Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
The CMA CGM Group has announced the acquisition of Freightliner in the United Kingdom. The transaction encompasses rail and road operations, inland terminals, as well as the Freightliner brand. This acquisition underlines CMA CGM’s ambition to build a sustainable and competitive transport...
www.multimodal.org.uk
The CMA CGM Group has announced the acquisition of Freightliner in the United Kingdom. The transaction encompasses rail and road operations, inland terminals, as well as the Freightliner brand.
This acquisition underlines CMA CGM’s ambition to build a sustainable and competitive transport offering in Europe. By adding a long-standing name in UK rail freight, the Group reaffirms its commitment to supporting the modal shift from road to rail – a cornerstone of decarbonising global supply chains.
The transaction is expected to close in early 2026, subject to the required regulatory approvals. Other Freightliner businesses – Heavy Haul, Rotterdam Rail Feeding, and Freightliner Poland/Germany – will remain under existing ownership.
Freightliner operations will remain focused on its multi-user and multi-customer approach, and will be run independently with existing teams who have proven their expertise and dedication.
Rail freight is a major lever for reducing CO₂ emissions. With Freightliner UK’s expertise and know-how, CMA CGM will further strengthen its ability to offer European customers, seamless and integrated intermodal solutions including transport and terminal operations.
The addition of Freightliner opens the way to significant enhanced-value offerings: developing comprehensive intermodal offerings combining maritime, rail, and road; enhancing connectivity between Europe’s major ports and the UK hinterland through strategically located inland terminals; and driving shared innovation in decarbonized logistics solutions.
Rodolphe Saadé, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the CMA CGM Group, said:
“The acquisition of Freightliner, a leading rail freight operator, strengthens our intermodal presence in the United Kingdom, a strategic market for CMA CGM. It enables us to connect sea, rail and road more efficiently, delivering better solutions for our customers. It is also a concrete step in expanding lower-carbon transport options, supporting both their needs and the decarbonisation of global trade.”
Commenting on the divestment, Tim Shoveller, Chief Executive Officer of Freightliner Group, said:
“This transaction marks an exciting new chapter for Intermodal and Heavy Haul, allowing each to focus on their distinct markets under separate ownership. The Intermodal business will become a stand-alone business within CMA CGM’s portfolio, with opportunities to collaborate with other arm’s length CMA CGM companies. Heavy Haul will continue its growth journey in the bulk materials sector under a new brand with a clear focus on strengthening its position as a key freight operator. Our customers will continue to receive the same high-quality leadership and operational teams, and we have robust plans in place to ensure a smooth transition of ownership.”
The news means that two of the largest container movers, Freightliner and Maritime Transport Ltd part of Medlog (MSC) are now - or will be - owned and operated by the two worlds two largest global shipping lines.
I doubt they will want to run intermodal trains through the Channel Tunnel as there is no real demand, it's much cheaper to feeder containers by ship plus you can't run hazardous cargo in those containers through the chunnel.
I've been told that Maersk were in for the business after it was taken off the market and all the boxes had been ticked, but CMA CGM jumped in presumably with a major bid. The move will cause major concern to all the other shipping lines and I would not be surprised if somebody like MSC put a bid through their subsidiary Medlog who own Maritime Transport Ltd for GB Railfreight which like Freightliner is owned by investment organisations.
Hopefully this means that in the long run, we at Intermodal get alot of our work back that has been wrongly given to HH and that it takes away the divide and conflict that there seems to be, bubbling away between the 2 divisions of the companies.
I have read that HH will be its own business, rebranded and completely separate from Intermodal. The day cannot come sooner.
The division of locos would possibly be something like this:
08 - Intermodal. I believe all of the Freightliner 08s are used at Freightliner Terminals or major yards (Ipswich and Crewe).
59 - Heavy Haul.
66/5 - split. Not sure exactly what the split would be but probably about half half.
66/6 - Heavy Haul.
66/9 - Intermodal. They can be used on Heavy Haul but are always concentrated on Intermodal.
70 - either Intermodal or Split. Can easily see them all with Intermodal for commonality.
