Re: Ashland, LA&S, and Fisher Body was (erielack) Re: EL in Railfan and Railroad

["Todd Stearns" <toddsyr_@_twcny.rr.com>]

"I wonder what the rate was on 50 tons of coil steel Cleveland-Harding back 
then?"

I guess that's the $34 question. Excellent description of the situation.

Todd K. Stearns

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Brezicki" <doctorpb_@_bellsouth.net>
To: "Stephen Twarogowski" <stwarogowski_@_windstream.net>; "EL Mail List" 
<erielack_@_lists.railfan.net>; "Keith Robbins" <KRinMich@aol.com>; "Michael 
Connor" <mjconnor_rr_@_hotmail.com>
Cc: <Smtimko_@_aol.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2009 1:33 AM
Subject: Re: Ashland, LA&S, and Fisher Body was (erielack) Re: EL in Railfan 
and Railroad


> I've been meaning to comment further on the EL Fisher Body study but I've 
> been preoccupied with several wiring projects on my 1:87 RR. The problem 
> with rail service from FB's standpoint was primarily lack of suitable 
> equipment (ie coil cars); slow transit time was not an issue because the 
> plant carried a 15 day inventory. Obviously JIT delivery had not yet 
> become popular. The equipment problem sounds uncharacteristic for EL, 
> since the road was more willing than some to acquire small numbers of 
> specialized cars to service specific customers. I'm going to look at the 
> proposed move as instructive from the perspective of equipment 
> utilization, and how difficult it is to get decent utilization in 
> short-haul moves, especially with conventional loose-car railroading.
>
> Some AAR stats from that time period (early-mid 60's) help put this 
> traffic in perspective. In 1965, the average freight haul was 503 miles. 
> The average car moved 44 miles/day, approximately half while empty. This 
> gives an abysmal 22 loaded car-miles/day (just under 1 mph), which helps 
> explain the ROI of 3.69% (it was 1.73 in 1970), figures signifying an 
> industry in trouble.
>
> For the FB move from Cleveland I'll use the highway distance of approx 80 
> miles, since that's what the competition used (rail via Akron or Kent was 
> longer but not excessively circuitous). From a rail standpoint, this was 
> very short-haul. Traffic from the two Cleveland plants amounted to about 
> ten cars daily based on a 5-day week. Rail transit took 3-4 days using 
> Cleveland interchange. 80 miles in 3-4 days is movement at roughly 1 mph. 
> I'm a bit confused here because EL supposedly didn't have the business, so 
> I'll assume they did, in fact, move a few cars. The best consistent 
> service time for shifting interchange to mainline points was 28 hours. 
> This is better, but at approx 3 mph, it's evident the cars spent most of 
> their time standing still even while in transit.
>
> I'm unclear as to what is included in "service time" in this case. Is it 
> dock-to-dock, ie measured from the time the loaded car is released by the 
> shipper to time spotted at FB, or time car arrives at FB (which may have 
> been many hours prior to spotting since switching the outbound parts was 
> higher priority)? The other question is how long did the coil cars spend 
> at Harding before heading back to Cleveland? Back then, the customer had 
> two free days (not including weekends and holidays) after day of arrival 
> before demurrage began. If the cars were handled expeditiously due to the 
> plant being switched 4x daily, they may have spent 2 days at Harding. 
> Assuming a similar transit time back to Cleveland, and a 48 hr turnaround 
> there as well, the mainline interchange arrangement would have seen the 
> equipment make a round trip in 8 days (no switching at FB on W/E's). This 
> is 10 loaded car-miles/day, and at 50 carloads/week it would take 65-70 
> cars (including some extras to cover for cars taken out of service for 
> maintenance and repairs) to protect the traffic. Assuming 5% interest, the 
> capital cost on a $31,000 car is $4.25/day or $34 in 8 days. I wonder what 
> the rate was on 50 tons of coil steel Cleveland-Harding back then?
>
> The trial didn't include the "unit train" discussed in the report, but 
> here the potential for improvement in utilization is the greatest. It 
