While autonomos rail cars may help carload and intermodal, there is still much unit train and bulk traffic which would still move more efficently by trainload. Would the autonomous cars need their own grade seperated ROW?
BaltACD MidlandMike Murphy Siding Why does intermodal freight all have to go so fast? True, some things need to go fast and people are willing to pay more. But, at some point doesn't it make sense for Walmart to order those containers of toasters into the distribution center a week earlier and ship them by rail at lower rates? Walmart or someone has to pay the carrying costs for that extra week the inventory is on the books. Also the retailer has to rely on one week older sales stats to guess how many toasters to order, so more likely missed sales or overstock. There are reasons for just-in-time. Wal-Mart traffic can lose a week or more on its trip from China to US Ports.
MidlandMike Murphy Siding Why does intermodal freight all have to go so fast? True, some things need to go fast and people are willing to pay more. But, at some point doesn't it make sense for Walmart to order those containers of toasters into the distribution center a week earlier and ship them by rail at lower rates? Walmart or someone has to pay the carrying costs for that extra week the inventory is on the books. Also the retailer has to rely on one week older sales stats to guess how many toasters to order, so more likely missed sales or overstock. There are reasons for just-in-time.
Murphy Siding Why does intermodal freight all have to go so fast? True, some things need to go fast and people are willing to pay more. But, at some point doesn't it make sense for Walmart to order those containers of toasters into the distribution center a week earlier and ship them by rail at lower rates?
Walmart or someone has to pay the carrying costs for that extra week the inventory is on the books. Also the retailer has to rely on one week older sales stats to guess how many toasters to order, so more likely missed sales or overstock. There are reasons for just-in-time.
Wal-Mart traffic can lose a week or more on its trip from China to US Ports.
Which is why manufacturing will eventually return to North America; once robots are as functional and cheap as any foreign labor.
MidlandMike CNSF Autonomous railcars aren't so much about eliminating crews. They're about eliminating the need for trains. If you don't need trains, you don't need yards, switching, or terminal dwell time. Every shipment travels on its own from origin to final destination. No waiting until you have enough volume to run a train, or for a rested crew; no missed connections or misrouting due to blocking errors. That might be workable if the rail system was electrified. However, tens (or is it hundreds) of thousands of diesel motorized railcars running around needing maintenance and refueling, and maybe many mini-terminals, would lose much of rail's advantage. Plus then you would still need a truck for the last mile.
CNSF Autonomous railcars aren't so much about eliminating crews. They're about eliminating the need for trains. If you don't need trains, you don't need yards, switching, or terminal dwell time. Every shipment travels on its own from origin to final destination. No waiting until you have enough volume to run a train, or for a rested crew; no missed connections or misrouting due to blocking errors.
That might be workable if the rail system was electrified. However, tens (or is it hundreds) of thousands of diesel motorized railcars running around needing maintenance and refueling, and maybe many mini-terminals, would lose much of rail's advantage. Plus then you would still need a truck for the last mile.
I've heard that BNSF has given up on their LNG experiment and is now interested in battery power. I believe the idea is for battery-pack cars (tenders?) that could swapped out as needed at enroute terminals. That seems like a more realistic way to electrify the entire rail network than catenary or third rail. However, that would likely require further improvement in battery technology.
Given that most people who are talking about autonomous trucks are also talking about battery-powered electric trucks, I'm guessing that issues such as maintenance and recharging/battery swapping enroute would be more or less equal regardless of mode.
The really big change is to start thinking about the railroad as an alternative form of highway. To hear people on this forum tell it, trucking with its higher costs has pushed rail almost to death's door. Maybe, if the rails functioned more like a highway, they wouldn't need such a big cost advantage?
You're right about still needing a truck for first and last mile - assuming you're dealing with containers. I suspect that the big winner in this system would be general merchandise carload, rather than intermodal. Imagine if a tank, hopper, or box car could simply pull out of the customer spur onto the mainline and navigate its own way all the way to the destination spur, stopping only for battery swaps or whatever. That could lead to a boom in new rail-served facilities.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Murphy SidingWhy does intermodal freight all have to go so fast? True, some things need to go fast and people are willing to pay more. But, at some point doesn't it make sense for Walmart to order those containers of toasters into the distribution center a week earlier and ship them by rail at lower rates?