90 - Intermodal. However this will be interesting as the 90s have been using Heavy Haul schedules over the last couple of years (on intermodal services!) to get cheaper bills for electricity. I presume this practice would have to finish.
Feel free to correct me on this, or to add something.
The division of locos would possibly be something like this:
08 - Intermodal. I believe all of the Freightliner 08s are used at Freightliner Terminals or major yards (Ipswich and Crewe).
59 - Heavy Haul.
66/5 - split. Not sure exactly what the split would be but probably about half half.
66/6 - Heavy Haul.
66/9 - Intermodal. They can be used on Heavy Haul but are always concentrated on Intermodal.
70 - either Intermodal or Split. Can easily see them all with Intermodal for commonality.
90 - Intermodal. However this will be interesting as the 90s have been using Heavy Haul schedules over the last couple of years (on intermodal services!) to get cheaper bills for electricity. I presume this practice would have to finish.
Feel free to correct me on this, or to add something.
It may also depend on who either owns or leases the fleets as everything is either Intermodal or Heavy Haul. So the 90s are owned by Intermodal, but the 66/5, 66/9 and 70 fleets are split in which business they are leased to.
Yes CMA CGM are based in Marseille
They recently bought a majority in Santos Brazil Participacaoes too.
This is the CMA CGM news story
Strengthening intermodal services in Europe: CMA CGM acquires Freightliner UK Intermodal Logistics, becoming a key player in rail logistics in the United Kingdom.
- Freightliner will remain a multi-user, multi-customer standalone operator whilst benefitting from CMA CGM’s support and coverage in logistics and shipping globally.
- Accelerating decarbonization: this acquisition supports the modal shift from road to rail, a key lever in reducing CO₂ emissions in supply chains.
- Creating value-added services: better interfacing rail and maritime expertise to deliver complementary and sustainable logistics solutions to customers.
The division of locos would possibly be something like this:
08 - Intermodal. I believe all of the Freightliner 08s are used at Freightliner Terminals or major yards (Ipswich and Crewe).
59 - Heavy Haul.
66/5 - split. Not sure exactly what the split would be but probably about half half.
66/6 - Heavy Haul.
66/9 - Intermodal. They can be used on Heavy Haul but are always concentrated on Intermodal.
70 - either Intermodal or Split. Can easily see them all with Intermodal for commonality.
90 - Intermodal. However this will be interesting as the 90s have been using Heavy Haul schedules over the last couple of years (on intermodal services!) to get cheaper bills for electricity. I presume this practice would have to finish.
Feel free to correct me on this, or to add something.
Aren't there already pooling splits in some of the latest TOPS lists circulated on line such that this isn't actually a mystery? DFIM / DFHJ / DFIN for the 66/5s.
Aren't there already pooling splits in some of the latest TOPS lists circulated on line such that this isn't actually a mystery? DFIM / DFHJ / DFIN for the 66/5s.
As a minor point of interest, does Lebanon have a railway network? I'm assuming even if it does, you couldn't run a through freight train from GB, due to the Syrian civil war.
As a minor point of interest, does Lebanon have a railway network? I'm assuming even if it does, you couldn't run a through freight train from GB, due to the Syrian civil war.
According to Wiki, CMA GCM is based in Marseille, and is 97% privately owned with 73% in France and 24% in Turkey (the remaining 3% is held by a French public sector bank).
They own significant interests in ships, ports and logistics around the world, and are the third biggest container shipper (behind MSC and Maersk).
According to Wiki, CMA GCM is based in Marseille, and is 97% privately owned with 73% in France and 24% in Turkey (the remaining 3% is held by a French public sector bank).
They own significant interests in ships, ports and logistics around the world, and are the third biggest container shipper (behind MSC and Maersk).
The Turkiish element is held by the Yildirum group.
The Turkish element is held by the YILDIRIM Group which is a highly-diversified, vertically integrated, global industrial conglomerate with headquarters in Amsterdam, Netherlands, and Istanbul, Türkiye. Established in 1963 as a construction material trading business in Samsun, the Company has broadened its focus through new subsidiaries and evolved to be one of the fastest-growing global industrial groups since its foundation.