> wouldn't have been a true unit train since the consist would almost 
> certainly have been broken up at one or both ends for switching, so 
> "dedicated" train is more accurate. This train would have operated more 
> like a truck. Transit time of 6 hours is reasonable considering 
> interchange and the runaround at SN. If the cars were loaded and unloaded 
> on a priority basis, say, 6 hours, you could get a round trip in 24 hours, 
> require only a dozen or so cars to protect the traffic, and make them work 
> harder at 80 loaded car-miles/day. Certainly not heroic, but a vast 
> improvement over conventional handling. For 18 hours at each end, you'd 
> still get 3 round trips/week with a 17 car train and about 20 to protect 
> the traffic, reducing your equipment cost by 70%.
>
> By comparison, a TTX flat shuttling back and forth Croxton-Chicago on EL 
> would make 1.5 round-trips, loaded in both directions, for a performance 
> of 416 loaded car-miles/day.
>
> Paul B
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Stephen Twarogowski" <stwarogowski_@_windstream.net>
> To: "EL Mail List" <erielack_@_lists.railfan.net>; "Keith Robbins" 
> <KRinMich_@_aol.com>; "Paul Brezicki" <doctorpb@bellsouth.net>; "Michael 
> Connor" <mjconnor_rr_@_hotmail.com>
> Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 11:41 AM
> Subject: Re: Ashland, LA&S, and Fisher Body was (erielack) Re: EL in 
> Railfan and Railroad
>
>
>> Some detail on the Fisher Body inbound steel study:  FB was receiving 
>> steel via rail from the EL direct in Youngstown and through Youngstown 
>> connections with the PLE.  The study looked at how the EL could capture 
>> the over the road traffic from Cleveland.  Republic and J&L were 
>> providing coiled steel to FB moving down I-71.  60% of the steel (384,000 
>> net tons consumed a year) moved from Cleveland or Youngstown with 
>> Cleveland providing 40% of the total tonnage.  It was estimated if it all 
>> moved by rail this would amount to 6,400 carloads per year based on a 
>> 48-week production year, or 133 cars per week.  FB was receiving steel 
>> from Armco in Middletown, OH (3%); Empire Steel from right in Mansfield 
>> (3.8%); Great Lakes (6.8%) and McClouth (11.3%) in Trenton MI; Weirton 
>> Steel in Weirton, WV (1.5%); Wheeling Steel in Steubenville, OH (3.8%) US 
>> Steel in Irvin, PA (3%): Pitt Steel in Pittsburgh (6.8%); Republic in 
>> Warren, OH (3.8%); Youngstown Sheet and Tube in Youngstown (16.5%); J&L 
>> in Cleveland (19.5%) and Republic in Cleveland (20.3%).  The actual 
>> handlings for 1963 showed the EL moving 1,949 carloads into FB; about 
>> 30.5% of the total.  Highway time was 3-4 hours, rail amounted to 3-4 
>> days.  The delay was due to the interchange at Cleveland. Republic's 
>> output moved via the River Terminal then to the B&O or NKP then to the EL 
>> in interchange switch.  Output from J&L moved from the Cuyahoga Valley 
>> then to the B&O or NKP then to the EL. This EL study was done to 
>> determine if the traffic would be better served if moved to a mainline 
>> junction instead of being interchanged in the Cleveland terminal.  One 
>> route was NKP-Kent-EL then to Fisher Body.  The B&O route was 
>> B&O-Akron-EL then to Fisher Body.  The NKP-Kent route provided a 28 hour 
>> service while the the B&O-Akron route was erratic and ranged from 24 to 
>> 48 hours.  During the study a few cars from each junction were mishandled 
>> and wound up in Marion and the service time because of that misrouting 
>> was 96 hours.  Routing via NKP-Kent saw the EL realize 61%-39% revenue 
>> split with the NKP; the B&O-Akron split was 57%-43% in favor of the EL. 
>> The possibility of  running an EL-direct unit train of coiled steel was 
>> also discussed (that would have been something to see, especially at 
>> Leavittsburg when the power would have to switch ends).  The report also 
>> notes that by using NKP and BO as originating carriers, there was a 
>> greater chance of insuring proper equipment was on hand for the movement.
>>
>> Later in the report an interview with Fisher Body's traffic manager is 
