JWB Posted August 9, 2013 Share Posted August 9, 2013 Pete asked about container shots in another thread. Here are some I've taken: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWB Posted August 10, 2013 Author Share Posted August 10, 2013 Here are some containers from the 1980s and 90s: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted August 10, 2013 Share Posted August 10, 2013 I've a bunch on here, a mix of my own and contributors - all of these were shot in the US, it includes 'deep sea' lines as we see plenty of over here, plus a few more unusual lines like Matson and Seaboard Marine, and of course some 48 and 53 domestic boxes and reefers: http://ukrailwaypics.smugmug.com/Non-UKrails/North-America-equipment/Freightcar-roster-shots-1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWB Posted August 11, 2013 Author Share Posted August 11, 2013 Here are some more recent ones: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted August 11, 2013 Share Posted August 11, 2013 Looking at the size of the gaps between the containers on one wagon and the next, I do find myself wondering what the advantages of double-stacking against single-stacking on something like fixed-formation 5-wagon rakes of 'normal' height wagons might be. Those gaps must increase the aerodynamic drag tremendously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted August 11, 2013 Share Posted August 11, 2013 I think that they are loaded according to designation by a computer rather than either random or human intervention. What the criteria is may change according to destination. Having naughtily "slipstreamed" container trucks on the road I can fairly confidently confirm that the gap between containers has to be much greater than the train loading to have a detrimental effect on drag. I really like the old APL/APC "fascist" eagle, you do not see them so much these days. I have noticed a big increase in the yellow MSC (Mediterranean Shipping Company of Italy) containers around the NY / NJ area... Thanks, JWB. Best, Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted August 11, 2013 Share Posted August 11, 2013 I've been trying to find a link to the CSX TV advert that show gallons per ton per 500 miles for InterModal traffic but this device will not access the viddys on their site (I'm not at home). Best, Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWB Posted August 11, 2013 Author Share Posted August 11, 2013 I think you're trading off various least-bad solutions -- certainly you could have an aerodynamically better design, but pretty soon you'd be asking why containers look the way they do in the first place, shouldn't they be different, etc. I think the Santa Fe in particular resisted the whole double-stack idea and I think proposed all-new container designs with an inverted U cross section that probably would have been better aerodynamically, except you had the existing stock of ISO containers do deal with. I think George Hilton had some interesting musings that the whole Janney coupler-glad hand air hose idea was far less efficient than many other solutions, but you'd have to replace all the existing stock as part of the deal. For that matter, said Hilton, what about standard gauge? And so forth. Double stacks are the best solution to a particular problem and were in fact imposed on the rail industry by the shipping companies. The SP did originate the idea, but that was because they didn't want to go to the expense of double tracking the Sunset Route or extending its sidings appreciably, so they went vertical. APL then said great, give us a break on the rate, and do it our way! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Wintle Posted August 11, 2013 Share Posted August 11, 2013 Looking at the size of the gaps between the containers on one wagon and the next, I do find myself wondering what the advantages of double-stacking against single-stacking on something like fixed-formation 5-wagon rakes of 'normal' height wagons might be. Those gaps must increase the aerodynamic drag tremendously. The reduction in tare weight by double-stacking is much more significant than the aerodynamic effects of the extra height and the gaps. Also, a lot of 48' well cars have been cut down to 40' wells, reducing both the weight and the gaps. There are primarily only 20', 40', and 53' containers in service these days. 45s are seen occasionally. Adrian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Wintle Posted August 11, 2013 Share Posted August 11, 2013 I really like the old APL/APC "fascist" eagle, you do not see them so much these days. I have noticed a big increase in the yellow MSC (Mediterranean Shipping Company of Italy) containers around the NY / NJ area... APL merged with Neptune Orient and then sold off its domestic network which became Pacer Stacktrain, so APL containers are unlikely to be seen. Also, a lot of their 53' containers were blue with a very discrete APL logo. The big red eagles were primarily on the 45s and 48s (although there is a 53 in the pics) and have mostly become extinct (as has the 48' container). Adrian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 so APL containers are unlikely to be seen Plenty of APL (the modern deep-sea shipper, not as in the domestic US operator) still to be seen on-rail, and (assumption alert) judging from the run of liveries to box numbers, their current scheme is back to having the big red eagle, after a phase of 'stealth' plain blue, followed by a phase of having a small logo in the top corner. (Photo credit to Mel Rogers, via my Ukrailwaypics site as linked above - shot in Feb 2012 at Portola CA) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 I have noticed a big increase in the yellow MSC (Mediterranean Shipping Company of Italy) containers around the NY / NJ area... From memory, they are now the 2nd largest 'Deep Sea' shipper (behind Maersk)... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Wintle Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 Plenty of APL (the modern deep-sea shipper, not as in the domestic US operator) still to be seen on-rail, and (assumption alert) judging from the run of liveries to box numbers, their current scheme is back to having the big red eagle, after a phase of 'stealth' plain blue, followed by a phase of having a small logo in the top corner. (Photo credit to Mel Rogers, via my Ukrailwaypics site as linked above - shot in Feb 2012 at Portola CA) Good point. We don't often see the APL international containers around here, but we do see a fair number of Pacer Stacktrain blue boxes. We see lots of other inernational shippers, though (Maersk, MSC, Hanjin, etc). There are a number of trucking/distribution hubs near work so I tend to see a lot of containers, albeit stacked or on trucks. Adrian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 And here's some typical MSC Containers.... http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2c/Containers_MSC.jpg&imgrefurl=http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Containers_MSC.jpg&h=342&w=633&sz=56&tbnid=GFLM1MRSQmdTsM:&tbnh=65&tbnw=120&prev=/search%3Fq%3DMSC%2BContainers%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=MSC+Containers&usg=__bbIW82c8p5Knlf8mNlMN9iGxGzc=&docid=1E9TbZBzPUgrGM&sa=X&ei=8AwJUvPOCIWGyQGI9oH4Ag&ved=0CFoQ9QEwAw&dur=1559 Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted August 12, 2013 Share Posted August 12, 2013 The good thing about the big deep-sea shipping companies is they have a truly global reach, that's one of the reasons I started shooting them in the UK! MSC seem to use MSCU and MEDU marks: http://ukrailwaypics.smugmug.com/The-Humble-Box/TheHumbleBox-Operator/M/MEDU-Mediterranean-Shipping-Co http://ukrailwaypics.smugmug.com/The-Humble-Box/TheHumbleBox-Operator/M/MSCU-Mediterranean-Shipping-Co Worth looking out for are some Gold Container Leasing (Touax) boxes marked up for them, in brown with a yellow logo, almost an MSC box in negative - there's a few 20s in the middle of this collection! http://ukrailwaypics.smugmug.com/The-Humble-Box/TheHumbleBox-Operator/G/GLDU-Gold Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gary H Posted August 16, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 16, 2013 Does anyone know what the 125-T denotes on the well cars? Seems to be on nearly all of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWB Posted August 16, 2013 Author Share Posted August 16, 2013 It means that the well has 125-ton capacity, with a 125-ton truck at each end. Normal maximum capacity for trucks in North America is nominal 100 tons. The 125 ton capacity allows heavier loading of containers -- some carry microwave ovens, which are light, but others carry scrap cardboard, which is heavy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Does anyone know what the 125-T denotes on the well cars? Seems to be on nearly all of them. Gross loaded weight?; it would give an axle-load of just over 31tonnes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWB Posted August 16, 2013 Author Share Posted August 16, 2013 I believe this is 125 tons nominal capacity, excluding the tare. However, the weight on the LD LMT line of the car data governs what can actually be loaded, which is almost always greater or smaller than the nominal capacity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Wintle Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Gross loaded weight?; it would give an axle-load of just over 31tonnes. Actually, it means it has 125T trucks. The actual load limit for a well is in the 60t range. In the photo of the BNSF car that Martyn posted, the load limit for the well is on the upper rail near the centre - 122700 lbs. Adrian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gary H Posted August 16, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 16, 2013 Actually, it means it has 125T trucks. The actual load limit for a well is in the 60t range. In the photo of the BNSF car that Matyn posted, the load limit for the well is on the upper rail near the centre - 122700 lbs. Adrian That would make a lot of sense since the data on the sides always seems to go with that! What confused me is that on every other freight car in the U.S that ive seen, weights always seem to be expressed in pounds / lbs and not Tons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Wintle Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 That would make a lot of sense since the data on the sides always seems to go with that! What confused me is that on every other freight car in the U.S that ive seen, weights always seem to be expressed in pounds / lbs and not Tons. Trucks (bogies) are always rated in tons, even though the car loadings are always in lbs. BTW, they are probably short tons (2000lbs). Adrian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.