Perishable traffic


Tim O'Connor
 

Bruce, I'm all for getting facts correct. In table below the TOTALS
are not correct. You have UP and SP switched!!

UP = 190755, not 248072
SP = 248072, not 190755

It might be helpful if you got your facts correct. Its the least I
expect from an editor. Since you obviously have not read Greg's
article in TKM, I will provide you with the (embarrassing) figures
for a few choice railroads <G>. I've left off many that Greg
included due to space considerations.

From the 1950 I. C. C. FREIGHT COMMODITY REPORTS for LOADS HANDLED
of FRESH FRUITS and FRESH VEGTABLES

CARRIER ATSF ERIE NYC PRR SP UP
COMMODITY ICC Code
Apples #49 #49 1947 2503 1249 2937 1673 6487
Bananas #51 #51 1628 1798 16185 9504 5958 1790
Melons/Cants #55 6393 6570 2050 6136 22920 9837
Grapes #57 10975 5972 1919 2894 13607 10504
Lemons/Limes #59 3931 1692 848 1504 9582 1816
Oranges/Citrus #61 21644 5370 5107 22916 20475 9488
Peaches #63 1904 614 868 1507 3146 3483
Pears #65 280 3409 580 1324 7846 8160
Watermelons #67 1336 279 1960 9859 2697 733
Other Fruit #69 1485 2002 660 1507 4403 4602
Cabbage #77 702 346 1679 4481 890 512
Celery #79 4598 699 2325 9257 8827 5049
Lettuce #81 9788 3439 8076 10831 69717 33162
Onions #83 3488 1368 4992 5408 4719 6744
Potatoes #85 29681 4371 14716 26869 33580 70248
Tomatoes #87 1333 824 1527 9898 9572 3084
Other Veg #89 6289 3759 9499 19183 28460 15056

Total handled 107402 45105 74240 145712 190755 248072


Miller, Andrew S. <asmiller@...>
 

Some interesting observations here (were fruits and vegetables ever
carried in observations?)

- The PRR blew away everyone in haulage of Oranges/Grapefruit #61. No
doubt that is because in addition to their share of the E/W Calif
traffic to the Northeast, they also had almost all of the N/S Fla
traffic. The only road which might have competed was the B&O and they
are not shown.

- East of the Mississippi I had always heard the Erie was the preferred
carrier. (Of course I heard that from Schuyler Larrabee so I must take
it with a grain of salt. No data is provided on salt) The Erie wins the
contest on Grapes, Melons, Lemons/Limes, and Pears. They blow the
competition away on Pears and onions. Where do all those pears and
onions come from? They might also win on Oranges, but I can not tell
from this chart how much to PRR's gargantuan total is E/W and how much
is N/S.

- The only commodity the NYC has a lock on is bananas. NYC is big in
the port of NY, but so was the PRR.

- The PRR must have had a conspiracy in restraint of trade on
watermelons!

- Overall the PRR wins the eastern contest 2:1 over the NYC and 3:1
over the Erie. This remains substantially the same even if you
discount the Oranges, likely most from Fla.

I do wonder where other eastern roads, particularly the B&O, would fit
in this picture.


regards,

Andy Miller

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Bruce Smith
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 9:28 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Perishable traffic was Interpreting Copeland
interchange data

On Mar 1, 2006, at 3:06 PM, Malcolm Laughlin wrote:

tgregmrtn@... wrote:
As I exhibited in TKM the PRR handled the Lions share of the hauls
for all perishable produce traffic from the Mississippi east, nearly
the sum of the NKP and Erie together, for most of the 50's (and
Likely before) until the traffic dwindled to truck and TOFC
business.

==============

The wildest dreams of the red team ?

In the late 50's-early 60's the NYC had at least three daily
trainloads
of perishables east from chicago and St. Louis.

And PRR couldn't touch us for service to New York and New England.
Ya know Malcolm,

It might be helpful if you got your facts correct. Its the least I
expect from an editor. Since you obviously have not read Greg's
article in TKM, I will provide you with the (embarrassing) figures
for a few choice railroads <G>. I've left off many that Greg
included due to space considerations.

From the 1950 I. C. C. FREIGHT COMMODITY REPORTS for LOADS HANDLED
of FRESH FRUITS and FRESH VEGTABLES

CARRIER ATSF ERIE NYC
PRR SP UP
COMMODITY ICC Code

Apples #49 #49 1947 2503 1249 2937 1673
6487
Bananas #51 #51 1628 1798 16185 9504 5958
1790
Cantalope/Melons #55 6393 6570 2050 6136 22920
9837
Grapes #57 10975 5972 1919 2894 13607 10504
Lemons/Limes #59 3931 1692 848 1504 9582
1816
Oranges/Grapefruit #61 21644 5370 5107 22916 20475
9488
Peaches #63 1904 614 868 1507 3146 3483
Pears #65 280 3409 580 1324 7846 8160
Watermelons #67 1336 279 1960 9859 2697
733
Other Fresh Fruit #69 1485 2002 660 1507 4403
4602
Cabbage #77 702 346 1679 4481 890 512
Celery #79 4598 699 2325 9257 8827 5049
Lettuce #81 9788 3439 8076 10831 69717 33162
Onions #83 3488 1368 4992 5408 4719 6744
Potatoes #85 29681 4371 14716 26869 33580
70248
Tomatoes #87 1333 824 1527 9898 9572
3084
Other Fresh Vegatabes #89 6289 3759 9499 19183
28460 15056
Total handled 107402 45105 74240 145712 190755
248072