CNSFAutonomous railcars aren't so much about eliminating crews. They're about eliminating the need for trains. If you don't need trains, you don't need yards, switching, or terminal dwell time. Every shipment travels on its own from origin to final destination. No waiting until you have enough volume to run a train, or for a rested crew; no missed connections or misrouting due to blocking errors.
Murphy Siding RailRoader608 I suspect a large percentage of truck freight doesn't need truck speed half as much as it needs truck reliability. That's where rail falls on its face. Ding!
RailRoader608 I suspect a large percentage of truck freight doesn't need truck speed half as much as it needs truck reliability. That's where rail falls on its face.
I suspect a large percentage of truck freight doesn't need truck speed half as much as it needs truck reliability. That's where rail falls on its face.
Ding!
You mean to say that those couple of containers of hay that were in my stack train's consist the other night weren't a priority?
Jeff
Murphy Siding working conditions of the majority of trucking companies
Russell
Shadow the Cats owner The so called Driver Shortage is the biggest myth screamed by the Mega carriers in History. Where I am at we never have a shortage of drivers. But then again my boss treats his drivers like human beings instead of slaves and dogs that need to be whipped. Our drivers are spoiled rotten and they know it when it comes to equipment in the trucks plus wages and benefits they do get from us. When a carrier runs a 150% turnover rate on their drivers a year it's the Carrier thats the problem not the driver. Some of the mega fleets are worse than that. You can tell the carriers that treat their drivers well they are the ones that drivers are always trying to get on with. The others well their records speak for themselves. The horror stories I have heard about some of the mega's from my drivers would make even the most jaded railroad employee go damn.
The so called Driver Shortage is the biggest myth screamed by the Mega carriers in History. Where I am at we never have a shortage of drivers. But then again my boss treats his drivers like human beings instead of slaves and dogs that need to be whipped. Our drivers are spoiled rotten and they know it when it comes to equipment in the trucks plus wages and benefits they do get from us. When a carrier runs a 150% turnover rate on their drivers a year it's the Carrier thats the problem not the driver. Some of the mega fleets are worse than that. You can tell the carriers that treat their drivers well they are the ones that drivers are always trying to get on with. The others well their records speak for themselves. The horror stories I have heard about some of the mega's from my drivers would make even the most jaded railroad employee go damn.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
charlie hebdo CNSF There was a truck driver shortage when I entered the transportation industry back in the 1980s. I think we can now safely assume this is a permanent situation for as long as trucks require human drivers. Autonomous OTR trucks and trains may have an increasingly important place over the next 10 years. Regardless, Rails need to figure out how to be predictable in pick up and delivery. The slowness in leading and off-loading in terminals needs and can be made up for in much higher sustained speeds between terminals. This can be made more possible through PTC providing greater capacity on track and fewer slow, bulk cargo (coal, sand, etc) unit trains.
CNSF There was a truck driver shortage when I entered the transportation industry back in the 1980s. I think we can now safely assume this is a permanent situation for as long as trucks require human drivers.
Autonomous OTR trucks and trains may have an increasingly important place over the next 10 years. Regardless, Rails need to figure out how to be predictable in pick up and delivery. The slowness in leading and off-loading in terminals needs and can be made up for in much higher sustained speeds between terminals. This can be made more possible through PTC providing greater capacity on track and fewer slow, bulk cargo (coal, sand, etc) unit trains.
Bulk unit trains aren't the problem. They don't significantly affect intermodal (or passenger) trains if the line isn't congested. If the line is congested, then it doesn't matter what type of train you're trying to meet, you're going to take pretty much the same delay.
Having said that, I do agree with you that you can only mix so many high-speed trains with low-speed trains before running into congestion. If all trains are running the same speed, you can actually run more of them without problems. I also agree with others who have commented that most truck freight is more sensitive to reliability issues than pure speed. You don't have to run the intermodal trains fast, but you do have to maintain 90%-plus on-time performance, door to door, to compete with truck.
So if a railroad wants to have a healthy intermodal franchise, they have to have enough line capacity to ensure on-time performance. That's why Rob Krebs wanted to doubletrack Santa Fe's transcon line, and insisted on 95% on-time performance. The resulting traffic growth on that line over the past two decades has proved him right.
CNSFThere was a truck driver shortage when I entered the transportation industry back in the 1980s. I think we can now safely assume this is a permanent situation for as long as trucks require human drivers.
