In some cases, customers went out of business because the increased costs of transport dented their bottom line too badly.   

Next, allow me to point out E-Dot had many gaffs.  One was on the former GTW, where his managers decided to single track around Marcellus on the South Bend sub.  It became a bottle neck, and E-Dot supported the move.  In the end, he and his crew had to eat crow, and as I understand it, restore the second main.    I hear stories from other railroaders about the goofs on he former IC RR.    And of course the constant back ups of traffic on interchange coming into Chicago on other carriers.  And I quote one morning report "as usual  CN cannot handle the cars til later in the day, so find a place for the trains to park...".    Not a blip on the radar, but a constant problem, to which other carriers had to alter their operations to resolve.   Many more stupid moves I have witnessed, or been privy to, raises a lot of eyebrows. 

Then finally the EJ&E debacle.  His managers, lawyers or other staff dropped the ball  when it came to the merger.  Not something I expected from the Railroader of the Century (or whatever they called E-Dot).   

It is true, they were profitable, but at what cost?  In the case of customers,  losing access to the national network was not appropriate.  To the public, the arrogance was a faux pas.  To connecting carriers, a lot more cooperation was needed.   To his employees, well I shall leave that for the folks up there to relate, needless to say, it was not in any spririt of goodwill.

I never drink water. I'm afraid it will become habit-forming.
W. C. Fields
I never met a Moderator I liked
  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Antioch, IL
  • 4,371 posts
Posted by greyhounds on Sunday, September 2, 2012 12:44 AM

Vern Moore

Intermodal operations in Milwaukee will never be cost effective because Milwaukee is simply too close to the much larger and efficient intermodal facilities in Chicago.  Intermodal is designed to be cost effective by making up to the first 300 miles of a haul via road, then the rail segment and then a return to road for up to the last 300 miles.

That's why all major trucking companies (Schneider, JB Hunt, Swift, Werner) are all moving towards doing regional haul trucking and everything over 600 miles total transit being moved by rail. Gone are the days when as a Schneider driver I would regularly get 1500-mile dispatches. Only freight too time sensitive to accept rail terminal delay time or incompatible with rail (like bottled beer) are candidates for road-only haul these days, and competition for that market with smaller, lower costs carriers is getting cut-throat..

Now a "long-haul" driver feels lucky to get a 600 mile assignment and those old 1500 mile loads are very few and far between. Meanwhile companies like Schneider are marketting intermodal service at a fraction of what a driver hauling that 1500 mile load costs the customer.

If you look at the traffic base in and out of all the terminals that EHH has closed you will see that the freight is being re-directed to larger terminals somewhere within 300 miles of the closed terminal's location. For now that is the cost-effective service radius of an intermodal terminal and the railroads, container chassis suppliers and trucking companies are concentrating their efforts to build-out and refine that system.

CP and WC were examples of companies that had overbuilt their intermodal systems and that now have to pare down the un-needed facilities to remain cost-competitive with the companies that have already slimmed-down. EHH did not cause that situation to arise, management before him did and he is now charged with correcting that situation to make CP as profitable of a railroad as he can.

Welcome to the forum.

You write well and are knowledgeable.

But, I've got one nit to pick.  At the Ole ICG we could handle bottled beer just fine in TOFC service.  When Schlitz closed its Milwaukee brewery they chose to supply the Chicago and Milwaukee areas out of their Memphis brewery.

We needed northbound loads out of Memphis so we went after the business.  We got it.  We handled kegs, cans and bottles.  Worked like a charm and put dollars on the bottom line.  (It's only 500 miles from Memphis to Chicago.  We trucked the suds up from the Chicago terminal to the Milwaukee market.)

What was needed was insulated trailers.  We leased 100.  Loaded 'em south with whatever and brought the beer back north.

A few years ago I was having a pizza dinner in a bar in Fond du Lac that still served Schlitz.  I thought:  "I haven't  had one of those in years" - so I ordered a Schlitz to go with the pizza.  A couple sips reminded me why I hadn't ordered a Schlitz for a while.

"By many measures, the U.S. freight rail system is the safest, most efficient and cost effective in the world." - Federal Railroad Administration, October, 2009. I'm just your average, everyday, uncivilized howling "anti-government" critic of mass government expenditures for "High Speed Rail" in the US. And I'm gosh darn proud of that.
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: NW Wisconsin
  • 3,857 posts
Posted by beaulieu on Sunday, September 2, 2012 2:31 AM

nordique72

WC had intermodal ramps at New Brighton (Twin Cities), Stevens Point, Neenah, Chippewa Falls and Green Bay (which was a Schneider ramp operated by WC).

Where did WCL have an Intermodal terminal in New Brighton? They used the Minnesota Commercial at New Brighton for their yard facilities such as they were. If they were south of the Soo trackage they would have had to be tucked behind Bell Pole, and there wasn't really any room to the north either. The only Intermodal I remember was off the BN.

Moderator
  • Member since
    November 2008
  • From: London ON
  • 10,392 posts
Posted by blownout cylinder on Sunday, September 2, 2012 7:15 AM

adrianspeeder

Mr. Railman

If they have better power stored elsewhere, then why do they use many leased locomotives, GE and EMD alike?

That is the point, use nicer up to date lease power that isn't in short supply.  I wouldn't want to run around in ole garbage without AC and such.  NS is finally cuttin' up non -2 SD-40s as we speak.

Adrianspeeder

Great point there. There are a lot of newer units that could be leased.

As for the snarkiness here....

Haters Gonna Hate....

Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry

I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...

http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: Libertyville, IL
  • 372 posts
Posted by Mr. Railman on Sunday, September 2, 2012 11:38 AM

adrianspeeder

Mr. Railman

If they have better power stored elsewhere, then why do they use many leased locomotives, GE and EMD alike?

That is the point, use nicer up to date lease power that isn't in short supply.  I wouldn't want to run around in ole garbage without AC and such.  NS is finally cuttin' up non -2 SD-40s as we speak.

Adrianspeeder

That's the thing...many of the SD40s are SD40-2s...the SD60s are getting rebuilt and repainted. The older geeps could be demoted to local service or the scrapper.

Also, there are plenty of leased SD40-2s being used on trains, such as 276/277.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

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