Speedlink

[Merle Haggard]

By the way - private owner wagons on Speedlink - the empty ones - got a free ride !

Not always - this is taking me back to the bane of my working life 25 years ago!
One of our customers had their own wagon controller, who would phone the local TOPS office for empty (PO car carrying) wagons to be released back to the loading point. This should have required a flow number, so that a charge was raised, but the customer didn't quote it so the TOPS office assumed it was another railway employee making the request and released it as an empty, which didn't require a flow number and went free. I spent a lot of effort tracking these down, and generating not inconsiderable revenue - far more than my salary!. Mr Bekhardt's men, who didn't understand TOPS, thought I was wasting my time, TOPS did everything, and put a stop to it.

One of the purposes of what became Speedlink was the conveyance of major customers' minor flows; the idea that every customer with very profitable trainload traffic also had small flows of less traffic than could be run economically as a trainload. The concept was that these flows could provide a base load, requiring only a comparatively small amount of other customers' ad hoc traffic to move into profitability.

Air braked 45t GLW wagons were introduced in number around 1970. The two usual types were originally known as 'Supervans' and 'Superwagons' (although one of my colleagues referred to them as 'the new GLW-type wagons ') but less common were the steel carriers. Possibly because of inadequate design of the stanchion, these wagons were memorably painted with the words 'STEEL AB - NOT TO BE LOADED WITH STEEL'.

And my thanks for the details about 56302 - so much knowledge here, we all learn something. Garston was a story in itself - some of the tales seemed unbelievable - turned out they were true

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Not always - this is taking me back to the bane of my working life 25 years ago!
One of our customers had their own wagon controller, who would phone the local TOPS office for empty (PO car carrying) wagons to be released back to the loading point. This should have required a flow number, so that a charge was raised, but the customer didn't quote it so the TOPS office assumed it was another railway employee making the request and released it as an empty, which didn't require a flow number and went free. I spent a lot of effort tracking these down, and generating not inconsiderable revenue - far more than my salary!. Mr Bekhardt's men, who didn't understand TOPS, thought I was wasting my time, TOPS did everything, and put a stop to it.

One of the purposes of what became Speedlink was the conveyance of major customers' minor flows; the idea that every customer with very profitable trainload traffic also had small flows of less traffic than could be run economically as a trainload. The concept was that these flows could provide a base load, requiring only a comparatively small amount of other customers' ad hoc traffic to move into profitability.

Air braked 45t GLW wagons were introduced in number around 1970. The two usual types were originally known as 'Supervans' and 'Superwagons' (although one of my colleagues referred to them as 'the new GLW-type wagons ') but less common were the steel carriers. Possibly because of inadequate design of the stanchion, these wagons were memorably painted with the words 'STEEL AB - NOT TO BE LOADED WITH STEEL'.

And my thanks for the details about 56302 - so much knowledge here, we all learn something. Garston was a story in itself - some of the tales seemed unbelievable - turned out they were true

Long time ago now , but I thought PO wagons paid some sort of annual registration fee , which then granted "free" transit when empty. Maybe differing companies had bespoke arrangements.

Garston - yes -a challenging environment - (the signalbox - Garston Jct got burned down after my time !) - the thieves were well organised one gathers , with "spotters" watching out for tempting targets. The BTP did a heroic job in keeping a lid on it - . Any vulnerable containers (consumer goods etc like tinned meat or imported French brandy , Italian wine from Felixstowe) , was strictly loaded next to the train engine and extra heavy duty seals affixed. Container doors blocked in where possible. Not always succesful regrettably. The Guinness traffic from Park Royal was dealt with at Spekeland Road (not far away) - the thieves stole the Portakabin type office one weekend , craning it onto a flatbed truck and drove off , the phone lines twanging away as they did so. Theft of aluminium kegs for smelting down illegally was a local micro-trade.

