I’m a bit surprised that no one mention the long-term feud the Southern had with the I.C.C that railroad had over using the larger cars. I do not remember the I.C.C.'s arguments, but the commission at last gave in.
Yeah, it was based on the conveluted ICC system of having to prove the need for the service and a price that did not hurt trucks. Or some BS to that effect. You had to get permission from the ICC to sneeze before you could get permission from them to use a handkershief or tissue.
[quote user="henry6"]
“…Yeah, it was based on the conveluted ICC system of having to prove the need for the service and a price that did not hurt trucks. Or some BS to that effect. You had to get permission from the ICC to sneeze before you could get permission from them to use a handkershief or tissue…”
[/quote]
To Henry6 and others:
Refer to the following: http://cs.trains.com/TRCCS/forums/p/87912/1037631.aspx
Thread from 2/2007
titled:“Southern Big John Confusion” OP was gabe
The following response from Mac (PNWRMNM) lays it out pretty succinctly:
**"…**The Big John case was NOT about interchange. It was about the right and ability of the railroad industry to respond to the market, and specifically to compete with trucks and barges.
The story is well told in “Brosnan, the Railroad’s Messiah”. The author of that book believes that the case was the begining of the end of the ICC because it revealed an agency bent on holding railroad rates up to protect modal competitors…"
Not mentioned so far yet is that with the disuse and formal abolition of roofwalks for the brakemen to use ( [swg] ) circa 1970, there was 6 ft. or so of clearance (to 22 ft. above Top of Rail) above the tops (16 ft. above Top of Rail) of the old-style box cars that that no longer had to be reserved for that purpose - so it could be used for paying cargo instead.
- Paul North.
Ever see the inside of a box car that was intended for grain service? There were lines on the walls for various different grains … corn, wheat, oats, etc … indicating how much of each type of grain could be loaded without exceeding the capacity of the car. Why replace a 40’ car with a larger one when the 40’ car was only about 2/3 full?
The moral of this story is that bulk grain is HEAVY!
Be glad the RR’s Never filled a 40 footer to the Top with Beans like I did that one time with my Grain Wagon that was a 48 footer. Called we had Rain coming in Both Weigh Wagons were FULL along with the Combine and I was the ONLY truck at the Loading point and I had a 48 footer with 8 foot sides. At the Elevator I was 140K lbs NET weight. 70 TONS of Beans in the Wagon and I was 170K gross so I was a little heavy for about 4 miles. Boss was Happy as I saved him about 5K in repairs on the Machinery. We lost 3 days waiting on the fields to dry.
The Canadians were the last to have 40’ boxcars for grain service as recent as the early 1990s since the Canadian railroads were obligated to serve grain elevators on substandard branchline track that couldn’t handle heavier 100+ ton covered hoppers.
And the Canadian government set the shipping rates to make it impossible to make a profit, hard to justify new equipment.