Murphy Siding What if a hobo posts that he hates graffiti?
What if a hobo posts that he hates graffiti?
CNSFSorry about the big block of text - I can't figure out how to get my paragraph breaks to stop disappearing when I post.
HH is safe for now. "He" is only hated, not loathed.
I like Hunter Harrison. He got CN on the right track and now he's doingthe same for CP... Its not so much that people don't like him, it's that they don't like change.
Ulrich ... Its not so much that people don't like him, it's that they don't like change.
... Its not so much that people don't like him, it's that they don't like change.
That's right...and progress or no progress, people generally don't like change. I'm not a big fan of change either unless there's a payoff involved. The trouble with change sometimes is that the people who have to make the changes aren't the one's who get a direct payoff... i..e." we're going to lay YOU off so that the railway can run more efficiently".. So change breeds fear, and fear breeds anger, resentment, and even hatred. That's especially true if you've got a few decades invested and you're within striking distance of retirement..who wants to go through change then? Not many do, unless you're supremely confident and capable...sort of like Harrison himself. Otherwise, duck, take cover, and lay low, and hopefully the changes won't nail you before you retire.
Was reading about the Higgs Boson particle…so it seems Yoda was telling the truth, there is a force in the universe that binds it all together…go figure!
So, if HH figures out how to work it, we can have the HHHB principle and no longer need diesels?
23 17 46 11
zardozProgress is always change, but change is not always progress.
Amen, brother.
I hesitate to bring it up, but I have been wondering about this for a week or so.
EHH and Bill A. have said that the release of the "big" plan for CP will be delayed from mid-October to early December. That would put the release date past the one year point of Bill A.'s announcement that he had taken a position in CP. I'm no securities expert, but would that then enable him to turn this whole thing into a "pump and dump" and sacrifice the CPR and EHH in the process? And he will be the only one to make any money in the process.
Bruce
So shovel the coal, let this rattler roll.
"A Train is a Place Going Somewhere" CP Rail Public Timetable
"O. S. Irricana"
. . . __ . ______
I don't think so. The long term viability of CP is not tied to what any one shareholder does.. he may decide to dump his shares and that would likely cause others to sell too..but over the long term the share price will continue to reflect the true value of the property. Ackman's involvement with CP is really of know concern to me... as a shareholder I'm more interested in the metrics and how well the people who are running the company are performing.
AgentKid zardozProgress is always change, but change is not always progress. Amen, brother. I hesitate to bring it up, but I have been wondering about this for a week or so. EHH and Bill A. have said that the release of the "big" plan for CP will be delayed from mid-October to early December. That would put the release date past the one year point of Bill A.'s announcement that he had taken a position in CP. I'm no securities expert, but would that then enable him to turn this whole thing into a "pump and dump" and sacrifice the CPR and EHH in the process? And he will be the only one to make any money in the process. Bruce
It's one year since he bought stock, but it's not one year since his people have had the ability to make changes(Date of the annual stockholder's meeting). At this point I doubt that he could get enough of a premium over his purchase price to be worthwhile. He needs to get the price higher, say around $90, and he needs to get the company's P/E ratio right so that just his selling doesn't drive the price lower.
There is no perfect railroad president. Some are very good, some have ideas that are better left in their heads than applied in the field. Wayne Johnston was president of the ICRR from 1945 to 1967. He increased the size of the ICRR and made it one of the great railroads of America. His predecessor William Johnson '67 to '69 was the man responsible for bankrupting the REA express. The UPS of its day. His philosophy was to dismantle as much of the ICRR as possible by divesting the secondary lines. This was done by providing poor service and then after the customers went to trucks, abandon the lines. This idea was also carried on by Alan Boyd. This may have been good for the stockholders, but it was a disaster for the railroad.
Here's a tiny update...
Sounds like He's going to spend more money on new GEs, instead of continuing the uopgrade on the SOO SD60s AND the reintroduction of the SD90-43MACs. Sounds like sooner than later the CP will be boasting mostly General electric power, while the identity of the SOO Line and the DM&E slowly crumble.