Regarding economics - Ferrywagon traffic - I was reliably informed that after shipping and port costs , BR had a net revenue of about £5 a wagon to anywhere in the UK left. A fascinating operation , and could be very busy. Some wonderful quirky flows like Northern Ireland made Feta cheese , shipped via Stranraer to somewhere in Europe via Dover. A very rare example of a return load from that part of the world.

 

[CW2]

In the early days of Speedlink there were trains which ran with a baseload of metals or coal traffic, which enabled less than trainload quantities of other traffics to reach obscure parts of the network at marginal costs. Once Speedlink Coal had declared UDI and set up their own network, followed by the metals sector doing much the same thing, there wasn't much hope of moving wagonload traffic back into profitability. Even with eagle-eyed accountants and account managers ensuring as much revenue as possible came the way of Speedlink, it was doomed. The first step was the takeover by Freightliner (or call it a merger if you want to save face).

 

[ChiefPlanner]

In the early days of Speedlink there were trains which ran with a baseload of metals or coal traffic, which enabled less than trainload quantities of other traffics to reach obscure parts of the network at marginal costs. Once Speedlink Coal had declared UDI and set up their own network, followed by the metals sector doing much the same thing, there wasn't much hope of moving wagonload traffic back into profitability. Even with eagle-eyed accountants and account managers ensuring as much revenue as possible came the way of Speedlink, it was doomed. The first step was the takeover by Freightliner (or call it a merger if you want to save face).

Spot on - the Speedlink Coal Network and "Metalslink" (?) - did knock a big hole in an already challenging Speedlink network , - the bespoke household coal trains seemed at times to have very low loadings , which probably killed them off in any case (that may have been the plan !)

Remember -even in the early 1980's , after Freightliner came back into the BRB fold from the NFC / BRB split - there was a good bit of tension between the 2 "organisations" initially - though this mellowed after a while and some Speedlink Network trains carried some FLL sets when needed - the 1009 Whitemoor to Parkeston Quay often had a "special" 5 set on the back , and Bristol Flt attached a 2 set (Harveys Bristol Cream and Embassy fags) onto a Mossend bound service coming up from Exeter Riverside.

 

[CW2]

Spot on - the Speedlink Coal Network and "Metalslink" (?) - did knock a big hole in an already challenging Speedlink network , - the bespoke household coal trains seemed at times to have very low loadings , which probably killed them off in any case (that may have been the plan !)

Remember -even in the early 1980's , after Freightliner came back into the BRB fold from the NFC / BRB split - there was a good bit of tension between the 2 "organisations" initially - though this mellowed after a while and some Speedlink Network trains carried some FLL sets when needed - the 1009 Whitemoor to Parkeston Quay often had a "special" 5 set on the back , and Bristol Flt attached a 2 set (Harveys Bristol Cream and Embassy fags) onto a Mossend bound service coming up from Exeter Riverside.

Yes, once the Crewe and York Speedlink offices were closed down, only a limited number of staff (myself among them) chose to make the move to London to work within the new combined Freightliner + Speedlink organisation. There was quite a culture clash at first, but we all learned about each other quite quickly, and got on with doing the best job possible.

 

[Dr Hoo]

I don't remember those [Class 4s]. Are you sure they were in the Speedlink era? Can you refresh my memory with some headcodes?

January 1985
WCML
4M64 1140 Bathgate-Willesden via Millerhill and Warrington
4M38 2055 Mossend-Willesden via Carlisle
4S48 2157 Willesden-Bathgate via Carlisle and Millerhill
4S70 2320 Warrington-Bathgate via Millerhill
ECML
4R40 0915 Wakefield-Dagenham via Doncaster
4S39 1842 Dagenham-Millerhill via Doncaster and Tyne
4L30 2005 Dagenham-Wakefield via Doncaster

(All from Paul Shannon's book, 'Speedlink')

Long time ago now , but I thought PO wagons paid some sort of annual registration fee , which then granted "free" transit when empty. Maybe differing companies had bespoke arrangements.

