Project Status

[DLM]

Question: Has your company performed a highly detailed cost analysis to get an accurate fix on the break-even point? Would your accounting staff even know what to do? From my, admittedly limited, experience in dealing with private enterprise in this area, I would strongly doubt it. Most businesses are content with rough approximations just to get by. But there could be many effective ways to get that price down below that $200 differential.

Answer: I own an intermodal marketing company (IMC). I have contracts to rep for UP, BNSF, NS, CSX, CP, CN, FEC, Pacer Stacktrain, Schnieder, Hunt, Swift, and most steamship lines. I have called on companies throughout Michigan and other states for 15 years to convince them to use intermodal. Before I quote my customers out of Michigan, I attempt to look at all options of price and transit. 999 out of 1000 times, Detroit does not work. I bring all my Cleveland, Columbus, and Cinninati, OH customers freight back to Chicago also. Lower prices and better transits make for happy customers.

Michigan continues to be to close to Chicago.

[azimmer]

Your company, then, is only a broker, or middleman, between the railroads and the shippers. You wouldn't know about the details of the actual costs for handling intermodal.

What we need is someone from the railroads to give an assessment of whether or not the DIFT would lead to lower costs of handling intermodal and to increased train transit times.

From the information I've been picking up, the railroads have a "take it leave it" attitude toward the DIFT. If it comes into being, they'll use it. If it doesn't, then they won't be terribly disappointed.

A. Zimmer

[Raildudes dad]

When this thread was started I was waiting for DLM to respond. I've known DLM for almost 20 years (it'll be 20 next year Dave and all I've got to say is he knows his stuff especially on this subject.

Didn't BNSF partner with someone on a facility in Battle Creek and it was a bust?

[MSchwiebert]

I think this is also why initial projections for traffic that is off & onloaded at the CSX facility that is going to be built at North Baltimore OH is rather small (70-100 trailers per day). No doubt that some of this traffic will be to/from Detroit (in addition to Toledo, Ft. Wayne and other points in the region). Until intermodal for western destinations can be railed through Chicago without classification, rubbering to Chicago will be preferred. (Chicago is just too close to Detroit to make the effort of loading a trailer, railing it to Chicago, rubbering it to one of the western terminals and loading it back on the railcar worthwhile). My employer shipped parts for the West Coast Truck Mfg's (Freightliner Portland - which is set to close this summer, and Kenworth Renton WA - which is now mothballed) from Lima OH, by the following method, rubber to Chicago and then rail to Seattle. If I am not mistaken, the intermodal rail service that comes into Detroit now (at least for NS & CSX) is from points other than Chicago, because of the closeness and the volume in draying capacity etc. that Chicago offers.

[azimmer]

I don't think CN's Moterm is operating near capacity. I believe it handles about a 1/3 the intermodal it was designed too.

Capacity is only one-half of the situation. The other half is the improved efficiency of train transit time through the Detroit labyrinth. Consolidating all intermodal operations at Livernois will bring about this greater efficiency.

The second post in this thread mentions the new connection at West Detroit between the NS Michigan Line and the CN Shoreline. This connection will bypass the huge curve on the Conrail main that slows train speeds down to 10 mph -- and this will be only a small part of the overall plan.

As mentioned on the MDOT web site, one alternative is to leave things as they are now. By 2025 the local terminals, including Moterm, will be able to handle 900,000 "lifts" per year. (A lift being a measure of intermodal transfer capacity.) With DIFT, however, the capacity of "lifts" by 2025 is projected to be 1.4 million.

But "lifts" aren't everything. Intermodal has to be well integrated with the main traffic arteries -- both rail and truck. Livernois yard, being situated right on the I-94/I-96 freeways and with direct access to all four Class 1 railroads, offers a much better scheme for integration than do these other scattered intemodal sites such as Moterm.

A. Zimmer

[azimmer]

Didn't BNSF partner with someone on a facility in Battle Creek and it was a bust?

You may be missing the whole point of the DIFT.

Intermodal in Detroit is happening right now on a large scale, and it will continue to happen into the foreseeable future. The DIFT is a plan to improve the existing operations and to better accommodate the projected needs of the years ahead, while hopefully enticing more business and jobs into the immediate area.

In other words, intermodal will continue to increase even without the DIFT, but it will increase more efficiently with the DIFT.

A. Zimmer

[DLM]

So DIFT will promote efficency on the current intermodal business. I do not know railroad costs. I do know railroads retail prices. I do know drayage costs and retail prices. Maybe it will grow the business going in/out of the east coast ports. Detroit can handle the heavy containers that Chicago can not which is a bonus.

Railroads sell domestic intermodal to the IMC's who then sell it to the end user. How will the CN, CSX, NS, Pacer Stacktrain convince me to sell DIFT to my customers? CN is pretty well out of the dometic intermodal business. Eastern railroads get the short haul ($) on western moves and they get all the money on eastern moves. From my seat, I'm just not seeing DIFT picking up any western or Asia business.

