kr79:
Do you believe everything you read in the paper. We are in the middle of a massive recession this Christmas has been one if the quietest for retailers in years which means less stuff for trucks to move.
Containers are a known low margin sector. So a slight dip is enough to make or break a firm. This is where your ownr driver argument is right. A bloke with a truck can keep costs down as you can just rent a ■■■■■■■■■■■■ from someone do your paperwork at home possibly do some maintence on the truck.
These big firms have to employ office staff possibly have there own workshops some nice shiney offices hot and cold running range rovers for the management.
All that don’t come cheap and even a few percent drop in turnover is all it takes.
But my owner driver argument ‘also’ included the fact that,at least in my case,even running containers as an owner driver wouldn’t pay or be worth the risk to the set up capital required under present fuel costs v mileage rates and with the ever increasing rate of rail freight capacity growth,regardless of the lower overheads.The reason why the government want those silly levels of road fuel taxes is so that the rail freight operators have an unfair trading advantage and if I’d rather leave the money in the bank you can bet that no fleet operators would want to bother with trying to compete with the rail freight operators either.
The fact is the issue is all about unsustainable road fuel costs and the resulting unfair competiton from the rail freight sector.While you can bet that the knock on effects will affect rates throughout every sector of the road transport industry in the long term owing to an ever increasing amount of domestic long haul operators being forced to look for what remains of the local running sectors of the industry.
kr79:
I’d love to see a train roll up outside a house and start craning off goods from the local Travis Perkins
No but that local builders materials job won’t look so lucrative when loads of operators,who previously had their wagons spending most of their time running boxes all over the country,have to leave the job to the rail freight industry and then start looking for some local intermodal or supermarket distribution subbing work or buys a HIAB wagon to run round the houses instead.Assuming they can find a driver who wants the job.
Not everyone wants to be a long haul super trucker. I know plenty of drivers who are good at there job but are strictly local work only.
Sounds good as I sit here in a one horse ■■■■■■■■ on my multi drop run around Saskatchewan
Wake up Carryfast. Road fuel duty is about raising coin for the government and motorists of all stripes have been an easy cash cow for many years. Road to rail is all about keeping the green lobby and anti truck brigade happy.
As has been said by people in the container trade it is low margin, volumes are down and that can break some firms with high overheads.
You can’t magically create more railway lines and trains to suddenly take all the road freight.
Moving the long distance stuff from the ports to an inland railhead by rail would be better than having hundreds of drivers slogging up and down the a14 all day.
As someone who used to work in the rail industry i can tell you that there is one massive barrier to expanding rail freight operations…capacity…our rail network simply doesn’t have the spare capacity.
Most major rail routes are running at near full capacity and without massive amounts of investment that isn’t going to change.
Gutted … mate’s dad works for elite, not sure how it works, but he says he does belgium sometimes with containers ? i thought it would have been cheaper sending it with another companies.
kr79:
I’d love to see a train roll up outside a house and start craning off goods from the local Travis Perkins
No but that local builders materials job won’t look so lucrative when loads of operators,who previously had their wagons spending most of their time running boxes all over the country,have to leave the job to the rail freight industry and then start looking for some local intermodal or supermarket distribution subbing work or buys a HIAB wagon to run round the houses instead.Assuming they can find a driver who wants the job.
don’t worry carryfast, the supply and demand will sort it out, the driver will be found
yes it’s unfair, but i’d hazard a guess that the majority of the general population would prefer more freight on the railways and off the road where it’s sensible to do so. what’s your opinion on that?
subsidiaries go on left right and center, so i’m not buying your road haulage is being singled out.
now i’ve now idea if mobile phone development had any government help, but you sound like a phone box assembler ■■■■■■■■ that mobile phones are going to mean job cuts in your factory, don’t get me wrong, it’s ■■■■ when people lose their jobs, but it’s not a reason to ban mobiles
what about hgv licenses being funded over the years, how many vans does an artic take off the road?
Ex Haulier:
Never really understood how the container transport business works. Are the shipping lines the client ?. Does the importer of the goods have a say in who delivers the box ?. Is it all on a flat mileage rate paid back to the dock ?. Always seemed a bit odd time that they all seem to run top of the range motors and do 4 or 5 nights out per week which seem to say they have pretty high labour costs yet the rates I have heard quoted didn’t seem that clever. Anyone care to educate me.
It’s all included in the cost of the sea freight. If you are an importer and you ship a container from China to Felixstowe then it will cost the same whether the eventual destination of the container is Ipswich or Aberdeen.
Total nonsense. You can ship a 20ft box from China to Felixstowe for about 700 dollars. The road freight to Aberdeen would cost more than that.
Correct. I work for a short sea container shipping line which has it’s own road haulage fleet in several countries. Boxes are charged either door to door or door to quay (Or quay to door, presumably) and the person paying for the shipping pays the bill accordingly. Obviously if they are not using our transport for part of the journey, they are not charged for it, but they sure as hell do get charged for the road legs we do undertake at the appropriate rate. Some cargo goes by train in some countries, in which case again the customer is billed accordingly.
