What is the rational behind the closing/conversion of hump yards to flat yards? As hump yards are automated, would it be the other way around - closing of flat yards in favor automated hump yards? Doesn’t switching in a flat yards involve more resources (locomotives, personnel, etc.) that in a hump yards with its computers and retarders?
All those computers and retarders are very expensive to maintain, which is made worse by the fact that a rail hump yard is a very rare piece of heavy-duty industrial equipment. It requires special, expensive parts, and if a specific hump is very old the maintainers may actually have to make their own replacement parts.
A hump yard needs to switch a very large number of cars in order to be cost-effective. As carload freight continues to decline and new operating plans like the so-called PSR seek to reduce the number of car handlings, the available work for each hump is reduced.
But closing a hump without thinking it through can have disatrous consequences for a railroad. Witness CSX’s reversal of some hump and other yard closures.
Closer to home, CN’s western Canada system has never fully recovered from or adapted to the 2011 closure of the hump at Walker Yard in Edmonton.
Before anyone swallows the line that ‘Hump yards delay cars a day’.
The railroads, except in RARE instances, have their service plans designed on the fact that customers get DAILY service, once a day. In that regard - service between major yards and serving yards are also once a day. While a carrier such as CSX may operate more than one train a day between Willard and Chicago - they are only operating for example, one train Willard to the BNSF at Chicago, one train Willard to the UP at Chicago, one train Willard to CP at Chicago, one train Willard to CN at Chicago, one train Willard to Barr Yard for CSX local customers in Chicago. If a car for any of those trains arrives Willard after the train for the car has been ‘closed out’; it will become part of tomorrows train to that destination.
To effectively operate ANY yard, the yard must get turned over on a daily basis. The trains/cars coming in today, need to be processed and gone tomorrow, if there are ‘hiccups’ in the ‘assembly line’; back up and congestion is the result. Hiccups can be getting 24 hours worth of trains arrivng in 4 to 8 hours; not being able to depart trains account power, manpower and operating conditions…and on and on.
ANY SWITCHING of cars will lose a day - Hump or Flat.
Closing a Hump yard may excise the costs of operating and supporting the Hump - it will not speed up traffic by converting the required switching to flat switching. Closing the Hump may REQUIRE more switching at the outlying points that feed traffic to the closed hump location - that additional switching most likely will require additional power and additional manpower at that outlying point to perfrom the additional flat switching.
There are no free lunches i
[quote user=“BaltACD”]
Before anyone swallows the line that ‘Hump yards delay cars a day’.
The railroads, except in RARE instances, have their service plans designed on the fact that customers get DAILY service, once a day. In that regard - service between major yards and serving yards are also once a day. While a carrier such as CSX may operate more than one train a day between Willard and Chicago - they are only operating for example, one train Willard to the BNSF at Chicago, one train Willard to the UP at Chicago, one train Willard to CP at Chicago, one train Willard to CN at Chicago, one train Willard to Barr Yard for CSX local customers in Chicago. If a car for any of those trains arrives Willard after the train for the car has been ‘closed out’; it will become part of tomorrows train to that destination.
To effectively operate ANY yard, the yard must get turned over on a daily basis. The trains/cars coming in today, need to be processed and gone tomorrow, if there are ‘hiccups’ in the ‘assembly line’; back up and congestion is the result. Hiccups can be getting 24 hours worth of trains arrivng in 4 to 8 hours; not being able to depart trains account power, manpower and operating conditions…and on and on.
ANY SWITCHING of cars will lose a day - Hump or Flat.
Closing a Hump yard may excise the costs of operating and supporting the Hump - it will not speed up traffic by converting the required switching to flat switching. Closing the Hump may REQUIRE more switching at the outlying points that feed traffic to the closed hump location - that additional switching most likely will require additional power and additional manpower at that outlying point to perfrom the additional flat switching.
And those are the non-standard metrics that EHH designed to report the benefits of PSR, rather and use the traditional and established metrics.
All metrics can be manipulated to show whatever story Management wants to display.
Lets say the BNSF train doesn’t have power and is moved from Willard on the CP train and is set off at Attica Jct for the NEXT BNSF train to pick up tomorrow - Willard’s metrics will show that block was move out of Willard near On Time, however the line of road ‘block swap’ will cost it 24 hours until that next BNSF train operates On Time. The Willard metric will show all cars moving within the proper time frame, however the block of cars that was moved to Attica will have LOST 24 hours - line of road does not get measured on car dwell, it only gets measured on train performance.
Managements know how the metrics are derived and play the game.