YILDIRIM Group currently operates in 57 countries and across 5 continents, employing 25,000 employees worldwide in 9 industries: metals & mining, port management, fertilizers & chemicals, energy & power, shipping & logistics, energy commodities, financial services, construction & real estate, and international trade. https://www.yildirimgroup.com/
Founder Jacques Saadé started the company then named Compagnie Maritime d’Affrètement" with four staff members, one ship and just one shipping route between Beirut, Latakia, Livorno and Marseille. This initial Mediterranean service was developed to include the North American continent and CMA bought its first ships, Ville d’Orient and Ville du Levant. Its aim was to facilitate trade between the east and west Mediterranean using containers. It purchased the bankrupt CGM from the French Government in the late 1980's for a nominal fee and started to merge the two companies headquartering the company in Marseille. In the years since the shipping operations have been expanded globally so that they are now the second largest global carrier next to MSC having passed Maersk in TEU capacity operated in the last twelve months. CMA CGM has also recently branched out into the media business in France and also sponsors Marseille football club as well as owning Ceva Logistics. The UK head office is in Liverpool.
I understand why people want to protect their T&Cs - I am of no exception to this, but we also need to be honest about the bigger picture. If a train gets cancelled or left in an awkward spot because someone chooses to lean on a clause for something that’s pretty trivial, the cost isn’t just a few quid — it’s often six figures once delays and knock-on effects are added up. That money doesn’t just disappear; it undermines the business and damages our reputation with customers who are relying on those goods being delivered.
Maybe that’s why HH drivers get put on more work — because there’s less risk of it being cancelled at the last minute and costing the company a fortune. In reality, those rigid conditions might actually be the reason the parent company decided to sell Intermodal in the first place. If management sees a division as more of a burden than an asset, then no wonder they’ve gone down the route of splitting it off.
At the end of the day, none of us benefit if the company bleeds money. Protecting conditions is important, but it has to be balanced with keeping the business viable. Otherwise, what good are T&Cs if the work — and the jobs that go with it — end up disappearing? It’s all about getting that balance right and moving with the times. A cancelled intermodal doesn’t sell the transition from road to rail.
The interesting thing with that is it's registered in France but their fleet ( all with F-xxxx registrations ) is based at Liege in Belgium.
Looking at the 2025 airliner version of the Combined Volume they have one A330 and the B777 directly, but it does look as if the bulk of what they shift is through specialist cargo airliner chartering services.
I am thinking that if they are looking at linking in rail distribution to various hubs of what is currently airfreighted and then moved by lorry directly from the airports then it could well create some very strong new flows on the railway which would be in addition to what is already being moved.
This deal is therefore well worth keeping a close eye on; there are several airports where it wouldn't be too difficult to add sidings directly into their freight terminal areas.
The short answer is the flexibility and cost effectivity of road transport.
The are very few industrial premises which boast their own rail facilities in the UK, these tend to produce either bulk cargo or a product in sufficient volumes to make trainload freight viable between a single load point to one or more rail connected delivery sites such as a port. This produces the situations for example where a ship carrying 50,000 tonnes of biomass can be moved entirely by rail to Drax whereas a similar ship carrying the same amount of grain results in the entire cargo being delivered by road. This is because the delivery points can vary from a factory in Manchester which can only take 30 tonne lots of material in one delivery to match it's daily or weekly production to a farmer in rural Cumbria who takes one 30 tonne delivery every six weeks. That cargo of grain may be delivered to dozens, possibly hundreds of sites around the country on tipper trucks that dump it straight into storage facilities in a couple of minutes, imagine the sort of facility that would be required for a rail truck to such efficiency. It's the same with liquid, semi liquid and specialist materials that are carried in road tankers, imagine trying to deliver fuel to a petrol station by rail, it's just not going to happen.
In the intermodal world containers move from our ports by road and rail, but the majority are collected or delivered to the producer or end user by road because the site is either not rail connected, can only load/unload a limited number of containers in a day or cannot physically load/unload containers on their own site so have the container loaded/unloaded by a third party elsewhere and then trucked to or from their premises. The intermodal model is basically a standard packaged size version of the grain ship distribution model, with the rail network and depots acting as part of a huge "warehouse" to distribute and if necessary store containers until they ready for delivery to the end user, or load on the next train to the port.
