Western Railroad Discussion > Trona Ca. 20' Containers?

So not sure if this was on a previous post, but it was a topic brought up on drive time with a fellow rail fan. So I drive to L.A. 2-5 days a week from Tehachapi for work. I notice, frequently, truck traffic consisting of 20' containers on triple axle trailers assuming destination is Long Beach Ca for export and origin is Trona Ca plant. Question is: why would 'they' not make up a stack train that would run Trona to Long Beach? 

Dan Tufts 

P5r24 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So not sure if this was on a previous post, but it
> was a topic brought up on drive time with a fellow
> rail fan. So I drive to L.A. 2-5 days a week from
> Tehachapi for work. I notice, frequently, truck
> traffic consisting of 20' containers on triple
> axle trailers assuming destination is Long Beach
> Ca for export and origin is Trona Ca plant.
> Question is: why would 'they' not make up a stack
> train that would run Trona to Long Beach? 
>

That's too short a haul for the railroads to consider profitable.
 

Considering that an amount of the ore that Trona ships is exported out of that very
port it wouldn't take much to add a few containers. Problem is, what would be the cost
of building and maintaining a container facility in Trona to load a few containers?

Out

toledopatch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> That's too short a haul for the railroads to
> consider profitable.
>  

It would be the same haul the ore or pot ash train runs currently


There are days on my 2hr drive on Hwy 14 to or from work that I will count 20+ truck containers so assume at times 50+/- daily. Container loading facility would seemingly pay for itself on longevity if they can do 2 or more trains a week? And though possibly the truck containers dont share the same destination as the bulk loaded hopper cars do... I guess its just a thought to catch one more train in our crazy hobby.  :)

My statement about haul applied to container service. The bulk haul in covered hoppers has a lower profitability threshhold.

They run unit train Out of Boron to the harbor what's the difference.

Posted from iPhone

toledopatch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> P5r24 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So not sure if this was on a previous post, but
> it
> > was a topic brought up on drive time with a
> fellow
> > rail fan. So I drive to L.A. 2-5 days a week
> from
> > Tehachapi for work. I notice, frequently, truck
> > traffic consisting of 20' containers on triple
> > axle trailers assuming destination is Long
> Beach
> > Ca for export and origin is Trona Ca plant.
> > Question is: why would 'they' not make up a
> stack
> > train that would run Trona to Long Beach? 
> >
>
> That's too short a haul for the railroads to
> consider profitable.


Nope Patch, it's not too short a haul to be profitable. It's being done all the time in other parts of the country and just depends on who wants it done. The Norfolk Southern and predecessor Southern Railway did it for decades on a similar commodity, equipment type and corridor 50 miles shorter than the Trona possibility, Sandersville, Georgia to Savannah GPA even before the Inland Port development became a hot topic within the transportation fraternity. One of CAL DOT's current planning efforts is the conversion of several intra-state intermodal corridors where truck traffic can be removed easily from California's highways in favor of short haul container trains moving over an expanded Alameda Corridor to reach the ports of LA and LB. That's what the Inland Ports development is all about, volume commitment with minimum handling and now its just like any other unit train pricing effort for a rail marketing guy or gal. What do you think the rail marketing and sales departments are going to replace all their missing coal revenue with to keep wall street happy? Just read or listen to their current and recent quarterly financial reports and you'll hear it in "marketing speak" or "wall street spin", even at CSX.

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/csx_transportation/news/CSX-expects-slight-earnings-decline-in-Q4-intermodal-to-lead-growth-in-2016--46433 

https://www.csx.com/index.cfm/investors/management-presentations/

Just a thought but the tunnel at Searles would pevent stacking of the containers i.e. they'd need to be single-level. Not sure if there may be a wheel-base issue also, i was out on the Trona railway a couple of months ago and the track is very uneven!
Actually, thinking about it i'm not sure it's even possible to stack 20' containers anyway - i don't think i've ever seen it!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/21/15 02:08 by exhaustED.

toledopatch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's too short a haul for the railroads to
> consider profitable.
  
Slingshot2, that quote should read:

> That's too short a haul for Union Pacific to
> consider profitable.

 

Two short hauls on Union Pacific in Southern California I know of. The rock train from Cabazon to the Los Angeles/Long Beach Harbor area. Another one that goes through Soladad Canyon. Burlington Northern Santa Fe runs a unit slab train from the LA/LB harbor to Fontana.  These are all examples of short hauls BNSF and UP run in the Greater LA area. As for 20' containers on 3 axles , they must be extra heavy. Also, railroads don't double-stack 20 foot containers. Trona may see that the best way is to truck them to the harbor area. Seems to me a single stack train of 20 foot containers are doable to LA/LB harbor, but I would not know the arrangements they have regarding the transport of the ore.

SantaFeRuss