Is DB Schenker doing enough?

[daccer]

When i left BR in 1989 the Railfreight sector was carring 150 million tonnes of traffic. Last year the combined total of freight uplifted was just over 100 million tonnes. All I keep hearing about is a massive railfreight boom in recent years and yet tonnages have plummeted. It seems we all get carried away by the tonne/km figure and yet on closer reflection it seems that this 'growth' is purely down to the disintigration of the Uk mining industry and the need to move imported coal from ports to (now)badly located power stations. My question is this ; have DBS (EWS) done enough to stimulate railfreight or did they simply think they were buying a monopoly and that they didnt need to worry about finding new flows and/or customers. I am concentrating on DBS as I believe the smaller players have gone out and tried to be creative with tie-ups with road hauliers and supermarkets (DRS) and new flows, timber (colas), scrap (Advenza). With the economic and political situation favouring railfreight for once, high fuel prices and green concerns especially, have DBS been remiss in finding new clients and in increasing railfreights market share. Channel Tunnel freight is minimal as is wagonload traffic. Can anybody name a major client DBS has brought to the market in the last decade? It seems that they have seen their market share diminish (for many reasons not all of their own making!) and have done little to stop the loss or try and lead the industry in breaking into new markets and attracting new clients. What do you think? Am I unfair or have they merely taken up BR's mantle and managed decline slowly but surely.

 

[whoshotjimmi]

I am trying to source figures for the last 20 years or so, but, as I go about finding it, I will say that DB Shchenker et al made a huge investment in new rolling stock to streamline the business and to deal with some of those green concerns. I wonder what would have become of freight on the railway had the class 59 and 66 not come along. I would also like to state that paths for passenger trains are given priority - a subject that has been keenly discussed by freight companies recently. Just look at the ECML and WCML.

 

[The_Rail_WAy]

Thanks for bringing this topic up Daceer, its a subject I am rather passionate about. There is simply not enough freight on Britains railways today. Period.

More needs to be done by the government, freight comanies, network rail etc to promote and increase the amount of freight traffic on our raiways.

 

[daccer]

The issue for me has not been DBS making the most of the traffic it has and maximising profits from the volumes it inherited from BR but the fact that even with the lower unit costs brought on by the new locomotive fleets and private sector freedoms DBS have not been able to attract new traffic. I have to ask the question why when the smaller operators have had to go out and be creative to develop their businesses DBS hasnt. Could it be that because of their original market leading monopoly DBS never really felt the need to go out and try and find new traffic flows and clients. What has happened over the last ten years does not really reflect well on DBS in terms of profitability and tonnages moved. Before people start using the inherited working practises as an excuse be aware that DBS themselves said that 30 million tonnes of traffic was out there waiting to be grabbed and as of yet little has moved to rail. DRS for example have built a business from their Nuclear traffic core by being innovative and looking at partnerships. DBS is not totally to blame i know and paths are an issue as is the strength of the road lobby but when compared to the smaller operators they seemed to have missed a trick and FL especially have benefited. Real tonnage moved has not grown even after a period of sustained economic growth and surely this is the most damning indictment of DBS which has been shown to be lethargic and a dilitantte when it comes to innovating and creativity.

 

[D841]

DBS have only been in business in the UK for a few months (as opposed to EWS, who I think you are really talking about).

DB have a very different attitude to business than Wisconsin Central had, and I would expect traffic volumes to rise when they get to grips with it. I have an inside track on some of their plans, can't post about them here though, due to confidentiality clauses, etc.

 

[90019]

DBS have only been in business in the UK for a few months (as opposed to EWS, who I think you are really talking about).

DBS have owned EWS since mid 2007.

 

[daccer]

I was refering to DBS/EWS as the same entity. I would hope that DBS have at least a plan for taking the business forward after watching what EWS have done for the past decade. It would seem that with EWS now incorporated into DBS fully there must be some pan-European cooperation coming. Hopefully they will look at DRS' model especially and see that partnerships are the way forward. Its time for a leader to finally get railfreight moving - 100 million tonnes is a pitiful amount of freight to be moved by rail and if it is to double over the next 10-15 years as everyone keeps predicting then someone needs to take the bull b the horns and get cracking!!

