BaltACD Paul_D_North_Jr "+1" to tree68's "open access" point (I was just about to post the same comment). Otherwise, in the last half-dozen or so posts, you guys are 'channeling' John Kneiling's many columns and articles. John would be flattered - and then annoyed that it's been this long and still the problem hasn't been resolved ! - PDN. Nor will it as long as human nature is part of the decision making process. Hasn't Britian tried the separte track and operator model - with a resounding lack of success.
Paul_D_North_Jr "+1" to tree68's "open access" point (I was just about to post the same comment). Otherwise, in the last half-dozen or so posts, you guys are 'channeling' John Kneiling's many columns and articles. John would be flattered - and then annoyed that it's been this long and still the problem hasn't been resolved ! - PDN.
Otherwise, in the last half-dozen or so posts, you guys are 'channeling' John Kneiling's many columns and articles. John would be flattered - and then annoyed that it's been this long and still the problem hasn't been resolved !
- PDN.
Nor will it as long as human nature is part of the decision making process. Hasn't Britian tried the separte track and operator model - with a resounding lack of success.
Australia's been a bit better with a similar model.
But with this type of setup there will always be the problem of operators trying to undercut one another which leads to worn out, fly-by-night outfits that don't maintain their rolling stock or buy new stuff. Look at the antiques that are still running down under.
And because the entity which controls the track is not the same one that serves the customers they risk becoming indifferent to real problems, and strategic planning can suffer or become inefficient due to lack of communication and understanding between the track owner and train operators.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
SD70M-2Dude BaltACD Paul_D_North_Jr "+1" to tree68's "open access" point (I was just about to post the same comment). Otherwise, in the last half-dozen or so posts, you guys are 'channeling' John Kneiling's many columns and articles. John would be flattered - and then annoyed that it's been this long and still the problem hasn't been resolved ! - PDN. Nor will it as long as human nature is part of the decision making process. Hasn't Britian tried the separte track and operator model - with a resounding lack of success. Australia's been a bit better with a similar model. But with this type of setup there will always be the problem of operators trying to undercut one another which leads to worn out, fly-by-night outfits that don't maintain their rolling stock or buy new stuff. Look at the antiques that are still running down under. And because the entity which controls the track is not the same one that serves the customers they risk becoming indifferent to real problems, and strategic planning can suffer or become inefficient due to lack of communication and understanding between the track owner and train operators.
The model is not necessarily flawed. It seems to work OK in many countries. Even in the UK, it is working ok now, AFAIK.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm SD70M-2Dude BaltACD Paul_D_North_Jr "+1" to tree68's "open access" point (I was just about to post the same comment). Otherwise, in the last half-dozen or so posts, you guys are 'channeling' John Kneiling's many columns and articles. John would be flattered - and then annoyed that it's been this long and still the problem hasn't been resolved ! - PDN. Nor will it as long as human nature is part of the decision making process. Hasn't Britian tried the separte track and operator model - with a resounding lack of success. Australia's been a bit better with a similar model. But with this type of setup there will always be the problem of operators trying to undercut one another which leads to worn out, fly-by-night outfits that don't maintain their rolling stock or buy new stuff. Look at the antiques that are still running down under. And because the entity which controls the track is not the same one that serves the customers they risk becoming indifferent to real problems, and strategic planning can suffer or become inefficient due to lack of communication and understanding between the track owner and train operators. The model is not necessarily flawed. It seems to work OK in many countries. Even in the UK, it is working ok now, AFAIK.
