Reefers

[SD60MAC9500]

 

greyhounds

 

 

Lithonia Operator

I have no idea how much perishable food travels from the NE to the west coast.

 

 

You could assume "None" and you wouldn't be very far off.  Maybe some frozen shellfish?

But don't limit the possible westbound loads to perishables.  Grab anything you can get.  (OK, toxic waste in a reefer is a bad idea.)  A reefer can well handle dry freight.  The refrigeration is needed for the eastbound load.  It may, or may not, be needed for the westbound load.  

For example, Campbell's has its largest production facility in Napoleon, OH.  Some of that V8 Juice and soup goes out west.  Get it.  Tell your sales/marketing people that they better have a damn good excuse if one truckload of that plant's output goes over the road to the west coast.  Tell your operating people that they best not loose business by failing to make a switch, or any other such failure that wasn't caused by an Act of God or a safety concern.  And, with great importance, tell your cost accounting people that it's the marginal costs that count.  If they show up with average costs have them escorted off the property.

Get every damn case of Jameson Irish Whiskey, every case of Heineken beer, every case of French wine, and everything else coming in from Europe and going "Out West."

Do not loose to a trucker on price on a long haul move!

 

I'll add that New York State is the 3rd largest wine producer in the nation. New England has dairy, and seafood production. Maine still has sizeable potato production. The Mid-Atlantic states are now heavy producers of seafood. The backhaul opportunities exist. 

 

[greyhounds]

[quote user="zugmann”] What’s the cost to build a reefer vs. a regular boxcar?   [/quote]

 

I don’t know and it doesn’t control the desirability of having two loads on the round trip for one railcar.  It’s a very false comparison.  We’re talking about moving two loads here.  One load is perishable product moving east.  The other is a non-perishable product moving west.  If you don’t use the reefer to move the non-perishables west, you’ll need two railcars. So, we’d need to compare the total cost of a reefer and a boxcar with just one reefer if it is loaded both ways.

 

I prefer using intermodal for perishables.  One reason is its greater flexibility for getting two-way revenue moves.  But if you want to talk railcar reefers I’ll oblige.

 

zugmann

Sounds like we are going to end up building a fleet of reefers that are never used for reefer purposes. 

 

Not at all!

 

The railroad must produce a round trip.  That reefer railcar, or a similar railcar, must be returned to the origin to get another load.  The railroad must produce the transportation to return the car to origin.  If it goes back empty, they get no revenue to cover those production costs.  (I’ll guarantee you the competing trucker isn’t going back empty with no revenue.)

 

Let’s take a movement of frozen potatoes from JR Simplot at Caldwell, ID to the New York City market.  Say it’s 2,000 miles each way.  So, if the railroad just sends the car back empty, it will have to produce 4,000 miles of transportation while only getting paid for the 2,000 miles the car was carrying a load.  A competing trucker can split his/her costs over loads going both ways.  That’s a big advantage for the trucker.  So, if you’re a railroad, don’t send the car back empty.

 

Neither the trucker nor the railroad is going to get a load going to Caldwell, ID.  Both are going to have to eat some empty, non-revenue miles.  The key is to minimize those non-revenue miles, but it is impossible to totally eliminate them.

 

So, what to do?  Well, one of the new big reefer cars can handle over three truckloads worth of freight.  So, if it’s in the New York area get a container load of Jameson Irish Whiskey (boy, is that good in coffee on a cold winter day), a container load of Heineken, and a container load of French wine and put all that in one railcar destined to Seattle.  Remember, I don’t want these expensive railcars used in traditional carload service.  They need to move from “ColdPark” to “ColdPark” on Z trains.  Local pick up and delivery will be by local trucking. 

 

After the car is unloaded in Seattle it will have to move as a non-revenue empty back to Caldwell.

 

It will cost more to do it this way than it would to just send the car back empty to Caldwell.  But…. That’s not the deciding factor.  The deciding factor is the difference in the incremental (marginal) revenue and the incremental (marginal) cost.  Again, I’ll guarantee that the loaded two-way trip will outperform the direct empty return and make the railroad much more competitive for the business.