First, of course, Mike and company will be happy to see UP in the
lead, with SP bringing up second (Tony can breath a sigh of
relief<G>). You will have to face the awful truth however that the
PRR was in third place NATIONALLY with more than 76% of the volume of
SP! ATSF comes in foourth (sorry 'bout that Richard!). And since you
want to bring the "red team - green team" silliness into this, the
"green team" must be green with envy, since they manage less than 50%
of the "red team" loadings. The vaunted ERIE, supposed pipeline of
perishables east according to the "left coasties" on this list, comes
in with just over 30% of the PRR's loadings. NKP (not shown) is
basically tied with ERIE.

So, once and for all, enough of this tired nonsense about the PRR not
handling perishables. Folks, the PRR didn't just "win" east of the
Mississippi, it DOMINATED and was a major player on a national
level. Just the facts.

Regards
Bruce

Bruce F. Smith
Auburn, AL
http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/~smithbf/

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy" - Benjamin
Franklin
__
/ &#92;
__<+--+>________________&#92;__/___ ________________________________
|- ______/ O O &#92;_______ -| | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ |
| / 4999 PENNSYLVANIA 4999 &#92; | ||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||
|/_____________________________&#92;|_|________________________________|
| O--O &#92;0 0 0 0/ O--O | 0-0-0 0-0-0





Yahoo! Groups Links


Greg Martin
 

Andy,

Not a competitive factor in our reporting. There was a limit to how much data we were willing ot publish but we tried to capture the largest carriers, if they didn't show in our charts it was not considered large enough to offer a big impact. If a carier did carrier one product at a much higher rate than others we considered that as well(like western apples). We tried to show the top 5 or so by region.

Greg Martin

-----Original Message-----
From: Miller, Andrew S. <asmiller@mitre.org>
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 12:37:10 -0500
Subject: RE: [STMFC] Perishable traffic


Some interesting observations here (were fruits and vegetables ever
carried in observations?)

- The PRR blew away everyone in haulage of Oranges/Grapefruit #61. No
doubt that is because in addition to their share of the E/W Calif
traffic to the Northeast, they also had almost all of the N/S Fla
traffic. The only road which might have competed was the B&O and they
are not shown.

- East of the Mississippi I had always heard the Erie was the preferred
carrier. (Of course I heard that from Schuyler Larrabee so I must take
it with a grain of salt. No data is provided on salt) The Erie wins the
contest on Grapes, Melons, Lemons/Limes, and Pears. They blow the
competition away on Pears and onions. Where do all those pears and
onions come from? They might also win on Oranges, but I can not tell
from this chart how much to PRR's gargantuan total is E/W and how much
is N/S.

- The only commodity the NYC has a lock on is bananas. NYC is big in
the port of NY, but so was the PRR.

- The PRR must have had a conspiracy in restraint of trade on
watermelons!

- Overall the PRR wins the eastern contest 2:1 over the NYC and 3:1
over the Erie. This remains substantially the same even if you
discount the Oranges, likely most from Fla.

I do wonder where other eastern roads, particularly the B&O, would fit
in this picture.


regards,

Andy Miller

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Bruce Smith
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 9:28 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STMFC] Perishable traffic was Interpreting Copeland
interchange data

On Mar 1, 2006, at 3:06 PM, Malcolm Laughlin wrote:

tgregmrtn@... wrote:
As I exhibited in TKM the PRR handled the Lions share of the hauls
for all perishable produce traffic from the Mississippi east, nearly
the sum of the NKP and Erie together, for most of the 50's (and
Likely before) until the traffic dwindled to truck and TOFC
business.

==============

The wildest dreams of the red team ?

In the late 50's-early 60's the NYC had at least three daily
trainloads
of perishables east from chicago and St. Louis.

And PRR couldn't touch us for service to New York and New England.
Ya know Malcolm,

It might be helpful if you got your facts correct. Its the least I
expect from an editor. Since you obviously have not read Greg's
article in TKM, I will provide you with the (embarrassing) figures
for a few choice railroads <G>. I've left off many that Greg
included due to space considerations.

From the 1950 I. C. C. FREIGHT COMMODITY REPORTS for LOADS HANDLED
of FRESH FRUITS and FRESH VEGTABLES

CARRIER ATSF ERIE NYC
PRR SP UP
COMMODITY ICC Code

Apples #49 #49 1947 2503 1249 2937 1673
6487
Bananas #51 #51 1628 1798 16185 9504 5958
1790
Cantalope/Melons #55 6393 6570 2050 6136 22920
9837
Grapes #57 10975 5972 1919 2894 13607 10504
Lemons/Limes #59 3931 1692 848 1504 9582
1816
Oranges/Grapefruit #61 21644 5370 5107 22916 20475
9488
Peaches #63 1904 614 868 1507 3146 3483
Pears #65 280 3409 580 1324 7846 8160
Watermelons #67 1336 279 1960 9859 2697
733
Other Fresh Fruit #69 1485 2002 660 1507 4403
4602
Cabbage #77 702 346 1679 4481 890 512
Celery #79 4598 699 2325 9257 8827 5049
Lettuce #81 9788 3439 8076 10831 69717 33162
Onions #83 3488 1368 4992 5408 4719 6744
Potatoes #85 29681 4371 14716 26869 33580
70248
Tomatoes #87 1333 824 1527 9898 9572
3084
Other Fresh Vegatabes #89 6289 3759 9499 19183
28460 15056
Total handled 107402 45105 74240 145712 190755
248072

