LOMBARD, Ill. — Precision Scheduled Railroading is helping to lift shippers opinions of railroads according to the recently released State of Logistics report of the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals. “Railroads did partic…
You can’t possibly mean…
That it works?
Aside from the bad taste left by the [whatever you want to call them] investors, there’s usually something good to be said for something like PSR. That the entire package doesn’t necessarily work is shown by those railroads returning to some pre-PSR practices after the proponents of PSR left those railroads.
The question remains - how long will it be before all signs of PSR, as a package, are just a memory.
I wonder what the vehemently anti-PSR folks’ response will be to that?
Well, we knew the Scheduling part works, as proven by 150+ years of railroading.
Also, we knew the Railroading part works, as proven by the same reason.
It’s the Precision part, or rather the interpretation thereof by Vulture Capitalists and their ilk (a.k.a. “Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash”), wherein the issue lies…
Remove traffic from the carriers and all of a sudden their On Time Performance improves - thus it has always been. PSR has driven off enough customers so that those that remain are now getting OT performance…
Watched my own company’s metrics through good times and bad. In high traffic, high revenue times the overall OT performance suffered - too much traffic competing for the same resources - Manpower, locomotive power, track time. In low traffic low revenue times while manpower was cut, locomotive power stored more track time became available for the trains that were run and the OT performance soared.
There is something just too certain and sure of itself in the sweeping and relentless repudiation of PSR. It is as if the issue is really about something else.
“Rail productivity continued to improve as the Class I railroads that adopted ‘precision railroading’ principles achieved ever-lower operating ratios.”
This is the only survey comment I’m seeing that is related to PSR. What I’m not seeing - at least in the info included in the article - is any specific claim that service improvements have resulted from PSR implementation.
It is - people using it as a “get rich quick” scheme…
No. I don’t think that is what it is about. That is just the way it is being painted.
I think the same about the PSR fangirlz.
Tell it to the loyal railroad employees that are no longer employed through no fault of their own.
About the same amount of time it took for the effects of all the track “rationalizations” (don’t ya just love corporate double-speak?) that occurred in previous decades.
Remember not too long ago when the railroads were advertising to get people to work for them, even to the point of paying (or at least offering) sign-on bonuses? Now they can’t fire them fast enough.
And locomotives? At $2million each…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZ36yCvFzMk
What I gathered from the article, it dealt more with intermodal users. PSR for us seems to be centered on the manifest and some unit train sectors. It was first said every train, except Z trains would be subject to work enroute. They even got rid of the K symbol for intermodal, an intermediate level of service, in anticipation for those trains working manifest. So far it hasn’t happened. There have been manifest symbols with blocks of IM, but no IM symbols carrying manifest cars. (There have been some IM trains with blocks of reefers or auto racks. These combinations predate the PSR movement.)
In any case, with the curtailing or abandonment of many IM lanes, it’s funny that they are happy with the service. Other railroads (CSX?) has tried combining manifest and IM trains. It’s hard to believe that most IM users would be happy about having their trailer/container moving on a 50 mph (if they have enough power) junk train instead of a 60 or 70 mph dedicated intermodal.
Jeff
I watched that first video about the 300 engines stored in Arizona. It makes a profound point, but I am not sure exactly what that point is.
What is the reason (or reasons) for U.P. having those 300 locomotives stored out of service? If they will not need them, what are they saving them for? If they will need them, why don’t they need them now?
What were they doing differently that required these engines when they bought them?
Glad to see the videos. Two years ago, I saw a portion of this lineup of locomotives and could not believe it. Several miles were visible from the highway.
Business levels fluctuate - if volume picks up, which is cheaper - restoring to opeation locomotives you already own and have stored or going to the locomotive manufacturers to buy more at $2M+ each as well as the 6-9 month wait to get what you have purchased.
I can understand business fluctuations, but storing 300 un-needed locomotives seems like an awfully large fluctuation. When and why was business so good that the 300 dead engines were being used?
I remember riding the “Sunset Limited” past the dead line in question two years ago. Most of the power was Dash-8’s being stored pending sale, having been replaced by Tier 4 power.
The question you want to ask is “where would I get my money out of the capital investment represented by those 300 locomotives if I try to sell or lease them rather than store”. If you follow that, you will understand why some railroads have made the choice to mothball instead.
Someone like JPS1 can explain whether there are tax consequences for the stored power that help justify storage instead of sale.