Did trucking kill the branch lines?

Is this a myth or is there some truth here?

The Trucking industry ended up with better roads after WW II paid for and maintained by unlcle sam, truck speed and service got better, while raailroads did no longer cater to smaller customers.
So yes a lot of railroad business was lost to truckers, and specially to industries that only took a few cars a week.
todays railroads are basicly unit trains with very little general freight.

But now that diesel cost almost $5.00 a gallon, branch lines kill the trucking!

The cost per mile for both go up proportionally so don't get your hopes up.

Remember that almost all the branch lines were constructed in the days before the internal combustion engine made trucking possible. Sidings where freight not consigned to a company with its own siding could be unloaded were originally called "team tracks", as in "team of horses".

Until about 1970, quite a bit of carload freight was still consigned to small businesses, -- lumber yards, oil and coal dealers, etc -- but that disappeared as the cost of picking up and setting off individual cars got too high. Since the early 80's most traffic has moved in multi-car shipments, containers, or unit trains.

Another example is the big center-sill flatcars that haul lumber; rather than being spotted at individual lumber yards, they are routed to a distribution center operated in a manner similar to a TOFC terminal, with the final delivery made by truck. "Bulk service", with a covered hopper full of flour servicng multiple bakeries by truck, is another example.

So unless a branch line has a mine or similar industry big enough to generate several carloads at a time, a revival isn't likely. One other possibility is the "spin-off" of marginal branches for operation as short lines, which can provide service at less cost, in part due to fewer restrictions imposed by labor contracts than on the major roads.

DutchRailnut wrote:The cost per mile for both go up proportionally so don't get your hopes up.

I believe fuel is a much smaller percentage of all cost to railroads. So how do you figure?

-.

slashmaster wrote:

DutchRailnut wrote:The cost per mile for both go up proportionally so don't get your hopes up.

I believe fuel is a much smaller percentage of all cost to railroads. So how do you figure?

Thats correct. I am not sure how the process works but railroads use the term ''hedging'' when they buy their fuel. I think it involves paying for fuel now that they are going to use a couple of years later. So basicly the fuel they are burning now they payed for in 05. Like I said I am not 100 percent sure how it works. And since they get a break in the price for buying so much it makes it even cheaper. An FRA guy that was in town last week said that the fuel they are using now thay paid about 1.50 for. They will no doubt pay more next time around but they will never pay the price the public pays.

The Hedging or bulk buying is done by large railroads not the shortlines.
The shortlines use everyday heating oil and get a return on their fuel tax.

DutchRailnut wrote:The Hedging or bulk buying is done by large railroads not the shortlines.
The shortlines use everyday heating oil and get a return on their fuel tax.

I forgot the class 1's dont have branchlines anymore.

henry6 wrote:No: main line railroad management wishing to eliminate overhead switching costs (union labor rules, equpment use, etc.) and not have to stop intercity freight trains enroute to pick up branch line traffic, thought it a good idea to cut the branches. But like a 10 inch water main, each time you take away a 1 inch feeder your main is less full and soon your main is gone, too.

Yes: the ability of a truck to pick up and deliver less than train load lots worked in the favor of train management and thus became a convenient reasoning aspect of railroad management to eliminate a branch line. The fact that the truck evaded the railroad interchange and went to and from the branch line siding directly to and from its originating or destination points eliminating the need for the railroad altogether does seem not to have been part of the railroad management thought process.

I agree 100%. The major railroads made an effort to kill off as much single carload traffic as possible. Not just on branchlines, either. My home terminal, that used to have two switch engines working 24 hours a day, has the home distribution warehouse for a regional grocery chain. It used to get deliveries by rail. The railroad started to deny the switch engines time to use the main track to switch the warehouse, sometimes delaying shipments up to a week. They of course switched to truck delivery. The track to the warehouse is long gone, and there is only one switch engine left, which on most days is done way before 8 hours.

Trucking deregulation, changes in tax laws and the adoption of Just in Time manufacturing also favor trucking over rail. Single car load moves aren't dead, and with fuel prices rising, eventually there may be more car load moves to distribution/break bulk centers but it will never be like it once was. I noticed one large warehouse complex we go past remodeled their main facility, removing the track with about 20 car spots. (They do retain a smaller building with about 3 car spots.) They obviously don't expect fuel prices to lead to using box cars for the long haul. Instead large shipments will come in by truck to be broken down and delivered by truck, using only the highways for the entire journey. I've heard talk of an increase in domestic intermodal, but on my main line, I still see more trailers on the parallel highway than on flat cars.

The mindset is that trucking is the preferred method of transportation. Most places that layout industrial parks, even when on an active railroad, place them where convienent to highways with rail an afterthought, if thought of at all.

JLH

Pretty much agree, based on my experience with the transportation of the Phalanx gun system from Pomona, CA to Norfolk shipyard, VA. Originally Union Pacific did the honors with depressed center flat cars. Then suddenly there were 18 wheelers pulling up with depressed center flat trailers. The reason given was economics. The trucking fees were considerably less than what UP would charge.

DutchRailnut wrote:The Trucking industry ended up with better roads after WW II paid for and maintained by unlcle sam, ...

I own and operate a tractor-trailer, and I paid about $11,800 last year for fuel taxes, tolls, NY Highway Use Tax, Ad Valorum taxes, and the annual federal Heavy Vehicle Use Tax. Just to set the record straight, Uncle Kevin paid for those highways.

wrong you paid for your share of maintenance of highways, not the highways themselfs

-