Eastern Railroad Discussion > Crew consist on Trucks

I think we should continue the battle for two people in the cab ... while the competition is starting to run with NO people in the cab.

Bot Auto, Ryan Transportation partner on driverless freight between Houston and Dallas - FreightWaves

Yes, I know, trains are different. So different that trucks don't even consider that railroads are a competitor.

I can't read it without signing up. Is this truly autonomous or is there still someone aboard? There's been a lot of hoopla over autonomous trucks that weren't truly autonomous. Then after a few days they have to abandon the autonomous part because glitches happen that need to be solved. You don't hear much about that part of the story. Then you almost never hear anything more of the operation.

It seems there's a lot more hype and bamboozling of the public. A public more and more raised on Sci-fi technology that is always 1000% perfect.

Posted from Android

Trains are different.  They have fewer variables than trucks to deal with.  They have no steering wheel!  Their routes are controlled.  If anything, trucks need mandatory crews.

Yet the same government pushing for mandatory crew sizes on trains is FUNDING truck autonomous research.  Rails arch competitor!  Make it make sense.

RB

Actually, railroads' arch competitor are railroads.

ShortlinesUSA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually, railroads' arch competitor are
> railroads.

"We have met the enemy and he is us."

I don't remember where I read/heard it, but it was in my childhood. I've been reminded of it many times in my career.

Dan

Posted from Android

ShortlinesUSA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually, railroads' arch competitor are
> railroads.

Never truer words spoken.

"Pogo", by Walt Kelly, 1950's. A wonderful, and sometimes politically insightful strip, his estate later published the collections in book form..
 

Well, this duscussion took an unexpected turn.  Of course railroads compete, sometimes fiercly, with one another.  Trucks have an ever growing share of traffic.  In addition, they:
- have government provided infrastructure.
- operate at 95 to 100% operating ratios, whIle railroads are punished and deemed irresponsible should their OR reach or exceed 70%.
- can pivot immediately when the market shifts, public roads go everywhere.  Railroads cannot move their routes, only shrink.
- have the USDOT funding autonomous truck research & development to reduce trucking cost and at the same time, that very same USDOT is looking to lock in crew costs via regulation.  Railroads efficient crew advantage vaporizes with truck automation. 

That is a tought recipe for railway success from my point of view.

I have wondered for a while what truck operating ratios were. It's no wonder they're doing well against railroads! They're provided the operating money to do it.

Railroads couldn't suck more if they tried. Please, don't cry me this OR thing versus trucks, the Class 1 railroads aren't even trying. Unless it's a unit train of something dropped in their lap, they don't want it.

I know a lot of people on the shipper side, I can't point to a single one happy to be shipping by rail.

Posted from Android

Also, I would add there are many trucking companies going out of business, almost daily. Some very large companies with an OR North of 100; Heartland Express immediately comes to mind in that category.

So comparatively (knowing it's a stretch) railroads are killing trucking companies in the OR department.

Posted from Android

Roadbed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, this duscussion took an unexpected turn. 
> Of course railroads compete, sometimes fiercly,
> with one another.  Trucks have an ever growing
> share of traffic.  In addition, they:
> - have government provided infrastructure.
> - operate at 95 to 100% operating ratios, whIle
> railroads are punished and deemed irresponsible
> should their OR reach or exceed 70%.
> - can pivot immediately when the market shifts,
> public roads go everywhere.  Railroads cannot
> move their routes, only shrink.
> - have the USDOT funding autonomous truck research
> & development to reduce trucking cost and at the
> same time, that very same USDOT is looking to lock
> in crew costs via regulation.  Railroads
> efficient crew advantage vaporizes with truck
> automation. 
>
> That is a tought recipe for railway success from
> my point of view.
And trucks are more able to run loaded in multiple directions. Vs railcars that (almost entirely) go back empty

ShortlinesUSA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Railroads couldn't suck more if they tried.
> Please, don't cry me this OR thing versus trucks,
> the Class 1 railroads aren't even trying. Unless
> it's a unit train of something dropped in their
> lap, they don't want it.
>
> I know a lot of people on the shipper side, I
> can't point to a single one happy to be shipping
> by rail.

I can't help but think that the heavy haul railroads are going to have a day of reckoning sooner that they expect.