First, of course, Mike and company will be happy to see UP in the
lead, with SP bringing up second (Tony can breath a sigh of
relief<G>). You will have to face the awful truth however that the
PRR was in third place NATIONALLY with more than 76% of the volume of
SP! ATSF comes in foourth (sorry 'bout that Richard!). And since you
want to bring the "red team - green team" silliness into this, the
"green team" must be green with envy, since they manage less than 50%
of the "red team" loadings. The vaunted ERIE, supposed pipeline of
perishables east according to the "left coasties" on this list, comes
in with just over 30% of the PRR's loadings. NKP (not shown) is
basically tied with ERIE.

So, once and for all, enough of this tired nonsense about the PRR not
handling perishables. Folks, the PRR didn't just "win" east of the
Mississippi, it DOMINATED and was a major player on a national
level. Just the facts.

Regards
Bruce

Bruce F. Smith
Auburn, AL
http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/~smithbf/

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy" - Benjamin
Franklin
__
/ &#92;
__<+--+>________________&#92;__/___ ________________________________
|- ______/ O O &#92;_______ -| | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ |
| / 4999 PENNSYLVANIA 4999 &#92; | ||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||
|/_____________________________&#92;|_|________________________________|
| O--O &#92;0 0 0 0/ O--O | 0-0-0 0-0-0





Yahoo! Groups Links










Yahoo! Groups Links


Tim Gilbert <tgilbert@...>
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:


Bruce, I'm all for getting facts correct. In table below the TOTALS
are not correct. You have UP and SP switched!!

UP = 190755, not 248072
SP = 248072, not 190755
Tim,

The figures are total carloads, not just those originated. Since UP was a bridge carrier for the SP reefer trade while the SP would have been an insignificant one for perishables originated on the UP.

What I don't like about the table is that there is no national totals provided. Ergo, we cannot say that UP, SP or PRR had a "x" percent of the national total.

That said, what would be the national total? Should it be the aggregate of all the RR's totals, or should it measure only that traffic was originated? For instance, there were 1,473,435 Tons of Oranges & Grapefruits Originated versus a total of 5,895,810 tons carried in 1950.

The latter 5.9 million figure includes not only the tons originated, but also the tons terminated and the tons carried between the originating carrier. That means one ton of oranges originated on the SP in California would also be one ton carried on the RI, one ton carried on the Wabash and one ton carried on the terminating eastern carrier, or four tons once aggregate.

To answer what percentage of the trade a specific RR had, the 1,473,435 tons would be the generally accepted denominator among statisticians and analysts.

Now let's go to Jim Singer's table which the TKM and Bruce Smith used and examine Oranges and Grapefruits.

Fortunately, MOODY's separated Oranges & Grapefruits out for the ACL, FEC, SAL, ATSF, SP and RF&P.

In 1950, there were about 66,474 carloads of O&G shipped nationally. The SP originated 13,256 and the ATSF 19,843 carloads which combined was about 54% of the national total originated. In Florida, the ACL originated 16,892 carloads, the SAL 12,647 carloads and FEC 3,715 carloads which, in total, was about 46% of the national total originated.

Of the Florida crop, 18,016 (27.7% nationally or 54.2% of the total Florida crop) of the carloads reached the RF&P. The RF&P, in turn, delivered almost all this crop to the PRR in Pot Yard - some may have gone to B&O whose business seemed not to include citrus and the DC market. So we can say with a good deal of confidence that the PRR received about 17,500 carloads of Oranges & Grapefruits at Pot Yard merely by default.

Of the approximate 17,500 carloads received at Pot Yard, about two thirds were terminated on the PRR, and the other third terminated in New England, other roads in the northeast & Eastern Canada.

Returning to the Florida Crop, 15,238 of the carloads did not arrive in Richmond. Since most of the southeast was served by trucks according to 1951 WS Gherke's PhD dissertation about SAL's Traffic Geography, only about 9% of the 15,238 carloads were terminated there. Some went west (about 5% of the 15,238). That leaves the Mid West east of the Mississippi with a about 13,000 carloads. Of this, the PRR got about 6% or about 1,000 carloads: - the B&O collected about 27%; the C&O 45%; and other roads 22%. When there was effective competition, the PRR got a run for their money.

In 1950, according to Jim Singer's table, the PRR carried 22,916 Oranges and Grapefruit of which about 17,500 was captive through Pot Yard, and another 1,000 of the Florida crop in the Mid West. That leaves 4,416 carloads of Oranges & Grapefruit from the West (mostly California), or 13% of that crop. How many of these carloads was the PRR the bridge line and how much they terminated can be estimated only after examining the detailed Freight Commodity Statistics which Jim Singer used - Jim was not looking at these tables with "Originate, Terminated or Bridge Line" in mind. Unfortunately, I cannot break down the California crop like I can the Florida crop (no Gherke dissertation).