Yes, I vaguely remember that. I think that it was called the 'Commuted Charges Scheme'. Must admit that I thought that it was intended for 'unusual' movements such as trips for storage, repair or modification, or 'rescuing' after being detached as a 'cripple' (for which otherwise the effort of quoting a one-off charge would have been disproportionate) rather than normal 'returns empty' when one might assume that the head haul rate already included an allowance for, subject to any specific arrangements for triangulation or back-loads.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

January 1985
WCML
4M64 1140 Bathgate-Willesden via Millerhill and Warrington
4M38 2055 Mossend-Willesden via Carlisle
4S48 2157 Willesden-Bathgate via Carlisle and Millerhill
4S70 2320 Warrington-Bathgate via Millerhill
ECML
4R40 0915 Wakefield-Dagenham via Doncaster
4S39 1842 Dagenham-Millerhill via Doncaster and Tyne
4L30 2005 Dagenham-Wakefield via Doncaster

(All from Paul Shannon's book, 'Speedlink')


Yes, I vaguely remember that. I think that it was called the 'Commuted Charges Scheme'. Must admit that I thought that it was intended for 'unusual' movements such as trips for storage, repair or modification, or 'rescuing' after being detached as a 'cripple' (for which otherwise the effort of quoting a one-off charge would have been disproportionate) rather than normal 'returns empty' when one might assume that the head haul rate already included an allowance for, subject to any specific arrangements for triangulation or back-loads.

Firstly - that lot of trains up there are pretty much all automotive services - but then "mixed" class 4 consists with A/B Speedlink wagons were possible - I had a glorious example at Ipswich once when due to the Southampton Dock strike we had imported containers from Ipswich to Barking Flt (imported South African fruit if you must know) - a 10 set , and a rare 10 COV/AB's of bagged malt from Ipswich Docks to Poplar Dock - it was economic to put the two together and run it via Temple Mills Yard. With a 37 ! - the shunters had to use the changeover levers on the vans to equalize the braking. A very rare working on reflection.

That and empty containers on a 5 set to Lowestoft , for loading with sawdust - for transit to Coatbridge , for bottle packing for the Scottish Whisky industry. (exports) - a rare 3-2-5 bell code in that part of the world. Set as out and back and attached to 4S80 at Ipswich Yard.

Thanks for the mention of "Commuted Charges" - that is something I have not thought of for well over 3 decades !

 

[Cheshire Scot]

I don't remember those. Are you sure they were in the Speedlink era? Can you refresh my memory with some headcodes?

100% Speedlink. My involvement was from 1978 to 1986 and I am certain it would have run throughout that for time sensitive traffics . Sorry I don't have headcodes, maybe someone has a relevant WTT of that era or a copy of the Paul Shannon book mentioned above to confirm headcodes. EDIT - I have just noticed Dr Hoo response above quoting 4M38, but no northbound balance at the date quoted although there may have been earlier.

 

[CW2]

As ChiefPlanner says, all those services listed were mostly automotive traffic. The southbound empties from Bathgate were tripped via Mossend. I was aware of these class 4 automotive services and specifically excluded them from my query.

 

[55002]

January 1985
WCML
4M64 1140 Bathgate-Willesden via Millerhill and Warrington
4M38 2055 Mossend-Willesden via Carlisle
4S48 2157 Willesden-Bathgate via Carlisle and Millerhill
4S70 2320 Warrington-Bathgate via Millerhill
ECML
4R40 0915 Wakefield-Dagenham via Doncaster
4S39 1842 Dagenham-Millerhill via Doncaster and Tyne
4L30 2005 Dagenham-Wakefield via Doncaster

(All from Paul Shannon's book, 'Speedlink')


Yes, I vaguely remember that. I think that it was called the 'Commuted Charges Scheme'. Must admit that I thought that it was intended for 'unusual' movements such as trips for storage, repair or modification, or 'rescuing' after being detached as a 'cripple' (for which otherwise the effort of quoting a one-off charge would have been disproportionate) rather than normal 'returns empty' when one might assume that the head haul rate already included an allowance for, subject to any specific arrangements for triangulation or back-loads.