There are a number of things to note about the British situation:
1/ There is only one "A" company (to use my terminology, previous entries), Network Rail. There is therefore no yardstick by which to compare track access charges and no means of effectively challenging this monopoly;
2/ Passenger services are franchised out to operating companies for a fixed period. Franchises are confined to specified areas, which in practice means that there are local monopolies for as long as the franchise is in operation;
3/ Freight however is organised differently. Rail freight companies have access to all of the network. They do not work within the constraints of a franchise period. Rail freight companies can therefore compete freely with each other to win business;
4/ When rail freight was privatised most went to Ed Burkhardt's English Welsh and Scottish Railway. Freightliner (intermodal movement of containers) was bought out by management (both EWS and Freightliner have since changed hands). A small, specialist part of the total, dealing with the movement of nuclear materials, went to Direct Rail Services;
5/ Since privatisation the original three freight companies have grown to seven and of the original three, both Freightliner and Direct Rail Services have moved into new areas of rail freight;
6/ Rail freight in Britain has constraints unknown in North America. First, the country isn't big enough for long-distance freight! Most of Britain's population is contained in a triangle about 500 miles long by 300 miles wide at the base. Secondly, the very restrictive British loading gauge rules out (i) TOFC; (ii) double-stack container trains; (iii) free access of European-sized freight wagons to all of the network. Lastly, that former staple of rail freight traffic, coal, has collapsed to a far greater degree in Britain than it has in North America.
The British model for rail freight is probably successful *in the circumstances*.
IslandMan1/ There is only one "A" company (to use my terminology, previous entries), Network Rail. There is therefore no yardstick by which to compare track access charges and no means of effectively challenging this monopoly;
It should be mentioned that Network Rail is non-profit "public sector company" or "government body" in British parlance, quasi-government (like Amtrak) to us. It took over the disastrous private company, Railtrack in 2002.
EWS was taken over by DB's freight division and is now called DB Cargo UK.
As a couple of reminders of the 'state of the art' before the advent of sideloaders and then HPIT, here are a couple of videos with interesting technical details:
(skip over the hokey introduction in the first three minutes or so)
These are relevant to the present discussion because they are pure 'circus'-type operation, using fixed and reasonably optimized terminal facilities, and I think it is highly interesting to consider (and perhaps discuss) what the Expressway service currently provides in comparison with some of the details from the early 'dedicated' TOFC services. (Note that this is a separate discussion from those involving regulatory restriction on intermodal competitiveness.)
Canadian Pacific Railway
Trenton Division
Piggyback Trains
R.L.Kennedy
MLW F1 4001 & 4401 Spanner April-May 1960
The above double cover photograph was likely taken much earlier than the April-May 1960 issue of Spanner since long before this (see below) the newest diesels were being assigned to the Pig trains. 928-929 the "Big Pig" was using four RS-18's to maintain a high speed and overcome the high wind resistance of these trains.
Howard Fogg painting of a similar scene 8742-8743 at Christie Lake 1957 Montreal Locomotive Works Collection
CPR publicity photograph shows piggyback train on scenic Mud Lake bridge, (running here as an "extra" in daylight for the photographer Nick Morant!)with the newest diesels, MLW RS-18's 8746 and 8756.
RMEAs a couple of reminders of the 'state of the art' before the advent of sideloaders and then HPIT, here are a couple of videos with interesting technical details: (skip over the hokey introduction in the first three minutes or so) These are relevant to the present discussion because they are pure 'circus'-type operation, using fixed and reasonably optimized terminal facilities, and I think it is highly interesting to consider (and perhaps discuss) what the Expressway service currently provides in comparison with some of the details from the early 'dedicated' TOFC services. (Note that this is a separate discussion from those involving regulatory restriction on intermodal competitiveness.)
In view of current operations, it is amazing how labor intensive intermodal was 'back in the day'.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACDIn view of current operations, it is amazing how labor intensive intermodal was 'back in the day'.
But note also some of the attempts then being made to reduce that cost: the idea of fixed deck hitches and the short 'cut' of the underfloor hydraulic device to engage bogie rims being two good examples. Note also the rather amazing poor ride in some of the on-train shots, something that may have necessitated more than a little of the required tie-down on inherently bouncy pneumatic tires and road suspension. That is one great inherent advantage of articulated lightweight platforms over 86' flats trucked at their effective quarter points, running on modern track under an operating model that stresses time precision at lower peak or even relatively low average road speed.
I am replying to bring this thread back into view alongside a more recent inquiry into Iron Highway
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.