Western Railroad Discussion > Some high value imports skip ship, rail

The Wall Street Journal reports on Asian airlines use of cargo aircraft to deliver high value electronics, fashion, meds, etc deep inside the US.

Asiana Air and others fly stripped out passenger jets, delivering 35 tons of cargo to NY from Seoul. If the company is licensed to fly passengers, it can fly high value cargo.

Less premium cargo for Z trains...

Posted from Android

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Wall Street Journal reports on Asian airlines
> use of cargo aircraft to deliver high value
> electronics, fashion, meds, etc deep inside the
> US.
>
> Asiana Air and others fly stripped out passenger
> jets, delivering 35 tons of cargo to NY from
> Seoul. If the company is licensed to fly
> passengers, it can fly high value cargo.
>
> Less premium cargo for Z trains...
>
> Posted from Android

Your post is worthless.

Why would a supplier/vendor/customer want to transport 35 tons of high value cargo via Air from say Seoul to LAX, then transload to a container or trailer to be then sent via intermodal from Los Angeles to New York, when instead it would go from Seoul directly to New York via air.

jst3751 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The Wall Street Journal reports on Asian
> airlines
> > use of cargo aircraft to deliver high value
> > electronics, fashion, meds, etc deep inside the
> > US.
> >
> > Asiana Air and others fly stripped out
> passenger
> > jets, delivering 35 tons of cargo to NY from
> > Seoul. If the company is licensed to fly
> > passengers, it can fly high value cargo.
> >
> > Less premium cargo for Z trains...
> >
> > Posted from Android
>
> Your post is worthless.
>
> Why would a supplier/vendor/customer want to
> transport 35 tons of high value cargo via Air from
> say Seoul to LAX, then transload to a container or
> trailer to be then sent via intermodal from Los
> Angeles to New York, when instead it would go from
> Seoul directly to New York via air.

You might want to reread the original post. 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/20 12:39 by kbarnett.

kbarnett Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jst3751 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The Wall Street Journal reports on Asian
> > airlines
> > > use of cargo aircraft to deliver high value
> > > electronics, fashion, meds, etc deep inside
> the
> > > US.
> > >
> > > Asiana Air and others fly stripped out
> > passenger
> > > jets, delivering 35 tons of cargo to NY from
> > > Seoul. If the company is licensed to fly
> > > passengers, it can fly high value cargo.
> > >
> > > Less premium cargo for Z trains...
> > >
> > > Posted from Android
> >
> > Your post is worthless.
> >
> > Why would a supplier/vendor/customer want to
> > transport 35 tons of high value cargo via Air
> from
> > say Seoul to LAX, then transload to a container
> or
> > trailer to be then sent via intermodal from Los
> > Angeles to New York, when instead it would go
> from
> > Seoul directly to New York via air.
>
> You might want to reread the original post. 

Just did, still stands. Why would anyone move a shipment via AIR to a transload to intermodel to a destinaiton that is served by air direct?

jst3751 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The Wall Street Journal reports on Asian
> airlines
> > use of cargo aircraft to deliver high value
> > electronics, fashion, meds, etc deep inside the
> > US.
> >
> > Asiana Air and others fly stripped out
> passenger
> > jets, delivering 35 tons of cargo to NY from
> > Seoul. If the company is licensed to fly
> > passengers, it can fly high value cargo.
> >
> > Less premium cargo for Z trains...
> >
> > Posted from Android
>
> Your post is worthless.
>
> Why would a supplier/vendor/customer want to
> transport 35 tons of high value cargo via Air from
> say Seoul to LAX, then transload to a container or
> trailer to be then sent via intermodal from Los
> Angeles to New York, when instead it would go from
> Seoul directly to New York via air.

why is the post worthless? Shipping high value cargo by Z train is premium rail cargo.

Losing that cargo to air is not good when railroads are chasing off lower value business.

The original post said paraphrasing  "fly to NY direct from Seoul, less premium cargo for Z trains". No where did he mention transload from air to rail. You were the one that mentioned transload.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jst3751 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The Wall Street Journal reports on Asian
> > airlines
> > > use of cargo aircraft to deliver high value
> > > electronics, fashion, meds, etc deep inside
> the
> > > US.
> > >
> > > Asiana Air and others fly stripped out
> > passenger
> > > jets, delivering 35 tons of cargo to NY from
> > > Seoul. If the company is licensed to fly
> > > passengers, it can fly high value cargo.
> > >
> > > Less premium cargo for Z trains...
> > >
> > > Posted from Android
> >
> > Your post is worthless.
> >
> > Why would a supplier/vendor/customer want to
> > transport 35 tons of high value cargo via Air
> from
> > say Seoul to LAX, then transload to a container
> or
> > trailer to be then sent via intermodal from Los
> > Angeles to New York, when instead it would go
> from
> > Seoul directly to New York via air.
>
> why is the post worthless? Shipping high value
> cargo by Z train is premium rail cargo.
>
> Losing that cargo to air is not good when
> railroads are chasing off lower value business.

Because they would NEVER have the business in the first place from which to loose it.

It is never going to happen. 

Now, if you were talking about large volume high value cargo from say China to Phoenix, that would go China to LAX then into a truck overnight to Phoenix as there is no direct direct CARGO flights between China and PHX. Again, this is talking about large volume. Large volume which can not be accommodated on passenger aircraft. 