Ah yes 4S39 cars used to follow the 1S37 kings Cross to Aberdeen parcels up, can’t remember 4L30 though (edit just looked at the 85 WTT and sure enough it’s there)..used to do lot of overnighters on ECML. The petfood train ran as 4S93 in 1985 too 1730 Wisbech to Deanside that was a dedicated COY (company) train though

 

[Tom Quinne]

I speak with some experience of Speedlink. Most trunk trains had a reservation system for the most important traffics , agreed for timetable periods , so that the yard supervisor at say Mossend would know how to plan the priorities for say 6Vxx to STJ , giving priority to "reserved" or priority confirmed traffics if there was a surplus for that particular train. It usually worked very well , and the liasion between the ground staff and the Speedlink / Regional controls worked very well. In a "one" railway , unburdened by track access rights - specials could and would be organized as needed , crews and traction provided. The overnight logs frequently gave examples of good proactive work in the small hours - where all sorts of things were done to keep traffic moving.

Brakevans (air piped ones) were also used for certain dangerous goods flows ,terminal operations and for some "escort" duties (which we won't go into here)

When the railway cared, and we had a can do attitude. Unlike today where alot simply don’t care, and will find any reason not to do.

 

[Dr Hoo]

When the railway cared, and we had a can do attitude. Unlike today where a lot simply don’t care, and will find any reason not to do.

Whilst I have quite a lot of sympathy for that view (and would like to count myself amongst those who 'cared' in many ways), the whole business model depended on having a lot of spare locomotives, wagons, crews and paths sitting around to run those ad hoc moves. Yet we have heard how much of the Speedlink traffic was conveyed on ridiculously low rates that could only ever lose money hand over fist, especially if it was intermittent or seasonal. (Unlike something like block coal or steel trains.)

And sadly even 'back in the day' you would still find crews who would refuse to 'make overtime' and insist on departing punctually rather than respond to pleas to hang on and make a booked connection with a late running trip.

Specifically in relation to freight (and I realise that there isn't a wagonload network any more) are there actually a lot of FOC staff that "simply don’t care, and will find any reason not to..."?

It's a long time since I worked 'on the ground'.

 

[Merle Haggard]

Long time ago now , but I thought PO wagons paid some sort of annual registration fee , which then granted "free" transit when empty. Maybe differing companies had bespoke arrangements.

Garston - yes -a challenging environment - (the signalbox - Garston Jct got burned down after my time !) - the thieves were well organised one gathers , with "spotters" watching out for tempting targets. The BTP did a heroic job in keeping a lid on it - . Any vulnerable containers (consumer goods etc like tinned meat or imported French brandy , Italian wine from Felixstowe) , was strictly loaded next to the train engine and extra heavy duty seals affixed. Container doors blocked in where possible. Not always succesful regrettably. The Guinness traffic from Park Royal was dealt with at Spekeland Road (not far away) - the thieves stole the Portakabin type office one weekend , craning it onto a flatbed truck and drove off , the phone lines twanging away as they did so. Theft of aluminium kegs for smelting down illegally was a local micro-trade.

Regarding economics - Ferrywagon traffic - I was reliably informed that after shipping and port costs , BR had a net revenue of about £5 a wagon to anywhere in the UK left. A fascinating operation , and could be very busy. Some wonderful quirky flows like Northern Ireland made Feta cheese , shipped via Stranraer to somewhere in Europe via Dover. A very rare example of a return load from that part of the world.

The annual fee was the Commuted Charges scheme and the wagon should carry the letters 'CC' in a specified place. This allowed out-of-course movements for maintenance and repair. Rates for movements where the empties returned to the original loading point were usually for the round trip. However, in the case of movements over a network, where loaded wagons received were either unloaded and reloaded, or unloaded and forwarded empty to a location different from the previous origin, were charged for single journeys, and the possibility to move empty wagons under TOPS without raising charges was what caused the difficulties.