 

It is impossible to do this two-way loaded round trip without the refrigeration capacity of the railcar.  So, we’re not acquiring refrigerated equipment to use in non-refrigerated service.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[daveklepper]

Makes sense.  But even better would be a relatively few empty miles to the Port of Providence, a load of frozen fish to the Seattle market, and then the empty miles to Caldwell.  Takes the marketing efforts of both BNSF and CSX, however.  But also in your case as well.

[BaltACD]

daveklepper

Makes sense.  But even better would be a relatively few empty miles to the Port of Providence, a load of frozen fish to the Seattle market, and then the empty miles to Caldwell.  Takes the marketing efforts of both BNSF and CSX, however.  But also in your case as well.

The bigger question - how much Atlantic seafood exists that doesn't already exist on the Pacific coast?

If either coast is shipping seafood, it is going to the interior of the country most frequently.

[Overmod]

BaltACD

The bigger question - how much Atlantic seafood exists that doesn't already exist on the Pacific coast?

Much of it is wildly different.  Take Atlantic vs. sockeye salmon for example, or different regional oysters, or mussels.  Gulf shrimp.  i could list blue mussels as a potential large-traffic item ... if a few bugs in marketing and marine biology could be successfully addressed in the way 'George Washington crabs' as a delicacy were... 

I don't think the aggregate steady traffic would ever get to block scale, but as one target of opportunity for what is very cheap high-priority reefer handling, it's certainly attractive...

[MMLDelete]

Living in Maine, I've eaten some Maine shrimp. Being from Louisiana and Mississippi, I've eaten lots of Gulf shrimp. The only kind of shrimp I've ever bought in a supermarket here is Gulf shrimp. Even frozen, Gulf shrimp beats Maine's version seven days a week. I think you'd be surprised how much seafood travels coast to coast. We sometimes can get Alaskan king crab in our local grocery. Maine lobster goes everywhere, but usually, I think, by Fedex airplanes; they are shipped alive. 

[tree68]

I would opine that the railroads have little interest in those fairly small markets.  Is a railroad willing to move one of those reefers per week to an east coast location so it can go west loaded?  Or deal with having to drop a reefer in Chicago for unloading on its way west?

Just playing the devil's advocate...

[MMLDelete]

You're probably right, Larry. I have no idea.

But, as for the reefer for Chicago, wouldn't you drop it at an intermediate yard from which hundreds of cars go to Chicago every day?

The travel of freight cars is a massive mystery I don't expect to comprehend in this lifetime.

[greyhounds]

daveklepper

Makes sense.  But even better would be a relatively few empty miles to the Port of Providence, a load of frozen fish to the Seattle market, and then the empty miles to Caldwell.  Takes the marketing efforts of both BNSF and CSX, however.

I think I could almost become a pescatarian.  I really like fish and seafood.  Almost!  We’ve got this nice bone in half ham sitting in the refrigerator and I can’t wait to see it on a plate. 

 

My favorite has to be channel catfish.  None of this farm raised stuff.  Skin it, gut it, cut the head off.  Leave the tail on.  The tail is good to eat.

 

Roll it in cornmeal and boil it in lard.  Fry some potatoes and onions in lard to go along with the catfish.  Boy, that’s good eating.  You won’t live too long if you eat that a lot.  But it tastes good.

 

I don’t know how much fish/seafood moves west from New England.  In 2018 the US per capita “Availability” of fish/seafood was 16.1 pounds.  (They call it “Availability” because they don’t know what happens after it hits the grocery store.  It could be thrown out by the grocer, thrown out by the buyer, or fed to the dog.  Who knows?)

 

What I do know is that I don’t want that expensive refrigerated railcar moving through the yards and locals up to Providence.  Then coming back through the same system to get on a westbound train.  Keep the wheels turning and keep them turning fast.  (45 MPH is good, if it’s maintained.)

 

Bring it east into a “ColdPort”, like an intermodal terminal.  Unload it, reload it, and send it back west.  Ideally, the eastbound carload would arrive at the “ColdPort” on say, a Wednesday morning.  It would be unloaded, then reloaded, and moved on an expedited train west Wednesday evening.  Do not ever let it sit in a yard.

 

The local movements, the pickup and delivery, are by truck.  Use each mode to its best advantage.  And keep all wheels turning.

[narig01]

Any of the three will work for Temperature Controlled Cargoes. Please note I say Temp Controlled not reefer.

