Rail & Post-Indus. Economy in Maine. Return to 19th Cen.?

zeke- great post. this is an ideal bulk materials intermodal move. at 80k gvw, i'm sure your friend is pulling 25 tons which, if the $4700 number is close is $188/ton. amazing that potatos could cover that. can it be true? as i see it , intermodal, 4- 20' refrigerated containers can move 80 tons. the rail rate probably $4k/car. so $50/ton plus another $10 for the drays. this can certainly provide a cushion for the 7 day r/t . the equipment - $18/ton. need to know how many trucks/day to n.c. to verify how this would work. you all need to know that in intermodal the rail rate is 75% of total costs. look at the 'intermodal to maine' site to understand how little is known relative to intemodal . ken patrick

The devil's in the details. The volume isn't there for unit reefer trains. According to Maine Potato Growers, only about 1-2 truckloads per day of seed and 16 of tablestock move to VA/NC combined daily (average). And the the moves are seasonal, making it even more problematic. (Historically-minded folks will recall that the potato-laden BAR leased out locomotives during the spring/summer lull.) Referring specifically to Zeke's truck example, note that the trucker's northbound trip has him picking up in one of two states (not towns but states!), making multiple stops in central Maine and then deadheading ~150 miles to the County. The trucker's southbound move may take him to one of two places, also about 150 miles apart, from which he has to deadhead to pick up his next northbound load and start over again. Consider the logistical nightmares associated with scheduling, repositioning, etc trying to make money employing a $275,000+ reefer.

Criticism of the railroads for not "wanting" this business is akin to bashing your local water works for not providing the option of getting lemonade from your tap on demand. There are reefer-oriented rail logistics companies out there that would tackle the challenge if there was money to be made: Railex, Cryotrans Logistics, Tiger Cool Express, etc; even more on the intermodal side. Obviously, no-one has cracked the code.

Cowford wrote:The devil's in the details. The volume isn't there for unit reefer trains. According to Maine Potato Growers, only about 1-2 truckloads per day of seed and 16 of tablestock move to VA/NC combined daily (average). And the the moves are seasonal, making it even more problematic. (Historically-minded folks will recall that the potato-laden BAR leased out locomotives during the spring/summer lull.) Referring specifically to Zeke's truck example, note that the trucker's northbound trip has him picking up in one of two states (not towns but states!), making multiple stops in central Maine and then deadheading ~150 miles to the County. The trucker's southbound move may take him to one of two places, also about 150 miles apart, from which he has to deadhead to pick up his next northbound load and start over again. Consider the logistical nightmares associated with scheduling, repositioning, etc trying to make money employing a $275,000+ reefer.

Criticism of the railroads for not "wanting" this business is akin to bashing your local water works for not providing the option of getting lemonade from your tap on demand. There are reefer-oriented rail logistics companies out there that would tackle the challenge if there was money to be made: Railex, Cryotrans Logistics, Tiger Cool Express, etc; even more on the intermodal side. Obviously, no-one has cracked the code.

Historical point on the potato traffic-- am I right in recalling that its going to truck also had something to do with Penn Central "losing" a trainload of spuds for so long that the refrigeration units ran out of fuel and the whole thing spoiled? Thinking this was in 1974 or so.

some facts about bulk intermodal. only my company successfully did bulk intermodal- because we invented a system that offset railroad . you never want 'unit trains' why? too expensive and too problematic. you want to run in existing merchandise trains. product flow timing? perfect for intermodal. just found out that maine pototoes are aggregated in 'sheds' and ship year round. hub & spoke. other freight forwarders? none that tackle bulk. i'm thinking we build a 20' hi-cube 3cr-12 container with an on-board small climate control module and roof access sliders for loading. rear door un-loading using a tilt trailer at destination. ken patrick

What about the backhaul?

Mr. Patrick, there ya go... a prime business opportunity to put your money where your mouth is!

