Charlie,
RE:Q-CNW direct interchange at Wood St.
I can’t answer for the 1968 time frame but do have earlier info.I’ll share.
I’ve been working on an article for the BRHS Bulletin entitled “Operations at Congress Park” on and off for the past year. As part of the research I’ve contacted individuals who I know and who worked at Congress Park. Among those, Steve Holding shared summaries of interchange correspondence he saved from the dumpsters at house 9 and elsewhere. I don’t want to give away too much detail(sound familiar ?). I will say the volumes of cars interchanged at Congress Park are mind boggling.
What I am willing to share is that in 1961 Q mgmt. became aware that certain other western carriers began direct interchanges with certain eastern carriers on perishable traffic. The impetus was to save the intermediate charge via BRC,IHB or IN. Q mgmt contacted numerous carriers trying to make direct interchanges work. The analysis is interesting to read( some of it will be in the future article).
The Q reached out to R.W. Heron,Gen. Supt. Of Transportation, C.&N.W. inquiring about of direct delivery from the Q to CNW at Wood St. Mr. Heron responded that the CNW was unable to accept direct deliveries from the Q at Wood St. I’m thinking that physically this basically industry yard didn’t have enough room of long tracks to handle deliveries.
Interestingly the CNW delivered direct to the Q at Cicero via Wood St. at that time. In October the CNW total direct deliveries(all traffic) to the Q were 359 loads and 371 empties. I’m assuming these originated at Proviso and simply passed by Wood St.
The CNW delivered to the Q via IN,IHB and BRC 49 loads and 64 empties.
The Q delivered 484 loads and 97 empties to CNW via BRC,IHB,IN.
These total interchanges were relatively small compared to the volume going via Congress Park to Erie,PRR,NYC,ETC,ETC.
This article is some time off in the future as some higher priority things are ahead of it.
Leo Phillipp
On Apr 14, 2021, at 4:49 PM, Jack Schroeder <jack@highlandwebworks.com> wrote:
Charlie:
I think you need to know operating costs but also what the
negotiated division of revenue was for each move/interchange point.
The Q may have had an agreement with the C&NW for this location
dating back years that made it a loser. Why didn't they change the
division? It was often a dangerous move to try and renegotiate
divisions as it could open up pressure from the C&NW in a
tit-for-tat situation at another location division where the
C&NW were losing money with the movement Q. In other words the
'Q' may have had a sweet division some where else with C&NW that
would be placed on the table subject to loss in the renegotiation
for the Potato Yard. Rate divisions were handled at the highest
managerial levels of marketing/pricing. They had a big and long term
impact on profits.
On 4/14/2021 2:45 PM, Charlie Vlk
wrote:
All-
Those on the list that have better
information can comment on why it was so unprofitable for
the CB&Q to deliver cars to the C&NW Wood Street
“Potato Yard”….
Seems to me the problem might be the
double transfer from Clyde…..to Western Avenue, then to a
transfer from there (using the SCAL?) to Wood Street. Would
shipper routing prohibited the Q from handing off the car to
the IHB Congress Park/C&NW Proviso/Wood Street or using
a C&NW transfer run from Clyde?
Charlie Vlk
You receive all messages sent to this group.