OK, this thread is getting better, just don't come to blows over
little ole me! :-)
Seriously, reviewing this thread, could my "traffic manager" at R&RW
Metals have worked out a "transit tarrif" so they didn't have to wait
for a new car to send out the large processed steel pieces (just keep
the same car the steel piece came in on)? John says yes, Russ says no way.
What confuses me still is if a load comes in on, say, a NYC gondola
and will only take a day or two to process, why not pay a couple of
days per diem just to keep the car on the property anbd get the load
shipped back out in a more timely manner? Even if the empty car was
picked up by the Q, theoritically, couldn't a good Q yardmaster just
keep the car in the yard a day or two, then send it back to make sure
the shipper got good service by getting an empty car in a timely
manner? Or would the yardmaster try to get an empty Q gondola to the
shipper, thus not have to share the revenue? I guess what I keep
thinking of is that to my understanding the railroad charged a fee for
each switching move, so the industry would have to pay for multiple
switching fees, which seem to me to be much higher than just paying a
few extra days per diem to keep the car if possible. For that matter,
to my understanding, an industry has a couple of days or so to get the
car unloaded, and if it goes overtime pays a per diem charge. So if
the empty car "just happens to be here" when we're ready to ship the
load out (because we got the steel piece processed in just a day or
two or three), why can't the industry request to use the car still on
hand?
FYI, the reason why this is important to me right now is I have all my
new waybills done for my CB&Q layout **except** for the loaded gons
and flats going to R&RW metals. I need to know whether I can do a
"loaded in, loaded out" waybill, or have to now do two separate
waybills - loaded in/empty out, empty in/loaded out.
Tom Mack
Cincinnati, OH
--- In CBQ@yahoogroups.com, "John D. Mitchell, Jr." <cbqrr47@y...> wrote:
> Wrong, you would want to get the foreign car off of
> your railroasd as quickly as possible, so you would
> not have to pay per diem. And it is better to send
> them back under load than back haul them empty.
> Likewise, the home cars on foreign lines were
> collecting per diem for their owners. You wanted only
> enough home road cars on home rails to handle loading
> requirements.
>
> --- soocarman <mitchc2@j...> wrote:
>
> > Also back in those days railroads had to get the
> > cars back to their
> > owners after it they are emptied. I don't think a
> > railroad would
> > use a foreign car for loading. You world use on of
> > your own to get
> > more money.
> > If someone can explain this better in the rules that
> > were in place
> > back in the 60's.
> > Thanks
> >
> > Mitch
> > --- In CBQ@yahoogroups.com, "thommack"
> > <thommack@y...> wrote:
> > > Thanks for the help so far. This is exactly what I
> > was looking
> > for. I
> > > know if the load changes that would be two
> > separate waybills/cars -
> > > e.g. Coil steel comes into R&RW Metals in a coil
> > car, goes out as
> > > stamped and coated plates in a boxcar.
> > >
> > > The trickier one that really brought up this
> > question is where the
> > > steel comes in as a couple of large billets in say
> > a gondola or on
> > a
> > > heavy duty flat, gets coated or treated (lets say
> > within 1-2 days
> > > max), then needs to go to final destination. I
> > would have thought
> > in
> > > this case it might be more cost effective for the
> > parties involved
> > to
> > > pay demurrage for an extra day or two for the car
> > to stick around,
> > > rather than waiting for a new car to come in and
> > also possibly pay
> > the
> > > extra switching charge. But I wasn't sure if that
> > was legal under
> > > tarriff laws in 67/68. So, what's the verdict on
> > this scenario?
> > >
> > > Tom
> > >
> > > --- In CBQ@yahoogroups.com, Russell Strodtz
> > <19main@g...> wrote:
> > > > John,
> > > >
> > > > I have to disagree. The Transit Billing system
> > did
> > > > not allow for a car to arrive at a Customer and
> > > > leave on the same billing. That concept would
> > only
> > > > apply to stop-offs and all they would allow is
> > partial
> > > > loading or partial unloading. Nothing could be
> > removed
> > > > from the car and then put back in.
> > > >
> > > > I stand by what I've already said.
> > > >
> > > > Russ
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: John D. Mitchell, Jr.
> > > > To: CBQ@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Sent: Monday, 08 August, 2005 22:02
> > > > Subject: Re: [CBQ] Q Operations Question
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > If there was a tariff for "transit privileges"
> > for
> > > > that industry at that point, then the steel
> > could be
> > > > processed with one waybill, one rate, one car,
> > and on
> > > > one billing. If not then there would be two
> > cars, two
> > > > waybills, two billings and in all likely hood
> > two
> > > > rates (finished products carry a higher rate
> > than raw
> > > > materials). A good traffic manager for the
> > steel
> > > > company would work out a transit tariff.
> > > >
> > > > --- thommack <thommack@y...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In 1967/68 timeframe, if a car on the CB&Q
> > was sent
> > > > > to an industry
> > > > > with a load that was being processed and
> > then
> > > > > forwarded to another
> > > > > industry, could it be shipped in and out on
> > the same
> > > > > car, or was it
> > > > > two separate waybills and thus two different
> > cars?
> > > > > On my CB&Q layout
> > > > > one of my industries is a large metal
> > treating and
> > > > > coating shop. Large
> > > > > steel castings or sheets come in via flat
> > car or
> > > > > gondola, are
> > > > > treated/coated, then sent on to the final
> > > > > destination. Can I ship a
> > > > > large steel piece in and out on the same
> > car, or
> > > > > would the load have
> > > > > been unloaded, then a new car sent later to
> > pick up
> > > > > the finished product?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Tom Mack
> > > > > Cincinnati, OH
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > __________________________________________________
> > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection
> > around
> > > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----------
> > > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> > > >
> > > > a.. Visit your group "CBQ" on the web.
> > > >
> > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an
> > email to:
> > > > CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > > >
> > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > the Yahoo!
> > Terms of
> > > Service.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----------
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
> > removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
<font face=arial size=-1><a
href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hursueb/M=362343.6886682.7839641.1493532/D=groups/S=1706043004:TM/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1124456124/A=2894352/R=0/SIG=11fdoufgv/*http://www.globalgiving.com/cb/cidi/tsun.html";>Help
tsunami villages rebuild at GlobalGiving. The real work starts now</a>.</font>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CBQ/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
CBQ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|