Autonomous OTR trucks and trains may have an increasingly important place over the next 10 years. Regardless, Rails need to figure out how to be predictable in pick up and delivery. The slowness in loading and off-loading in terminals needs and can be made up for in much higher sustained speeds between terminals. This can be made more possible through PTC providing greater capacity on track and fewer slow, bulk cargo (coal, sand, etc) unit trains.
Greetings "NKP Guy"
All great points you make here about the Erie Lackawanna (EL) and the Pittsburgh & Lake Erie Railroads. During its heyday, the P&LE was quite a railroad with a considerable amount of bulk traffic for the steel industry. As a subsidiary of the New York Central Railroad, it managed to stay out of the post-bankruptcy collapse of the Penn Central Railroad in 1970 (and in fact managed to remain profitable in the early/mid 1970s). When John W. Barriger III was president of the P+LE in the late 1950s/early 1960s (1956-1964), he had thought it could become a model "Super Railroad" in the image of what envisioned for super-efficient, heavy-haul, well-engineered railroad with the ability to haul long trains at low cost. In its day, the P+LE was knnown as "The Little Giant". But when the steel industry in Pittshburgh and the Ohio valley collapsed in the 1980s, the P+LE was clearly doomed. It was finally wound down and taken over by CSX in 1992.
As for the Erie Lackawanna (EL), yes, they had too many commuter operations in northern New Jersey that lost them trainloads of money. I think NJ property taxes were pretty onerous for the EL as well, since the EL had a lot of facilities and property there to tax.
CMStPnP NKP guy Do you work for the Erie Lackawanna? The Pittsburgh & Lake Erie? I think with those two examples their issue wasn't lack of opportunity or traffic rather lack of competitiveness due to lack of diversification of their traffic mix. They found a large chuck of volume in one or two primary markets and stuck with it to the exclusion of almost anything else. P&LE = Steel Industry related traffic over reliance E-L = Inability to shed money losiing passenger operations, reliance on coal and fruit shipments (which St. Lawerence Seaway cut into). Inability to quickly respond to rising passenger deficits and declining frieght traffic. Could make the argument that railroad regulation by the Feds made E-L Management complacent.
NKP guy Do you work for the Erie Lackawanna? The Pittsburgh & Lake Erie?
I think with those two examples their issue wasn't lack of opportunity or traffic rather lack of competitiveness due to lack of diversification of their traffic mix. They found a large chuck of volume in one or two primary markets and stuck with it to the exclusion of almost anything else.
P&LE = Steel Industry related traffic over reliance
E-L = Inability to shed money losiing passenger operations, reliance on coal and fruit shipments (which St. Lawerence Seaway cut into). Inability to quickly respond to rising passenger deficits and declining frieght traffic. Could make the argument that railroad regulation by the Feds made E-L Management complacent.
Pity the EL couldn't survive on its own, it was a truly fascinating railroad. If only railroad deregulation had come earlier, say in the 1973, rather than 1980, maybe the EL would still be around? (And the Rock Island? And the Milwaukee Road?).
If only?
Cheers!
charlie hebdo..... but what about the future, especially if OTR solves its shortage of drivers issues? Railroading really needs to start looking ahead else it will always be playing catch up or the "we're (almost) as good as..." game.
Of course the railroads need to always be planning ahead for the future. How big of a slice of the pie is intermodal traffic now? What is the potential for it in the future? What type of investments would it take to get deeper into that market slice and would it justify the investment? Would it enough for the railroads to someday be in the position to say “we may not be as fast and reliable as trucks may be, but we can wax them on the cost, and we’re making a pretty fair profit doing so”?
Murphy Siding charlie hebdo zardoz Murphy Siding Why does intermodal freight all have to go so fast? True, some things need to go fast and people are willing to pay more. But, at some point doesn't it make sense for Walmart to order those containers of toasters into the distribution center a week earlier and ship them by rail at lower rates? There you go again: making sense. It needs to be able to compete with OTR trucking for time and reliability, endpoint to endpoint, not just cost. True, but as I mentioned up above somewhere the trucking industry is working through some issues that are making them less timely and less reliable. Maybe the railroad industry doesn't have to raise their standards as high as was previously thought in order to compete with trucking?
charlie hebdo zardoz Murphy Siding Why does intermodal freight all have to go so fast? True, some things need to go fast and people are willing to pay more. But, at some point doesn't it make sense for Walmart to order those containers of toasters into the distribution center a week earlier and ship them by rail at lower rates? There you go again: making sense. It needs to be able to compete with OTR trucking for time and reliability, endpoint to endpoint, not just cost.
zardoz Murphy Siding Why does intermodal freight all have to go so fast? True, some things need to go fast and people are willing to pay more. But, at some point doesn't it make sense for Walmart to order those containers of toasters into the distribution center a week earlier and ship them by rail at lower rates? There you go again: making sense.
