Originally posted by chad thomas [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 10:34 AM About time! I'm happy to see that railroads are working together to add new service and also improve efficiency. If UP and CSX don't drop the ball we could see a new trend here. Reply Edit TheS.P.caboose Member sinceMarch 2005 From: Canoga Park (Los Angeles) 494 posts Posted by TheS.P.caboose on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 11:13 AM Sounds kind of like a take off of Southern Pacific's old "Salad Bowl Express" train from the San Joaquin Valley in central California to New York. Either way; it's all good. Regards Gary Reply Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 11:13 AM Is it of one particular customer or several shipping their products east? Sounds like primarily Simplot and Lamb Weston moves. Andrew Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 11:37 AM This is fantastic news. Good to see the railroads make a comitment to a service they sorta of lost interest in during years past. SPCaboose, hopefully maybe if market condition are right, UP will bring back the "Salad Bowl Express." Jim Reply Edit CShaveRR Member sinceJune 2001 From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois 13,681 posts Posted by CShaveRR on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 2:52 PM This sounds like it's a cut above the "Express Lane" service that UP and CSX now operate. The Albany destination mentioned almost certainly is Selkirk Yard. The big difference will (or should) be that the new trains apparently won't be reclassified at North Platte, or have cars added to them at Proviso. I'm hoping that it means that the train now serving this business east of North Platte will remain as a run-through freight to Selkirk, handling other manifest as well as perishables from other origins. Carl Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!) CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM) Reply MP173 Member sinceMay 2004 From: Valparaiso, In 5,921 posts Posted by MP173 on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 3:10 PM That is good news. It must mean that shippers are lined up for service. If this is a unit train, then how frequently is it moving? Daily, 1x a week? Also, 124 hours does not exactly set speed records. That computes out to a little over 23mph, which is average speed for freight trains. Wouldnt you expect a little better performance than that? Perhaps that is all that is needed by shippers. It will be interesting to watch how this performs and if it can create a new trend. ed Reply coborn35 Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Duluth,Minnesota,USA 4,015 posts Posted by coborn35 on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 5:00 PM Cant wait to see fruit soup[}:)][}:)][}:)][}:)] Mechanical Department "No no that's fine shove that 20 pound set all around the yard... those shoes aren't hell and a half to change..." The Missabe Road: Safety First Reply csxns Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: North Carolina 1,905 posts Posted by csxns on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 5:19 PM Dole is building a new plant here in NC that will be located next to the NS main line and Dole was looking for good rail service.They will be loading refers of package salad. Russell Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 8:10 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by MP173 That is good news. It must mean that shippers are lined up for service. If this is a unit train, then how frequently is it moving? Daily, 1x a week? Also, 124 hours does not exactly set speed records. That computes out to a little over 23mph, which is average speed for freight trains. Wouldnt you expect a little better performance than that? Perhaps that is all that is needed by shippers. It will be interesting to watch how this performs and if it can create a new trend. ed If it is one dedicated car set, and a round trip will be about 10 days ("124 hour transit time" = 5 days x 2), then that means it shows up at Wallula every ten days assuming everything goes right. You're right, that is slow considering we're talking about perishables. I guess the farmers will schedule their fruit & veggie picking once every ten days as well. If only Mother Nature would oblige and ripen the produce to the optimum level of ripeness prior to picking and shipping, then it's all good. Also, Wallula isn't exactly situated in the heart of the fruit and veggie producing areas of Washington State, so that means commercial trucks will likely be the means to take the produce from farm to new loading center, which will add at least a day or two to the overall transit time. Too bad the railroads can't utilize individual carloads from points in the Yakima Valley and rotate them into the consist when it manages to roll into the Wallula track, if for no other reason than to keep from having to move individual pallets from the trucks to the new warehouse to the new unit trains cars. I wonder how this service will compare with the use of bi-modal technology like BNSF's Ice Cold Express? Bi-modal technology would allow them to bypass the need for the distribution center, instead taking in truck shipments from existing outlying warehouses and forming them into consists. BTW, we knew about this last week. The Port of Walla Walla has been working to get them to open this facility at their Wallula site, and they put out a few press releases on the job creation aspect of the project. I asked the commissioners if this facility would be accessable by both UP and BNSF (since both lines have a presence in Wallula) but never heard back from them, so I suspect BNSF is not welcome at this new facility, and also that RailPax is an adjunct of UP in some form. Thus another captive shipper is born! At least a new captive shipper is better than no new shipper at all! Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 8:30 PM thast a really cool idea Reply Edit greyhounds Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Antioch, IL 4,371 posts Posted by greyhounds on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 8:38 PM It's good! And it ain't all that slow. The "perishables" out of Washington State aren't all that "perishable". Apples, pears, onions, potatoes. They ain't wilting like lettuce. Just keep 'em moving and you've got the deal. The apples are the big deal. (something like 19 pounds of apples per person per year in the US) They go into storage after harvest and are shipped on an as needed basis to eastern markets. You can keep a good apple around for a while, if you treat it right. "Forward Locate" them in Albany and you can offer overnight delivery to any grocer in the Northeast. (Inventory cost thing.) Store 'em in Yakima - or store 'em in Albany, don't make no one no never mind. But if you can offer overnight delivery of Washington State fruit in the Norheast you B a winner! At least they're trying. For far too long the railroads have ignored the food markiet. Give UP/CSX a pat on the back. They're giving it a try! As for "bi-modal" technology. It has failed time and time again. "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 ericsp Member sinceMay 2015 5,134 posts Posted by ericsp on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 8:53 PM Who said anything about dedicated train sets? I saw nothing about it in UP's press release. If these are the ARMN 110000 series cars, then once the order is filled UP will 1500 of these cars. If it takes 124 hours to get to the destination and 10 days to return, be inspected, cleaned, and repaired (if necessary), UP will need 825 of these cars, not including spares, for a daily train. I wonder if UPFE and other ARMN reefers will eventually get in these trains. By the way I saw ARMN 111064 today, so ARMN 111111 should be coming out soon, or maybe it has been built already. "No soup for you!" - Yev Kassem (from Seinfeld) Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 9:52 PM Greyhounds, The statement that "bi-modal technology has failed again and again" is a bit presumptuous, given that the technology is still being tried out on a basis of slothful attrition by the railroads. We know that the modal transfer times using bi-modal are exceptional, in some cases saving days over pallet transfer. Bi-modal reefer trailers have more capacity than reefer containers, so it even beats COFC. Frankly, given what we see in the success of Triple Crown vs the other operations, it is apparent that only by the prime directive of a trucking firm will bi-modal get a fair chance at success. Conversely, if we leave it to the railroads, they will surely find a way to turn lemonade into lemons and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 11:05 PM I know that Simplott grows taters and makes french fries for McDonald's, but what is Lamb Weston's stock-in-trade? allen Reply Edit conrailman Member sinceDecember 2001 From: NS Main Line at MP12 Blairsville,Pa 830 posts Posted by conrailman on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 11:28 PM Amtrak has 350 Box Cars for Sale Now will UP Buy all of Them up? Reply CShaveRR Member sinceJune 2001 From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois 13,681 posts Posted by CShaveRR on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 11:43 PM I think you're right about the trains' makeup, Eric--wouldn't be surprised to see other cars get in there, including the CRYX mechanical reefers, too. And don't forget the 23000-series UPFE cars! My information shows ARMN 111111 at North Platte now; no destination. Carl Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!) CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM) Reply ericsp Member sinceMay 2015 5,134 posts Posted by ericsp on Wednesday, August 3, 2005 11:48 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by CShaveRR I think you're right about the trains' makeup, Eric--wouldn't be surprised to see other cars get in there, including the CRYX mechanical reefers, too. And don't forget the 23000-series UPFE cars! My information shows ARMN 111111 at North Platte now; no destination. CRYX mechanical reefers come down here so rarely, I forgot all about them. Their RCs (presumably being used as RBLs) are common down here though. I think UP knows where they need to send that reefer (out here). "No soup for you!" - Yev Kassem (from Seinfeld) Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, August 4, 2005 1:05 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by smalling_60626 I know that Simplott grows taters and makes french fries for McDonald's, but what is Lamb Weston's stock-in-trade? allen They also do taters, and I think for McDonald's too. Reply Edit Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Thursday, August 4, 2005 6:19 AM Does BNSF do something like this already? They sure have alot of those BNFE reefer in addition to their excess height 70 foot reefers. What is with the "Western Fruit Express"? Andrew Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, August 4, 2005 7:06 AM Yes I saw reefers being loaded up west of West Yellowstone MT on a UPRR spur with taters. [:o)] Originally posted by SP9033 Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply adrianspeeder Member sinceMarch 2002 From: Harrisburg PA / Dover AFB DE 1,482 posts Posted by adrianspeeder on Thursday, August 4, 2005 7:19 AM Mmmmmm Taters... So what was the deal that killed the salad bowl express? Adrianspeeder USAF TSgt C-17 Aircraft Maintenance Flying Crew Chief & Flightline Avionics Craftsman Reply chad thomas Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Ely, Nv. 6,312 posts Posted by chad thomas on Thursday, August 4, 2005 10:15 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by adrianspeeder Mmmmmm Taters... So what was the deal that killed the salad bowl express? Adrianspeeder Trucks. And if I remember right, this was a SP-UP-Conrail train and was not that lucrative of a train. Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, August 4, 2005 10:33 AM Trains had an article about a year ago on how the SP lost the lettuce business. Apparently, time is of the essence, and trains just cannot deliver directly to supermarkets with the speed of trucks, direct from grower to supermarket. I think it could be revived as Triple Crown business, but I doubt it can go back to reefers or box cars or containers. At the end, growers were using it merely as protection, with the bulk of the traffic going by truck. Reply greyhounds Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Antioch, IL 4,371 posts Posted by greyhounds on Thursday, August 4, 2005 8:41 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Greyhounds, The statement that "bi-modal technology has failed again and again" is a bit presumptuous, given that the technology is still being tried out on a basis of slothful attrition by the railroads. We know that the modal transfer times using bi-modal are exceptional, in some cases saving days over pallet transfer. Bi-modal reefer trailers have more capacity than reefer containers, so it even beats COFC. Frankly, given what we see in the success of Triple Crown vs the other operations, it is apparent that only by the prime directive of a trucking firm will bi-modal get a fair chance at success. Conversely, if we leave it to the railroads, they will surely find a way to turn lemonade into lemons and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. This is from an unpublished writing by me. It's evident that it was written a while ago. "The BNSF just recently suspended operation of its “Ice Cold Express” RoadRailer trains. The elimination of these trains, which operated between Los Angeles and Chicago, is disturbing for two reasons. First, they were targeted on the California produce transportation market. This market is huge, long haul, and predominately moves via motor freight. California produces about one half the fresh fruits and vegetables consumed in North America. This equates to around 500,000 refrigerated tractor-trailers leaving California each year. Most of these trucks are on long haul runs to eastern population centers. These truckers don’t return to California empty, they maximize their revenue by getting “backhaul loads” from those eastern cities to California. That makes the total market, including backhauls, 1,000,000 long haul loads per year. The railroads successfully handled this business for years, but were driven out in large part by Federal rate regulation. For the DECADES since, the railroads have generally conceded this long haul business to the truckers. The now defunct Ice Cold Express was a strong attempt by the BNSF to get more of this business back on the rails where it belongs. It’s sad to see such a false start in such a worthy, important effort. Secondly, this is yet another setback for RoadRailer. For a while, it looked as if the Ice Cold Express might have ben RoadRailer’s big break through. A major railroad had made a major investment in refrigerated RoadRailer equipment for the first time. Two intermodal marketing companies, Alliance Shippers and Clipper Exxpress, also joined the operation. These companies also made substantial investments in the service by purchasing their own equipment to operate in the trains. The CN established a connecting RoadRailer Service to Toronto and Montreal. These cities are both major markets for California produce. CSX established its own connecting service to the US east coast. It looked as if RoadRailer might be finally on its way. Then things began to fall apart. First, the CSX and CN connecting services at Chicago were shut down. Now the Ice Cold Express no itself longer operates. Just what the Hell went wrong? Why did the Ice Cold Express join the ranks of other failed RoadRailer operations?" This service wasn't marketed by the BNSF. It was marketed by Mark VII Transportation, an outfit owned by R.C. Mateny. R.C. had started National Piggyback Services. This was an intermodal marketing company with a strong presence in the perishable market. When American President Lines needed to establish a domestic intermodal network to compliment their international stack train operations, they bought R.C. out and National Pig became APL Domestic and now Pacer Stack Train. R.C. aparently got tired of playing golf every day and started Mark VII. BNSF went to him to market their Ice Cold Express RoadRailer service. And even he couldn't make it work. The Ice Cold joined other failed RoadRailer ops on the CN, UP, CSX, etc. Even Swift Transportation, a very successful trucker couldn't make it work on the West Coast. Tripple Crown has gone basically nowhere in 20 years. Yes, I know, they've got a relatively new run up to Minneapolis. Big Deal. They're basically where they were 20 years ago. It ain't workin'. It could work in some places. But that Washington fruit, onions and potatoes will move just fine in refrigerated boxcars. Ken "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 Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Thursday, August 4, 2005 9:20 PM Don't forget Schneider which has decided to go by domestic container expansion. Andrew Reply ericsp Member sinceMay 2015 5,134 posts Posted by ericsp on Thursday, August 4, 2005 9:25 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper Trains had an article about a year ago on how the SP lost the lettuce business. Apparently, time is of the essence, and trains just cannot deliver directly to supermarkets with the speed of trucks, direct from grower to supermarket. I think it could be revived as Triple Crown business, but I doubt it can go back to reefers or box cars or containers. At the end, growers were using it merely as protection, with the bulk of the traffic going by truck. December 2004 issue. "No soup for you!" - Yev Kassem (from Seinfeld) Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, August 5, 2005 12:30 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Greyhounds, The statement that "bi-modal technology has failed again and again" is a bit presumptuous, given that the technology is still being tried out on a basis of slothful attrition by the railroads. We know that the modal transfer times using bi-modal are exceptional, in some cases saving days over pallet transfer. Bi-modal reefer trailers have more capacity than reefer containers, so it even beats COFC. Frankly, given what we see in the success of Triple Crown vs the other operations, it is apparent that only by the prime directive of a trucking firm will bi-modal get a fair chance at success. Conversely, if we leave it to the railroads, they will surely find a way to turn