It might be helpful if you got your facts correct. Its the least I expect from an editor.
There is an old adage that figures never lie, but liars figure. In this example, the statistics tell only part of the story. Of the eastern lines cited by Jim Singer, only the PRR and NYC could be considered north-south lines and the Central only in the Mid West. Until, there is a better understanding of where the volumes of each perishable was originated, and then trace as best as one can the route to ultimate consumer, there will be misunderstanding of what is meant by "lions share." The PRR certainly had the lion's share of goods coming up through Pot Yard. They had the lion's share of goods coming into Baltimore, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh because the local auction markets were located on their own lines. How well the PRR did outside of this is anybody's guess at this point.

Tim Gilbert


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Tim Gilbert wrote:
The figures are total carloads, not just those originated. Since UP was
a bridge carrier for the SP reefer trade while the SP would have been an
insignificant one for perishables originated on the UP.
Interesting comments, Tim (not just the ones quoted above). I would observe that UP did originate a lot of perishables in the Northwest, and I'm sure that both fruit and potatoes/onions from there did go to California and southwestern points via SP. Not all traffic is east-west.
For many years, SP originated about 70 percent of all PFE carloads, the basis for an ongoing dispute with co-PFE owner UP, which naturally wanted to split PFE revenues 50-50 (ownership was 50-50). As detailed in the PFE book, SP had arranged in the 1928 Car Hire Agreement that they should receive financial "compensation" for their share of originations, and that continued to be the case when the agreement was renewed in 1958, despite UP efforts to end the compensation.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Tim Gilbert <tgilbert@...>
 

Miller, Andrew S. wrote:

Some interesting observations here (were fruits and vegetables ever
carried in observations?)

- The PRR blew away everyone in haulage of Oranges/Grapefruit #61. No
doubt that is because in addition to their share of the E/W Calif
traffic to the Northeast, they also had almost all of the N/S Fla
traffic. The only road which might have competed was the B&O and they
are not shown.
Covered in a 2:38 pm posting today.


- East of the Mississippi I had always heard the Erie was the preferred
carrier. (Of course I heard that from Schuyler Larrabee so I must take
it with a grain of salt. No data is provided on salt) The Erie wins the
contest on Grapes, Melons, Lemons/Limes, and Pears. They blow the
competition away on Pears and onions. Where do all those pears and
onions come from? They might also win on Oranges, but I can not tell
from this chart how much to PRR's gargantuan total is E/W and how much
is N/S.

- The only commodity the NYC has a lock on is bananas. NYC is big in
the port of NY, but so was the PRR.
Excluding the IC's routes north from the Big Easy. How much of PRR's bananas came out of Effingham IL?


- The PRR must have had a conspiracy in restraint of trade on
watermelons!
Per Jim Singer's chart, both ACL and the SAL were big in watermelons. I imagine that the SOU was too.

- Overall the PRR wins the eastern contest 2:1 over the NYC and 3:1
over the Erie. This remains substantially the same even if you
discount the Oranges, likely most from Fla.

I do wonder where other eastern roads, particularly the B&O, would fit
in this picture.
If such a table was done, I would hope that the originated, terminated and bridge line components would be shown. That data is available in tons for each of the railroads included in the ICC's FREIGHT COMMODITY STATISTICS. Carloads are only shown in total, but a simple tons/car calculation based upon the total would suffice for analytical purposes.

Tim Gilbert


Tim Gilbert <tgilbert@...>
 

Anthony Thompson wrote:

Tim Gilbert wrote:
The figures are total carloads, not just those originated. Since UP was
a bridge carrier for the SP reefer trade while the SP would have been
an
insignificant one for perishables originated on the UP.
Interesting comments, Tim (not just the ones quoted above). I
would observe that UP did originate a lot of perishables in the
Northwest, and I'm sure that both fruit and potatoes/onions from there
did go to California and southwestern points via SP. Not all traffic is
east-west.
One way to find out is to look at the the breakdown of SP's FREIGHT COMMODITY STATISTICS to determine how much of each commodity was originated & terminated on line; originated & delivered to a connecting carrier; received from a connecting carrier & terminated on line; and received from a connecting carrier & delivered to still another connecting carrier - the last of these four categories may be considered "bridge line." I don't think CSRM has the FREIGHT COMMODITY tomes, but Stanford's or Cal's business libraries may. Dave Nelson may be of service. I know Harvard's Baker Library has - two bad we did have this thread two weeks ago so Jeff Aley could have answered some of our questions.

For many years, SP originated about 70 percent of all PFE
carloads, the basis for an ongoing dispute with co-PFE owner UP, which
naturally wanted to split PFE revenues 50-50 (ownership was 50-50). As
detailed in the PFE book, SP had arranged in the 1928 Car Hire
Agreement that they should receive financial "compensation" for their
share of originations, and that continued to be the case when the
agreement was renewed in 1958, despite UP efforts to end the
compensation.
This confirms my suspicion that the UP had more PFE bridge line traffic than the SP.