      There are many cargoes out there that need temperature control, as opposed to refrigeration. Best example chocolate candy. Needs to be kept cool, usually 45f - 55f depending on time of year. Also needs good air circulation within the box to prevent hot or cold spots from developing within.  Another medical supplies such as IV bags. These need to be protected from excessive heat(+80f) and freezing. The main complaint I heard about rail transport was rough handling and refusal of the carrier to pay claims(these cargoes easily went into the million dollar range in value). JB Hunt is getting some of the business in dry boxes during certain times of the year, but could do better, IMHO. 

      Perishables, one major shipper of quantity car load produce are the package salad companies. I know one that at one point had an operation that was moving 20 containers of lettuce everyday from California to Illinois, Texas and Georgia. One of the railroads involved had an early cutoff time and what was happening was 20 boxes would show up 20-30 minutes before cutoff. Not all the boxes would make the train forcing the truck company to deploy driver teams to make up the difference. 

      This was back in the mid 1990's. It left a bitter taste in a lot of peoples mouths. And memories are long. 

       If I had a choice I would develop a refrigeration unit that would fit in a lower well of a 53' well car. Also be in a position to offer shore power for units on board the train. Have a generator mounted to provide power for four or more containers. This would be an excellent way to go after some of the banana shipments. 

     Most of my experience is driving OTR pulling a reefer, ahem a Temperature Controlled trailer. 

     One thing you have to think about is most grocery store distribution centre's only have truck docks. One of the reasons you don't see a lot of refrigeration loads is it costs money to transfer cargo from a railcar to a truck. There are exceptions. A good one being Idaho French Fries. Those come from a single shipper and they use any number of cold storage warehouses throughout the country. The good news is the larger cold chain logistics providers make sure they have reliable rail access when building new cold storage.

[narig01]

Opinion, railroads could do a much better job, it just a matter of paying attention to the details. Like making sure the cargo makes it scheduled train.

         A solo truck driver is only capable of driving approx 500 miles in a day. A reasonable efficient railroad should be capable of moving that cargo 800 miles a day. Further a rail car can move 3-5 times the weight. Volume is another matter.(think how much a box of frozen waffles weighs compared to the equivalent volume of coal). 

       Cargo value is another matter. High value shipments are going to stop at the limit of available cargo insurance. A good example of this is IV solutions. In truckload volumes it is a rare example of a cargo that will gross out a trailer load, cube out the trailer and value limit. That is to say, fully loaded the truck will be close to 80,000lbs, the cargo will take up 80-90% of the interior volume of the trailer, and be very close to the limits of readily obtained cargo insurance in case of loss of the cargo.

        Medical supplies like that also command top dollar for carriers who handle it. 

[charlie hebdo]

It's hard to imagine lightweight,  high value freight being shipped by rail.  Can anyone name any that is? 

[BaltACD]

charlie hebdo

It's hard to imagine lightweight,  high value freight being shipped by rail.  Can anyone name any that is? 

The contents of UPS, FedEx and many other containers/trailers traversing the rails in intermodal service.

[greyhounds]

narig01

The main complaint I heard about rail transport was rough handling and refusal of the carrier to pay claims(these cargoes easily went into the million dollar range in value).

Oh, for sure.

First, thank you narig01.  You know what you are talking about and you add value to the conversation.

I went quite a few rounds with our freight loss and damage people.  They ran a lot of freight off the railroad.  Their objective was to not pay loss and damage claims.  Do that once on a legitimate claim and the customer goes elsewhere.  They didn't care about that.  Their objective was to not pay loss and damage claims.  Their objective was fully achieved when we didn't haul the freight.  There were no loss and damage claims on freight we didn't haul.

They were total jerks.  I was trying to get Chiquita banana traffic imported through Gulfport going to Chicago.  The business moved in Chiquita containers so we didn't have to acquire any equipment.  

I didn't want any claims problems so I tried to work things out ahead of time.  Nope.  They were there to not pay loss and damage claims and that was it.

At first, the head of the department actually denied that intermodal had been deregulated.  "Not this part of it, they didn't".  I had to get a railroad lawyer to tell him deregulated meant deregulated.  We could write a contract and negotiate the loss and damage provisions.  This basically unhinged everyone in the L&D claims department.  They followed the government rules.  When those rules were taken away they were lost souls.

