Rail freight: an ambition vacuum
DAVID CLOUGH talks to rail freight insiders about who is (and who isn’t) taking the lead in winning new freight traffic for rail
If you believe the public statements from most of the current large rail freight operating companies, they are working hard to expand and develop this sector. But is this the whole story? Who is actually behind the emergence of the Doncaster iPort rail⁄road terminal, and others such as East Midlands Gateway and Mossend International Railfreight Park (MIRP)?
Have these innovations come from the ‘old guard’ operators? Or have others shown the initiative? Moreover, are these examples of Strategic Rail Freight Interchanges (SRFIs) the way forward from 2022?
Rail freight insiders are reluctant to go on the record because of implications for their careers. But they are happy to offer a counterpoint to the oft-cited industry leaders, who portray a dynamic image of what they are doing to grow the sector. Yet it is what they are not doing that irritates others who never get a voice.
The latter argue that too many freight operators are risk-averse and only chase the low-hanging fruit. They believe that it is the ‘upstart’ freight companies and outsiders who are truly making the running, and not merely operating a few extra HS2 construction trains - or (as one insider admitted) shaving margins to wafer-thin levels to win an intermodal contract from a competitor. Surely, freight by road is the target, but there has been no impact on this so far in 2022.
The decline in Channel Tunnel traffic is referred to frequently, but no one answers the obvious questions of what caused the decline and how this can be reversed.
One recent bright spot was a new automotive flow won by DB Cargo. In April, we saw chronic congestion in Kent caused by a lack of Channel ferry capacity, with fresh produce jeopardised. There was no similar hold-up for freight trains passing through the Tunnel.
Some in the industry refer to inertia from most of the established operators, pointing out that port companies are now queuing to set up, arrange and pay for trains because the UK rail freight companies won’t take any risk. The initiative for SRFIs has so far come from outside the rail freight sector.
Are the insiders who spoke to RAIL being unfair? Is winning new business for the railway too difficult?
Relative newcomer DC Rail offers two examples of recent innovation. One is the conveyance of aggregates to a new unloading facility beyond Chessington South in Surrey. Starting in December 2021, the first train was hauled by one of the operator’s Class 60s, acquired from DB Cargo.
Earlier in the year, the operator resurrected a long-defunct sand flow from Norfolk to Merseyside, initially using traction hired from another freight operator. And there is speculation that the operator wants to buy more ‘60s’ from DB Cargo, which has a surplus of the type.
More evidence of enterprise comes from Rail Operations Group, which has repurposed redundant Class 319 electric multiple units.
Recognising the growth in ecommerce, ROG looked at a way of tapping the long-distance element of this market. In conjunction with train leasing company Porterbrook, several Class 319s have been converted to bi-mode operation and equipped internally by the removal of seats to convey crates of parcels.
These modified Class 768s have a top speed of 100mph, which makes them easier to path on a busy railway than 75mph (or even 60mph), locomotive-hauled freight. These sorts of services would be ideal for DB Cargo’s 125mph Class 67s, which have very little work these days, with ten stored.
Another reason for a perceived lack of ambition is that while freight volumes in 2021 exceeded those in 2019, the growth was largely from existing customers.
For example, the construction sector is notably buoyant - not least because of building HS2. No ambition is required to operate a few
extra Class 66-hauled aggregates services for an existing client.
Everyone was in agreement that for the first time in a generation, central and local government, the public and the decarbonisation agenda have all lined up for rail. The shortage of HGV drivers is wellknown, and also works to rail’s advantage. Businesses that have never previously used rail are now exploring the possibility. A reduction in passenger traffic post-COVID has freed capacity for more freight, while Network Rail has also shown more flexibility in the timing and pathing of such services.
As ship size grew through the last decade, there was general agreement across government, rail freight operators and shipping lines that all the cargo handling work could not be done at the ports, and that there was a need for expanded inland terminals such as SRFIs. There was also agreement that the main sectors for real growth in rail freight were intermodal and construction, and this has been proven to be accurate.