>> summarized.  He stated that this was the first time the EL was actively 
>> pursuing this traffic out of Cleveland and indicated a lack of suitable 
>> equipment may have been the reason for ignoring it in the past.  It 
>> appears the analyst writing the report concurred with that opinion.  The 
>> traffic manager also complained about the wooden skids used for bracing 
>> the coils in gondolas.  He stated that splinters often became embedded in 
>> the coils and caused indentations in the finished stampings.  This was an 
>> issue with the steel mills and was not discussed further.  He offered no 
>> objections to the EL handling the traffic as long as they could furnish 
>> the proper equipment. They carry a 15 day inventory so fast service was 
>> not an issue.  Pitt Steel would occasionally request to move via truck 
>> because the PRR did not have proper equipment on hand for loading.  This 
>> traffic moved PRR-Youngstown-EL when by rail.
>>
>> The EL maintained round the clock crews at Harding Yard to switch Fisher 
>> Body.  Switching was set up as needed but was generally done at 1100, 
>> 1530, 2000 and 0001.  Spotting loads of steel was determined by what 
>> loads needed to be pulled.  "Under no circumstances will any inbound cars 
>> be switched that would interfere with the switching of outbound auto 
>> parts."
>>
>> At the end of the report are some handwritten notes.  The scribble is 
>> hard to decipher but it looks like someone made contact with other roads 
>> about pooling cars for a unit train.  Also in the margin are prices of 
>> what can be assumed to be coil cars - Thrall $32-34,000; Greenville 
>> $31,533; PS $30,245.
>>
>> As the report was done as a study of "what if" there is nothing further 
>> regarding what decision was made.  The only other data I have regarding 
>> Fisher Body in Ontario OH is from 1982, nearly 20 years after this study. 
>> Conrail moved 10,153 loads of autoparts out of Fisher Body but only 648 
>> loads of steel in.  And GM announced this plant is to be closed in June 
>> 2010.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Paul Brezicki" <doctorpb_@_bellsouth.net>
>> To: "EL Mailing List" <erielack_@_lists.railfan.net>; "Stephen Twarogowski"
>> <stwarogowski_@_windstream.net>; "Keith Robbins" <KRinMich@aol.com>
>> Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 6:58 AM
>> Subject: (erielack) Re: EL in Railfan and Railroad
>>
>>
>>> Thanks, Steve, I figured you'd chime in at some point. That's quite an
>>> Ashland Turn, 99 cars. Considering the FB-4 consist, it appears that
>>> roughly half the Turn was Hardings. Interesting also that the train was
>>> essentially empty parts cars. IIRC, the inbound materials for Fisher 
>>> Body
>>> were trucked in from foundries nearby at Lordstown and Cleveland. I 
>>> recall
>>> a study you sent me a while back, conducted by EL in the mid-60's,
>>> considering the potential for diversion of FB traffic from Cleveland 
>>> being
>>> diverted to rail. It concluded that rail service was too slow and
>>> unreliable over such a short haul, not to mention the poor equipment
>>> utilization. One wonders if a dedicated short, reduced crew,
>>> interdivisional train similar in concept to Reading's "Bee-Line Service"
>>> might have succeeded here.
>>>
>>> There were quite a few customers at Ashland. It appears that activity on
>>> the Kent Sub was concentrated in two portions, between Harding and 
>>> Ashland
>>> (including Mansfield), then further east between Creston (W&LE
>>> interchange) and Kent, and few customers in the roughly 20 miles between
>>> Ashland and Creston. So a turn terminating at Ashland makes sense to me
>>> now.
>>>
>>> According to my SPV atlas, the LA&S (Lorain, Ashland & Southern) was a 
>>> PRR
>>> affiliate, and evidently was abandoned long before the EL years. So I
>>> presume Erie picked up some LA&S trackage and customers in the Ashland
>>> area when this occurred.
>>>
>>> Paul B
>>>
>>>
>>> From: "Stephen Twarogowski" <stwarogowski_@_windstream.net>
>>> Subject: (erielack) Re: EL in Railfan and Railroad
>>>
>>> Industry in Ashland included the following (from the Central Territory
