Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Interesting article. Part of the reason given was low demand, sounds like all the paper people should get together and place an order for a pile of cars at a lower price and see if the mfg will build them. A big enough one time order could break the bottleneck.

The possible life extension would also help but you need a good inspection program then which also costs a lot.

Containers are not sturdy enough to handle the weight of paper/ wood products. I wonder why Ga Pacific does not have their own box cars built. Many companies own their own cars (oil companies, for example) and CSX indicates that 2/3 of the cars that run on CSX tracks are owned by someone else. I find it hard to believe that manufacturers that produce box cars would not be able to do so if a company places an order and has the financing. 

Originally Posted by New Haven Joe:

I wonder why containers aren't used for paper products.

 

NH Joe

We're down by the Port of Los Angeles. They call containers "cans" and for good reason. Except for the frame, containers are literally big thin steel cans. When they drop one, a lot of times it twists, bends, or breaks open. If you loaded one with paper or wood products, odds are if the load shifted it would rip the thing apart. At best, the sides would get seriously distorted.

Originally Posted by Russell:

Interesting article. Part of the reason given was low demand, sounds like all the paper people should get together and place an order for a pile of cars at a lower price and see if the mfg will build them. A big enough one time order could break the bottleneck.

The possible life extension would also help but you need a good inspection program then which also costs a lot.

That makes perfect sense. The COOP principle worked for grain elevators, it could work for a fleet of purpose-built box cars.

I believe that the wider width of a boxcar allows for more efficient loading, than what will fit in a container. If I remember what I have seen of paper rolls, they will fit two wide in a boxcar, but not in a container.

 

 Also, a boxcar will handle more weight, than a container will, so for what one boxcar will handle, two containers would be needed, which would erode the cost savings of rail transport.

 

 Many of the paper producer/consumer pairs are old enough that they are better set up to handle loading and unloading of railcars, and may not have adequate truck dock capacity to change transport mode ratios to a large extent.

 

Doug

Originally Posted by challenger3980:

I believe that the wider width of a boxcar allows for more efficient loading, than what will fit in a container. If I remember what I have seen of paper rolls, they will fit two wide in a boxcar, but not in a container.

 

 Also, a boxcar will handle more weight, than a container will, so for what one boxcar will handle, two containers would be needed, which would erode the cost savings of rail transport.

 

 Many of the paper producer/consumer pairs are old enough that they are better set up to handle loading and unloading of railcars, and may not have adequate truck dock capacity to change transport mode ratios to a large extent.

 

Doug

There is another drawback to containers for some of these industries, namely the doors are on the end and too small. It is much easier to load a double door box.

 

Great article! I found it interesting that 60' will be the new standard.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×