tree68A problem with this approach is that in today's railroad financial climate, what would happen after "Sell the track" would be to move the money in total to the bottom line to be harvested by the investors.
Someone is sure to bring up Network Rail, Hatfield, and The Permanent Way at some point. Let 'em. We might get wretchedness but not that kind, and we have lots of examples of what to avoid and why to educate the stockholders and investors with...
What he "predicted," remember, was that the ROWs would be abandoned
Rail ROWs are too narrow to be useful carriageways. Sure, they could be sold off and used as utility corridors, but if trains aren't running on them, for our purposes they are as good as abandoned.
Carload is dying and this presents a huge problem. The majority of rail revenues and volumes come from carload. Intermodal accounts for a much smaller share of revenue and tonnage handled by railroads. When carload dies, so too will the majority of freight rail. It is true that railroads are the only declining mode of transport in a growing economy. It is sad, but they aren't really relevant to the economy anymore.
ttrraaffiicc It is sad, but they aren't really relevant to the economy anymore.
Forty to sixty trains through Deshler per day say they are relevant...
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
ttrraaffiicc What he "predicted," remember, was that the ROWs would be abandoned Rail ROWs are too narrow to be useful carriageways. Sure, they could be sold off and used as utility corridors, but if trains aren't running on them, for our purposes they are as good as abandoned. Carload is dying and this presents a huge problem. The majority of rail revenues and volumes come from carload. Intermodal accounts for a much smaller share of revenue and tonnage handled by railroads. When carload dies, so too will the majority of freight rail. It is true that railroads are the only declining mode of transport in a growing economy. It is sad, but they aren't really relevant to the economy anymore.
That must be some real Rocky Mountain High you are on.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Yeah, all that hazmat traffic a beboppin' down the highway. Noone's gonna object to that.
oltmanndSo, if RRs are going to stick around, they have to figure out how to improve what they do to stay competitive. Status quo won't hunt. They need a 20 year capital plan, not just a 5 year one.
Are they trying to figure that out? Is there a solution that can be figured out? Do they realize they must figure out a way to stay competitive?
Why do they need a 20 year capital plan instead of a 5 year plan?
tree68 ttrraaffiicc It is sad, but they aren't really relevant to the economy anymore. Forty to sixty trains through Deshler per day say they are relevant...
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
ttrraaffiicc Carload is dying and this presents a huge problem. The majority of rail revenues and volumes come from carload. Intermodal accounts for a much smaller share of revenue and tonnage handled by railroads. When carload dies, so too will the majority of freight rail.
Carload is dying and this presents a huge problem. The majority of rail revenues and volumes come from carload. Intermodal accounts for a much smaller share of revenue and tonnage handled by railroads. When carload dies, so too will the majority of freight rail.
ttrraaffiicc There is a lot of pessimism ......blah blah blah...
There is a lot of pessimism ......blah blah blah...
Euclid SD60MAC9500 It's known that Euro Railfreight operators would love to have a much larger loading gauge, with the ability to run longer trains, double stacks, along with heavier axle loads. This would lower cost for rail freight in Europe along with a unified freight reservation system to allocate path transition between nations. Until then dreams persist. Do you have a source for that? Maybe they do not need the kind of extreme heavy haul system that we have. Maybe their system is more light and nimble than ours and thus matches the demands of their transportation market. Indeed, it seems that our market is changing to require a system that is more like that of Europe.
SD60MAC9500 It's known that Euro Railfreight operators would love to have a much larger loading gauge, with the ability to run longer trains, double stacks, along with heavier axle loads. This would lower cost for rail freight in Europe along with a unified freight reservation system to allocate path transition between nations. Until then dreams persist.
Do you have a source for that?
Maybe they do not need the kind of extreme heavy haul system that we have. Maybe their system is more light and nimble than ours and thus matches the demands of their transportation market. Indeed, it seems that our market is changing to require a system that is more like that of Europe.