The £5 is an exaggeration, but the 'rail' receipts (i.e., Dover or Harwich to final destination) were not great. However, before the introduction of the Nord pas de Calais, B.R. also received income from the 'sea' element, too. The ferry represented a fixed cost and so marginal traffic could be conveyed at almost no cost on the ferry, giving a better picture of BR total revenue than just taking the rail element. International traffic was charged under publicly published tariffs, dating back to the original European Coal and Steel Community but of course developed, as a certain organisation evolved, to be more general. The tariffs were published and the logic (?) was to be transparently clear that every customer was offered the same price, to ensure that well-worn epithet 'level playing field'. One may ask why our competitors were not placed in the same position, but the answer to that question is that, in certain Western European countries even in the late 20th Century long distance road haulage was effectively so heavily restricted as to be un-competitive - the concept of market pricing and the idea that a monopoly was certainly not in place did not trouble our mainland European partners.

On a lighter note, my reference to Garston was an oblique reference to the entrepreneurial sales skills of one of our colleagues which, unfortunately for him, resulted in a custodial sentence. Quite remarkable, though, and made the national, press!!!

- - - - - - - - -

I have mentioned already that major customers' smaller flows could provide the 'backbone' for a Speedlink route, requiring only a small amount of additional traffic to become worthwhile. The enforced demise of Speedlink not only destroyed the opportunity to convey the major customers' flows, but also the opportunity to move small volumes for a new customer with the aim of that traffic becoming significant enough to be of trainload quantity. No customer would transfer all their traffic to rail in one go, but after trials they might move over more and more traffic until trainload volumes were acxheived.

 

[muddythefish]

Thanks for memories of the Speedlink trains of the 1980s and 90s, successors to the wagonload freight trains that I grew up watching in the 1960s and 70s.

The demise of wagonload freight was one of the saddest parts of the railway's decline in my lifetime. I used to love watching and listening to at night the shunting activities in our local goods yard

Wagonload freight still seems to be quite common in Europe. On trips to France, Germany, Austra and Italy (pre pandemic) towns and small wayside stations often hadve wagons in sidings serving local factories and businesses. I assume the economics of wagonload freight in Europe aren't that much different to the UK so why have we given up ?

On another note, I remember Freightliner terminals in the 1970/80s carrying internal UK freight at places such Nottingham, Sheffield, Swansea, Edinburgh, Dundee, Newcastle, Wilton, all of which have shut. Were these uneconomic too and why?

 

[Irascible]

Wagonload freight still seems to be quite common in Europe. On trips to France, Germany, Austra and Italy (pre pandemic) towns and small wayside stations often hadve wagons in sidings serving local factories and businesses. I assume the economics of wagonload freight in Europe aren't that much different to the UK so why have we given up ?

On another note, I remember Freightliner terminals in the 1970/80s carrying internal UK freight at places such Nottingham, Sheffield, Swansea, Edinburgh, Dundee, Newcastle, Wilton, all of which have shut. Were these uneconomic too and why?

We are a little smaller than France & Germany, so I think road is a bit more favourable, especially for JIT logistics when you include the time transferring & waiting around for the train to move. I'd like to know about internal liner traffic though - that *is* the replacement for wagonload/pickup goods, you've just replaced the rails with the liner train itself. Not enough terminal facilities for internal use? I remember someone talking about Ed Burkhardt bemoaning that we had so few terminal facilites for anything here.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Thanks for memories of the Speedlink trains of the 1980s and 90s, successors to the wagonload freight trains that I grew up watching in the 1960s and 70s.

The demise of wagonload freight was one of the saddest parts of the railway's decline in my lifetime. I used to love watching and listening to at night the shunting activities in our local goods yard

Wagonload freight still seems to be quite common in Europe. On trips to France, Germany, Austra and Italy (pre pandemic) towns and small wayside stations often hadve wagons in sidings serving local factories and businesses. I assume the economics of wagonload freight in Europe aren't that much different to the UK so why have we given up ?