If outside haulage is used for whatever reason, the customer is billed just as if it were us doing it, and the subcontractor invoices the shipping line at whatever their own agreed rate is, it makes no difference to the cost for the shipper. So in the case of, say, Elite, they would bill the shipping line whatever they are contracted to and the shipping line deals with the customer from there.
Sometimes a big supermarket, or whatever, might want to use their own choice of haulier or their own vehicles to collect boxes from port and deliver them to their end destination. In that case the shipping line would charge door-quay and the last road leg would be arranged between customer and haulier.
Does all that make sense? That’s how I understand it, anyway.
kr79:
Not everyone wants to be a long haul super trucker. I know plenty of drivers who are good at there job but are strictly local work only.
Sounds good as I sit here in a one horse [zb] on my multi drop run around Saskatchewan
I think there’s more drivers doing local zb work who are only doing it because the rail freight lot and the east european road transport industry has taken most of the long distance work.So it’s a choice of that or nothing.Personally as I’ve said I’d rather drive a cab or a bus for around the same money as all the aggravation of driving a builders wagon etc or an artic on local zb.Although if you’re right then why is it that in this case that it seems to be redundancies owing to rail freight taking the work,assuming that the opportunity,to shift the fleet onto all that so called local zb work,which you say is available,is there.
kr79:
I’d love to see a train roll up outside a house and start craning off goods from the local Travis Perkins
No but that local builders materials job won’t look so lucrative when loads of operators,who previously had their wagons spending most of their time running boxes all over the country,have to leave the job to the rail freight industry and then start looking for some local intermodal or supermarket distribution subbing work or buys a HIAB wagon to run round the houses instead.Assuming they can find a driver who wants the job.
don’t worry carryfast, the supply and demand will sort it out, the driver will be found
yes it’s unfair, but i’d hazard a guess that the majority of the general population would prefer more freight on the railways and off the road where it’s sensible to do so. what’s your opinion on that?
subsidiaries go on left right and center, so i’m not buying your road haulage is being singled out.
now i’ve now idea if mobile phone development had any government help, but you sound like a phone box assembler ■■■■■■■■ that mobile phones are going to mean job cuts in your factory, don’t get me wrong, it’s [zb] when people lose their jobs, but it’s not a reason to ban mobiles
what about hgv licenses being funded over the years, how many vans does an artic take off the road?
I think in this case the correct analogy would be more like the government imposing a massive land line tax to make land lines economically unviable to use so that the mobile phones operators can take all the land line customers thereby creating a mobile phone monopoly in the long term.
As for the question of my personal opinion concerning the so called ‘advantages’ of shifting freight from road to rail yeah great assuming that I was a train driver.But it’s a suicidal idea if you’re living depends on the road transport industry.So my question is why is it that so many of those who’s living depends on the road transport industry,seem to think that the government’s plans,for massive shift in freight transport from road to rail,using unfair anti competitive trading practices to do so,is a good idea.
kr79:
I’d love to see a train roll up outside a house and start craning off goods from the local Travis Perkins
No but that local builders materials job won’t look so lucrative when loads of operators,who previously had their wagons spending most of their time running boxes all over the country,have to leave the job to the rail freight industry and then start looking for some local intermodal or supermarket distribution subbing work or buys a HIAB wagon to run round the houses instead.Assuming they can find a driver who wants the job.
don’t worry carryfast, the supply and demand will sort it out, the driver will be found
yes it’s unfair, but i’d hazard a guess that the majority of the general population would prefer more freight on the railways and off the road where it’s sensible to do so. what’s your opinion on that?
subsidiaries go on left right and center, so i’m not buying your road haulage is being singled out.
now i’ve now idea if mobile phone development had any government help, but you sound like a phone box assembler ■■■■■■■■ that mobile phones are going to mean job cuts in your factory, don’t get me wrong, it’s [zb] when people lose their jobs, but it’s not a reason to ban mobiles
what about hgv licenses being funded over the years, how many vans does an artic take off the road?
I think in this case the correct analogy would be more like the government imposing a massive land line tax to make land lines economically unviable to use so that the mobile phones operators can take all the land line customers thereby creating a mobile phone monopoly in the long term.
