greyhounds IslandMan Circus loading is like trying to load a subway train by permitting passengers to use only one set of doors at one end of the train. The longer the train, the slower loading/unloading becomes. Since economy of scale is rail's big selling point, this is a serious disadvantage. Ideally, it would be best if at TOFC loading points, many trailers could be loaded or unloaded simultaneously (just as on a normal subway train, many passengers can get on or off the train quickly). It would be possible to load a long TOFC train quickly by using many cranes/gantries simultaneously, but the capital cost of each loading point would be horrendous. There have been a few recent intermodal innovations in Europe which might point the way forward, for example CargoBeamer and Modalohr: http://www.cargobeamer.eu/How-it-works-849768.html http://lohr.fr/lohr-railway-system-en/ The key advantage of the systems above is quick turnaround times at terminals. Train length does not impact on loading times, capital cost at loading points is low and the road trailers do not need to be adapted or specialised in any way. Dwell time for both trucks and trains is low, benefitting both railroads and trucking companies. Nope. Keep those damn expensive Tinker Toys in Europe. All you basically need is: 1) Some space around a track with some white rock dumped on it 2) A driver who knows what he/she is doing 3) Some ramps 4) Flatcars Anything more than that for a smaller market intermodal terminal is a waste of money. You do not have to back the length of a whole train with the tractor. You can break the train (or more likely the set out/pick up) between cars and move portable ramps into position. Then you can load/unload very quckly. This isn't rocket science and it doesn't benefit from expensive Tinker Toys.
IslandMan Circus loading is like trying to load a subway train by permitting passengers to use only one set of doors at one end of the train. The longer the train, the slower loading/unloading becomes. Since economy of scale is rail's big selling point, this is a serious disadvantage. Ideally, it would be best if at TOFC loading points, many trailers could be loaded or unloaded simultaneously (just as on a normal subway train, many passengers can get on or off the train quickly). It would be possible to load a long TOFC train quickly by using many cranes/gantries simultaneously, but the capital cost of each loading point would be horrendous. There have been a few recent intermodal innovations in Europe which might point the way forward, for example CargoBeamer and Modalohr: http://www.cargobeamer.eu/How-it-works-849768.html http://lohr.fr/lohr-railway-system-en/ The key advantage of the systems above is quick turnaround times at terminals. Train length does not impact on loading times, capital cost at loading points is low and the road trailers do not need to be adapted or specialised in any way. Dwell time for both trucks and trains is low, benefitting both railroads and trucking companies.
Nope.
Keep those damn expensive Tinker Toys in Europe.
All you basically need is:
1) Some space around a track with some white rock dumped on it
2) A driver who knows what he/she is doing
3) Some ramps
4) Flatcars
Anything more than that for a smaller market intermodal terminal is a waste of money. You do not have to back the length of a whole train with the tractor. You can break the train (or more likely the set out/pick up) between cars and move portable ramps into position. Then you can load/unload very quckly.
This isn't rocket science and it doesn't benefit from expensive Tinker Toys.
Better tell the CEOs of the companies developing and manufacturing CargoBeamer and Modalohr that their 'Tinker Toys' have no USP before they spend any more money!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.