On another note, I remember Freightliner terminals in the 1970/80s carrying internal UK freight at places such Nottingham, Sheffield, Swansea, Edinburgh, Dundee, Newcastle, Wilton, all of which have shut. Were these uneconomic too and why?

Long and complicated story as to why the great hope of Freightliner domestic traffic failed to shine - basically , it was a question of costs and efficiencies - particularly with competition from much better roads and lorry challenges - it was always worked out that a 200+ mile journey was needed to compete - terminal to terminal costs were reasonable , but you had to add on local collection and delivery costs , plus the terminals were often underused for the volume available - and were "fixed" costs. All very sad really - like an improved fast wagonload network , the 1960's FLL network would have flourished had it been around from about 1950.

Increasingly , FLL moved onto deep sea and less so European traffics - where someone else did the fiddly bits , and even then it was challenging. Swansea to Dudley steel and tinplate traffics , was a good example of loss making business - not helped by strikes in the producing industries , and in the case of the original Willesden terminal , - much of the indigenous manufectering firms moving out to other locations from North West London. (or closed down) In that case - collecting from say a firm making steel stillages in say Hemel Hempstead and moving it south to go north was never going to really compete with the newish M1 on the doorstep.

 

[Merle Haggard]

The following has been suggested in ChiefPlanner's reply, but might be worth setting out for clarity.
When a container was moved by F/Liner on a 'domestic' (G.B. internal) move it required two transhipments, and the greater competitiveness of the rail haul vs road had to overcome the cost of these. In the case of import/export traffic, Deep Sea or European, two transhipments were still required, but the road competitor also had one transhipment (at the port).

This was the reason that, in RfD days at least, the Deep Sea and European elements were the ones that received the most attention.
It might also be worth pointing out that Freight Liners Ltd, having become part of the nationalised road transport business along with N.C.L. in the late 1960s restructuring, was treated as a customer by B.R. Railfreight when it wasn't part of B.R.. This ,meant that prices were agreed for running trains but gave FLL the opportunity to cancel trains that would be lightly loaded and thereby reduce costs (cancellation charges were not fully developed). The cost of the ability to adjust train operation costs to maximise net revenue thereby fell on B.R. When Freightliners became part of RfD, the change was that, when you cancel a train at short notice, the associated costs don't go away they are allocated to you, not absorbed somewhere else. FLL was thereby transformed overnight from a very profitable company to one with the same difficulties as the rest of Railfreight. Without going into details, not taken well!

 

[ChiefPlanner]

The following has been suggested in ChiefPlanner's reply, but might be worth setting out for clarity.
When a container was moved by F/Liner on a 'domestic' (G.B. internal) move it required two transhipments, and the greater competitiveness of the rail haul vs road had to overcome the cost of these. In the case of import/export traffic, Deep Sea or European, two transhipments were still required, but the road competitor also had one transhipment (at the port).

This was the reason that, in RfD days at least, the Deep Sea and European elements were the ones that received the most attention.
It might also be worth pointing out that Freight Liners Ltd, having become part of the nationalised road transport business along with N.C.L. in the late 1960s restructuring, was treated as a customer by B.R. Railfreight when it wasn't part of B.R.. This ,meant that prices were agreed for running trains but gave FLL the opportunity to cancel trains that would be lightly loaded and thereby reduce costs (cancellation charges were not fully developed). The cost of the ability to adjust train operation costs to maximise net revenue thereby fell on B.R. When Freightliners became part of RfD, the change was that, when you cancel a train at short notice, the associated costs don't go away they are allocated to you, not absorbed somewhere else. FLL was thereby transformed overnight from a very profitable company to one with the same difficulties as the rest of Railfreight. Without going into details, not taken well!