Speaking of practical inventions, the University of Maine has done work with composite materials for wind technology and as a 'by-product' they built a 20' container out of composite materials that is just as strong as steel but lighter. It also has built in sensors to provide data about the load and trip. When I found out about this I asked them why they haven't been marketing it and they just told me that they did it for fun and not for practical use.... Yet they are complaining about having no money and relying on grants as their primary source of income. Unfortunately, I could not get a cost estimate compared to traditional containers but surely it is a bit more, but still it sounds interesting. I inquired about using it to build rail cars but I'm not sure how the lighter weight would factor in.

i should have added 'backhauls are discouraged by railroad pricing". counter-intuitive but reality. railroad revenue controls could not handle two loaded moves for the same equipment in the same lane. pricing is a loaded one-way move, free empty return. railroad revenue controls have a difficult task, largely due to timing of data flows. among my firsts with railroad pricing was an argument that my equipment could never have a free empty return because we were carrying empty containers. yes, there is pricing for empty container moves. it's a difficult task to properly bill every move. as i think i've posted before- if you're at a crossing watching a train pass, 1/2 half of the cars are going in the wrong direction. i think any billers posting here could offer some current numbers on no-bills. ken patrick

KEN PATRICK wrote:i should have added 'backhauls are discouraged by railroad pricing"...

Huh-WHAAA???

counter-intuitive but reality.

SAYS YOU!

railroad revenue controls could not handle two loaded moves for the same equipment in the same lane. pricing is a loaded one-way move, free empty return. railroad revenue controls have a difficult task,...

Ok, I'm sorry, but this all sounds like mumbo-jumbo pretending to be some kind of industry-insider-speak.
PLEASE somebody correct me.

i think any billers posting here could offer some current numbers on no-bills. ken patrick

Yes.... I'd like to SEE the numbers... can anyone back Ken up on this? Cowford? Anybody?

Probably, but only via anecdotal observation. When I came around the RR in 1970 quite a few box cars would have routing instruction stenciled by the doors... " when empty return via reverse route." There was a huge imbalance in reefer loads coming out of the west CA,OR, WA. The PC would send probably 65% of the inbound reefers waybilled to the east coast, back empty. The other 35% would back haul things like cigarettes, beer and LTL from outfits like ACME FAST FRIEGHT, LIFSCHUTZ, Clipper carloading, Western carloading and Chicago Shippers east coast branches etc. The reefers would be handled MTY or load in hotshot trains like Harsimus cove - Chicago PR-9 or Jersey City- St Louis PR-7 and authorized to operate 60 mph. I recall they instituted a 72 car limit on piggyback trains in and out of North Jersey, that operated via the old PRR, due to the derailments longer trains were experiencing while being pushed over the mountains out of Altoona PA. They started using empty deadheading westbound reefers, coupled ahead of the cabin car.That reduced jackknifing caused derailments and got the reefers back out west faster, when Junes' western harvest campaign kicked in full blast, and the WP SP And UP had all kinds of eastbound produce traffic ready to load and no reefers.

Most of the rates given to western produce shippers would fold in the cost incurred by DH-ing the MTY cars back off the east coast. A few produce hauling truckers I knew would position themselves out in California about the second week in June when the RR reefer shortage kicked in and land 6000 dollar loads of strawberries destined for east coast markets. This was back in the 1970's, guys called the strawberry loads, mortgage lifters.

Re; Aroostook potato traffic. The three RR's marketing groups would have to identify receivers down south who had the volume of business to handle unit containers or railroad reefers, then work backwards through all three carriers for scheduling then get the Aroostook farmers on board for the logistics end of things. To me it seems the RR's just don't have the interest or zeal required to put a complex and possibly low revenue deal like this together. I foresee maybe two round trips a month for said assigned equipment and from what I read here,PAR's service is non existent. So the trucker's have the business and are making a small profit, the farmers are getting excellent service and there it stands.

