TSW

Slide1: 

One Size Doesn’t Fit All

Overview: 

Overview Report 267 Recommendations Will Have a Significant Effect on Rail Intermodal if Implemented Dual 28 foot “pups” to dual 33 foot “pups” 90,000 pound six axle single trailer trucks Possible larger trucks in future Permit system for new LCV and/or heavier vehicles increases ambiguity about the future

Overview: 

Overview Report 267 Virtually Ignores Effect on National Transportation System Outside of Trucking Mostly ignores the systemic nature of the national transportation system Fails to consider effect on railroad intermodal efficiency Dramatically increases difficulty for railroads in matching railcar configuration with trailer/container size Doesn’t adequately investigate traffic diversion from rail intermodal and carload to truck (not covered here)

Why Might This Be A Problem: 

Why Might This Be A Problem Railcars are Built to Handle Specific Sizes of Trailers and/or Containers Exact matching of platform size to trailer/container size results in higher fuel economy for rail Equipment Replacement Cycle for Trailers is Ten Years Versus Forty Years For Railcars As New Trailers are Introduced, Both Old and New Railcars Will Be Needed to Handle New Mix of Trailers

Overview of Intermodal Equipment Types: 

Overview of Intermodal Equipment Types Trailer On Flat Car (TOFC) Railcars Container On Flat Car (COFC) Doublestack Railcars Trailers (28, 45, 48, 53, 57 feet lengths) Heavy duty trailers for often required for intermodal use Containers International (mostly 20 and 40 feet lengths) Domestic (mostly 28, 48, 53 foot lengths)

Railroad TOFC Intermodal Equipment: 

Railroad TOFC Intermodal Equipment TOFC Cars (and/or platforms) 48% of TTX platforms handle three 28 foot trailers or two 48 foot trailers 37% of TTX platforms capable of handling 53 foot trailers 19% of TTX platforms capable of handling 57 foot trailers

Railroad COFC Equipment: 

Railroad COFC Equipment Articulated Cars 40 foot 48 foot (can handle 53 foot on top of 48 foot) 53 foot (cannot handle doublestack “heavy” containers) Non-Articulated Cars Greater tare weight Can doublestack “heavy” containers

Intermodal Rail Operations: 

Intermodal Rail Operations For One Class I Railroad Currently 8% of trailers handled are 28 feet 38% of trailers handled are 45 feet 43% of trailers handled are 48 feet 11% of trailers handled are 53 feet Matching a diverse fleet to a diverse traffic mix is challenging On any given day, lane imbalances and mismatch of trailer length versus railcar capability leads to platform utilization of between 85-90%

Investment Problems: 

Investment Problems Use of Heavy 53 Foot Containers (Trailers) Would Force Railroads (TTX) to Build 53 Non-Articulated Cars at Around $50,000 per car Longer Trailers/Containers Would Force Construction of New Cars Not enough railcar capacity for 53 foot trailers and containers, let alone 57 foot containers Replacing Entire Fleet Would Cost Approximately $4 Billion ($50,000 x 81,000 89 foot car equivalents) If Future Truck Size (and weight) is Ambiguous, Investment in Intermodal Railcars Might Cease

Operational Costs 33 Foot Pups: 

Operational Costs 33 Foot Pups Cost of Rail Movement for 33 Foot Trailer Could be 50% higher than that for 28 Foot Pup Many cars can handle three 28 foot trailers or two 33 foot trailers Air resistance would likely be higher due to greater distance between trailers No railcars designed for 33 foot trailers

Operational Cost Heavy Containers: 

Operational Cost Heavy Containers Would Increase Complexity for Railcar Loading Cannot put two heavy containers together on same articulated railcar platform Building New Cars (and Containers) to Accommodate (90,000 Pound) Heavy Containers Would Increase Tare Weight for Railcars and Containers This would decrease effective savings

Summary: 

Summary We Need to Approach Issue of Truck Size and Weight as a National Transportation Policy rather than National Truck Policy Need to Reduce the Complexity of Equipment Types to Improve Efficiency and Effectiveness of Intermodal Failing to Do This May Result in Trying to Meet Freight Capacity Needs in 2020 Using Trucks Alone