QUOTE: Originally posted by edbenton I know for a Fact the Coors brewary in Memphis TN recives all of there water via train in tank cars the recive on avarage 35 a day. The reason I know this is I used to haul the finished product out of there and while waiting to load would see the BNSF bring cuts of tankers marked CORX into the brewary. One time I asked the train crew what was in those same cars and was told all it is is rocky mountain spring water.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan That statement tells me several things about this person or persons. 1/ They know jack $%#$ about anything having to do with rail for starters. 2/ They are using rail as a scape-goat for their own agenda and not considering others. A typical selfish response from someone who obviously has nothing better to do than complain and engage in negative smearing likely. 3/ They are probably stupid and don't are are incapable of using logic. Any intelligent person who has read studies or for that matter looked at the roads can tell you that trucks cause increase wear on the roads and so having a rail user will reduce costs to the taxpayer. It is also more space efficient to have a single track line go through town then a double or quadruple lane road for truck use. It is even better because unlike a road, the rail upkeep is up to the railroad and not average Joe-taxpayer. The more roads you have and more trucks using existing road, add to maintainance cost and also decrease amount of land available for development. 4/ Trucks are archaic, they only carry one or two loads per 28 to 57 feet in length. The only reason why they exist still is because sometimes they are cheaper, easier and quicker then rail but not always. They certainly don't do wonders for industries that requires large quantities or bulk commodities either for importing or exporting. I wi***he government would undertake in a rail awearness program for basic understanding of the railroad. They do it for safety (Operation Lifesaver) why don't they do so people would be more educated and informed about the benefits of a railroad?
Jock Ellis Cumming, GA US of A Georgia Association of Railroad Passengers
QUOTE: Originally posted by ironken [As far as effeciency goes, trains have trucks beat hands down. Consider horsepower per ton. A figure that is very important to the RR. We often run as little as 1 HPT on the flatter runs. Correct me if I'm wrong, but, aren't the newer semis pushing 500 hp? and hauling around 50 tons? If so that equates to 10 hpt to move that freight. Our most powered up trains on steep grades rarely use even half of that. Food for thought.
QUOTE: Originally posted by HighIron2003ar QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds QUOTE: Originally posted by HighIron2003ar At a meat plant in Liberal Kansas I have to negotiate a forest of railcars. It may not have been touched by a railroad but wherever you live you can bet a trucker brought it to you. Can't argue with the last sentence HighIron. Do you fee comfortable talking about those meat loads out of Liberal? East coast or west coast? What was the transit time by truck. You probably didn't get a load back to Liberal. Where did you load to on the return trip? What kind of freight would you haul on the return? I'd guess pulling out of Farmland, you were an owner operator. Do you know what the truck charges were for delivery on either, or both, coasts? The movement of freight is facinating to me. I know the railroad end of things. I'd like to learn more about trucking. You seem to be someone who could educate me. Nothing went back to Liberal except cattle and perhaps gasoline/merchandise and what not for the support of the city. You went up there empty and you hauled beef out Some to the west, most to the east. The company would try to stay ahead of the plant's shipping by keeping a pool of empties being loaded so you dont have to wait. If I remember correctly we had major areas to the north and south of liberal where you could deliver a revenue load to like walmart distribution etc and then dead head a few hours to liberal. With a reefer you can also function as a "box" if needed. Ill post more but need to recollect my thoughts.
QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds QUOTE: Originally posted by HighIron2003ar At a meat plant in Liberal Kansas I have to negotiate a forest of railcars. It may not have been touched by a railroad but wherever you live you can bet a trucker brought it to you. Can't argue with the last sentence HighIron. Do you fee comfortable talking about those meat loads out of Liberal? East coast or west coast? What was the transit time by truck. You probably didn't get a load back to Liberal. Where did you load to on the return trip? What kind of freight would you haul on the return? I'd guess pulling out of Farmland, you were an owner operator. Do you know what the truck charges were for delivery on either, or both, coasts? The movement of freight is facinating to me. I know the railroad end of things. I'd like to learn more about trucking. You seem to be someone who could educate me.