lemonade into lemons and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. This is from an unpublished writing by me. It's evident that it was written a while ago. "The BNSF just recently suspended operation of its “Ice Cold Express” RoadRailer trains. The elimination of these trains, which operated between Los Angeles and Chicago, is disturbing for two reasons. First, they were targeted on the California produce transportation market. This market is huge, long haul, and predominately moves via motor freight. California produces about one half the fresh fruits and vegetables consumed in North America. This equates to around 500,000 refrigerated tractor-trailers leaving California each year. Most of these trucks are on long haul runs to eastern population centers. These truckers don’t return to California empty, they maximize their revenue by getting “backhaul loads” from those eastern cities to California. That makes the total market, including backhauls, 1,000,000 long haul loads per year. The railroads successfully handled this business for years, but were driven out in large part by Federal rate regulation. For the DECADES since, the railroads have generally conceded this long haul business to the truckers. The now defunct Ice Cold Express was a strong attempt by the BNSF to get more of this business back on the rails where it belongs. It’s sad to see such a false start in such a worthy, important effort. Secondly, this is yet another setback for RoadRailer. For a while, it looked as if the Ice Cold Express might have ben RoadRailer’s big break through. A major railroad had made a major investment in refrigerated RoadRailer equipment for the first time. Two intermodal marketing companies, Alliance Shippers and Clipper Exxpress, also joined the operation. These companies also made substantial investments in the service by purchasing their own equipment to operate in the trains. The CN established a connecting RoadRailer Service to Toronto and Montreal. These cities are both major markets for California produce. CSX established its own connecting service to the US east coast. It looked as if RoadRailer might be finally on its way. Then things began to fall apart. First, the CSX and CN connecting services at Chicago were shut down. Now the Ice Cold Express no itself longer operates. Just what the Hell went wrong? Why did the Ice Cold Express join the ranks of other failed RoadRailer operations?" This service wasn't marketed by the BNSF. It was marketed by Mark VII Transportation, an outfit owned by R.C. Mateny. R.C. had started National Piggyback Services. This was an intermodal marketing company with a strong presence in the perishable market. When American President Lines needed to establish a domestic intermodal network to compliment their international stack train operations, they bought R.C. out and National Pig became APL Domestic and now Pacer Stack Train. R.C. aparently got tired of playing golf every day and started Mark VII. BNSF went to him to market their Ice Cold Express RoadRailer service. And even he couldn't make it work. The Ice Cold joined other failed RoadRailer ops on the CN, UP, CSX, etc. Even Swift Transportation, a very successful trucker couldn't make it work on the West Coast. Tripple Crown has gone basically nowhere in 20 years. Yes, I know, they've got a relatively new run up to Minneapolis. Big Deal. They're basically where they were 20 years ago. It ain't workin'. It could work in some places. But that Washington fruit, onions and potatoes will move just fine in refrigerated boxcars. Ken Nice article. Could be published if you include a few observations that were left out, such as the fact that it was BNSF that yanked all bi-modal service, not Swift or RC. If you remember correctly, when it came time to renegotiate the Swift RoadRailer agreement, BNSF suddenly jacked up the rate, so high that it then became cheaper for Swift to take these trailers over the road. We all know that both BNSF and Swift profited from the RoadRailer operation, but for some reason BNSF has an aversion to making money from bi-modal innovation. I know this from personal experience. Perhaps they were afraid that the RoadRailer operations might be too successful, causing a supply chain shift away from newly ordered boxcars and well cars. Hmmmm, it is interesting to note that a truly integrated transportation company would never behave thus, but unfortunately for the USA our rail system is closed access, and such irrational behaviour is the result. But I am open for other excuses besides tried and true monopolists theory. Question: Is there anyone out there who thinks that box of cherries is going to get from the orchard to NYC just as fast as the over the road truckers, or at the same cost to the grower/marketer? Don't forget, there are plenty of storage facilities already in place, so why would the growers want to yank their investments there and commit to a centralized rail distribution center? They will still need truckers to take the fruit from one facility to the new facility, transload the pallets into the faciltiy, then reload the pallets onto the fridge cars, mosey along to NYC in 5 days, where the process will have to be reversed, then mosey on back to Washington State. By that time, the over the road truckers will have handled two cross country trips between existing facilities, probably with backhaul to boot, which totally negates rail's efficiency advantage since the truckers will have hauled just as much freight in that time period as the rail cars. Anyone with any brains can see that this situation was made for bi-modal. The facilities are already in place, and all we need is two terminal sidings for the modal transfer. Under open access any number of 3PI's would jump at the chance if they had fee simple right of access to use the rails, and the net result is a more efficient expenditure of capital. Unfortunately, we all have to deal with the royal idiots of the current rail oligarchy, who even with monopolistic pricing still can't cover their ROI targets. Reply Edit edbenton Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack 2,011 posts Posted by edbenton on Friday, August 5, 2005 12:55 PM Another probelm with hauling produce of any kind on a train is if that reefer unit on the car goes down there is no way of knowing about it till the next inspection point. 