There you go again: making sense.
It needs to be able to compete with OTR trucking for time and reliability, endpoint to endpoint, not just cost.
True, but as I mentioned up above somewhere the trucking industry is working through some issues that are making them less timely and less reliable. Maybe the railroad industry doesn't have to raise their standards as high as was previously thought in order to compete with trucking?
Maybe that is so right now and for the rest of 2019 and 2020, but what about the future, especially if OTR solves its shortage of drivers issues? Railroading really needs to start looking ahead else it will always be playing catch up or the "we're (almost) as good as..." game.
charlie hebdo It needs to be able to compete with OTR trucking for time and reliability, endpoint to endpoint, not just cost.
Arguably it needs to compete with trucking on reliability and cost while not taking an inordinately long time to get there. Truck + a day or two would work if the reliability were there. I don't think rail has to be as fast as truck to compete for most loads.
Autonomous railcars aren't so much about eliminating crews. They're about eliminating the need for trains. If you don't need trains, you don't need yards, switching, or terminal dwell time. Every shipment travels on its own from origin to final destination. No waiting until you have enough volume to run a train, or for a rested crew; no missed connections or misrouting due to blocking errors.
Now that's an interesting idea! Of course utilization rates would go through the roof if you could sort out the blocking/PTC issues but then you're giving up the efficiency of 2-3 locomotives moving hundreds and hundreds of containers. If you drop down to a 1:1 or 1:10 ratio you improve delivery times and utilization rates but the economics are going to suffer.
I completely agree. I just read something from the DOE the other day saying that rail intermodal could be extremely competitive with trucking if it could reach the same levels of on-time reliability and breakage even if it couldn't compete with outright speed. I suspect a large percentage of truck freight doesn't need truck speed half as much as it needs truck reliability. That's where rail falls on its face.
It depends if the 'customer' is into PSR, Precision Scheduled Retailing at the lowest costs possible.
Does Wal-Mart want to pay Neiman Marcus freight rates?
cx500The long trains are very efficient, until a problem arises, at which point correcting it can tie up the whole railroad for hours. Just walking the length of a 12,000 foot train will take most of an hour, and as long again to walk back to the headend.
daveklepperTrains don't spend 24-30 hours in classification yards, cars did-- Before precision ralaroading?
and after
As long as railroads normally service a particular location with one train a day then cars going to those locations will lay somewhere for 24-30 hours to catch that particular train (on average - some cars may arrive and be processed within windows that allow lesst time to make their destination train).
Trains don't spend 24-30 hours in classification yards, cars did-- Before precision ralaroading?
I think (for better or worse) the biggest change in railroad operations will be crew size.
I fully expect to see Engineer-only train operation within my career. In Canada the Lac-Megantic disaster and lack of PTC will probably delay it 10 years behind the U.S, but it is coming.
As long as there is local work with hand-operated switches, Janney couplers and gladhands then Conductors will still be found on certain jobs.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
zugmannSometimes a car gets in the wrong block of cars and goes for a ride. When it is one of 150 cars on a train, does it make sense to delay the other 149 cars on a train to kick out one?
Of course not. But it exemplifies the opposing philosophies of maximizing train operating efficiency vs maximizing customer service. Doesn't matter how efficiently the trains are run if the customers are not there to fill them. The long trains are very efficient, until a problem arises, at which point correcting it can tie up the whole railroad for hours. Just walking the length of a 12,000 foot train will take most of an hour, and as long again to walk back to the headend.
The Class 1s seem have adopted the first as their religion; meanwhile the short lines focus more on the service. Both philosophies have provided satisfactory results, for the moment at least. The happy spot is probably somewhere in the middle but that might nudge the almighty operating ratio a point or two higher.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.