Below is a map of MSC's UK intermodal network which will be similar to all the other shipping lines. Apart from their well known volumes that move through Felixstowe, London Gateway, Southampton and Liverpool, they also serve other UK ports by their own feeders at the ports shown. This too is mirrored by other shipping lines to a lesser extent so there are smaller volumes moving by road.
However, in general terms it's generally accepted in the shipping industry that rail delivery is more effective when the distance is about 100 miles but this can be slightly less if the volumes demand as this allows maximum use of truck drivers hours when working out from a local rail connected depot.
It should also be considered that a single container load may also consist of goods destined or originating from multiple companies, which often can mean 20-30 different shipments in one load. Wherever the loading or unloading of the contents takes place will result in multiple truck movements as the collection from the manufacturers premises or the delivery to the end user take place and whilst some of the movements will take place on 44 tonne trucks, there will many completed on smaller vehicles including the humble transit van for those smaller shipments. For those who may have an interest in model railways just imagine how many vehicles it has taken to deliver your latest prized purchase from the major manufacturers whose factories are in China to your door. That I think will explain why rail carries only a relatively small amount of freight compared to rail.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The interesting thing with that is it's registered in France but their fleet ( all with F-xxxx registrations ) is based at Liege in Belgium.
Looking at the 2025 airliner version of the Combined Volume they have one A330 and the B777 directly, but it does look as if the bulk of what they shift is through specialist cargo airliner chartering services.
I am thinking that if they are looking at linking in rail distribution to various hubs of what is currently airfreighted and then moved by lorry directly from the airports then it could well create some very strong new flows on the railway which would be in addition to what is already being moved.
This deal is therefore well worth keeping a close eye on; there are several airports where it wouldn't be too difficult to add sidings directly into their freight terminal areas.
The reason for basing the fleet at Liege Belgium is because it's already a logistics hub for other operators and I believe allows night flights as well as it's central location in Europe.
I can't see the air division supporting the rail division in this country, for a start the payload of a single plane might just fill a single 40ft container so you would need a lot of planes and huge volumes to support those movements. The whole concept of airfreight is that it's designed to be quick, those parts arriving on a flight tonight could be required the following day in the factory especially if it's for the motor industry.
CMA CGM is only interested in purchasing Freightliner for two reasons. The first is to secure control of a haulier with sufficient capacity and reach to handle it's UK intermodal needs, bearing in mind that when MSC through Medlog took control of Maritime Transport Ltd through their Medlog subsidiary, MSC effectively purchased CMA-CGM main UK haulier. The second reason is to develop their logisitcs infrastructure, following again the lead taken by MSC. Apart from hauling containers around the country Maritime Transport provides logistics for many companies including loading/unloading containers which allow the contents to delivered to their warehouses and distribution centres in the exact standard sizes their warehouses technology require. For the same reason I would not be surprised if for example MSC made a move for GBRail which ultimately owned by an investment bank entity, and even DCcargo which is state owned being offloaded to Maersk or Hapag, following their offloading of Arriva busses and the freight forwarding division of DB Schenker to Denmarks' DSV.
The short answer is the flexibility and cost effectivity of road transport.
The are very few industrial premises which boast their own rail facilities in the UK, these tend to produce either bulk cargo or a product in sufficient volumes to make trainload freight viable between a single load point to one or more rail connected delivery sites such as a port. This produces the situations for example where a ship carrying 50,000 tonnes of biomass can be moved entirely by rail to Drax whereas a similar ship carrying the same amount of grain results in the entire cargo being delivered by road. This is because the delivery points can vary from a factory in Manchester which can only take 30 tonne lots of material in one delivery to match it's daily or weekly production to a farmer in rural Cumbria who takes one 30 tonne delivery every six weeks. That cargo of grain may be delivered to dozens, possibly hundreds of sites around the country on tipper trucks that dump it straight into storage facilities in a couple of minutes, imagine the sort of facility that would be required for a rail truck to such efficiency. It's the same with liquid, semi liquid and specialist materials that are carried in road tankers, imagine trying to deliver fuel to a petrol station by rail, it's just not going to happen.
