Is CN really the only railroad that runs freight trains on a schedule…i.e. what they call Precision Railroading? What makes CN’s undertaking so different from what others are doing?
Every Class I railroad has scheduled freight trains - how closely they follow their schedules is open to conjecture.
One other thing - how they score their ability to follow the schedules is also a open ended question with each of them having their own standards and methods of accounting for those schedules.
It is fairly easy to operate a scheduled general merchandise/intermodal network.
Where the problems begin to arise in any scheduled network is when bulk commodity trains get introduced into the network - both from a engine power and man power standpoint - as movement of these trains require both, as well as track space and terminal space. Additionally the shippers of bulk commodity trains generally are not operating in concert with the receivers of those trains and such things as ‘bunching’ occurs as well as the receiver stating they are in ‘shut down’ mode awaiting the arrival of a particular train. Bulk commodities are such things as fertilizer, grains, coal, ore, coke, ethanol and any other commodity that is shipped in Unit Train sized shipment.
Yes, the Precision Railroad model begs the question, how precise is precise?
No, I believe CN is not alone - at least NS and CSX have adopted similar methods and procedures. At NS, it’s the “Thoroughbred Operating Plan” (or “TOP”) and subsidiary software - though apparently it’s now being replaced by GE’s “Unified Train Control System” (“UTCS”) - see this webpage for a summary of each: http://www.nscorp.com/nscportal/nscorp/Investors/Financial_Reports/Investor%20Book/technology.html
At CSX, it was (is ?) the “ONE Plan” - see this article from January 2007’s Progressive Railroading: http://www.progressiverailroading.com/c_s/article/CSX-Service-metrics-are-better-traffics-up-The-challenge-Maintaining-the-momentum--13285 And this letter to CSX employees from Tony Ingram: http://www.multimodalways.org/docs/railroads/companies/CSX/CSX%20Ingram%20One%20Plan.pdf See also the Customer’s “Service Schedule” webpage at: http://shipcsx.com/public/ec.shipcsxpublic/Main?module_url=/ec.serviceschedulepublic/ServiceSchedule
The differences ? I don’t really know, and I’ve been thinking that would be a good article for Trains, but not being written by a salesman or marketer for one of the proprietary software systems (i.e. , ALK, MultiModal Applied Systems, now MultiRail at Oliver Wyman - see: http://rail.railplanning.com/multi-rail/ and http://rail.railplanning.com/profil
Schedules are nothing new on the freight side of the railroad ledger - they have existed almost as long as the schedules for passenger trains.
My carrier had a extensive scheduled freight network in place the many years ago when I hired out.
How closely a carrier follows it’s scheduled network is a function of senior managements priorities and where senior management sees it’s income potentials. When senior management’s emphasis is on the scheduled network - the resources necessary to run the scheduled network are available when needed to support the networks performance. If senior management views segments of the bulk commodities area as having more income potential then they emphasis on providing resources goes to supporting that commodity and the scheduled network suffers as a consequence.
Management, as a matter of practicality, does not want to have enough resources to handle ALL the commodities handled at the max level as rarely, if ever, are all commodities performing at max level. Running a carrier is a matter of juggling the available resources between the various aspects of the markets that will maximize the return on those resources.
UP inherited a “car-scheduling” system from MP, which looked great on paper, and actually worked pretty well until the CNW merger. When they merged with us, they inherited problems that we had had all along–busy connections with eastern railroads and switching lines at Chicago with their own priorities–and things very rarely worked out as so carefully (?) planned. It took a while before the UP realized that the CNW knew what it was doing in that respect.
But yes, cars coming in to our yard on certain trains had definite connections for their departures, geared to reduce terminal dwell time. The percentages of cars making connection were closely watched. The problem was, though, that about the time they’d get things tweaked to run smoothly, somebody would get the idea that the work should be able to be done with less (fewer yard jobs, fewer trains, whatever), and the process would start over again.
UP now has an operating ratio that people would have died to achieve a few years back…but trust me, someone somewhere is saying that it isn’t good enough. At least we’re pretty well past the stage of ripping up right-of-way in the interest of economy…I think that lesson may have been learned.
Don’t confuse trolley car schedules with freight schedules. All railroads claim freight scheduling with certain cut off time for building and readying the train and calling and scheduling crews. Moving from terminal to yard to yard…to yard to terminal is a euphamistic schedule. On some roads if it is held to within an hour’s window, its on time; on other roads and at other times, if it is within the trick or even the day, it works. But with today’s computers, dedicated trains, unit trains, etc., established times can actually be near realistic.
CN’s scheduled railroad is not so much about running trains on schedule, but individual cars. Every car that is received in interchange or released from a industry is given a schedule by the great computer in Montreal. This computer then determines the best way to move that car from point A to point B. The computer also issues a multitude of report’s that management personnel can use to determine the best way to make this happen. After perusing these report’s, the result is an order to a crew going on duty of a 70 car, engine on, blocked, air tested train, to cut away, go the other side of the yard, and pick up two empty flat cars that must make your train. A timely departure now becomes a 4 hour delay! Oh, and as far as the great computer in Montreal is concerned, the train departed on time!
I thought that was a function of the originating terminal so all the delay can be shown on those nasty train dispatchers and their inability to get the train over the road and hide that 4 hours of orign terminal lied out on time delay…
Thank you for that. I have read that before, but with your explanation it is the first time the concept really made sense to me.
Bruce
Yes thank you… that makes more sense as I knew that other railroads also ran trains on schedules… But I thought that great computer was in Chicago…