As for the question of my personal opinion concerning the so called ‘advantages’ of shifting freight from road to rail yeah great assuming that I was a train driver.But it’s a suicidal idea if you’re living depends on the road transport industry.So my question is why is it that so many of those who’s living depends on the road transport industry,seem to think that the government’s plans,for massive shift in freight transport from road to rail,using unfair anti competitive trading practices to do so,is a good idea.
kr79:
I’d love to see a train roll up outside a house and start craning off goods from the local Travis Perkins
No but that local builders materials job won’t look so lucrative when loads of operators,who previously had their wagons spending most of their time running boxes all over the country,have to leave the job to the rail freight industry and then start looking for some local intermodal or supermarket distribution subbing work or buys a HIAB wagon to run round the houses instead.Assuming they can find a driver who wants the job.
don’t worry carryfast, the supply and demand will sort it out, the driver will be found
yes it’s unfair, but i’d hazard a guess that the majority of the general population would prefer more freight on the railways and off the road where it’s sensible to do so. what’s your opinion on that?
subsidiaries go on left right and center, so i’m not buying your road haulage is being singled out.
now i’ve now idea if mobile phone development had any government help, but you sound like a phone box assembler ■■■■■■■■ that mobile phones are going to mean job cuts in your factory, don’t get me wrong, it’s [zb] when people lose their jobs, but it’s not a reason to ban mobiles
what about hgv licenses being funded over the years, how many vans does an artic take off the road?
I think in this case the correct analogy would be more like the government imposing a massive land line tax to make land lines economically unviable to use so that the mobile phones operators can take all the land line customers thereby creating a mobile phone monopoly in the long term.
As for the question of my personal opinion concerning the so called ‘advantages’ of shifting freight from road to rail yeah great assuming that I was a train driver.But it’s a suicidal idea if you’re living depends on the road transport industry.So my question is why is it that so many of those who’s living depends on the road transport industry,seem to think that the government’s plans,for massive shift in freight transport from road to rail,using unfair anti competitive trading practices to do so,is a good idea.
so you can’t look at something objectively?
I think that was as objective as it gets at least from the point of view of any of those drivers who’ve just lost their jobs in this case.
In all but a few,isolated,seams of intense heavy movements of containers,fuel oils,coal and aggregates the UK isn’t large enough for the economic movement of goods by rail,period! Never mind all the “Bollox” spouted by the “enviromentalists” the distances are not viable,unlike the USA for instance,3000 miles from coast to coast! London to Glasgow (small population in Scotland!) 400 miles,what a joke,rail will never be viable in the UK especially with a truck journey at each end of the operation.Mass movement of passengers by rail YES,but to move freight------ build some decent connecting motorways between the large conerbations,now that would really create some impetus to the lagging economy ! Cheers Bewick.
The rail option is beneficial in a number of ways, if logically routed it saves on transport costs, it also helps remove the one way issue, if you send a truck you’ve got to get in back plus it helps with moving boxes inland in advance of the booking which saves quay rent and puts the box closer to the delivery point aiding late delivery requests
The rail is starting to max out, in both available paths and train lengths, any additional growth will have to be on new paths such as ex Gateway when it opens
A few years ago our quarry supplied Rockwool in Bridgend,rate was £5.50 per tonne.I got to thinking as to why it wasnt put on the train. The nearest rail line was 5 miles away so in those days the quarry could probably get it hauled for £1.50 a tonne and let suppose the line the other end was the same distance and rate so that left £2.50 per tonne to load and unload and haul it on the train. As Bewick says the country isnt big enough to bother with much freight on the rails.
Bewick:
In all but a few,isolated,seams of intense heavy movements of containers,fuel oils,coal and aggregates the UK isn’t large enough for the economic movement of goods by rail,period! Never mind all the “Bollox” spouted by the “enviromentalists” the distances are not viable,unlike the USA for instance,3000 miles from coast to coast! London to Glasgow (small population in Scotland!) 400 miles,what a joke,rail will never be viable in the UK especially with a truck journey at each end of the operation.Mass movement of passengers by rail YES,but to move freight------ build some decent connecting motorways between the large conerbations,now that would really create some impetus to the lagging economy ! Cheers Bewick.
The fact is transport of freight ( not bulk aggregates etc ) by road beats rail wherever it is even over those North American distances.The history of the road transport industry shows that.What we’re seeing now is a deliberate government anti competitive policy of targeted fuel taxation and unrealistic regulation of the road transport industry in order to make rail transport more attractive than it would posibly otherwise be.The whole thing is dressed up as some bs ‘environmental’ issue when the reality is it’s all about the big business rail freight sector wanting to take over the freight/logistics industry,by reversing the growth of the long distance sector of the road transport industry,which took place by road taking market share from rail during the mid-late 20th century.
The surprising thing is the way in which the road transport industry seems to be willing to let it happen without at least putting up a fight by taking court action against an obvious government policy which favours the rail freight industry at the expense of the road transport industry.
stringy:
The rail option is beneficial in a number of ways, if logically routed it saves on transport costs, it also helps remove the one way issue, if you send a truck you’ve got to get in back plus it helps with moving boxes inland in advance of the booking which saves quay rent and puts the box closer to the delivery point aiding late delivery requests
The rail is starting to max out, in both available paths and train lengths, any additional growth will have to be on new paths such as ex Gateway when it opens
It’s my bet that the rail option would be put back in it’s rightful place v road transport ( which was seen during the mid-late 20th century) simply by government action of making a fair level playing field between road and rail on the fuel taxation issue and de regulation of truck lengths and gross train weights to at least Scandinavian levels.