Mr. Railman Here's a tiny update... Sounds like He's going to spend more money on new GEs, instead of continuing the uopgrade on the SOO SD60s AND the reintroduction of the SD90-43MACs. Sounds like sooner than later the CP will be boasting mostly General electric power, while the identity of the SOO Line and the DM&E slowly crumble.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
mudchicken HH is safe for now. "He" is only hated, not loathed.
I think someone is on the verge of loathing....
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/
Murphy Siding Mr. Railman Here's a tiny update... Sounds like He's going to spend more money on new GEs, instead of continuing the uopgrade on the SOO SD60s AND the reintroduction of the SD90-43MACs. Sounds like sooner than later the CP will be boasting mostly General electric power, while the identity of the SOO Line and the DM&E slowly crumble. Just how much do you think the identity of the Soo line and DM&E add the the bottom line?
I guess with some, 'image' is more important than the bottom line.
And, to top it all up, if GE power is better for the bottom line then I see it as fine....
Hold the phone, CP isn't already boasting mostly GE power?
Go here for my rail shots! http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=9296
Building the CPR Kootenay division in N scale, blog here: http://kootenaymodelrailway.wordpress.com/
They are boasting a hefty amount of GE power, but are also in supply of plenty of EMD locompotives that they're bwginning to send to away, I assume. On the other hand. CN is purchasing about 50 SD60s from Oakway and it sounds like they're going to purchase the rest from them.
On a side note, CN isn't all DC power anymore since they're acquiring SD70ACe's
CP also has an order for a large number of ECO's, both 4-motor and 6-motor, from EMD.
Ulrich [snipped - PDN] . . . as a shareholder I'm more interested in the metrics and how well the people who are running the company are performing.
However, in the "53 Week History" view, for the week ending 06/01/12 the Terminal Dwell for the Entire Railroad more than doubled from the previous week, from 17.9 to 36.5 hours, with 4 terminals getting into the 50 to 60+ hour range !
Stay tuned for more cogent analysis from time to time . . .
- Paul North.
Paul_D_North_Jr Ulrich [snipped - PDN] . . . as a shareholder I'm more interested in the metrics and how well the people who are running the company are performing. As I've mentioned before someplace, the "Railroad Performance Measures" ought to provide some insight on these points. And they do - see: http://www.railroadpm.org/Performance%20Reports/CP.aspx , both the "View Current Trends" and the "View 53 Week History" - from the former, it looks like Train Speed is up from 10 to 12 %, and Terminal Dwell is slightly less. However, in the "53 Week History" view, for the week ending 06/01/12 the Terminal Dwell for the Entire Railroad more than doubled from the previous week, from 17.9 to 36.5 hours, with 4 terminals getting into the 50 to 60+ hour range ! Calgary, AB at 52.6 hours; Montreal, PQ at 65.0 hours; Toronto, ON at 51.0 hours; and, Vancouver, BC at 69.3 hours ! Stay tuned for more cogent analysis from time to time . . . - Paul North.
The type of metric one would expect when a 'fewer, bigger trains' operating philosophy is implemented. To get more cars for a train, it takes longer for those cars to accumulate to the minimum required to operate the train.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
As it relates to the other thread about Calgary's Alyth Yard, did you see the amazing drop in yard dwell times after CP turned the hump back on at that location. I am really curious to see the September numbers.
Paul, thank you for letting us know about this site. I have already bookmarked it.
BaltACD The type of metric one would expect when a 'fewer, bigger trains' operating philosophy is implemented. To get more cars for a train, it takes longer for those cars to accumulate to the minimum required to operate the train.
Actually, thinking about it a little further now:
Bruce - you're quite welcome, you too have shared much over the years. Note also that with a few clicks of the computer's mouse, most of those numerical tables can also be presented as graphs with some few options as to what is displayed, which makes it easier to understand all that data.
Paul_D_North_JrWasn't there a brief strike of the operating crafts back around then ? That's a more plausible explanation to me.