So then, we got into an agument about 2 degrees of temperature.  Chiquita's shipping instructions were "Maintain 58 degrees."  But the department head had a book that said bananas should move at 56 degrees.  In reality, either temperature will deliver a good banana fit for retail sale.  But if the customer says 58 degrees just make sure the unit is maintaining 58 degrees.  Nope.  He had a book and no damn customer was going to tell him what to do.

I could go on.

Anyway, I got Chiquita bananas on the railroad.  It wasn't easy.  The actual movement was simple enough.  We trucked the bananas from Gulfport, MS to New Orleans and put them on an existing intermodal train to Chicago.  Not a big issue.

It was the corporate bureaucracy that caused the problems.  The railroad could compete just fine.  It was the people, not the ability to compete, that caused the problems.

 

 

[SD70Dude]

A few comments.

The forces encountered by a freight shipment will be much lower on intermodal trains, due to their relative lack of slack.  

In my area it currently usually takes between 5 and 10 hours for a train to travel 100 miles on our main line.  Too many trains, not enough track (a shame Hunter ripped up all those sidings and double track).  And the double track we do have is often used as a parking lot to stage trains that cannot be handled by terminals hundreds of miles down the line.  

I know we're not the only ones with these problems.

Genset containers already exist, and most of our intermodal trains carry them.  It is normal to see cables strung out across multiple cars, which must be watched out for when switching, I'm told they make quite the light show when the cars are uncoupled but the cables aren't.......

[Ulrich]

In the past ag commodities were considered "exempt" from regulation for trucking purposes. But that wasn't really the main reason the railroads lost that business to trucks. In the 40s and 50s farmers themselves bought trucks to move their products to market, and out of that grew the owner-operator trucker movement that gravitated toward this biz. Most of these small one or two truck carriers grew up on the farm and had a good working knowledge not only of trucks and transportation but of growing seasons and crops as well. Even today with more stringent safety regulations ag commodites remain a good fit for the small trucking operation due to faster response times, flexiblity in routing, of course speed of service... and door to door delivery. Also..the ability to peddle a load with 3 to 10 stops on it  helps.. and for some loads, like berries, it's important to have someone with the load who can monitor it continously.  The railroads could carve out a niche in the volume processed foods area... frozen foods and canned foods etc.. but I doubt they'll take back fresh foods.. and foods that require temp control. 

[jeffhergert]

A retired GM&O/ICG dispatcher, now deceased, gave a slide show at the local railfan group about 5 years ago.  He talked about some of the loss from the meat plants was because of the trailers the railroad was supplying the packers.  More of the trailers supplied were being rejected as unfit to load and the packers became tired of that.

One of his slides was of trailers being loaded at the IBP Denison plant.  The ramp is still there, the track gone.  I'd been going past there for years at that time and never noticed it until that picture.  Hiding in plain sight.

Jeff

[MMLDelete]

greyhounds

 

 

narig01

The main complaint I heard about rail transport was rough handling and refusal of the carrier to pay claims(these cargoes easily went into the million dollar range in value).

 

 

Oh, for sure.

First, thank you narig01.  You know what you are talking about and you add value to the conversation.

I went quite a few rounds with our freight loss and damage people.  They ran a lot of freight off the railroad.  Their objective was to not pay loss and damage claims.  Do that once on a legitimate claim and the customer goes elsewhere.  They didn't care about that.  Their objective was to not pay loss and damage claims.  Their objective was fully achieved when we didn't haul the freight.  There were no loss and damage claims on freight we didn't haul.

They were total jerks.  I was trying to get Chiquita banana traffic imported through Gulfport going to Chicago.  The business moved in Chiquita containers so we didn't have to acquire any equipment.  

I didn't want any claims problems so I tried to work things out ahead of time.  Nope.  They were there to not pay loss and damage claims and that was it.

At first, the head of the department actually denied that intermodal had been deregulated.  "Not this part of it, they didn't".  I had to get a railroad lawyer to tell him deregulated meant deregulated.  We could write a contract and negotiate the loss and damage provisions.  This basically unhinged everyone in the L&D claims department.  They followed the government rules.  When those rules were taken away they were lost souls.

