All-door boxcars

[Pendolino]

Thanks to davesnow, we now have the Thrall and Evans all-door boxcars in Trainz. I have always wondered why these cars were not successful in the U.S.

As far as I have been able to ascertain, these cars were conceived in the 1960s and remained in service until the mid-90s.
The Thrall cars were owned by lumber companies, which used them to carry lumber.
I found images of Evans cars owned by Southern, Southern Pacific, ATSF and Bennet Lumber Products.

In Europe, all-door cars appeared in the late 1960s and now they have almost completely replaced conventional boxcars for a wide range of loads, such auto parts, paper rolls and almost any conceivable palletized load, since loading/unloading with a fork lift is much easier and faster than a conventional boxcar. These are the features that are highlighted in this description of a Southern prototype built in 1961:

Can someone explain why this type of car has not been successful in the U.S.?

Thanks in advance

 

[DaveL]

Hi Carlo,

That might be because the shippers did not scream loud enough to get them in wide spread use.

Dave

 

[fran1]

"Can someone explain why this type of car has not been successful in the U.S.?"

Maybe because it would have taken less men to load it and been quicker to load.

 

[rgcx]

Top 3 Reasons

1) There were lots of problems with their doors. They would jam; wouldn't stay closed or fall off. Unlike a slider which can roll open during transit; these cars would get trains stopped if the doors rolled open ~empty or loaded.

2) They were largely owned by private leasing companies (Timber, wood finishing, plywood and veneer) so they were restricted from being reloaded with different cargo/loads so they would always be empty going one direction. Railroads will always bill THEIR cars first; even competitor's cars before going thru the trouble of privately owned boxcars.

3) The rules changed in the 1980s under the Staggers Act. With a sluggish recession from 1981-1983, railroads were able to choose and legally refuse (by charging outrageous car prices per load) which businesses they wanted to serve. The idea of charging fair~competive prices with the downturn of the economy caused the previous boxcar shortage to turn into a glutton. Remember Rail Box and those colorfully per diem Shortline boxcars? Those new, high capacity boxcars were picked up railroads wanting to modernize their fleets.

Bottom line: They were expensive to use and maintain. Railroads knew it and passed those costs to private companies. As more US timber ops shut down; they reverted to conventional boxcars or embraced wrapping lumber loads and center beam flatcars. The latter began to occur in the early 1990s which coincides with many all door boxcars being retired and or scrapped.

More reading is available here. You don't need to be a member to read, but to see the pictures.
http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?11,2299813,2300308#msg-2300308

 

[Konni]

Hi,

That does not explain, why the same kind of boxcars are so successful in Europe with many different design variations offered by a wide range of manufacturers. The economic advantages of easy loading by forklifts should apply in the US as well.

Cheers,

Konni

 

[kws4000]

Limited payload size (eg dimensions) also limiting factor.
Also, moving parts imply matinence. No moving parts = no matinence = more time on the line = more revenue.