Zeke wrote:Re; Aroostook potato traffic. The three RR's marketing groups would have to identify receivers down south who had the volume of business to handle unit containers or railroad reefers, then work backwards through all three carriers for scheduling then get the Aroostook farmers on board for the logistics end of things. To me it seems the RR's just don't have the interest or zeal required to put a complex and possibly low revenue deal like this together. I foresee maybe two round trips a month for said assigned equipment and from what I read here,PAR's service is non existent. So the trucker's have the business and are making a small profit, the farmers are getting excellent service and there it stands.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Any historian of the BAR will tell you they bent over backwards for the potato farmers and have been used as a leveraging tool to lower trucking rates since the 60's. Even when the BAR's cost were cheaper than trucks for export moves to Searsport or to the plant in Belfast (which the BAR/MEC/BML drastically cut the rates to obtain the traffic), trucks always won out. BAR built a rolling warehouse at Searsport by cutting up two boxcars for transloading potatoes and was never utilized, all on the speculation the potato farmer MIGHT use it. Dedicated intermodal was tried in the early Iron Roads days with McCain French Fry trailers and quickly was abandoned. So my question is, WHO wants rail service in the potato industry? Good money has been spent over speculation of use of service over the years and I think a sort of symbiotic relationship now exists; healthy trucking bolsters potato farmers bottom lines for transportation which in turn bolsters any remaing use for agricultural moves by rail in the county by doing what each mode does best, truckers move the product, rail moves fertilizers and fuel. I'm as optimistic about new rail service to Maine as the next guy, so if someone has built a better mousetrap, I'd support it all the way, but one must always look to the past as to why things are the way they are now.

I would be curious to know how much potatoes are actually kept in the US as opposed to going to the big processors over the border in NB.

For the sake of posterity here in these forums could you please clarify the reference to a plant in Belfast? I've never heard of this traffic previously or of any potato traffic moves over the BML. Many thanks.

tofc is limited by truck 80k hence the failure of earlier potato moves. cofc would have had a better chance since the railcar weight advantage over truck is better apportioned.
as for backhaul? railroad billing prevents utilization of the backhaul move. think about it. what o/d pairs have return traffic that can be handled in a fashion similar to the outbound. railroad billing systems cannot handle such a move even on a partial basis. in fact changing the destination for an empty move requires management involvement. and of course unit trains are far more expensive than cofc in merchandise trains.
based on earlier posts, i think cofc could reduce transportation by 1/2. wouldn't that permit farmers to enjoy more gross profit?
lastly, composite containers? more taxpayer grants chasing a non-starter. 20' corten container $10k us, $8k venezuela, $6k south korea. composite railcar- never. the students would be better served by avoiding these 'grants' ken patrick

gokeefe wrote:For the sake of posterity here in these forums could you please clarify the reference to a plant in Belfast? I've never heard of this traffic previously or of any potato traffic moves over the BML. Many thanks.

Penobscot Frozen Foods. Located on the Belfast waterfront they received sporadic carloads of Maine Whites from their warehouse in Washburn. If you look at some pictures of the old waterfront you can see the occasional BAR 111000 series mech reefer spotted during the 60's-70's. Initially BAR/MEC/BML, when BAR and MEC weren't playing nice, switched to all BAR to Searsport, transloaded onto a "rolling warehouse" of two 6800 double door box cars welded together for transloading into trucks for the short trip to Belfast. BAR and BML tried to get this move back in late 80's early 90's and BML bought a couple of ex BAR rebuilt 190 series green mech reefers for the service but ultimately to no avail. Interestingly enough PFF started their own trucking co, JDR Transport specializing in potato movements.

KEN PATRICK wrote:based on earlier posts, i think cofc could reduce transportation by 1/2. wouldn't that permit farmers to enjoy more gross profit?

And where to load these single stack COFC of "bulk" potatoes? Edmunston, St Leonard, Bangor, Waterville, Portland? The drayage alone would negate any cost benefits and might make it comparable if not more expensive then a straight truck route.