BTW in 1950, the SP originated 13,256 carloads of oranges & grapefruits while carrying a total of 20,475. Meanwhile, the Santa Fe originated 19,843 cars of oranges & grapefruits while carrying a total of 21,644. The difference between total & originated are the carloads received from connecting carriers - either to be terminated on line or delivered to another carrier. Since I assume that ATSF and the SP were the only originators of non-Florida oranges & grapefruits (the numbers pretty much support this assumption), that means that 7,219 cars of O&G were originated on ATSF and delivered to the SP. Mike Brock wants to know how many of these mostly SFRD reefers went through Valhalla (a.k.a. Sherman Hill).

Tim Gilbert


Tim O'Connor
 

Tim, the UP came into the LA basin and certainly ran through lots
of towns with significant citrus production -- It seems incredible that
they would not originate at least -some- of this citrus traffic. The SP
got the lion's share thanks to a much larger branchline structure and
service to the Imperial Valley and southern Arizona, the Central Valley
and lots of other places.

Tim O.

-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Tim Gilbert <tgilbert@sunlink.net>
anwhile, the Santa Fe originated

Since I assume that ATSF and the SP were the only originators of non-Florida
oranges & grapefruits (the numbers pretty much support this assumption)


Douglas Harding <d.harding@...>
 

What are the stats on meat and PHP? So far all I have seen mentioned is
produce, perishables consisted of more than fruits and vegetables.

Meat packers want railroads that delivered on time and with little damage.
Here again the NKP and Erie out of Chicago carried a lot of this traffic, or
so I have been told. Who has the statistics?

Doug Harding
Iowa Central Railroad
http://d.harding.home.mchsi.com


Tim O'Connor
 

Tim

Since I am a modeler, not a statistical analyst, I think it's more
interesting to know whether railroad X had Y cars on Z trains by
location A during years MMMM to NNNN. I mean, of what possible
use to me is knowing whether UP (a 9,000+ route mile railroad)
originated or terminated more or less traffic of a particular kind
than the SP (a 12,000+ mile railroad when you include T&NO).
I ain't modeling an entire system!

And by the way, UP originated about 30% of PFE carloadings,
which would be a pretty large number in the peak years of the
1950's!

I do agree that UP received far more produce than it got from
the SP. On the other hand, UP probably delivered a lot more
meat and beer and newspapers to the SP than it received from
them. Processed foods (i.e. canned and frozen) travelled in
all directions so I have no idea whether an imbalance there
favored the UP or the SP.

Tim

-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Tim Gilbert <tgilbert@sunlink.net>

The figures are total carloads, not just those originated. Since UP was
a bridge carrier for the SP reefer trade while the SP would have been an
insignificant one for perishables originated on the UP.

What I don't like about the table is that there is no national totals
provided. Ergo, we cannot say that UP, SP or PRR had a "x" percent of
the national total.


Tim Gilbert <tgilbert@...>
 

Douglas Harding wrote:

What are the stats on meat and PHP? So far all I have seen mentioned is
produce, perishables consisted of more than fruits and vegetables.

Meat packers want railroads that delivered on time and with little damage.
Here again the NKP and Erie out of Chicago carried a lot of this traffic, or
so I have been told. Who has the statistics?
Jim Singer released the equivalent for his Naperville clinic. I bitched to him with no avail about the failure to separate originated from total. Unfortunately, my arguements saying that it mattered where the traffic originated was not persuasive.

Unfortunately, he did not anticipate the problem as this discussion has raised when he copied the carloads from the FREIGHT COMMODITY STATISTICS. Its a lot of work, and I can sympathize with him about reluctant to doing it over again. Does not solve our problems though.

Tim Gilbert


jaley <jaley@...>
 

On Mar 2, 3:07pm, Tim Gilbert wrote:
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Perishable traffic
I don't think CSRM has the FREIGHT COMMODITY tomes, but
Stanford's or Cal's business libraries may. Dave Nelson may be of
service. I know Harvard's Baker Library has - two bad we did have this
thread two weeks ago so Jeff Aley could have answered some of our
questions.
-- End of excerpt from Tim Gilbert
Tim,

Are these the ICC publications? If so, Stanford has 'em, and I
have copies of some of them.

As far as Baker library is concerned, it probably would have cost
me $50 to access the collections that include teh Freight Commodity
Statistics. (The Copeland reports are in the Historical Collection, so
access is free).

Regards,

-Jeff


--
Jeff Aley jaley@pcocd2.intel.com
DPG Chipsets Product Engineering
Intel Corporation, Folsom, CA
(916) 356-3533


ljack70117@...
 