100 tons of pears is roughly 150-200 thousand in cost to the railroad. and pears are a hardy produce they ake alot of abuse. Cherries apricots and strawberries look at them wrong and they go bad. A trucked load of produce has an advantage if something does happen to the reefer unit a driver is going to know about it right away. I pulled reefer and when you are hauling produce and all of a sudden the unit stops during the middle of the night you are out of bed and seeing what ahappened to the unit. So absically it is going to be have a unti that gets checked during a 1000 mile inspection or having someone in the cab keeping an eye on it 5 days plus or 4 days delevery. I say this new service will not last to long sooner or later the profit margin will be to low for even CSX to want to run it. Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY. Reply 1234567 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
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
Mechanical Department "No no that's fine shove that 20 pound set all around the yard... those shoes aren't hell and a half to change..."
The Missabe Road: Safety First
Russell
QUOTE: Originally posted by MP173 That is good news. It must mean that shippers are lined up for service. If this is a unit train, then how frequently is it moving? Daily, 1x a week? Also, 124 hours does not exactly set speed records. That computes out to a little over 23mph, which is average speed for freight trains. Wouldnt you expect a little better performance than that? Perhaps that is all that is needed by shippers. It will be interesting to watch how this performs and if it can create a new trend. ed
"No soup for you!" - Yev Kassem (from Seinfeld)
QUOTE: Originally posted by CShaveRR I think you're right about the trains' makeup, Eric--wouldn't be surprised to see other cars get in there, including the CRYX mechanical reefers, too. And don't forget the 23000-series UPFE cars! My information shows ARMN 111111 at North Platte now; no destination.
QUOTE: Originally posted by smalling_60626 I know that Simplott grows taters and makes french fries for McDonald's, but what is Lamb Weston's stock-in-trade? allen
Originally posted by SP9033 Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply adrianspeeder Member sinceMarch 2002 From: Harrisburg PA / Dover AFB DE 1,482 posts Posted by adrianspeeder on Thursday, August 4, 2005 7:19 AM Mmmmmm Taters... So what was the deal that killed the salad bowl express? Adrianspeeder USAF TSgt C-17 Aircraft Maintenance Flying Crew Chief & Flightline Avionics Craftsman Reply chad thomas Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Ely, Nv. 6,312 posts Posted by chad thomas on Thursday, August 4, 2005 10:15 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by adrianspeeder Mmmmmm Taters... So what was the deal that killed the salad bowl express? Adrianspeeder Trucks. And if I remember right, this was a SP-UP-Conrail train and was not that lucrative of a train. Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, August 4, 2005 10:33 AM Trains had an article about a year ago on how the SP lost the lettuce business. Apparently, time is of the essence, and trains just cannot deliver directly to supermarkets with the speed of trucks, direct from grower to supermarket. I think it could be revived as Triple Crown business, but I doubt it can go back to reefers or box cars or containers. At the end, growers were using it merely as protection, with the bulk of the traffic going by truck. Reply greyhounds Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Antioch, IL 4,371 posts Posted by greyhounds on Thursday, August 4, 2005 8:41 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Greyhounds, The statement that "bi-modal technology has failed again and again" is a bit presumptuous, given that the technology is still being tried out on a basis of slothful attrition by the railroads. We know that the modal transfer times using bi-modal are exceptional, in some cases saving days over pallet transfer. Bi-modal reefer trailers have more capacity than reefer containers, so it even beats COFC. Frankly, given what we see in the success of Triple Crown vs the other operations, it is apparent that only by the prime directive of a trucking firm will bi-modal get a fair chance at success. Conversely, if we leave it to the railroads, they will surely find a way to turn lemonade into lemons and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. This is from an unpublished writing by me. It's evident that it was written a while ago. "The BNSF just recently suspended operation of its “Ice Cold Express” RoadRailer trains. The elimination of these trains, which operated between Los Angeles and Chicago, is disturbing for two reasons. First, they were targeted on the California produce transportation market. This market is huge, long haul, and predominately moves via motor freight. California produces about one half the fresh fruits and vegetables consumed in North America. This equates to around 500,000 refrigerated tractor-trailers leaving California each year. Most of these trucks are on long haul runs to eastern population centers. These truckers don’t return to California empty, they maximize their revenue by getting “backhaul loads” from those eastern cities to California. That makes the total market, including backhauls, 1,000,000 long haul loads per year. The railroads successfully handled this business for years, but were driven out in large part by Federal rate regulation. For the DECADES since, the railroads have generally conceded this long haul business to the truckers. The now defunct Ice Cold Express was a strong attempt by the BNSF to get more of this business back on the rails where it belongs. It’s sad to see such a false start in such a worthy, important effort. Secondly, this is yet another setback for RoadRailer. For a while, it looked as if the Ice Cold Express might have ben RoadRailer’s big break through. A major railroad had made a major investment in refrigerated RoadRailer equipment for the first time. Two intermodal