So then, we got into an agument about 2 degrees of temperature.  Chiquita's shipping instructions were "Maintain 58 degrees."  But the department head had a book that said bananas should move at 56 degrees.  In reality, either temperature will deliver a good banana fit for retail sale.  But if the customer says 58 degrees just make sure the unit is maintaining 58 degrees.  Nope.  He had a book and no damn customer was going to tell him what to do.

I could go on.

Anyway, I got Chiquita bananas on the railroad.  It wasn't easy.  The actual movement was simple enough.  We trucked the bananas from Gulfport, MS to New Orleans and put them on an existing intermodal train to Chicago.  Not a big issue.

It was the corporate bureaucracy that caused the problems.  The railroad could compete just fine.  It was the people, not the ability to compete, that caused the problems.

 

 

 

Was this IC, ICG, CN?

If so, was there any thought of using rail directly from Gulfport, via Hattiesburg?

[greyhounds]

Lithonia Operator

Was this IC, ICG, CN? If so, was there any thought of using rail directly from Gulfport, via Hattiesburg?

ICG.  

The line from Jackson, MS to Gulfport, MS was a slow route.  With the limited volume I was originally seeking it made more sense to truck the containers 90 miles from Gulfport to New Orleans and put them on an existing train.  That got going successfully after several knock down, drag out arguments.  And a few doubles on the commuter train ride home.  (I walked home from the train station.)

Then, wonder of wonders, if you show a customer you can actually do something they might, just might, show up and ask you to take more business.

So, some people from Chiquita showed up in Chicago one day and presented a proposal for us to take 40 containers twice a week to Chicago.  (They had two ships arriving in Gulfport each week.)  This volume would have been moved on rail directly out of Gulfport.  They wanted to establish a facility in Chicago that they could sell out of.  If they held bananas there they could offer next day delivery to the Twin Cities, Detroit, etc.  Sounded good to me.

This time it was the operating department that didn't want to be bothered with extra business.  We had to have this movement "Costed".  Railroad cost accounting is quite problematical.  The operating department made sure they wouldn't have to bother with the bananas by claiming it would take six locomotives to handle this move.  And they didn't have a spare six locomotives.

Bull!  Pure Bull!  

One locomotive could have brought 20 cars with 40 containers out of Gulfport to Jackson, MS.  Then gone on through to Chicago with the containers.  Turn it back with returning containers.  It could have easily made one round trip per week.  

When I challenged their locomotive requirement and claimed they could do it with but two I was told:  "Things just don't work that way."

That's the pathetic management the ICG had.  One reason I admire EH Harrison is that he was able to straighten it out.

[MMLDelete]

Man, that outfit warranted some doubles on the train home! First the damage guys, then the operating guys. I lived in Gulfport as a kid. My recollection is that Gulfport to Jackson is flat as a pancake. Six engines to pull 40 containers!? That's unreal.

Were you able to get that business, though, by trucking to NOLA?

[greyhounds]

Ulrich

ven today with more stringent safety regulations ag commodites remain a good fit for the small trucking operation due to faster response times, flexiblity in routing, of course speed of service... and door to door delivery. Also..the ability to peddle a load with 3 to 10 stops on it  helps.. and for some loads, like berries, it's important to have someone with the load who can monitor it continously.  The railroads could carve out a niche in the volume processed foods area... frozen foods and canned foods etc.. but I doubt they'll take back fresh foods.. and foods that require temp control. 

OK, I’ll disagree.

 

The railroads can readily handle fresh food that requires temperature control.  They still do so today.  Not to nearly the extent they should.  But they do move fresh fruit and vegetables, and they do it successfully.  They’ve generally got a real advantage in this market because this product tends to move long distances.  This should favor rail movement.

 

I’ll use fresh fruit as an example.  In 2018 the per capita US availability of fresh fruit was 133.1 pounds.  Of this amount just three commodities 1) bananas, 28.3 pounds, 2) citrus, 23.0 pounds, and 3) apples, 16.3 pounds, made up over half the tonnage.  None of those is difficult to handle by rail. 

 

Add in melons, 22.4 pounds, avocados, 7.6 pounds, pineapple, 7.4 pounds, grapes, 7.4 pounds, and peaches/nectarines, 2.1 pounds and we’re at 88% of the market being suitable for rail movement.

