Eastern Railroad Discussion > Top Lift Trailers

http://www.toplifttrailers.com
I saw one these today on an NS train for the first time. Good idea.

Posted from iPhone

I thought everything was top lift by now. But I see they are selling the idea of a top lift van with a chassis that is married to it, is that right? I'd call it semi-intermodal......... : < )) 

All containers are top lift but all semi trailers (piggy back) are bottom lift.  So if a piggy back trailer needs unloaded they need a special lift for it.  With this trailer it can be unloaded at any location that a container is unloaded without the hassel of getting a chassis.  Plus most container chassis are are junk as no one wants to pay to fix them.  My father's trucking company wanted to get into hauling containers out of Chicago but the cost of fixing tires made them get out of the business. 

 It amazes me sometimes how the obvious just doesn't seem to come to pass. Is there any good reason why all piggy backs aren't top lift already? When it comes to intermodal, the rail industry seems to follow the technology of maritime shipping, but about three decades behind.

Everything is lifted from above now. 'Circus' ramps have been gone for years, probably 2 decades. But the machines that lift trailers onto intermodal cars now are like big fork lifts that go underneath. This new  concept is worthy, and very useful; but what does it do to net weight capacity? By the time you add the cornerposts and their weight to that of the trailer, plus a refrigeration unit, what does it do to net capacity? If the weight of the commodity works out, fine, this will succeed. If not, the bottom lift of trailers will have to continue for awhile.

Ideally, all intermodal shipments would be using containers.  They are easily stackable, universal, and can fit into any bucket (well) car of sufficient length.  In some cases, longer containers can be stacked on top, such as putting a 48' container on top of a 40' container, or even a pair of 20 footers.  The design and the location of the lifting posts allows standardized lift equipment to pick up every container.

It's my opinion that the railroads would like to see the trailers go away.  I'm only guessing, but I suspect the pricing structure from A to B for a trailer is perhaps 40-50% more expensive than a container of the same size.  This is primarily due to the inability to double-stack them, and, different lift equipment must be used.  While some lift equipment contain both 'top pick' (twist lock) and trailer lift capabilities, the added time needed to lower and raise  the 'arms' with their 12" x 3" lift pads on them adds perhaps a 2 minutes to the time needed to put a trailer on the train.  It also requires the trailers to be parked alongside the train facing the proper direction of the hitch (like a 5th wheel), which may cause added time just to spot the trailers for loading.  As many of the hitch cars (spines) can carry containers as well as trailers, all too often, the hitches must be 'lifted' so the position can be used by a trailer.  This adds yet a couple minutes more to loading time for trailers.  

The other side of the coin is that shippers such as UPS and many refrigerated trailer companies really want to stay with trailers.  Why?  Because they have control over the quality of the wheels under the box (and brakes, lights, wiring, etc).  It also gives them immediate availability after train arrival as they are unaffected by an occassional shortage of chassis.  As noted by a prior respondent, many of the chassis are in less than tip-top condition.  In some cases, a trucker will report a problem with a chassis it will be fixed.  The job of the gate inspector at the intermodal ramp is to find problems that the driver may not be aware of when coming in such as a flat tire or a burned out light somewhere.  All reported and 'found' defects get flagged for repair.  Pool chassis, and most private owner chassis (under contract), are maintained by the repair shop at the ramps (often, separate contract companies), and they use lowest cost products they can find.  The most obvious of these is the recap tires.  Some of the base tires (casings) are so old the sidewalls are cracking and crumbling, but they have a brand new tread on top of them. 

These days, most chassis have stickers on them indicating that only recap tires are to be used.  The chassis owning companies don't want to be putting brand new tires on them as the 'pirates' will swap them out for junk tires.  Some trucking companies have a history of swapping parts on new or nearly new equipment to upgrade their own private trailer fleet.  I personally discovered the tip of the ice burg of one such company in my days as an intermodal ramp employee and reported it to management.  It was later proven they were stealling/swapping everything but the frame.  That trucking company is now permanently banned from doing business with the railroad.  



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/24/15 19:06 by BRAtkinson.

howeld Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>  So if a piggy
> back trailer needs unloaded they need a special
> lift for it.

Nearly every intermodal ramp I've been on, has cranes/mobile lifts (often called "packers") with dual mode (top lift container/TOFC bottom lift trailer) capability.  Just takes a few seconds for the bottom lift arms to fold down when a standard trailer needs to be lifted.

moltensulphur Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>  It amazes me sometimes how the obvious just
> doesn't seem to come to pass. Is there any good
> reason why all piggy backs aren't top lift
> already? When it comes to intermodal, the rail
> industry seems to follow the technology of
> maritime shipping, but about three decades behind.

As was pointed out, it can add considerably to the weight of the trailer, thereby reducing the amount of weight that can be carried.
Personally, as a driver, I have a strong dislike for chassis trailers.  More often than not, there's a defect with the chassis.  They're just
not maintained to a high level. Try finding someone to repair/replace a chassis at the railyard during off hours.

rfprr



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/25/15 04:39 by rfprr.

Tripple crown is making a forray into TOFC right now. Seeing more and more. Not the Roadrailers but regular trailers.

How long will it be until there is no need for a Triple Crown Company?
NSDTK Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tripple crown is making a forray into TOFC right
> now. Seeing more and more. Not the Roadrailers but
> regular trailers.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/26/15 07:22 by wabash2800.

I think Triple Crown will continue since it feeds alot of traffic to the NS Intermodal system. Roadrailers may be the question.

Don't be surprised if it goes away.

Two more points. On CSX, several years ago they designated some intermodal terminals as container (top-lift) only; Philadelphia is one of them. But NS seems to be more flexible and can handle both trailers and contaniers at most if not all of their facilities. Correct me if I am wrong.
Second, you see new well cars of 40 foot and 53 foot wells from time to time, but no new cars that can handle trailers in wells and certainly no new spine cars. The number of trailer capable cars is a small fraction of container capable cars. I'm doing a survey of that, albeit from an APR 2013 RER, the lastest one I have; so when I'm done it is already two years old. But some major markets on BNSF, CSX and NS still seem to want trailers for their service.  
 

Thank You, www.toplifttrailers.com

Totally new patented trailers, www.toplifttrailers.com