QUOTE: Originally posted by HighIron2003ar At a meat plant in Liberal Kansas I have to negotiate a forest of railcars. It may not have been touched by a railroad but wherever you live you can bet a trucker brought it to you.
QUOTE: Originally posted by HighIron2003ar QUOTE: Originally posted by eolafan Last time I looked, eighteen wheel trucks can't go accross deserts, mountains, rivers, etc. without roads, so where is the difference...tracks, good roads, no difference. We need both railroads and truck lines with the proper use of each in a balance. Wanna bet?? A big old Diamond Reo with the walking beams probably is capable of getting to the logging road with a load where there aint no roads. You need to consider ground pressure per inch and the solidity of the ground. I have gone off road many times in a 18 wheeler. Thank god for the ground clearence and the really low gear ratios (and dry weather too)
QUOTE: Originally posted by eolafan Last time I looked, eighteen wheel trucks can't go accross deserts, mountains, rivers, etc. without roads, so where is the difference...tracks, good roads, no difference. We need both railroads and truck lines with the proper use of each in a balance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.
QUOTE: Originally posted by HighIron2003ar Originally posted by mac 4884 Diesel trucks fry too much. That's why trucks go up a runaway on a steep downgrade. Diesel trains DONT have that problem! "And this is comming from a steam fan ! " So, we are all jetting off Donnr Pass's I-80, watching them bulid these ramps, talking on the two-way (CB) about this stupid waste of money...As if the state of California buys our chat, It takes the state two years to spec the rock and purchase it for these run-away ramps! WHAT a joke. I used to joke to many, Donner Pass's I-80 was the only highway in America that a driver could do by numbered signs...sort of like paint by number! Jim - Lawton, NV ...A TEAMSTER Reply Edit greyhounds Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Antioch, IL 4,371 posts Posted by greyhounds on Sunday, February 20, 2005 1:55 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by HighIron2003ar At a meat plant in Liberal Kansas I have to negotiate a forest of railcars. It may not have been touched by a railroad but wherever you live you can bet a trucker brought it to you. Can't argue with the last sentence HighIron. Do you fee comfortable talking about those meat loads out of Liberal? East coast or west coast? What was the transit time by truck. You probably didn't get a load back to Liberal. Where did you load to on the return trip? What kind of freight would you haul on the return? I'd guess pulling out of Farmland, you were an owner operator. Do you know what the truck charges were for delivery on either, or both, coasts? The movement of freight is facinating to me. I know the railroad end of things. I'd like to learn more about trucking. You seem to be someone who could educate me. "By many measures, the U.S. freight rail system is the safest, most efficient and cost effective in the world." - Federal Railroad Administration, October, 2009. I'm just your average, everyday, uncivilized howling "anti-government" critic of mass government expenditures for "High Speed Rail" in the US. And I'm gosh darn proud of that. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, February 20, 2005 1:32 AM ironken, what grade are you near where so many truckers are smoking? I recall back in the days before jakebrakes were bought by companies willing to invest in safety I would smoke em now and again... but there should not be that many smokers. You are correct about the emergency stop on the cars. I was dramatizing a bit to make a point. Stand on summit by the interstate and look down cajon's twisting and winding path and it seems like LA is "right there" but I think about 15 miles or more away but not sure. Owner operaters will buy 500+ horses for rigs. The majority of the trucks such as JB Hunt or Swift *COUGH KAFF COUGH** excuse me.. they usually run detroits or cummins rated between 320-470 at the most. 350-430 is about the best HP versus fuel consumption and about as much money fleet managers want to pay for units. I recall the old mack 280's that you could wind out all day at 90+ mph and it did not matter what horses you had back then. No siree.. 50 ton is too heavy. 