 

We can leave the strawberries, apricots, kiwifruit, etc. to the truckers and still have a huge market development opportunity for rail.

 

As for the multi stop deliveries, they seem well suited for railcar service through “ColdPorts”.  Just unload the car and put each delivery on a truck headed to destination.

[SD60MAC9500]

 

greyhounds

 

 

Lithonia Operator

Was this IC, ICG, CN? If so, was there any thought of using rail directly from Gulfport, via Hattiesburg?

 

 

ICG.  

The line from Jackson, MS to Gulfport, MS was a slow route.  With the limited volume I was originally seeking it made more sense to truck the containers 90 miles from Gulfport to New Orleans and put them on an existing train.  That got going successfully after several knock down, drag out arguments.  And a few doubles on the commuter train ride home.  (I walked home from the train station.)

Then, wonder of wonders, if you show a customer you can actually do something they might, just might, show up and ask you to take more business.

So, some people from Chiquita showed up in Chicago one day and presented a proposal for us to take 40 containers twice a week to Chicago.  (They had two ships arriving in Gulfport each week.)  This volume would have been moved on rail directly out of Gulfport.  They wanted to establish a facility in Chicago that they could sell out of.  If they held bananas there they could offer next day delivery to the Twin Cities, Detroit, etc.  Sounded good to me.

This time it was the operating department that didn't want to be bothered with extra business.  We had to have this movement "Costed".  Railroad cost accounting is quite problematical.  The operating department made sure they wouldn't have to bother with the bananas by claiming it would take six locomotives to handle this move.  And they didn't have a spare six locomotives.

Bull!  Pure Bull!  

One locomotive could have brought 20 cars with 40 containers out of Gulfport to Jackson, MS.  Then gone on through to Chicago with the containers.  Turn it back with returning containers.  It could have easily made one round trip per week.  

When I challenged their locomotive requirement and claimed they could do it with but two I was told:  "Things just don't work that way."

That's the pathetic management the ICG had.  One reason I admire EH Harrison is that he was able to straighten it out.

 

So this is great insight. The operating dept. made an assumption based off of an assumption? The operating dept. should be the main ones pushing traffic growth as the income benefits them... It's hard to fathom..

 

[BaltACD]

SD60MAC9500

So this is great insight. The operating dept. made an assumption based off of an assumption? The operating dept. should be the main ones pushing traffic growth as the income benefits them... It's hard to fathom..

It is not hard to fathom when the Operating Dept. is being pushed from on high to decrease costs anyway possible.  When operating under those considerations, revenue doesn't enter into the equation.  The pressure to cut costs comes from the top - not the Operating Dept. pre se.

[greyhounds]

Lithonia Operator

My recollection is that Gulfport to Jackson is flat as a pancake. Six engines to pull 40 containers!? That's unreal. Were you able to get that business, though, by trucking to NOLA?

No.  I was defeated.  We did hang on to the original business that was trucked from Gulfport to New Orleans.  The customer was easy.  It was our own people that caused the problems.

I'll go further.  We were to check the reefer units for proper operation in Memphis.  So, one day I got a call from a union official.  He told me that failed reefer units were just being moved on through without any attempts to restart the system.  I had to get that changed.  I asked him why he called.  He said he'd do what he could to get more business.  It meant more work. I thanked him.  He cared more than our management did.

As to the six locomotive requirement: Their plan, if you can call it that, was to put two locomotives on each 20 car cut out of Gulfport and move them on through to Memphis.  Then they'd replace them with one extra locomotive on a regular IM train to Chicago.  

The Gulfport-Memphis locomotives were "Planned" for one round trip per week and that cost was assigned to the proposed movement.  Gulfport to Jackson, MS was slow track and you could figure 12 hours for the move.  Jackson to Memphis was good and fast.  With no stops that 210 miles could be run in around five - six hours.  (Most freight went another route, so meets were rare.)  So figure an easy 24 hours from Gulfport to Memphis and another 24 hours back.  Please know that the movement north from Jackson would have been on an existing IM train.

So, this meant that their "Plan" called for four locomotives cycling between Gulport and Memphis at one round trip each per week.  That's 28 days of locomotive ownership cost/week to move 80 loaded containers.  They couldn't imagine getting two round trips per week.  Nor could they conceive of moving 20 flatcars with one loco. 