The point is intermodal rail will NEVER have a piece of that pie as it makes no sense whatsoever, and only adds potential problem spots.
 

kbarnett Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The original post said paraphrasing  "fly to NY
> direct from Seoul, less premium cargo for Z
> trains". No where did he mention transload from
> air to rail. You were the one that mentioned
> transload.

Please explain how the cargo would go from the belly of a airplane onto a train without transloading?

jst3751 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> kbarnett Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> Please explain how the cargo would go from the
> belly of a airplane onto a train without
> transloading?

Was OP meaning new or existing high value freight? Show me a place in the USA that any cargo other than human are transloaded from plane to rail. And then reread the original post! 

kbarnett Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jst3751 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > kbarnett Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > Please explain how the cargo would go from the
> > belly of a airplane onto a train without
> > transloading?
>
> Was OP meaning new or existing high value
> freight?

Does it matter?

> Show me a place in the USA that any cargo
> other than human are transloaded from plane to
> rail.

None that I know of.

> And then reread the original post! 

Maybe you should?

"Less premium cargo for Z trains..." is really a worthless thing to say, since Z intermodel trains are not an end-all be-all for all cargo, and since they would never have that traffic in the first place. 

DONE!

Having a bad day?

The assumption that the air cargo mentioned would have a chance to compete with "Z" class intermodal is false: the international extremely time sensitive and highly valuable freight mentioned always has gone by air in the first place. Comparing the frieght carried by air cargo and intermodal is like comparing apples and oranges, in the context of international shipping. One key exception is domestic 2 or 3 day air shipments: UPS touts 2 day air service between Chicago and MSP, but it really goes on the BNSF Z-CHCSTP. There are a few other domestic routes of 300-600 miles that ship "2 or 3 day air" by rail.

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jst3751 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The Wall Street Journal reports on Asian
> > airlines
> > > use of cargo aircraft to deliver high value
> > > electronics, fashion, meds, etc deep inside
> the
> > > US.
> > >
> > > Asiana Air and others fly stripped out
> > passenger
> > > jets, delivering 35 tons of cargo to NY from
> > > Seoul. If the company is licensed to fly
> > > passengers, it can fly high value cargo.
> > >
> > > Less premium cargo for Z trains...
> > >
> > > Posted from Android
> >
> > Your post is worthless.
> >
> > Why would a supplier/vendor/customer want to
> > transport 35 tons of high value cargo via Air
> from
> > say Seoul to LAX, then transload to a container
> or
> > trailer to be then sent via intermodal from Los
> > Angeles to New York, when instead it would go
> from
> > Seoul directly to New York via air.
>
> why is the post worthless? Shipping high value
> cargo by Z train is premium rail cargo.
>
> Losing that cargo to air is not good when
> railroads are chasing off lower value business.

Posted from iPhone



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/20 13:42 by BurtNorton.

You all need a break.

The point of the article is they are using PASSENGER aircraft to transport stuff that likely would have otherwise taken a ship and then possibly a train. Due to Covid there are a ton of PASSENGER aircraft sitting unused so higher value stuff can be shipped affordably.

Remove the seats stuff the plane with stuff and fly it.

Posted from iPhone

The airlines serving China were looking for ways to make up the revenue they lost when the passenger flights were cancelled.
Hauling lightweight cargo in the passenger cabin was just one of the ways they coped with the situation.
While passenger flights were cut back, there was no restriction at all with "cargo" flights.
And while I have never seen aircraft containers off loaded from an aircraft to a train I have seen aircraft containers loaded on modified truck trailers.
UPS does it every night of the week at their hub in Ontario IAP, CA.

jst3751 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> The point is intermodal rail will NEVER have a
> piece of that pie as it makes no sense whatsoever,
> and only adds potential problem spots.
>  

There appears to be some misunderstanding. I interpreted it to mean that air freight has taken some marine traffic due to innovative use of idle passenger capacity. Had that traffic remained on the sea, it would have found its way to Z trains after arrival on the West Coast.

TAW

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> UPS does it every night of the week at their hub
> in Ontario IAP, CA.

UPS, FedEx, USPS, and others (maybe DHL) have permanent presence at major airports, where transloading from airplanes to trucks is routine. People can argue how much of that actually ends up on trains, but for most (actually ALL) of my international shipments the past decade, they went to SFO, then got trucked to the appropriate distribution facility, no trains involved. In fact, I bought something from Japan several weeks ago, and FedEx got it in my hands in 3 days - the shipper decided to send it that way, no extra charge. Wonder if it ended up on a Narita - SFO passenger flight?

This thread is similar to the Shinkansen shipping fresh fish ("Something's fishy") thread we had in the International Discussions. Looks like a short term reaction to generate revenue due to COVID, not necessarily a long term trend (Z trains not gaining business). 

That's not 100% true. Not all passenger aircraft can carry HAZMAT, or if you prefer dangerous goods. Also certain things like oxygen generators cannot be hauled on passenger aircraft. 

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Wall Street Journal reports on Asian airlines
> use of cargo aircraft to deliver high value
> electronics, fashion, meds, etc deep inside the
> US.
>
> Asiana Air and others fly stripped out passenger
> jets, delivering 35 tons of cargo to NY from
> Seoul. If the company is licensed to fly
> passengers, it can fly high value cargo.
>
> Less premium cargo for Z trains...
>
> Posted from Android

This not a new phenomenon, even though it just filled space in a newspaper.  It's been going on for years, and that cargo never moved by rail in the first place.

BobE