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ShortlinesUSA Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Railroads couldn't suck more if they tried.
> > Please, don't cry me this OR thing versus
> trucks,
> > the Class 1 railroads aren't even trying.
> Unless
> > it's a unit train of something dropped in their
> > lap, they don't want it.
> >
> > I know a lot of people on the shipper side, I
> > can't point to a single one happy to be
> shipping
> > by rail.
>
> I can't help but think that the heavy haul
> railroads are going to have a day of reckoning
> sooner that they expect.

Transportation of industrial goods in the US is already seeing problems.  The very cheap, non-English speaker truck driver popuation is being reduced.  Several reports say the truck checkpoints entering Florida are already testing for English language competency among commercial drivers.  Cutting the supply of labor should push up prices and reduce supply.

 

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Transportation of industrial goods in the US is
> already seeing problems.  The very cheap,
> non-English speaker truck driver popuation is
> being reduced.  Several reports say the truck
> checkpoints entering Florida are already testing
> for English language competency among commercial
> drivers.  Cutting the supply of labor should push
> up prices and reduce supply.

Recently the CHP in California conducted one of their infamous mandatory commercial inspections at a rest stop. This is where they force all trucks to exit into the rest area and have 6-10 commercial CHP officers inspecting trucks, with separate officers then writing the tickets. It is my understanding, with information received from a third party, that in a 4 hour period, 7 drivers were removed from service because they could not pass a simple English language competency test. ONE of those ended up leaving in hand cuffs because he understood zero English and would not cooperate with the officers at all. 3 times he tried to get back into the truck and drive off, and they finally just arrested him.

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I can't help but think that the heavy haul
> railroads are going to have a day of reckoning
> sooner that they expect.


Not as long as the "lie(s)" are kept going between the Carriers, FRA, STB, the general public, etc.

Posted from Android



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/02/26 00:27 by ns1000.

Roadbed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Of course railroads compete, sometimes fiercly, with one another.

What percentage of businesses are rail served? What percentage of businesses could be rail served with the addition of a siding or spur?
This would help define where railroads could grow by serving additional customers. But the reality is railroads are backing away from customers that "don't ship enough to serve". Even to the point of abandoning lines that have active customers. (Or reducing service/raising costs to the point where customers are happy to look elsewhere.)

What percentage of rail served businesses are served by two railroads? Or could be served by two railroads with the addition of a siding or spur?
Railroads have a captive customer base. Most customers do not have a choice of which railroad serves their businesses, other than building their business next to a more desirable railroad.

Where do railroads compete with each other? On long hauls from central points where railroads actually serve both ends of a connection and a customer would have a choice between two class 1s? Or are rail served customers locked down to the company with a spur to their business?

The biggest way that railroads can compete relies on intermodal and trucking. Use trucks to get the load to the customer's choice of intermodal service and the customer does not have to worry about what (if any) class 1 railroads serve their property. The customer can easily pivot to another railroad if a relationship sours or shipping becomes too expensive. But the caveat is that once a shipment is loaded into a truck it might as well stay on the roads unless the railroads provide excellent service that truly is competitive with direct truck transportation.

Trucks are not winning due to some grand conspiracy to put railroads out of business, they are winning because the service is more flexible and competitive. Run through the questions I asked at the beginning of this post and think about trucking:
What percentage of businesses are or could be served by trucks? Nearly all. It would be easier to list what can not be served by trucks.
What percentage of businesses are of could be served by different trucking companies? If a business could be served by one trucking company they could be served by all.
Trucking companies are constantly competing with each other. When one company fails there is another to take over the loads. The logistics are in the favor of trucking companies.

There are a lot of regulations on trucking ... some should be better enforced. I do not want autonomous trucks or trains operating on or crossing public roadways.

If there would be any regulation I would add to trucking (mainly out of spite) it would be some form of PTC. The electronic log books are a step in that direction (harder to spoof). A PTC style system that monitored speeds, time operated, lanes operated in, roads operated on and even a requirement for inward and outward facing cameras (not required for PTC) would be measures that could be taken in the name of safety. The railroads were required to comply with a mandate, why not trucking?

Completely unmanned might still eventually be banned.  A confused Waymo vehicle for several minutes blocked first responders to Saturday night's terrorist attack in Austin, TX.  That event alone won't trigger it, but sooner or later there will be one with more deaths in part because of automation not being able to adequately handle unusual circumstances.  Or more likely an accumulation of such incidents.

Video of incident



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/02/26 10:19 by baretables.