I ask what does it matter which RR hauled it east? Weather it got there in good shape or bad shape. The people in NYC did not know the difference. My Wife is a cute NYC jewish girl. You should see some of the produce she buys. And she gets angry with me because I will not eat it. I always told her it took so long to get it to her that she did not know the difference between good and bad. If any one in Kansas tried to sell some of the stuff you see in NYC stores we would run then out of town.
BIG Grin 8>)
Thank you
Larry Jackman
ljack70117@adelphia.net


Anthony Thompson <thompson@...>
 

Tim O'Connor wrote:
I do agree that UP received far more produce than it got from
the SP. On the other hand, UP probably delivered a lot more
meat and beer and newspapers to the SP than it received from
them. Processed foods (i.e. canned and frozen) travelled in
all directions so I have no idea whether an imbalance there
favored the UP or the SP.
Just as a heck of a lot of fresh produce was shipped from the West, so was a heck of a lot of it processed in the West before shipping. Idaho potatoes, fresh and frozen; California fruit, fresh and canned; etc. etc. SP and UP handled a lot of the processed food too, though less and less in reefers as insulated box cars became common. Frozen of course still needed reefers. Since we are talking 1950s, newspapers and beer were pretty local or at least regional; so was much meat. Magazines were significant tonnage westward.

Tony Thompson Editor, Signature Press, Berkeley, CA
2906 Forest Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705 www.signaturepress.com
(510) 540-6538; fax, (510) 540-1937; e-mail, thompson@signaturepress.com
Publishers of books on railroad history


Dave Nelson <muskoka@...>
 

Tim Gilbert wrote:

Dave Nelson may be of service.
Ok.

I'll try to be brief and this is a seat of the pants analysis so an error or
two may have crept in, but I think it'll still give the overall picture.

This is about ICC Comm. #61, Oranges, grapefruit, etc., for rail shipments
in 1950.


CA net exports, total...............675,275 tons
FL net exports, total...............685,367 tons
TX/LA/AR net exports total...........33,782 tons
Total rail tonnage................1,394,424 tons

Delivered west of IL................178,926 tons *
- From CA/TX.........147,917
- From FL............ 31,009
Delivered to deep South..............67,536 tons
Delivered to IL (net)...............139,080 tons *
- from CA/TX........95,668
- from FL...........43,412

Still moving........................969,914 tons *
- From CA/TX........389,867
- From FL...........580,047

Delivered to Pot Yard...............371,269 tons (per Tim Gilbert)
Available at all other gateways.....598,645 tons *
- From CA...........389,867
- From FL...........208,778

Delivered to MI, KY, TN, OH, IN.....255,930 tons *
- From CA...........142,231
- From FL...........113,699

Left................................713,984 tons *
- At Pot Yd.........371,269
- From CA...........247,636
- From FL........... 95,079

At this point I run out of useful data. What's needed is the total receipts
of this commodity by the PRR. I have that data for many roads for 1950, but
this isn't one of them. If I had, I'd subtract out from that figure some
very large percentage of the Pot Yard tonnage and what was left would
suggest how much of the remaining traffic the PRR captured at other exchange
points, which, in some ignorance of the facts, I'd assume would occur at the
western end of the system. Ideally, tons miles would be found somewhere but
I think that highly unlikely.

As for data sources, this comes ICC Commodity report for 1950 and State to
State distribution for 1950. Data marked with an asterick indicate the
combined sum is from the commodity report, likely to be very accurate
whereas the subtotals below that are estimated from the state-to-state
distribution report. Fortunately this commodity class is large enough that
the state-to-state numbers are likely to be very accurate.

Lastly, there's a tiny bit of slop in the numbers as I did not isolate FL
oranges to the west coast or CA oranges into the deep south. I figured I
could ignore that detail as the numbers were fairly small.

Dave Nelson


Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

Tim Gilbert writes:

Mike Brock wants to know how
many of these mostly SFRD reefers went through Valhalla (a.k.a. Sherman
Hill).
After reading through all the messages on perishable traffic I'm not certain what I want...except perhaps a new thread. Curiosity is, of course, a significant motivator so I suppose one might be drawn to wanting to know which RR in the east carried the most perishables the greatest distance but I doubt we'll ever know and, if we do find out, nothing much will change as far as modeling and/or simulating the actual traffic pattern is concerned. IOW, if, instead of modeling Valhalla, I modeled a much less significant area...like...well...say Altoona and Horseshoe Curve <G>, and I did it in a similar way to what I did with Valhalla, I can't really see what any of this would have to do with my efforts. I would, of course, do scenery. That would dictate within a range of perhaps 4 months when the model portays the area. Hence, what happened over a yr wouldn't really matter. What happened during 4 months would but I'd only be modeling about 3 hours of a given day. Thus, I'd only be sampling 1/8th of the possible traffic. The key...IMO...to modeling with some accuracy this little known area would be to have frt train consists...frt conductor books...available. Just knowing the totals for a full yr...while interesting...still fails to deliver accurate information regarding a frt train that one might choose to model. Returning to Valhalla again, I seriously doubt that yearly totals would predict that on May 14, 1956, a UP frt train would travel from Cheyenne to Laramie with fully 95 SFRD reefers in tow. Fortunately, since the train DID exist, it was traveling west...and, therefore did not break Brock's Fourth Rule of Frt Trains...SFRD cars shall travel only westward on UP tracks...MT no doubt. So...what should one do if they WERE modeling the Altoona area? Well...that's a good question...far beyond my knowledge base but one thing's for sure. They could have just about any frt car model made...just like those modeling Valhalla. The numbers of each on a given day would depend on daily wheel reports, not on yearly totals...IMO. I realize, of course, that such might not be available and, hence, we might find yearly totals the only game in town. In that case, yearly totals would have to used to predict...but we should be aware of their inherent inaccuracies.