marketing companies, Alliance Shippers and Clipper Exxpress, also joined the operation. These companies also made substantial investments in the service by purchasing their own equipment to operate in the trains. The CN established a connecting RoadRailer Service to Toronto and Montreal. These cities are both major markets for California produce. CSX established its own connecting service to the US east coast. It looked as if RoadRailer might be finally on its way. Then things began to fall apart. First, the CSX and CN connecting services at Chicago were shut down. Now the Ice Cold Express no itself longer operates. Just what the Hell went wrong? Why did the Ice Cold Express join the ranks of other failed RoadRailer operations?" This service wasn't marketed by the BNSF. It was marketed by Mark VII Transportation, an outfit owned by R.C. Mateny. R.C. had started National Piggyback Services. This was an intermodal marketing company with a strong presence in the perishable market. When American President Lines needed to establish a domestic intermodal network to compliment their international stack train operations, they bought R.C. out and National Pig became APL Domestic and now Pacer Stack Train. R.C. aparently got tired of playing golf every day and started Mark VII. BNSF went to him to market their Ice Cold Express RoadRailer service. And even he couldn't make it work. The Ice Cold joined other failed RoadRailer ops on the CN, UP, CSX, etc. Even Swift Transportation, a very successful trucker couldn't make it work on the West Coast. Tripple Crown has gone basically nowhere in 20 years. Yes, I know, they've got a relatively new run up to Minneapolis. Big Deal. They're basically where they were 20 years ago. It ain't workin'. It could work in some places. But that Washington fruit, onions and potatoes will move just fine in refrigerated boxcars. Ken "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 Junctionfan Member sinceFebruary 2004 From: St.Catharines, Ontario 3,770 posts Posted by Junctionfan on Thursday, August 4, 2005 9:20 PM Don't forget Schneider which has decided to go by domestic container expansion. Andrew Reply ericsp Member sinceMay 2015 5,134 posts Posted by ericsp on Thursday, August 4, 2005 9:25 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper Trains had an article about a year ago on how the SP lost the lettuce business. Apparently, time is of the essence, and trains just cannot deliver directly to supermarkets with the speed of trucks, direct from grower to supermarket. I think it could be revived as Triple Crown business, but I doubt it can go back to reefers or box cars or containers. At the end, growers were using it merely as protection, with the bulk of the traffic going by truck. December 2004 issue. "No soup for you!" - Yev Kassem (from Seinfeld) Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Friday, August 5, 2005 12:30 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Greyhounds, The statement that "bi-modal technology has failed again and again" is a bit presumptuous, given that the technology is still being tried out on a basis of slothful attrition by the railroads. We know that the modal transfer times using bi-modal are exceptional, in some cases saving days over pallet transfer. Bi-modal reefer trailers have more capacity than reefer containers, so it even beats COFC. Frankly, given what we see in the success of Triple Crown vs the other operations, it is apparent that only by the prime directive of a trucking firm will bi-modal get a fair chance at success. Conversely, if we leave it to the railroads, they will surely find a way to turn lemonade into lemons and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. This is from an unpublished writing by me. It's evident that it was written a while ago. "The BNSF just recently suspended operation of its “Ice Cold Express” RoadRailer trains. The elimination of these trains, which operated between Los Angeles and Chicago, is disturbing for two reasons. First, they were targeted on the California produce transportation market. This market is huge, long haul, and predominately moves via motor freight. California produces about one half the fresh fruits and vegetables consumed in North America. This equates to around 500,000 refrigerated tractor-trailers leaving California each year. Most of these trucks are on long haul runs to eastern population centers. These truckers don’t return to California empty, they maximize their revenue by getting “backhaul loads” from those eastern cities to California. That makes the total market, including backhauls, 1,000,000 long haul loads per year. The railroads successfully handled this business for years, but were driven out in large part by Federal rate regulation. For the DECADES since, the railroads have generally conceded this long haul business to the truckers. The now defunct Ice Cold Express was a strong attempt by the BNSF to get more of this business back on the rails where it belongs. It’s sad to see such a false start in such a worthy, important effort. Secondly, this is yet another setback for RoadRailer. For a while, it looked as if the Ice Cold Express might have ben RoadRailer’s big break through. A major railroad had made a major investment in refrigerated RoadRailer equipment for the first time. Two intermodal marketing companies, Alliance Shippers and Clipper Exxpress, also joined the operation. These companies also made substantial investments in the service by purchasing their own equipment to operate in the trains. The CN established a connecting RoadRailer Service to Toronto and Montreal. These cities are both major markets for California produce. CSX established its own connecting service to the US east coast. It looked as if RoadRailer might be finally on its way. Then things began to fall apart. First, the CSX and CN connecting services at Chicago were shut down. Now the Ice Cold Express no itself longer operates. Just what the Hell went wrong? Why did the Ice Cold Express join the ranks of other failed RoadRailer operations?" This service wasn't marketed by the BNSF. It was marketed by Mark VII Transportation, an outfit owned by R.C. Mateny. R.C. had started National Piggyback