No one said they want it to be a copycat system like ours. They would like to run longer trians with a heavier axle load, and the ability to run DS..They've been testing these scenarios out for that very reason..
https://www.railjournal.com/opinion/time-is-not-on-the-side-of-european-rail-freight-operators
https://www.railjournal.com/freight/fret-sncf-trials-1000m-long-freight-trains/
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/why-is-europe-so-absurdly-backward-compared-to-the-u-s-in-rail-freight-transport
https://www.joc.com/rail-intermodal/international-rail/europe/european-rail-operators-losing-containerized-freight-road-transport_20160701.html
https://books.google.com/books?id=Xn-8BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=SNCF+fret+1000m+trains&source=bl&ots=fXcdsMYzaX&sig=ACfU3U0cXRBLOvCzlmC_vGKYf4nNiBEL_g&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi1uaSb1ePpAhXYK80KHZrMBn4Q6AEwAnoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=SNCF%20fret%201000m%20trains&f=false
ttrraaffiiccThe reality is that during this pandemic, huge amounts of freight will shift from rail to road and never come back.
Why? What is it about the pandemic that's causing a shift? If anything, I'd expect the opposite, as it takes fewer people to move a given amount of freight by rail than by truck (the people actually interacting with the freight, that is), so I'd think rail would be a better way to maintain reduced human interaction ala social distancing.
MikeInPlano ttrraaffiicc The reality is that during this pandemic, huge amounts of freight will shift from rail to road and never come back. Why? What is it about the pandemic that's causing a shift? If anything, I'd expect the opposite, as it takes fewer people to move a given amount of freight by rail than by truck (the people actually interacting with the freight, that is), so I'd think rail would be a better way to maintain reduced human interaction ala social distancing.
ttrraaffiicc The reality is that during this pandemic, huge amounts of freight will shift from rail to road and never come back.
I guess Canada didn't get the same memo as ttrraaffiicc - they just moved traffic.
https://www.progressiverailroading.com/canadian_national/news/CN-set-grain-haul-record-in-May--60582
BaltACD MikeInPlano ttrraaffiicc The reality is that during this pandemic, huge amounts of freight will shift from rail to road and never come back. Why? What is it about the pandemic that's causing a shift? If anything, I'd expect the opposite, as it takes fewer people to move a given amount of freight by rail than by truck (the people actually interacting with the freight, that is), so I'd think rail would be a better way to maintain reduced human interaction ala social distancing. I guess Canada didn't get the same memo as ttrraaffiicc - they just moved traffic. https://www.progressiverailroading.com/canadian_national/news/CN-set-grain-haul-record-in-May--60582
SD60MAC9500 Euclid SD60MAC9500 It's known that Euro Railfreight operators would love to have a much larger loading gauge, with the ability to run longer trains, double stacks, along with heavier axle loads. This would lower cost for rail freight in Europe along with a unified freight reservation system to allocate path transition between nations. Until then dreams persist. Do you have a source for that? Maybe they do not need the kind of extreme heavy haul system that we have. Maybe their system is more light and nimble than ours and thus matches the demands of their transportation market. Indeed, it seems that our market is changing to require a system that is more like that of Europe. No one said they want it to be a copycat system like ours. They would like to run longer trians with a heavier axle load, and the ability to run DS..They've been testing these scenarios out for that very reason.. https://www.railjournal.com/opinion/time-is-not-on-the-side-of-european-rail-freight-operators https://www.railjournal.com/freight/fret-sncf-trials-1000m-long-freight-trains/ https://www.freightwaves.com/news/why-is-europe-so-absurdly-backward-compared-to-the-u-s-in-rail-freight-transport https://www.joc.com/rail-intermodal/international-rail/europe/european-rail-operators-losing-containerized-freight-road-transport_20160701.html https://books.google.com/books?id=Xn-8BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=SNCF+fret+1000m+trains&source=bl&ots=fXcdsMYzaX&sig=ACfU3U0cXRBLOvCzlmC_vGKYf4nNiBEL_g&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi1uaSb1ePpAhXYK80KHZrMBn4Q6AEwAnoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=SNCF%20fret%201000m%20trains&f=false
Thanks for those references. I will take a look a them.
tree68 charlie hebdo 1. Sell the track and ROWs cheaply to the government and use the recovered cash to do the profitable thing - operate revenue-generating train. A problem with this approach is that in today's railroad financial climate, what would happen after "Sell the track" would be to move the money in total to the bottom line to be harvested by the investors.
charlie hebdo 1. Sell the track and ROWs cheaply to the government and use the recovered cash to do the profitable thing - operate revenue-generating train.