Back in 1968, the fledgling Freightliner (a standalone comany from BR) began to develop a large network of container bases across the country - not just at seaports, but also at some of the inland locations closed during the 1980s.
Today, the freight companies still have a number of legacy BR yards used for intermodal traffic. For example, Freightliner has Trafford
What is a Strategic Rail Freight Interchange?
The aim of an SRFI is to optimise the use of rail in the freight journey. In its 2014 policy statement, National Planning Statement for National Networks, the Government stated: “A Strategic Rail Freight Interchange (SRFI) is a large multi-purpose rail freight interchange and distribution centre linked into both the rail and trunk road system. It has rail-connected warehousing and container handling facilities and may also include manufacturing and processing activities.”
Park, Leeds and Lawley Street (Birmingham), while DB Cargo has Wakefield, a smaller site at Trafford Park, and Mossend Euroterminal.
Why did companies with existing facilities, now all privately run and claiming to be hungry for new business, not adapt these and embrace the SRFI concept now springing up at sites such as East Midlands Gateway, Mossend Railhead and Doncaster iPort?
These large, successful and profitable longterm sites are now firmly in the hands of nonrail freight companies. Contrast this with the recent news that two established Scottish rail terminals have been leased to road hauliers, rather than the foreign-owned rail operators themselves investing in upgraded facilities. Is this inertia again, or unwillingness to provide the money?
And is the problem solely inertia on the part of freight companies?
Informants point to Parkside, a potential site for an SRFI approach. The colliery closed in 1993, and there has been talk for decades about its use as a rail⁄road logistics base.
It is in Merseyside, right on the border
with the counties of Greater Manchester and West Cheshire & Chester. The West Coast Main Line (WCML) runs along one boundary, while the M6 skirts another.
A former haul road for the colliery waste crosses farmland in Cheshire to a quarry located a quarter of a mile from Junction 22 of the M6. A short siding used to serve the colliery from just east of Newton-le-Willows station. Logistics operator the Malcolm Group now has a base four miles away at Haydock, but the potential rail access has been built over.
Parkside, a brownfield site, ought to be ideal for repurposing, but other factors have stalled progress. There is strong local opposition, St Helens Council is not sufficiently resourced to make the running on a project of this scale, and being at the convergence of three planning authorities brings differences in approach to planning issues. Is there a greater role for regional mayors and central government here, particularly within the Department for Transport?
This brings into the discussion the reopening of closed rail⁄road depots that used to handle Speedlink wagonload traffic, with the Dallam site in Warrington serving as an example.
It is next to the WCML, and several attempts have been made to resuscitate the facility. Unfortunately, road access is poor and siding space is incapable of being expanded to meet the requirements of the longer trains now envisaged for SRFIs.
If the future does lie with the SRFI concept, what is the potential number nationwide? The opinion is 12-14 nationally, although (again) planning consent might scupper some in ideal locations.
Stourton in Leeds is an industrial area whose location would be ideal, but recent housing development might arouse strong opposition from residents. This is where Doncaster iPort scores because it has the golden scenario of being just a few miles away from the urban conurbation, with excellent rail and road access.
Another issue that causes irritation to insiders is that the Government shells out more than £20 million every year in MSRS (Modal Shift Revenue Support) grants for freight that has been moving on rail for decades.
They believe that these should mostly be for ‘new’ to rail freight custom, and that the present arrangement amounts to a subsidy, rather than a shift to rail. These grants should also be for a limited period, after which a flow is either viable or not worth supporting.
RAIL asked each of its sources for the prevailing strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats confronting rail freight. Distilling their views, the strengths
Low-hanging fruit? Operating a few extra aggregates trains for existing clients is not a powerful example of modal shift. On March 23, 59002 passes Hungerford Common with the 0712 Merehead Quarry-Acton.
were the decarbonisation agenda and the shortage of truck drivers, together with Network Rail being more sympathetic toward freight. Rail freight had a good COVID pandemic because more people - especially the young and even politicians - have taken an interest in logistics.