Freightliner (circa 1980) had quite a tight cost control management from my experience - monthly terminal audits and a well set up route planning team which apart from producing the train plan ( a lot of it was portion working - e.g the 1027 Felixstowe departure was something like 10 Stratford , 5 Leeds and 5 Willesden - but a large degree of flexibility on a day to day basis) - they worked out "flow" revenues for both existing and prospective traffics so you could work out the viability or otherwise of all non contract traffic This work was later rolled out into a strategic forward plan , which eventually saw the end of the "domestic" terminals at places like Swansea and Newcastle (amongst others) , and a greater concentration on the deep sea / european flows - of which Felixstowe was the emerging giant. Yes it was profitable and in my time you saw the figures rise and rise. The management ethos was quite commercial and much emphasis was put into seeking out decent traffic and filling empty spaces on trains where you could.

Incidentally - the timetable was "agreed" with "BR" - and any variations on the day (of which there was a lot at Felixstowe !) - and the summary of actual versus planned workings were carried out in some detail each week. There was sufficient slack in "BR" resources at the time so an extra 1900 to Stratford could be rustled up with a couple of hours notice , often using cancelled general freight resources , (local trip workings could be usefully used on such flows as the train crews were able to do Stratford and back light engine in a few hours) - we sometimes got "spare" passenger engines on specials , like the iconic Stratford silver roofed 47's. I speak a period before electrification of course. Very hard work all round.

 

[Merle Haggard]

Freightliner (circa 1980) had quite a tight cost control management from my experience - monthly terminal audits and a well set up route planning team which apart from producing the train plan ( a lot of it was portion working - e.g the 1027 Felixstowe departure was something like 10 Stratford , 5 Leeds and 5 Willesden - but a large degree of flexibility on a day to day basis) - they worked out "flow" revenues for both existing and prospective traffics so you could work out the viability or otherwise of all non contract traffic This work was later rolled out into a strategic forward plan , which eventually saw the end of the "domestic" terminals at places like Swansea and Newcastle (amongst others) , and a greater concentration on the deep sea / european flows - of which Felixstowe was the emerging giant. Yes it was profitable and in my time you saw the figures rise and rise. The management ethos was quite commercial and much emphasis was put into seeking out decent traffic and filling empty spaces on trains where you could.

Incidentally - the timetable was "agreed" with "BR" - and any variations on the day (of which there was a lot at Felixstowe !) - and the summary of actual versus planned workings were carried out in some detail each week. There was sufficient slack in "BR" resources at the time so an extra 1900 to Stratford could be rustled up with a couple of hours notice , often using cancelled general freight resources , (local trip workings could be usefully used on such flows as the train crews were able to do Stratford and back light engine in a few hours) - we sometimes got "spare" passenger engines on specials , like the iconic Stratford silver roofed 47's. I speak a period before electrification of course. Very hard work all round.

Thank you for the insights. My perhaps sour-sounding experience of them as a customer was back in the early and middle 1970s, working for (amongst others) Ray Ahmad, who was the FLL business manager at GMO Euston. In those days, short notice cancellations were frequently made and, for instance, some SX services were cancelled twice per week. I detected that there was an intention to make FLL successful, and of course this was when company trains were (correctly) seen as the way forward, but it didn't do favours in PP&CCA*

I would also like to add that I was with RfD for the whole of its existence. It is often vilified by enthusiasts (well, we were given the unwanted leftovers of the Railfreight loco fleet ) but I personally found my time there to be the most satisfying and enjoyable of my railway career. There was a much more flexible and can-do atmosphere, and people (generally) got on very well - it's hard to be bloody-minded to someone you like! A good social life, too - choosing to adjourn to West End clubs together on a Friday night was probably a bit unusual for a railway office...

'Profit Planning and Cost Centre Analysis'. Or' if you're a cynic 'Poor Planning and Cash Crisis Analysis'!

 

[Grumpy]

However, before the introduction of the Nord pas de Calais, B.R. also received income from the 'sea' element, too. The ferry represented a fixed cost and so marginal traffic could be conveyed at almost no cost on the ferry, giving a better picture of BR total revenue than just taking the rail element.