A problem with this approach is that in today's railroad financial climate, what would happen after "Sell the track" would be to move the money in total to the bottom line to be harvested by the investors.
Then some of the existing railroads would be quaint history. The track and ROW, owned and maintained in a rational, upgraded system would be available to idea-driven organizations that want to run profitable trains as a transportion niche, as truck lines do now on a federal highway system.
charlie hebdo Murphy Siding charlie hebdo 1. Sell the track and ROWs cheaply to the government and use the recovered cash to do the profitable thing - operate revenue-generating train. 2. Beef up marketing and sales with people who know what that means. Find new niches. I doubt they could sell the track and ROWs *cheaply* to anybody considering the amount of capital the railroads have invested in them. It's unavailable capital that isn't productive. That's the problem and it costs a lot to maintain. I know nothing about futuremidal, but he seems to have had some ideas that challenge this same ol' same ol'thinking. So do Oltmann and Greyhounds.
Murphy Siding charlie hebdo 1. Sell the track and ROWs cheaply to the government and use the recovered cash to do the profitable thing - operate revenue-generating train. 2. Beef up marketing and sales with people who know what that means. Find new niches. I doubt they could sell the track and ROWs *cheaply* to anybody considering the amount of capital the railroads have invested in them.
charlie hebdo 1. Sell the track and ROWs cheaply to the government and use the recovered cash to do the profitable thing - operate revenue-generating train. 2. Beef up marketing and sales with people who know what that means. Find new niches.
1. Sell the track and ROWs cheaply to the government and use the recovered cash to do the profitable thing - operate revenue-generating train.
2. Beef up marketing and sales with people who know what that means. Find new niches.
I doubt they could sell the track and ROWs *cheaply* to anybody considering the amount of capital the railroads have invested in them.
It's unavailable capital that isn't productive. That's the problem and it costs a lot to maintain.
I know nothing about futuremidal, but he seems to have had some ideas that challenge this same ol' same ol'thinking. So do Oltmann and Greyhounds.
Murphy Siding If anyone can figure out how to find an old thread through the impossible search function, look up "OAT- the Open Access Thread".
http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/42044.aspx?page=1
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
Ah yes, the Europe vs United States comparison again completely silly in this case.......
I think we have to be honest here about European frieght. The Eurozone is still not a unified country per se and you still have each Euro country competing against each other for steel production, auto production and the like. Additionally thier nationalized rail systems are roughly several Wisconsin and Southerns pieced together and end at the countries border. Think of running freight in that scenario across state lines as one train with crew change points in which both the crew and railroad change. It has to be fairly expensive to ship by rail in Europe compared to trucking lines. Many European trucking lines crossed the borders a long time ago. Not a lot of rail freight companies have. Where is there even land space in Europe for Internal ports for Intermodal Trains? Many of Europes major cities are on a major River or near a Major Port making cross country intermodal trains in Europe far less economic with all the rail systems they have to traverse, in my view.
Europeans also built their highways and infrastructure differently and it is far more durable to heavier truck weights than ours is. Further look at European truck trailers, some have three axles compared to the United States' two. Tandem trucks in Europe are far more numerous than in the United States. I would venture to say the European Trucking Industry is far different than that of the United States as well.
International trip vs International Trip. United States international movement could involve Canada to Mexico via the United States fairly routinely now. That kind of several thousand mile movement in Europe I see as a rarity for a frieght car or series of frieght cars in Europe.
Even on that thread, there is largely sarcasm and humor than a serious discussion of how a separation of ROW ownership and maintenance from operators might lead to an improvement in rail transportation.