Mike Brock


David Smith <dsmith@...>
 

And here we have the modelers' version of the Heisenberg Uncertainty
Principle... You can model a given day with high precision and you
sacrifice precision in the overall fleet or you can model the overall
fleet with high precision and you sacrifice precision on the actual
consists of any given day. Neither one is inherently more precise than
the other, just different. And what we will never have, but would be
fascinating, are the logs of individual cars over their lifetimes.

Dave Smith

David L. Smith, Ph.D.
Director of Professional Development
Da Vinci Discovery Center, Allentown, PA
http://www.davinci-center.org
"Who will pick up where Leonardo left off?"

-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Mike Brock
Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 12:13 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Perishable traffic


Tim Gilbert writes:

Mike Brock wants to know how
many of these mostly SFRD reefers went through Valhalla (a.k.a.
Sherman Hill).
After reading through all the messages on perishable traffic
I'm not certain
what I want...except perhaps a new thread. Curiosity is, of course, a
significant motivator so I suppose one might be drawn to
wanting to know
which RR in the east carried the most perishables the
greatest distance but
I doubt we'll ever know and, if we do find out, nothing much
will change as
far as modeling and/or simulating the actual traffic pattern
is concerned.
IOW, if, instead of modeling Valhalla, I modeled a much less
significant
area...like...well...say Altoona and Horseshoe Curve <G>, and
I did it in a
similar way to what I did with Valhalla, I can't really see
what any of this
would have to do with my efforts. I would, of course, do
scenery. That would
dictate within a range of perhaps 4 months when the model
portays the area.
Hence, what happened over a yr wouldn't really matter. What
happened during
4 months would but I'd only be modeling about 3 hours of a
given day. Thus,
I'd only be sampling 1/8th of the possible traffic. The
key...IMO...to
modeling with some accuracy this little known area would be
to have frt
train consists...frt conductor books...available. Just
knowing the totals
for a full yr...while interesting...still fails to deliver accurate
information regarding a frt train that one might choose to
model. Returning
to Valhalla again, I seriously doubt that yearly totals would
predict that
on May 14, 1956, a UP frt train would travel from Cheyenne to
Laramie with
fully 95 SFRD reefers in tow. Fortunately, since the train
DID exist, it was
traveling west...and, therefore did not break Brock's Fourth
Rule of Frt
Trains...SFRD cars shall travel only westward on UP
tracks...MT no doubt.
So...what should one do if they WERE modeling the Altoona area?
Well...that's a good question...far beyond my knowledge base
but one thing's
for sure. They could have just about any frt car model
made...just like
those modeling Valhalla. The numbers of each on a given day
would depend on
daily wheel reports, not on yearly totals...IMO. I realize,
of course, that
such might not be available and, hence, we might find yearly
totals the only
game in town. In that case, yearly totals would have to used to
predict...but we should be aware of their inherent inaccuracies.

Mike Brock




Yahoo! Groups Links







Bruce Smith
 

On Mar 2, 2006, at 11:13 PM, Mike Brock wrote:
I seriously doubt that yearly totals would predict that
on May 14, 1956, a UP frt train would travel from Cheyenne to Laramie with
fully 95 SFRD reefers in tow.
And this is an argument FOR using wheel reports <G>? It seems to strongly reinforce my brother's earlier point that a single train represents nothing more than that single train. It gives no predictive value for any other train on that day, and may not be that predictive of the same train on any other day (this latter case is somewhat weaker for very specific trains like your SP forwarder, but even there, is not predictive of the class or number of SP cars seen on that train.)

Wheel reports like this work wonderfully if you meet THREE conditions:
1) You are modeling May 14, 1956
2) You have the wheel reports for EVERY train on that day, or fraction of that day you model (and I don't think very many folks have that kind of information).
3) You think Groundhog Day is the best movie ever made

On an operations based layout, modeling specific freight train consists would be a hugely daunting task... and for that matter, who wants to see exactly the same train every op session? What I look for are representative trains, that show the mix of cars that might have traveled that railroad at that time.

That would
dictate within a range of perhaps 4 months when the model portays the area.
Hence, what happened over a yr wouldn't really matter. What happened during
4 months would
Mike's point is well taken that some traffic is seasonal. This is more typical of specialized car types, such as stock and reefers. Thus, one might want to use care in designing this traffic on a layout to ensure that it was seasonally appropriate. Even there however, alternative uses often saw special use cars in service in "off seasons".

but I'd only be modeling about 3 hours of a given day. Thus,
I'd only be sampling 1/8th of the possible traffic.
But are you? What day? I thought you were modeling a PERIOD (about 4 months of 1 year). Thus you are modeling about 1/8 of 120 days, not ONE day <G>.

