QUOTE: Originally posted by mudchicken You do NOT want to go from FTA to FRA rules if you are the light rail operator. Better to remain severed from the national interstate rail network.
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
QUOTE: Originally posted by narig01 I'm a truck driver. I was looking at the comments on If shippers want an alternative to highways why not build a light rail line for produce and other freight going to port. Typically containers and trailers are in the 30-35 ton(english) range. For railroads these are fairly lite loads. Using say road-railer technology. It would be cheaper than building a heavy rail operation & would not be as major an irratation to the NIMBY's(yea right) It seems to me that light rail is very underutilised for freight. Could short trains of 10-20 boxes travel on light rail lines(say at nite or off peak)? I know this sounds crazy, but remember many of the rail operations from the interurban era that survive today generally survived because they had freight. One of the things I have noticed is that the heavy railroads are very good if you have huge amounts of cargo(Unit coal trains, grain,30-50 carloads of this or that). On the other end of the scale Truck Load & LTL are done very well by the truck load companies. what is needed is a niche of have 3-20 truck load cargos & a network to move this. Especially for the short haul market(50-700 miles). Why are major retailers moving large quantity of boxes(100 + a day in some cases) from rail yards to their Distribution Centres by road? I also saw the forum about moving produce from Eastern Washington state to pacific coast ports. If shippers want an alternative why not build a light rail line.
QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper Most interurban lines DID at one time or another have freight service. All the famous ones did, the three Insull interurbans of Chicago, who interchanged with steam railroads (South Shore is also a diesel freight railroad today.) Here is a list from memory: Pacific Electric Railroad cars Sacramento Northern Railroad cars Waterloo Ceder Falls and Northern Railroad cars Crandic Railroad cars Mason City and Clear Lake Railroad cars Texas Electric both railroad cars and interurban box motors with wood trailers Add Springfield Interurban (Springfield Ohio) to your list. John. Indiana Railroad ditto Cincinnati and Lake Erie Interurban cars and trailers only, as far as I know Lehigh Valley Transit Converted passenger cars to freight motors and trailers North Shore, South Shore, and CA&E Railroad cars Laural Line Railroad cars Illinois Terminal Railroad Cars Milwaukee ("TM") Railroad cars and interurban cars Washington Baltimore and Annapolis Railroad cars Lehigh Valley Transit (Liberty Bell LImited) Interurban freight motors West Penn and Pittsburgh Railways Interurban Motors and trailers Piedmont and Northern Railroad cars Lake Shore Electric Interurban Motors and Trailers The real interurbans that were not just really suburban trolley lines upgraded, like Key System, were few in number that did not run freight trains. True, many of the interurbans that used interurban equipment and did not exchange with regular railroads simply rebuilt old passenger equipment into freight equipment, and in some cases, this meant just a freight trailer (usually wood, and sometimes with cleristory roofs retained) running behind steel motor passenger cars. In addition to reading about these services, I actually rode pure trolley freight on the Lehigh Valley Transit (and freight service through to 69th Street continued after passengers had to change to Red Arrow "bullets" at the Norristown Station), and Charles City Western. In most cases, lines handling regular railroad cars, continued in freight service for some time after passenger service was ended.
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
QUOTE: Originally posted by stmtrolleyguy In theory, it could work. As mentioned, "light rail" has been moving freight for decades before, using either trailer cars for less-than-carload freight, or hauling railroad cars behind electric locomotives, or large heavy passenger cars. I think the problem is that it becomes too hard to manage both freight and passenger service. I would think that you could (technically, not legally) haul a few freight cars on a "light rail" line (4-5 max), even mixing in with regular traffic. I think the problem is that there aren't any customers that need only 4-5 cars moved at a time, or that need them all in the same place. Any freight movements would need to go quickly - they can't tie up the main LR line while switching out a customer. This adds costly siding tracks for the industries. There just aren't enough customers who need this kind of service. Most light rail lines are near cities, where it would be easiest to simply unload the freight cars and make the final delivery by truck. Also, a lot of regular freight cars still weight a lot more loaded than a light rail vehicle. The difference isn't enough for a car or two, here and there, but start sending more and more heavy freight cars on a light rail line, and the track will take a beating. A road-railer like concept might work, but then add on the cost of the facility to change from over-the-road to over-the-rail and the costs start to add up. That, and currently the FRA requires all cars that run with regular trains to be built to much higher standards of crash protection. I think the reality problem is that the two types of service just don't work well with each other at the same time. I would hope that in the future dual-use lines could be built, where passenger traffic can use the line during the day, and freight traffic can use the line during the night, allowing full utilization of the right of way and the tracks.
QUOTE: Originally posted by germanium What would be the practicability of a form of"mixed" train - say a streetcar carrying passengers but delivering light goods to customers on its route ? Anyone come across this ?
QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper There were tram system, possibly still are, in Europe, that had mailboxes on the tram cars. Nearly all interurban lines had express business for high valued on-line freight. Often this was simply carried next to the motorman or operator in space next to the controls at the front of the car. The recepient was expected to meet the car at the destination stop, often a flag stop, except at major terminals like Indianapolis or Dayton, or 69th Street Upper Darby, where the package or packages could be handled with regular baggage if the car was not met. But when I mentioned the interurbans that ran freight trains, this meant always including vehicles that were not for passenger use, not just baggage compartments, but freight motors and the typical wood boxcars and gondolas, with radial couplers that could take the sharp streetcar curves in the towns and cities. And again, at one time or another, this was characteristic of about 90% of the North American interurban lines if we also include those that handled regular freight cars without special interurban freight cars (like Pacific Electric, Piedmont and Northern, the three Chicago lines, and Waterloo Ceder Falls and Northern).
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.