Murphy Siding Actually with PSR unit trains are being deemphasized. If traffic can be moved on a manifest train it will go on as a block, to save crew starts. The only thing I like about PSR is it has a lot of focus on moving loose car load freight more efficiently, a lot of the customers like that they can get 7 day a week service. Local service has increased at most locations also more coordination with shortlines has been occuring. I did not like this, but intermodal sevice is what has been cut the most, CSX just closed their Pittsburgh terminal, hundreds of intermodal service lanes have been eliminated, why because the business was low volume low margin, which kills the operating ratio. I think long run railroads will do just fine, the industry definitely going through a lot of changes! No need for so much doom and gloom! Car load freight is definitely not dead, before the pandemic a lot of new industry siding projects were being developed or opening, even on class ones. ttrraaffiicc Carload is dying and this presents a huge problem. The majority of rail revenues and volumes come from carload. Intermodal accounts for a much smaller share of revenue and tonnage handled by railroads. When carload dies, so too will the majority of freight rail. Didn't you get the memo? Carload died a long time ago. It was replaced by unit trains. Unit trains- you know, the ones you don't want to talk about because they can't be replaced by fleets of driverless elctric trucks that don't exist yet.
I did not like this, but intermodal sevice is what has been cut the most, CSX just closed their Pittsburgh terminal, hundreds of intermodal service lanes have been eliminated, why because the business was low volume low margin, which kills the operating ratio. I think long run railroads will do just fine, the industry definitely going through a lot of changes! No need for so much doom and gloom! Car load freight is definitely not dead, before the pandemic a lot of new industry siding projects were being developed or opening, even on class ones.
Didn't you get the memo? Carload died a long time ago. It was replaced by unit trains. Unit trains- you know, the ones you don't want to talk about because they can't be replaced by fleets of driverless elctric trucks that don't exist yet.
James Sanchez
charlie hebdo Even on that thread, there is largely sarcasm and humor than a serious discussion of how a separation of ROW ownership and maintenance from operators might lead to an improvement in rail transportation.
That was about the 20th thread about Open Access by that point, and the two sides had long been delineated. The thread was an attempt to consolidate all the open access discussion into one spot- for better or for worse. Most of the long winded, anonymous replies are by Futuremodal; some are by other posters who no longer have accounts on the forum. It looks too, like there are also replies to posts that are not there anymore.
zugmann Murphy Siding If anyone can figure out how to find an old thread through the impossible search function, look up "OAT- the Open Access Thread". http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/42044.aspx?page=1
Futuremodal seemed to believe that open access, Roadrailers and dual-power locomotives would save American railroading. After reading some of his responses to my posts, I came to the conclusion that he was really looking for more variety in his trainwatching.
Murphy SidingHow did you find that?
Some of the longer threads come up very fast in Google, as I found when looking for the post about Michael Sol's fields of experience. As someone noted, using cs.trains.com as one of the search terms can greatly accelerate finding threads.
Often you can piece together 'who was who' in the now-anonymous posts by looking at the quotes, where the account names usually remain intact in the quote-tag syntax (the same literal parsing that makes emoticons in quoted text become just the ASCII characters and not picture smileys).
It was interesting to compare Dave Smith's futures with John Kneiling's, the whole TOFC revolution represented by HPIT, the Iron Highway, and like things having essentially come and gone in the years between (not to mention systems based like mine on sideloading to rack flats, or on Fuel Foiler-like extremely-low-tare skeleton cars with kangaroo pockets).
Much of the 'subsequent future' has been dominated by a very different paradigm, involving stack operations enabled by inexpensive Asian goods, centralization of logistics and dispatch, peak speed reductions and greater emphasis on fuel conservation from increasingly 'computerized' locomotives, and the rise of the PSR craze. We have Aldo been treated to some object lessons on where RoadRailer-style augmented vans, either with 'their own wheels' or special bogies, are actually competitive long-term... and why RoadRailer container chassis are almost always a solution looking for a problem they won't solve at all cost-effectively.
I don't have a problem with the basic concept of open access.
But there are a plethora of questions on how to implement it, and that's where the problems begin. The devil, as they say, is in the details.
As CH suggested a few posts ago, the current railroad companies probably wouldn't last too long as OA would depend on going out and looking for loads (a la trucking), and lately the Class Ones haven't exactly been active in the marketing arena.
Mind you, I don't look at it with the same single mindedness as FM. It's just another direction things could go.
Well, the last couple months has served as a dry run for what it'd be like with no passenger trains. Hard to say they would be missed. If the railroads run their freight biz into the ground, let 'em do it. Just don't foist it off onto the govt. It's got more than enough on its plate.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.