If of course the ferry has otherwise vacant space, and the income from conveying the railway wagon is not achieved by turning away other more remunerative traffic.
I seem to recall that SISD were more than happy to see the end of the Night Ferry sleepers as they could make more money from the same deck space by conveying RoRo.

 

[telstarbox]

Thanks for all the detail in this thread, it's really interesting.

Are the long trains which currently run to Trafford Park also "wagonload" as all the containers appear to be with different companies? If so are they viable because the whole train runs over a long distance (from Felixstowe / Channel Tunnel?)

 

[Merle Haggard]

If of course the ferry has otherwise vacant space, and the income from conveying the railway wagon is not achieved by turning away other more remunerative traffic.
I seem to recall that SISD were more than happy to see the end of the Night Ferry sleepers as they could make more money from the same deck space by conveying RoRo.

One of the oddities of policy was that the train ferries were (said to be) the only ones on the Channel crossing to be able to carry dangerous goods. One might have thought this provided a USP and used to encourage the rail movement of d.g.s. - but A.L.A. seemed to be happy to use the vacant space to load road vehicles conveying dangerous goods.
Road vehicles were conveyed on the train ferry 'to occupy vacant space' but this was not at marginal cost; the French retained the fully staffed restaurant from the Night ferry days to provide free meals to lorry drivers.
Meals also sometimes offered to B.R. staff visiting ALA on business - 4 courses and very substantial. In my experience though, not all crews welcomed B.R. staff travelling on business - once forced to use a rope ladder to board. Not easy carrying an overnight bag on a rough afternoon. Seemed to forget who paid their wages...

 

[Grumpy]

Seemed to forget who paid their wages...

Didn't BR effectively own ALA?

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Thanks for all the detail in this thread, it's really interesting.

Are the long trains which currently run to Trafford Park also "wagonload" as all the containers appear to be with different companies? If so are they viable because the whole train runs over a long distance (from Felixstowe / Channel Tunnel?)

In some respects - modern Freightliner trains are the descendant of the old mixed freight. Some trains are "contract" trains for one major customer , others are more of an open to all service , and can carry a range of boxes for various shippers.

It used to be much more varied - (shipper wise) - but globalisation has resulted in centralisation into a handful of really big conglomerates. In my days at Felixstowe - we had just on the North Atlantic trade United States Lines , Dart Lines , Manchester Liners , CAST (Canadian) and no doubt others serving specialised areas - like Anglo-Carribean , and so on. You used to get huge blocks of semi-raw materials for Heinz , nickel pellets for Inco Swansea and (hard to imagine today - one ton blocks of lead to go into anti-knock compound on Merseyside !)

Of course we could see what the declared contents were (an interesting things to do in the odd quiet moment) - literally everything you can think of tinned salmon , timber , car parts etc etc. Think of the domestic intermodals for say Tesco (other supermarkets are available) , which presumably carry everything a well stocked supermarket needs and sells.

 

[Irascible]

Long and complicated story as to why the great hope of Freightliner domestic traffic failed to shine - basically , it was a question of costs and efficiencies - particularly with competition from much better roads and lorry challenges - it was always worked out that a 200+ mile journey was needed to compete - terminal to terminal costs were reasonable , but you had to add on local collection and delivery costs , plus the terminals were often underused for the volume available - and were "fixed" costs. All very sad really - like an improved fast wagonload network , the 1960's FLL network would have flourished had it been around from about 1950.

This crosses into a discussion from a locked thread elsewhere; do you think domestic FL could be made to work with different technology, like say self-loading flats, or road trailers which could offload straight to the train? that would simplify the terminal side of things greatly. On the economical we're looking at electric road tractors in the near future which probably aren't going to have a great range, so there will have to be one or more breaks of journey to either charge what will be a rather large battery, or to swap tractor. One wonders just how realistically inconvenient road has to get to make rail attractive again.

I do miss the Barnstaple goods - felt so wierd to see the goods yard in use still, like they'd forgotten to close it in the 60s & everyone was hoping it wasn't going to be noticed.