Services. This was an intermodal marketing company with a strong presence in the perishable market. When American President Lines needed to establish a domestic intermodal network to compliment their international stack train operations, they bought R.C. out and National Pig became APL Domestic and now Pacer Stack Train. R.C. aparently got tired of playing golf every day and started Mark VII. BNSF went to him to market their Ice Cold Express RoadRailer service. And even he couldn't make it work. The Ice Cold joined other failed RoadRailer ops on the CN, UP, CSX, etc. Even Swift Transportation, a very successful trucker couldn't make it work on the West Coast. Tripple Crown has gone basically nowhere in 20 years. Yes, I know, they've got a relatively new run up to Minneapolis. Big Deal. They're basically where they were 20 years ago. It ain't workin'. It could work in some places. But that Washington fruit, onions and potatoes will move just fine in refrigerated boxcars. Ken Nice article. Could be published if you include a few observations that were left out, such as the fact that it was BNSF that yanked all bi-modal service, not Swift or RC. If you remember correctly, when it came time to renegotiate the Swift RoadRailer agreement, BNSF suddenly jacked up the rate, so high that it then became cheaper for Swift to take these trailers over the road. We all know that both BNSF and Swift profited from the RoadRailer operation, but for some reason BNSF has an aversion to making money from bi-modal innovation. I know this from personal experience. Perhaps they were afraid that the RoadRailer operations might be too successful, causing a supply chain shift away from newly ordered boxcars and well cars. Hmmmm, it is interesting to note that a truly integrated transportation company would never behave thus, but unfortunately for the USA our rail system is closed access, and such irrational behaviour is the result. But I am open for other excuses besides tried and true monopolists theory. Question: Is there anyone out there who thinks that box of cherries is going to get from the orchard to NYC just as fast as the over the road truckers, or at the same cost to the grower/marketer? Don't forget, there are plenty of storage facilities already in place, so why would the growers want to yank their investments there and commit to a centralized rail distribution center? They will still need truckers to take the fruit from one facility to the new facility, transload the pallets into the faciltiy, then reload the pallets onto the fridge cars, mosey along to NYC in 5 days, where the process will have to be reversed, then mosey on back to Washington State. By that time, the over the road truckers will have handled two cross country trips between existing facilities, probably with backhaul to boot, which totally negates rail's efficiency advantage since the truckers will have hauled just as much freight in that time period as the rail cars. Anyone with any brains can see that this situation was made for bi-modal. The facilities are already in place, and all we need is two terminal sidings for the modal transfer. Under open access any number of 3PI's would jump at the chance if they had fee simple right of access to use the rails, and the net result is a more efficient expenditure of capital. Unfortunately, we all have to deal with the royal idiots of the current rail oligarchy, who even with monopolistic pricing still can't cover their ROI targets. Reply Edit edbenton Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: Back home on the Chi to KC racetrack 2,011 posts Posted by edbenton on Friday, August 5, 2005 12:55 PM Another probelm with hauling produce of any kind on a train is if that reefer unit on the car goes down there is no way of knowing about it till the next inspection point. 100 tons of pears is roughly 150-200 thousand in cost to the railroad. and pears are a hardy produce they ake alot of abuse. Cherries apricots and strawberries look at them wrong and they go bad. A trucked load of produce has an advantage if something does happen to the reefer unit a driver is going to know about it right away. I pulled reefer and when you are hauling produce and all of a sudden the unit stops during the middle of the night you are out of bed and seeing what ahappened to the unit. So absically it is going to be have a unti that gets checked during a 1000 mile inspection or having someone in the cab keeping an eye on it 5 days plus or 4 days delevery. I say this new service will not last to long sooner or later the profit margin will be to low for even CSX to want to run it. Always at war with those that think OTR trucking is EASY. Reply 1234567 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
USAF TSgt C-17 Aircraft Maintenance Flying Crew Chief & Flightline Avionics Craftsman
QUOTE: Originally posted by adrianspeeder Mmmmmm Taters... So what was the deal that killed the salad bowl express? Adrianspeeder
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Greyhounds, The statement that "bi-modal technology has failed again and again" is a bit presumptuous, given that the technology is still being tried out on a basis of slothful attrition by the railroads. We know that the modal transfer times using bi-modal are exceptional, in some cases saving days over pallet transfer. Bi-modal reefer trailers have more capacity than reefer containers, so it even beats COFC. Frankly, given what we see in the success of Triple Crown vs the other operations, it is apparent that only by the prime directive of a trucking firm will bi-modal get a fair chance at success. Conversely, if we leave it to the railroads, they will surely find a way to turn lemonade into lemons and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper Trains had an article about a year ago on how the SP lost the lettuce business. Apparently, time is of the essence, and trains just cannot deliver directly to supermarkets with the speed of trucks, direct from grower to supermarket. I think it could be revived as Triple Crown business, but I doubt it can go back to reefers or box cars or containers. At the end, growers were using it merely as protection, with the bulk of the traffic going by truck.
QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Greyhounds, The statement that "bi-modal technology has failed again and again" is a bit presumptuous, given that the technology is still being tried out on a basis of slothful attrition by the railroads. We know that the modal transfer times using bi-modal are exceptional, in some cases saving days over pallet transfer. Bi-modal reefer trailers have more capacity than reefer containers, so it even beats COFC. Frankly, given what we see in the success of Triple Crown vs the other operations, it is apparent that only by the prime directive of a trucking firm will bi-modal get a fair chance at success. Conversely, if we leave it to the railroads, they will surely find a way to turn lemonade into lemons and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. This is from an unpublished writing by me. It's evident that it was written a while ago. "The BNSF just recently suspended operation of its “Ice Cold Express” RoadRailer trains. The elimination of these trains, which operated between Los Angeles and Chicago, is disturbing for two reasons. First, they were targeted on the California produce transportation market. This market is huge, long haul, and predominately moves via motor freight. California produces about one half the fresh fruits and vegetables consumed in North America. This equates to around 500,000 refrigerated tractor-trailers leaving California each year. Most of these trucks are on long haul runs to eastern population centers. These truckers don’t return to California empty, they maximize their revenue by getting “backhaul loads” from those eastern cities to California. That makes the total market, including backhauls, 1,000,000 long haul loads per year. The railroads successfully handled this business for years, but were driven out in large part by Federal rate regulation. For the DECADES since, the railroads have generally conceded this long haul business to the truckers. The now defunct Ice Cold Express was a strong attempt by the BNSF to get more of this business back on the rails where it belongs. It’s sad to see such a false start in such a worthy, important effort. Secondly, this is yet another setback for RoadRailer. For a while, it looked as if the Ice Cold Express might have ben RoadRailer’s big break through. A major railroad had made a major investment in refrigerated RoadRailer equipment for the first time. Two intermodal marketing companies, Alliance Shippers and Clipper Exxpress, also joined the operation. These companies also made substantial investments in the service by purchasing their own equipment to operate in the trains. The CN established a connecting RoadRailer Service to Toronto and Montreal. These cities are both major markets for California produce. CSX established its own connecting service to the US east coast. It looked as if RoadRailer might be finally on its way. Then things began to fall apart. First, the CSX and CN connecting services at Chicago were shut down. Now the Ice Cold Express no itself longer operates. Just what the Hell went wrong? Why did the Ice Cold Express join the ranks of other failed RoadRailer operations?" This service wasn't marketed by the BNSF. It was marketed by Mark VII Transportation, an outfit owned by R.C. Mateny. R.C. had started National Piggyback Services. This was an intermodal marketing company with a strong presence in the perishable market. When American President Lines needed to establish a domestic intermodal network to compliment their international stack train operations, they bought R.C. out and National Pig became APL Domestic and now Pacer Stack Train. R.C. aparently got tired of playing golf every day and started Mark VII. BNSF went to him to market their Ice Cold Express RoadRailer service. And even he couldn't make it work. The Ice Cold joined other failed RoadRailer ops on the CN, UP, CSX, etc. Even Swift Transportation, a very successful trucker couldn't make it work on the West Coast. Tripple Crown has gone basically nowhere in 20 years. Yes, I know, they've got a relatively new run up to Minneapolis. Big Deal. They're basically where they were 20 years ago. It ain't workin'. It could work in some places. But that Washington fruit, onions and potatoes will move just fine in refrigerated boxcars. Ken
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.