Turning to weaknesses, this comes back to a lack of ambition among most of the big operators. There is reputedly evidence that ecommerce giant Amazon could be pro-rail, but is anyone in rail freight pursuing the opportunity?
The view is that the intermodal freight sector is led by road hauliers and the ports. While rail freight companies might have account managers, there are insufficient highquality business development executives and supporting marketing resources.
Spending the budget for MSRS grants on 20-year-old flows leaves very little for the new business the money was supposedly to attract. Are businesses with goods to move aware that rail is hungry for their business?
What about opportunities? One commentator believes there is a huge demand to know about modern rail freight. He mentions a recent contact with a trade body that said it had no idea how to get in touch with a rail freight company.
The Channel Tunnel offers a great opportunity which the pan-European
operations of the owners of DB Cargo ought to be well-placed to exploit.
And it has taken rail outsiders to spot the advantages of bringing rail, road and warehousing together at one site - the SRFI concept.
Turning to threats, a big issue is rail’s cost base. Apart from network access charges, rail employees are well-paid, and this is especially true for train versus truck drivers. With rocketing fuel and energy costs, this element of the operation will need careful monitoring.
Private ownership of facilities such as SRFIs will make the rail freight operators susceptible to these highly commercial owners. This happened with shipping lines a generation ago, when 20 businesses became four and cost many jobs.
Do freight operators have the traction resources to meet a growth in demand?
Over the past 20 years, evidence of the lack of a modal shift from road to rail has resulted in 13 Class 92 locomotives (the only freight traction permitted to work trains through the Tunnel) sent to Eastern Europe. A further 15 are stored, but probably cannibalised to a greater or lesser degree.
This leaves just 18 in operation with DB Cargo and GB Railfreight (GBRf). Of these, GBRf dedicates ten to Caledonian Sleeper work, which leaves a mere eight of the 46 Class 92s that were built during the 1990s available for their intended use through the Tunnel.
The significance of motive power availability has a much broader reach than just the Tunnel.
Back in 1991, British Rail’s Railfreight Distribution business conducted trials with Class 59s and ‘60s’ to assess their suitability for high-speed movements at up to 75mph.
With a trailing load of 1,800 tonnes, these locomotives, which can deliver around 2,600-2,700hp at the rail, were incapable of maintaining the desired journey times. At full power, these Type 5s could only sustain 65mph, not the 75mph desired.
The subsequent Class 65 project for a diesel locomotive of at least 4,000 installed horsepower faltered in the run-up to rail privatisation.
By contrast, Class 92s deliver 6,700hp at the rail, while the much smaller Class 88s are good for 5,400hp. Both these electric designs can cruise along the WCML at 75mph with 1,800 tonnes on the drawbar. Coincidentally, 1,800 tonnes is the predicted weight of the planned maximum-length intermodal trains for which SRFIs are being designed.
Current intermodal services are around 1,200-1,400 tonnes, so diesel and electric traction have similar timings once on the move. The difference between them emerges during acceleration and on the WCML’s northern banks.
Both types average 69mph between Gretna Junction and Beattock, but the Class 66 then crawls up the ten-mile bank at 26mph, whereas an electric averages 47mph. The future is electric - and a greener option.
Reengineering Class 92s or ageing ‘90s’ would cost around one quarter of the price of a new model. In addition to the stored ‘92s’, there are currently 14 ‘90s’ laid up that could be resurrected and modernised, as GBRf has done with ten of its ‘92s’. Clearly, the capacity exists to handle a growth in fast, green longhaul freight, if new business was won. But will the owners pay for the traction upgrading?
Network Rail has helped the gearing-up needed for greater freight volumes by providing capacity improvements at Southampton Western Docks and on the Bootle branch that links the Port of Liverpool with the national network. The thorny matter of 300-plus miles of infill electrification that would benefit rail freight remains.