 

[D841]

I was refering to DBS/EWS as the same entity. I would hope that DBS have at least a plan for taking the business forward after watching what EWS have done for the past decade. It would seem that with EWS now incorporated into DBS fully there must be some pan-European cooperation coming. Hopefully they will look at DRS' model especially and see that partnerships are the way forward. Its time for a leader to finally get railfreight moving - 100 million tonnes is a pitiful amount of freight to be moved by rail and if it is to double over the next 10-15 years as everyone keeps predicting then someone needs to take the bull b the horns and get cracking!!

Where do you get the idea that traffic will double over the next 10 - 15 years? Even before the recession/depression came along, studies were done suggesting only minimal future growth in carryings.

I don't disagree with your comments re: DRS strategies, but don't forget they're still Government-owned and thus might not be the best operator to make comparisons with. GBRf on the other hand would be a good place to look for such comparisons.

 

[daccer]

Every long term forecast I have read in the rail press including interviews with the rail heirachy and those in the political arena say that freight volumes should be doubling in the next two decades. I know Govt policy is for this to happen hence the pressure on NR to free up capacity. I agree with you though that I cannot see any growth coming as Imported Power station coal will inevitably drop off in the coming years as the stations themselves get decommissioned and we look for alternative energy sources and this is still the dominant freight flow at this time. Unless someone really goes for it at DBS or FL we will not see much growth at all.

Although DRS is Govt owned it has shown a willingness to be creative and build partnerships - Stobart,Malcolms etc. I do agree the Gbrf is also a good example of a smaller operator making a business by being flexible and creative.

The main purpose of this thread was to highlight that DBS (EWS) had a basic monopoly when they took over Railfreight. The had a chance to revolutionise freight on rail and to build a growing business. I am not sure if they used this opportunity to its fullest and as such being bought out by the Germans was probably the best result they could have got as the business seemed to be in decline.

By the way on reading the interview with Keith Heller in Rail this month I can only say how underwhelmed I am by his responses. Its pretty obvious that the interviewer wasn't overly-impressed either by some of the nuances in the piece!!

 

[37402]

The continual attempts at cost cutting and its consequential customer dissatisfaction (causing traffic losses to road and to the competition) due to no loco, no wagons etc is to support the operation in France and has been for a number of years. Those at EWS could/can see this and it is a widely held belief that DB only acquired EWS for access into France and the UK isn't high on the list of priorities.

 

[adamp]

Well as passenger trains take priority, because they are faster, instead of building new units which have a top speed of 75mph, why not build new engines or carry out modifications to increase that speed and acceleration. Surely this will make rail freight more popular and deliver an improved speedy service!

As mentioned in another thread about the HSTs being phased out from passenger use, could HST's cope with light loads of freight?
-Adam

 

[90019]

As mentioned already, passenger trains have a higher priority than freight, but also with the much larger amount of red tape when transporting things by rail compared to putting it on a truck, and the ability of a truck to go straight to it's destination (within reason) without messing about at depots offloading it and then getting it to it's final destination (often by truck, somewhat ironically), road freight is generally much more desirable for businesses trying to move goods around.

 

[GB]

As mentioned already, passenger trains have a higher priority than freight, but also with the much larger amount of red tape when transporting things by rail compared to putting it on a truck, and the ability of a truck to go straight to it's destination (within reason) without messing about at depots offloading it and then getting it to it's final destination (often by truck, somewhat ironically), road freight is generally much more desirable for businesses trying to move goods around.

All depends on location and how much traffic they want moved as to which is better for buisnesses. Using rail saves alot in the area of driver hours/wages for long distance travel.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well as passenger trains take priority, because they are faster, instead of building new units which have a top speed of 75mph, why not build new engines or carry out modifications to increase that speed and acceleration. Surely this will make rail freight more popular and deliver an improved speedy service!

As mentioned in another thread about the HSTs being phased out from passenger use, could HST's cope with light loads of freight?
-Adam

The top speed of Intermodel wagons are 75mph (alot less for infustructure wagons), so increasing the top speed of a loco passed 75mph is pretty pointless.

The trouble with freights is getting up to speed and maintaining it behind local services.

 

[90019]

All depends on location and how much traffic they want moved as to which is better for buisnesses. Using rail saves alot in the area of driver hours/wages for long distance travel.

Indeed, but Road freight is a lot more flexible, and it'll be easier to get road haulage at short notice for most businesses, if it's needed.

 

[adamp]

How about increasing the speed of the wagons then?

 

[GB]

How about increasing the speed of the wagons then?

Becasue what it comes down to as always is £££. It would take considerable investment (if you can call it an investment) just to either replace or alter existing intermodel wagons not to mention the vast amount of infustructure wagons out there.