40 is the limit. A Cummins M11 rated at 320 HP moving 40 ton is not that great. It's the "pull" on hills like Cajon that gives us the speed. If that rig was able to run cajon at about 18 mph and I had a Detroit 470 HP and run that same load at about 32 mph and perhaps slightly better fuel usage. Railroads simply add units until they have enough to meet the tonnage and then pray that none of the units go down. We drivers just want to be rolling with enough horses to make a difference. Nothing is worse than a engine governed at 58 mph where in the top gear is just at or below max torque and downshifting to gain horsepower to the next lower gear only drops you to about 53 mph and no room at the governer to be worth a damn. Now If I wanted to get some what simpler with autos I had a 3700 pound car with a 350 HP v8 a friend of mine had a 3200 pound car with a supercharged v6 his numbers are very close to mine. Ultimately there is nothing that matches the top dogs. My little bitty car got blown away by a huge hogging Buick Lesabre 4 door with the 500 ci V8 with so much S**T that is just glided away from me no matter what I did. It is my understanding that railroads are very "tight fisted" with horsepower as a means to get the tonnage over the pass or division and hope that none of the units go down. If it was me I would give the engineer twice as much HP and let him have at it. Then again my railroad will be broke and out of business by the end of the year. Reply Edit greyhounds Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Antioch, IL 4,371 posts Posted by greyhounds on Sunday, February 20, 2005 1:27 AM Well, it's pretty much only 40 tons gross vehicle weight for a semi. Although there are exceptions. And that weight has to be distributed just so. 17 tons on each tandem axle. 6 tons on the steering axle. They're illegal if they've got 19 tons on one tandem even if the GVW is under 40 tons. In the late 80's when I was with Navistar we rarely produced a highway tractor with more than 350 HP. I was very suprised to see that the engine HP in highway tractors had increased given the increased emphasis on fuel economy. What's "driving" that, I'm told, is that the higher horsepower truck engines require less work on the drivers' part. They don't have to work the clutch and shifter as much. Retaining good drivers has long been a problem for trucking companies. Unless you like to be away from your family and like to live in the back of a truck the job has its drawbacks. Making a driver's job easier with a more powerful engine is one way to keep the good drivers around. "By many measures, the U.S. freight rail system is the safest, most efficient and cost effective in the world." - Federal Railroad Administration, October, 2009. I'm just your average, everyday, uncivilized howling "anti-government" critic of mass government expenditures for "High Speed Rail" in the US. And I'm gosh darn proud of that. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, February 19, 2005 9:57 PM Highiron, you wrote "if a coupler failed, the cars would end up down in L.A." I've been on the Cajon pass. They would end up in San Bernadino.....hehehe. But seriousely, if a drawbar/knuckle broke, the cars would go into emergency and stop. I live at the bottom of two grades traversed by quite a few trucks and nearly every time that I get out on the road, there are at least one truck or more stopped with smoke billowing off of the wheel area. Too common! We just had a runaway a few days ago and they are not uncommon. As far as effeciency goes, trains have trucks beat hands down. Consider horsepower per ton. A figure that is very important to the RR. We often run as little as 1 HPT on the flatter runs. Correct me if I'm wrong, but, aren't the newer semis pushing 500 hp? and hauling around 50 tons? If so that equates to 10 hpt to move that freight. Our most powered up trains on steep grades rarely use even half of that. Food for thought. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, February 19, 2005 9:43 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by edbenton I know for a Fact the Coors brewary in Memphis TN recives all of there water via train in tank cars the recive on avarage 35 a day. The reason I know this is I used to haul the finished product out of there and while waiting to load would see the BNSF bring cuts of tankers marked CORX into the brewary. One time I asked the train crew what was in those same cars and was told all it is is rocky mountain spring water. Ed, what is in those tanks is Wart. What exactly Wart is I cannot say more than "unfinished" beer. Was praying for a leaker in the yard until the yardmaster broke the news to me. Oh well. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, February 19, 2005 9:41 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by mac 4884 Diesel trucks fry too much. That's why trucks go up a runaway on a steep downgrade. Diesel trains DONT have that problem! "And this is comming from a steam fan ! " This is usually due to a braking problem. Today's trucks properly maintained and driven by TRAINED drivers 9 times of 10 will make it down the hill regardless of the weather or conditions. It is the 1 truck that suffers a failure thru any number of causes that needs rescue by "runaway ramp". The causes range from poor heat management, poor use of brakes, improper speed etc etc etc. Go to cajon pass and look at the railroad struggling to the top. If a coupler failed or something went wrong those cars will run away to downtown LA. No one wants that. ALL trains or trucks respect down grades of any kind. To do down one correctly means to live and deliver the goods safely. There is no shame in using these ramps. That means to live and see your family again. Not to use these ramps means to die. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, February 19, 2005 9:13 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by eolafan Last time I looked, eighteen wheel trucks can't go accross deserts, mountains, rivers, etc. without roads, so where is the difference...tracks, good roads, no difference. We need both railroads and truck lines with the proper use of each in a balance. Wanna bet?? A big old Diamond Reo with the walking beams probably is capable of getting to the logging road with a load where there aint no roads. You need to consider ground pressure per inch and the solidity of the ground. I have gone off road many times in a 18 wheeler. Thank god for the ground clearence and the really low gear ratios (and dry weather too) Reply Edit adrianspeeder Member sinceMarch 2002 From: Harrisburg PA / Dover AFB DE 1,482 posts Posted by adrianspeeder on Saturday, February 19, 2005 1:50 PM To quote my favorite line "dat boya might be retaarded" Adrianspeeder USAF TSgt C-17 Aircraft Maintenance Flying Crew Chief & Flightline Avionics Craftsman Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, February 19, 2005 12:25 PM Are others seeing a big decline in piggyback service lately? I use to see a lot of piggyback trailers on an intermodal train (CN mainline from Toronto to Port Huron/ USA). I can not recall the last time I saw any piggybacks. There use to be a few Triple Crown trains, but that has come and gone, and this forum has already discussed that issue. I agree with a previous comment made here, that as driver hours get reduced, it may boost the piggyback service. Reply Edit Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Saturday, February 19, 2005 11:29 AM That statement tells me several things about this person or persons. 1/ They know jack $%#$ about anything having to do with rail for starters. 2/ They are using rail as a scape-goat for their own agenda and not considering others. A typical selfish response from someone who obviously has nothing better to do than complain and engage in negative smearing likely. 3/ They are probably stupid and don't are are incapable of using logic. Any intelligent person who has read studies or for that matter looked at the roads can tell you that trucks cause increase wear on the roads and so having a rail user will reduce costs to the taxpayer. It is also more space efficient to have a single track line go through town then a double or quadruple lane road for truck use. It is even better because unlike a road, the rail upkeep is up to the railroad and not average Joe-taxpayer. The more roads you have and more trucks using existing road, add to maintainance cost and also decrease amount of land available for development. 4/ Trucks are archaic, they only carry one or two loads per 28 to 57 feet in length. The only reason why they exist still is because sometimes they are cheaper, easier and quicker then rail but not always. They certainly don't do wonders for industries that requires large quantities or bulk commodities either for importing or exporting. I wi***he government would undertake in a rail awearness program for basic understanding of the railroad. They do it for safety (Operation Lifesaver) why don't they do so people would be more educated and informed about the benefits of a railroad? Andrew Reply eolafan Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Aurora, IL 4,515 posts Posted by eolafan on Saturday, February 19, 2005 9:34 AM Last time I looked, eighteen wheel trucks can't go accross deserts, mountains, rivers, etc. without roads, so where is the difference...tracks, good roads, no difference. We need both railroads and truck lines with the proper use of each in a balance. Eolafan (a.k.a. Jim) Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, February 19, 2005 6:26 AM I know I've stood on the soap box a few times and given the coal & electricity speech. I think the RRs should do more tv spots and ad campaigns that focus on how the fit in to the economy. UP and NS seem to have stated down the right path, but there is no follow throughas of yet. I can see it now: "BNSF, we don't make the things you buy, we deliver what they're made of!" dehusman is on the right track (no pun intended)! Reply Edit 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by mac 4884 Diesel trucks fry too much. That's why trucks go up a runaway on a steep downgrade. Diesel trains DONT have that problem! "And this is comming from a steam fan ! "
QUOTE: Originally posted by mac 4884 Diesel trucks fry too much. That's why trucks go up a runaway on a steep downgrade. Diesel trains DONT have that problem! "And this is comming from a steam fan ! "
USAF TSgt C-17 Aircraft Maintenance Flying Crew Chief & Flightline Avionics Craftsman
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.