In the intermodal world containers move from our ports by road and rail, but the majority are collected or delivered to the producer or end user by road because the site is either not rail connected, can only load/unload a limited number of containers in a day or cannot physically load/unload containers on their own site so have the container loaded/unloaded by a third party elsewhere and then trucked to or from their premises. The intermodal model is basically a standard packaged size version of the grain ship distribution model, with the rail network and depots acting as part of a huge "warehouse" to distribute and if necessary store containers until they ready for delivery to the end user, or load on the next train to the port.
Below is a map of MSC's UK intermodal network which will be similar to all the other shipping lines. Apart from their well known volumes that move through Felixstowe, London Gateway, Southampton and Liverpool, they also serve other UK ports by their own feeders at the ports shown. This too is mirrored by other shipping lines to a lesser extent so there are smaller volumes moving by road.
However, in general terms it's generally accepted in the shipping industry that rail delivery is more effective when the distance is about 100 miles but this can be slightly less if the volumes demand as this allows maximum use of truck drivers hours when working out from a local rail connected depot.
It should also be considered that a single container load may also consist of goods destined or originating from multiple companies, which often can mean 20-30 different shipments in one load. Wherever the loading or unloading of the contents takes place will result in multiple truck movements as the collection from the manufacturers premises or the delivery to the end user take place and whilst some of the movements will take place on 44 tonne trucks, there will many completed on smaller vehicles including the humble transit van for those smaller shipments. For those who may have an interest in model railways just imagine how many vehicles it has taken to deliver your latest prized purchase from the major manufacturers whose factories are in China to your door. That I think will explain why rail carries only a relatively small amount of freight compared to rail.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The reason for basing the fleet at Liege Belgium is because it's already a logistics hub for other operators and I believe allows night flights as well as it's central location in Europe.
I can't see the air division supporting the rail division in this country, for a start the payload of a single plane might just fill a single 40ft container so you would need a lot of planes and huge volumes to support those movements. The whole concept of airfreight is that it's designed to be quick, those parts arriving on a flight tonight could be required the following day in the factory especially if it's for the motor industry.
CMA CGM is only interested in purchasing Freightliner for two reasons. The first is to secure control of a haulier with sufficient capacity and reach to handle it's UK intermodal needs, bearing in mind that when MSC through Medlog took control of Maritime Transport Ltd through their Medlog subsidiary, MSC effectively purchased CMA-CGM main UK haulier. The second reason is to develop their logisitcs infrastructure, following again the lead taken by MSC. Apart from hauling containers around the country Maritime Transport provides logistics for many companies including loading/unloading containers which allow the contents to delivered to their warehouses and distribution centres in the exact standard sizes their warehouses technology require. For the same reason I would not be surprised if for example MSC made a move for GBRail which ultimately owned by an investment bank entity, and even DCcargo which is state owned being offloaded to Maersk or Hapag, following their offloading of Arriva busses and the freight forwarding division of DB Schenker to Denmarks' DSV.
The Railways had all this business - they had the forerunners of distribution warehouses and freight depots the length and breadth of the country. They had every major manufacturing business served by sidings. What they didn't have was efficient means of serving and operating these facilities - too many staff, too many inefficient practices, too much out of date equipment, not enough control over individual shipments. Not that we should berate our own railways only - no other country in the world has managed to adapt and retain their competitive edge over road transport (except for bulk commodities and/or over long distances).
The railways had all the business when it was he most efficient method of moving good around, predominantly because:
a) it was much quicker than waterborne transport or a horse
b) motor vehicles and motorways hadn’t been invented
c) when motor vehicles had been invented, they were heavily regulated in freight transport.
Once road freight regulation disappeared, it rapidly became much more efficient than railfreight in most freight markets.
Rail remains more efficient than road at moving large volumes or weights of freight any distance, or medium volumes / weights over long distances (100miles plus).
I’ve had a bit of a tidy up of some of the more ‘fruity’ posts in this thread, and that’s meant that a few things that were probably ok have ended up being removed due to time constraints.
Look, by all means debate the issues, but please keep it civil, respectful and constructive.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
www.multimodal.org.uk