Yes, the strike ended 06/01/12.
AgentKid As it relates to the other thread about Calgary's Alyth Yard, did you see the amazing drop in yard dwell times after CP turned the hump back on at that location. I am really curious to see the September numbers. Paul, thank you for letting us know about this site. I have already bookmarked it. Bruce
A few more weeks of data and a look at the companion yards on either side ought to tell whether the performance is actually improving systemwide, or if the workload is just being "kicked on down the road" to those other yards.
Paul_D_North_Jr if the workload is just being "kicked on down the road" to those other yards.
Which raises a question I was wondering about earlier. I'm not sure how this organization deals with the following type of situation.
Lethbridge, AB: You have Arch Resources(?) unit coal trains passing through N/S on their way to/from the PRB to Prince Rupert, BC. You have Canpotex unit potash trains passing through E/W on their way to/from the mines in Saskatchewan to Portland, OR. All trains must travel on a (approx.)10 mile stretch of common trackage that is terminated at the west end by the east throat of the Lethbridge West yard. Handled by road crews. Including a 1 mile stretch of single track over the "world famous" Lethbridge Viaduct.
You could say that technically the yard isn't part of the congested area, but as posts in the "Hunter, . . so far" thread pointed out, there are big time delays being experienced. And getting in and out of the yard is one of the problems.
I'm not sure their method of reporting "Yard Dwell Times" would properly pick up on this very real source of delay. Have you heard of similar situations where congestion is immediately adjacent to a yard.
Can't speak to how CP calculates terminal dwell, on my carrier, through trains do not count against a terminal's dwell calculation; only those cars that arrive at the terminal to be reclassified or to be delivered to industries serviced by the terminal as well as cars pulled from industries and are to be dispatched from the terminal are counted in the dwell calculation.
BaltACD through trains do not count against a terminal's dwell calculation
Thank you for your explanation. It coalesced some random thoughts I had been having on this subject into an easily understood definition.
Actually, I was "this close" to hitting the "Post" button when I added the sentence about the common track area being handled by the road crews, and I realized I had probably answered my own question. Thanks again.
From the "Definitions" page of the "Railroad Performance Measures" website at: http://www.railroadpm.org/Definitions.aspx
"Terminal Dwell (Hours)
Terminal Dwell is the average time a car resides at the specified terminal location expressed in hours. The measurement begins with a customer release, received interchange, or train arrival event and ends with a customer placement (actual or constructive), delivered or offered in interchange, or train departure event. Cars that move through a terminal on a run-through train are excluded, as are stored, bad ordered, and maintenance of way cars."
Also, from the top of the CP page of the "Railroad Performance Measures" (don't know why I didn't see this before):
"PLEASE NOTE: Train speed calculation for the time period May 23-31, 2012 excludes trains staged in terminals and sidings > 72 hours, due to work stoppage by the TCRC Union that resulted in a complete shutdown of CP Canadian Operations."
Paul_D_North_Jr "Terminal Dwell (Hours) Terminal Dwell is the average time a car resides at the specified terminal location expressed in hours. Cars that move through a terminal on a run-through train are excluded, as are stored, bad ordered, and maintenance of way cars." - Paul North.
Terminal Dwell is the average time a car resides at the specified terminal location expressed in hours. Cars that move through a terminal on a run-through train are excluded, as are stored, bad ordered, and maintenance of way cars."
PDN; The definition of terminal dwell time brings up a big question. By excluding run-through trains a manager of a yard is given a hole to drive a ship thru.
1. If I have a shortage of crews or loco power then I can hold the run through and get my yard cleard out if I have parking space for the run-through(s).
2. As upper management I need to know what the total dwell time is for all cars going thru the terminal not just O/D/ SWITCHED CARS.
3. Idle cars or locos are cost items especially per diem on cars. Locos depends on financials of each one.
4. I will grant no charge for refueling, bad order set outs.
5. So a full break down of all terminal dwell times IMHO need to be available to management. That would include trains that are held out of a terminal for whatever reason.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.