It gets worse.  To move the containers north of Memphis they claimed to need two more dedicated locomoitves.  It was an overnight run.  One assigned locomotive could have made two round trips per week.

To this day I'm convinced they sabotaged the opportunity by loading it with unreasonable costs. 

 

[MMLDelete]

My first locomotive ride was when I was about 12, at the small engine terminal IC had in Gulfport, about a mile or so north of the crossing with LN. Gulfport was a pretty good location for a railfan kid. Most of the action, of course, was on the L&N.

[BaltACD]

greyhounds

 

Lithonia Operator

My recollection is that Gulfport to Jackson is flat as a pancake. Six engines to pull 40 containers!? That's unreal. Were you able to get that business, though, by trucking to NOLA? 

No.  I was defeated.  We did hang on to the original business that was trucked from Gulfport to New Orleans.  The customer was easy.  It was our own people that caused the problems.

I'll go further.  We were to check the reefer units for proper operation in Memphis.  So, one day I got a call from a union official.  He told me that failed reefer units were just being moved on through without any attempts to restart the system.  I had to get that changed.  I asked him why he called.  He said he'd do what he could to get more business.  It meant more work. I thanked him.  He cared more than our management did.

As to the six locomotive requirement: Their plan, if you can call it that, was to put two locomotives on each 20 car cut out of Gulfport and move them on through to Memphis.  Then they'd replace them with one extra locomotive on a regular IM train to Chicago.  

The Gulfport-Memphis locomotives were "Planned" for one round trip per week and that cost was assigned to the proposed movement.  Gulfport to Jackson, MS was slow track and you could figure 12 hours for the move.  Jackson to Memphis was good and fast.  With no stops that 210 miles could be run in around five - six hours.  (Most freight went another route, so meets were rare.)  So figure an easy 24 hours from Gulfport to Memphis and another 24 hours back.  Please know that the movement north from Jackson would have been on an existing IM train.

So, this meant that their "Plan" called for four locomotives cycling between Gulport and Memphis at one round trip each per week.  That's 28 days of locomotive ownership cost/week to move 80 loaded containers.  They couldn't imagine getting two round trips per week.  Nor could they conceive of moving 20 flatcars with one loco. 

It gets worse.  To move the containers north of Memphis they claimed to need two more dedicated locomoitves.  It was an overnight run.  One assigned locomotive could have made two round trips per week.

To this day I'm convinced they sabotaged the opportunity by loading it with unreasonable costs. 

Your account just proves my contention that 'cost accounting' on the railroad is anything that top management wants it to be, whenever it wants that to be the case.

Your method of accounting for costs differed from Top Managements methods of accounting for costs.  In the world of corporate politics you method was wrong (not that it was really wrong).

[lanarkdepot]

A freind of mine told me a similar story about trying to get the railroad to transport eggs from Iowa to California with a guaranteed backhaul of lettuce.  No matter what the shipper agreed to related to indemnification for damages the railroad claims people found another objection.

 

[greyhounds]

lanarkdepot

A freind of mine told me a similar story about trying to get the railroad to transport eggs from Iowa to California with a guaranteed backhaul of lettuce.  No matter what the shipper agreed to related to indemnification for damages the railroad claims people found another objection.  

Thinking about this thread I remembered an "I can top that" example.

Our VP-Sales, one R.L. Rushing, was complaining about a division super who didn't want to handle some new business because it would create more paperwork.  I am not making this up!

In reference to you're egg example, the goal of freight claims people is to not pay freight claims.  If the railroad doesn't handle the freight, they're not going to have any loss and damage claims to pay.  So, the freight claims people resist handling new business.

 

 

[GERALD A EDGAR]

Agreed.  UP mgt has been underperforming for years now (conside the billionnaire wizard of Omaha who set out to buy a RR, bought BN despite UP being in his backyard - he knew which was a far better deal!)

[Sunnyland]

I can remember the reefer cars when I  would visit the Frisco yard  where Dad worked. The constant hum on the motor keeping the contents cool were hard to miss.  The boxcar was and is still my favorite car because I remember seeing so many of them. When one passed with open door, Dad always said there goes a "sidedoor Pullman".  The place where hobos would catch a ride and  a good name for the car.