Regards
Bruce

Bruce F. Smith
Auburn, AL
http://www.vetmed.auburn.edu/~smithbf/

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy" - Benjamin Franklin
__
/ &#92;
__<+--+>________________&#92;__/___ ________________________________
|- ______/ O O &#92;_______ -| | __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ |
| / 4999 PENNSYLVANIA 4999 &#92; | ||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||__||
|/_____________________________&#92;|_|________________________________|
| O--O &#92;0 0 0 0/ O--O | 0-0-0 0-0-0


Mike Brock <brockm@...>
 

Dave Smith writes:


And here we have the modelers' version of the Heisenberg Uncertainty
Principle... You can model a given day with high precision and you
sacrifice precision in the overall fleet or you can model the overall
fleet with high precision and you sacrifice precision on the actual
consists of any given day.
Well, perhaps if someone is modeling a very short short line. In my own case, I'm compressing the modeled part of the railroad by a factor of about three. Thus, most scenes are about a third of the actual size linearly. And, about 90% of the area is not modeled at all. I compress frt trains by about one third as well. Hence, I can't model even three hours with high precision. I CAN produce a fairly representative impression of Valhalla given the information from daily train consists...although even then the population of frt cars is dependent upon the models available and my generation of them.
I would guess that many other prototype modelers might find themselves in similar straits if they had wheel reports available. So...the term "precise" is not one that I might choose to describe frt car population accuracy over either a long or short term time span.

The point, however, is understood. Short term and long term results will be different.

Mike Brock


al_brown03
 

Herein lies the fascination. The underlying question is "how random
was freight-car movement?" The closest we are to an answer
is "somewhat but not totally, and it depends". Some equipment moved
highly predictably, e.g. Dow Chemical bromine cars in dedicated
service. Other cars appear in places that just seem bizarre, e.g. a
Clinchfield stock car in Alamosa, Colorado. It's clear that freight-
car distribution on a particular line depends heavily on the function
of that line, not just of the railroad. Say you model "SAL in
Florida": do you model the Orlando Sub or the Bone Valley? For the
Bone Valley, you need lots of phosphate hoppers, few reefers; for the
Orlando Sub, the other way around (and maybe some tanks of avgas for
Orlando AFB). The Chubb formula was state-of-the-art 30 years back;
we're far past that now, but we've still just scratched the surface.
There's lots to learn.

Of course, any realistic car-movement scheme must reproduce the well-
known fact that coelacanth oil was shipped over Sherman Hill in U.S.
Coast Guard tank cars, the prototypes of the Tichy model. :-)

Al Brown, Melbourne, Fla.



--- In STMFC@yahoogroups.com, "David Smith" <dsmith@...> wrote:

And here we have the modelers' version of the Heisenberg Uncertainty
Principle... You can model a given day with high precision and you
sacrifice precision in the overall fleet or you can model the
overall
fleet with high precision and you sacrifice precision on the actual
consists of any given day. Neither one is inherently more precise
than
the other, just different. And what we will never have, but would
be
fascinating, are the logs of individual cars over their lifetimes.

Dave Smith

David L. Smith, Ph.D.
Director of Professional Development
Da Vinci Discovery Center, Allentown, PA
http://www.davinci-center.org
"Who will pick up where Leonardo left off?"



-----Original Message-----
From: STMFC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STMFC@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Mike Brock
Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 12:13 AM
To: STMFC@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [STMFC] Perishable traffic


Tim Gilbert writes:

Mike Brock wants to know how
many of these mostly SFRD reefers went through Valhalla
(a.k.a.
Sherman Hill).
After reading through all the messages on perishable traffic
I'm not certain
what I want...except perhaps a new thread. Curiosity is, of
course, a
significant motivator so I suppose one might be drawn to
wanting to know
which RR in the east carried the most perishables the
greatest distance but
I doubt we'll ever know and, if we do find out, nothing much
will change as
far as modeling and/or simulating the actual traffic pattern
is concerned.
IOW, if, instead of modeling Valhalla, I modeled a much less
significant
area...like...well...say Altoona and Horseshoe Curve <G>, and
I did it in a
similar way to what I did with Valhalla, I can't really see
what any of this
would have to do with my efforts. I would, of course, do
scenery. That would
dictate within a range of perhaps 4 months when the model
portays the area.
Hence, what happened over a yr wouldn't really matter. What
happened during
4 months would but I'd only be modeling about 3 hours of a
given day. Thus,
I'd only be sampling 1/8th of the possible traffic. The
key...IMO...to
modeling with some accuracy this little known area would be
to have frt
train consists...frt conductor books...available. Just
knowing the totals
for a full yr...while interesting...still fails to deliver
accurate
information regarding a frt train that one might choose to
model. Returning
to Valhalla again, I seriously doubt that yearly totals would
predict that
on May 14, 1956, a UP frt train would travel from Cheyenne to
Laramie with
fully 95 SFRD reefers in tow. Fortunately, since the train
DID exist, it was
traveling west...and, therefore did not break Brock's Fourth
Rule of Frt
Trains...SFRD cars shall travel only westward on UP
tracks...MT no doubt.
So...what should one do if they WERE modeling the Altoona area?
Well...that's a good question...far beyond my knowledge base
but one thing's
for sure. They could have just about any frt car model
made...just like
those modeling Valhalla. The numbers of each on a given day
would depend on
daily wheel reports, not on yearly totals...IMO. I realize,
of course, that
such might not be available and, hence, we might find yearly
totals the only
game in town. In that case, yearly totals would have to used to
predict...but we should be aware of their inherent inaccuracies.

Mike Brock




Yahoo! Groups Links