The only routings Pacer Stacktrain offers is Detroit to Laredo and Mexico with return service. This is the "Ford" train. They will not accept any shipments on the train that can not breeze through Mexican customs and slow down Ford's parts.

Battle Creek Ramp - The cereal companies promised lots of freight and the ramp was built. Since it was a BN ramp, you could not route loads to places like Los Angeles. Of course nobody routed loads inbound to feed the outbound need. Again, to close to Chicago, added transit time, and higher price inbound. Itried pricing it several times and the cost was always higher. The cereal companies never lived up to their promisies as there were no empty containers, transit was slower, and the price was higher.

HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ALL.

[sd70accsxt700]

Just a few more things. While I have not meat DLM personaly, (at least I dont think so, if I have I'm sorry I dont rember), but he is almost always on top of stuff. Im just pointing out stuff, that I see when I walk the train. Pacer Stacktrain is for Chrysler not Ford, or at least thats what I have been told. And yea I could see why they wouldent want anyting else on it. And it really is not a supprise that it is less expensive. Seams that there is usualy only a few cars a day for Chicago, and out west. Fred when I walk the train we rarly have any 48' containers. Almost 95% on Q150, and Q151 are 40's and 20's. And when your out for a long walk doubling or putting it away, you pick up on those thing quicky (or at least I do, who knows if any of the others do). And there has to be another lane for Pacer then just Mexico. Just that night that I posted I had Q151 and right on the head end was two three packs with 53' Pacer's on them, now if they came from the west via Chicago I have no way of knowing.

One more question I have that some one may know is, I know there are two diffrent size 40' container, (I also think all of them are), where one is taller then the other. I the taller of the two, still considered international? Or are those domestic only? You know the ones with the yellow and black tape on the corners. The ones that stacked two high wont fit in the tunnel in Detroit.

[KenB]

Fred:

No the resendets have signed off on the project. To make them happy, the gate on Vernor-Dix will be closed and a new entrance will be built at Wyoming and at Livernois there will be no left turn for trucks to go south on Livernois.
Ther will be a wall around the place with a berm in front of it and trees. Lighting will be arrenged so it does not leave the property. Loacal roads will be fixed up and an underpass will be built at Central Ave under the tracks so local leaders are pleased.

This is a 10 year project, both CSXT and NS have comitted money. Trying to get Federal money which should be easer now, only problem is State money. State does not have any however some of the projects will be pushed such as the Central Ave underpass, the new connection between MC and GTW at West Detroit.

Bottom line. This is going to happen, maybe not right away but after 2010 work should start so get your pictures now because there will be a lot of changes.

Happy Thanksgiving to Fred and his family and to all the Railfans.
KenB

[gridejq]

Matt...you are crazy...you can get a car number from your train and trace it...it will tell you where it came from very easily...I will make it easy on you..you give me the number and Ill trace it....

And unless Im really out of it and the UP info is incorrect...the ZMXDT (Q132) is mostly for Mazda (so tech Ford)...as this is the traffic from the old GT 170....

JQ

[AARR]

Does anyone think Moterm could see increased traffic if CN gets EJ&E? One of the benefits of Moterm is CN does not have to weave through the tracks of Detroit.

[DLM]

Container Sizes:

20' standard - 96" W x 92" H
40' standard - 96" W x 92" H
40' highcube - 96" W x 106" H
45 standard - I have never seen one if they exsist
45' highcube - 96" W x 106" H
48' standard - 102" W x 106" H (being phased out currently)
53' standard - 102" W x 106" H (should be phased out in about 2 years)
53' highcube - 102" W x 109.5" H (current industry standard)
53' wide top - same as highcube, but just a little wider inside.

List does not include flatrack and reefer containers.

[azimmer]

Here is a link to a map of the proposed construction of the consolidated Livernois yard. The date of this map is 2003 and since then the project has been reduced a little in scope, but the map still gives a general idea of the extent of the construction. Most of the old yard area west of Lonyo, which has been all ripped out at present, will be built up anew. A lot of housing and businesses to the north of John Kronk Avenue will also be demolished. John Kronk itself will also be relocated farther to the north.

Unfortuantely, this map is terrible. It is barely legible but it comes directly, in a totally unaltered form, from the MDOT documents. This project will cost in excess of a half a billion dollars yet they cannot even produce a decent set of documents and maps. The research firm that was contracted to do the initial study surely was paid well for its work, yet all that we, the taxpayers, receive as a result is this inferior set of barely readable maps.

For whatever it may be worth, here is the extracted map image file:

home.comcast.net/~frank.peters/dift.gif

It seems that there will be four terminals in all, A, B, C, and D, shown on the map in four different colors from north to south. Terminal D seems to coincide with the current CSX intermodal yard at the southeast corner. The other terminals will stretch across the long distance from Livernois to Miller, and maybe even farther to Townline junction.

A. Zimmer