>>> firms list):
>>>
>>>      Ashland City Farm Bureau Ashland OH EL Grain
>>>      Ashland Equity Exchange Ashland OH EL Grain
>>>      Budd Co. Ashland OH EL Railcars
>>>      Eagle Rubber CO. Ashland OH EL Rubber Goods
>>>      F.E. Myers Ashland OH EL Pumps and Sprayers
>>>      Faultless Rubber Co. Ashland OH EL Rubber Goods
>>>      Garber Publishing Ashland OH EL Printers
>>>      General Latex & Chemical Ashland OH EL Liquid Latex
>>>      Hess and Clark Ashland OH EL Animal Feed
>>>      National Latex Products Ashland OH EL Rubber Goods
>>>      U Brand Co. Ashland OH EL Pipe Fittings
>>>
>>>
>>> Picking a Sunday out of my January 1972 Marion Trainsheets it shows the
>>> Ashland Turn on Sunday, Jan 16, 1972 as being ordered at 1700 and
>>> departing Marion at 1900.  10 loads, 89 empties with RS3's 1005, 1037,
>>> 1026, 1008, 1021.  The 1026 and 1008 were left at Harding; 1037 was left
>>> at Mansfield; the 1005 was left at Ashland.  The following day FB-4 was
>>> ordered at 1600 and departed Marion at 2100 with C424 2406 and 1 load, 
>>> 52
>>> empties.  It arrived OD at 2245.  FB-5 made the return trip departing OD
>>> at 0035 with 43 loads and 8 empties; 29/8 for Marion, 14/0 for the C&O.
>>> Looking at a few days worth of FB-4/FB-5 it looks like C209 was its
>>> assigned caboose. Conductor McAdow and engineer Schmitt.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>>
>>> From: krinmich_@_aol.com
>>> Subject: (erielack) Re: EL in Railfan and Railroad
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> The last crew at Harding was done on Saturday morning.? Sometime on
>>> Friday/Saturday whatever westbound with a divisional crew that came 
>>> along
>>> and could work without delaying anybody would gather up the engines.?
>>> Could be MC-3, 93, 95, 89, 61 whatever - any Marion hump train.? Might 
>>> not
>>> be the same train for all the engines because there was a timetable 
>>> limit
>>> on how many engines you could have together.? Ashland had a lot of 
>>> little
>>> places.? There was some kind of foundry and a lot of stuff along the old
>>> LA&S south.? Biggest place was probably Eagle Rubber (I think that's the
>>> name).? They did a lot of business but no tonnage because it was a lot 
>>> of
>>> rubber toy products.? Eagle Rubber still was using a lot of the old 40 
>>> ft
>>> box cars just because of?their product with low tonnage.? I nerver 
>>> worked
>>> as an agent there so I couldn't tell you all the places.? Ashland was 
>>> the
>>> end of the turn because we had to get the serviced engine back there in
>>> time for Monday morning.? There wouldn't!
>>>  be anything to pick up coming back unless for some reason the Marions
>>> from Friday had gotten missed at Ashland or Mansfield or maybe there was
>>> still a WB of all Marions still sitting at Martel WB siding that had 
>>> been
>>> set off because Yard C was filled up.? You couldn't pick up anything off
>>> the PRR at Mansfield because that would be a yard move and I don't 
>>> really
>>> think it would be a wise idea to have rord power going into the 
>>> sidetracks
>>> at Mansfield to pick up.? If there was anything, there wouldn't be 
>>> anyone
>>> there to tell us it was ready.? Anything that got picked up on Sunday
>>> night was because it had not been picked up since?it was ready on Friday
>>> or the aforementioned Marions not moved because Yard C was full.? 
>>> Usually
>>> by Sunday night we had cleaned up what we had set off on Wednesday 
>>> through
>>> Friday that?had been?held out of Marion WB Yard.
>>>
>>> Keith
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
>>> http://EL-List.railfan.net/
>>> To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html
>>>
>>
>
>
> The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
> http://EL-List.railfan.net/
> To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
> signature database 4181 (20090623) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> 


	The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
	http://EL-List.railfan.net/
	To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html

------------------------------