AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Distribution in the 1970s by John Darker

25th April 1969, Page 26
25th April 1969
Page 26
Page 26, 25th April 1969 — Distribution in the 1970s by John Darker
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

• A two-day conference last week considered some of the likely changes in distribution methods in the 1970s. The organizers, the Management Studies Centre Ltd„ brought together transport and distribution executives from many of the largest firms in the country. Their confrontation with speakers with a wealth of practical experience on mechanical handling, warehousing, road and rail transport and, especially, advanced forms of computer systems design was highly stimulating. There were down-to-earth contributions by the traffic manager of National Carriers Ltd., Mr. A. Richards, and by the assistant director of marketing of Freightliners Ltd., Mr. C. C. Durrant.

Describing the organization of National Carriers Ltd., Mr. Richards said the road fleet of over 9,000 tractors and 23,000 trailers operated through 190 depots. Its national warehousing facilities controlled about 200 warehouses with a storage space of over 5m square feet. It was currently the biggest customer of Freightliners Ltd., forwarding over 1,000 containers per week.

About 75 per cent of NCL traffic moved between depots by conventional rail wagons or containers, 15 per cent by Freightliner container and 10 per cent by road vehicles. The trend was to hire company trains between the larger main centres moving their own traffic at high speeds and at their own times. Two such trains were already in use.

NCL depots, said Mr. Richards, ranged from 100 years old to some completed within the past 12 months. Handling methods used covered slat conveyors, tugs and trolleys, electric tractors, lifting tractors, semi-live stillages, sack barrows and some specialized systems. Tests tended to show that depot handling methods had only a marginal effect on unit costs; other factors, such as quality of management, had a much more serious effect on cost and efficiency.

Collection and delivery methods were almost exclusively by articulated vehicles. The C and D rounds had been devised by a technique developed by the Operational Research department which utilized a manual method after considering computer techniques. The area served was divided up into a number of small zones linked by means of a "serpent" drawn through the zone in a particular manner. Usually this serpent was drawn starting from the outside of the area and it finished in the centre near the depot.

This method enabled the workload of each zone to be established and the serpent was chopped into sections of a day's work or a vehicle's load, whichever was the more appropriate.

Describing the continuous quality control system employed, Mr. Richards said that a 1 in 100 sample of package transit times was taken continuously. This was done by means of labels stuck or tied to packages bearing the date of collection, loading, transhipment, unloading and delivery. The labels were processed through a computer and information nationally, by area and by depot, was produced each four weeks. He added that some 35 per cent of the identification labels were retrieved at destination depots; he was satisfied that the information provided by the quality control check was substantially accurate though he confessed that during visits to depots he frequently noticed the "guinea pig" parcels stuck on loading platforms.

Tailor-made schemes were being developed to suit the needs of individual firms using the whole facility of NCL. For example, part or complete storage at forwarding or destination points could be allied to road or rail movement of bulk traffic, or a firm's production could be stored at a number of strategically placed warehouses so that delivery time was reduced to a minimum.

After describing the Freightliner system Mr. Durrant gave up-to-date details of the growth of traffic. The number of containers carried in 1968 was 10 times greater than in 1966. Today Freightliners operated on 46 routes and it was expected that this figure would exceed 70 by the end of this year.

Road hauliers, said the speaker, were playing an important part in the success of Freightliners. It was envisaged in the original marketing plan that at least 50 per cent of Freightliner business would come from road hauliers and C-licence operators who would continue to act as principals for the throughout movement, employing Freightliners as the sub-contractor for the trunk movement. These early estimates were proving accurate and it would not be long before the figure of 50 per cent was reached.

Internationally, Freightliners were setting their stall out to cater for the container boom. Services were operated from London and the Midlands to Ireland and short sea business was handled through Harwich to and from the Continent via Zeebrugge, Rotterdam and Dunkirk. Tilbury and Felixstowe, dealing mainly in deep sea business, were linked by Freightliners to London, South Wales, the Midlands, the North West and Scotland. Freightliner services were also operated direct to ports from inland Customs depots.

Mr. Durrant concluded that despite the progress made it was still early days both for Freightliners and for containerization. He felt containers were here to stay and they had an important role to fulfil in any distribution system which afforded the opportunity for bulk movements.

When the NCL and Freightliner corn

pany spokesman answered questions it was apparent that both companies maintained separate commercial representation—some of those present saw the logic of an integrated marketing set-up for all NFC and rail ser vices. Asked whether the two parallel net works of BRS Parcels and NCL would one day be merged into one, Mr. Richards said this was possible. The railway parcels ser vices had lost 8 per cent of traffic per year since 1950. The trend was reversed in 1968 and current thinking was that each organization could improve the other. "Give us three years to see what we can do," he said.

Mr. C. G. Chantrill, principal of C. G. Chantrill and Partners Ltd., introduced his lectures—,"The Transport Bill and its ef fects" and "Packaging and Material Handling"—with a reminder that the volume and speed of all forms of transport were reaching fever pitch: congestion threatened to be general. There was an interesting correlation between the population explo sion and transport speed. World population

—around billion in A.D. 1—took 16 centuries to double. Today's population of 3 billion was expected to double by A.D. 2000.

Similarly, speeds were rocketing: the maximum of around 10 mph before the railway era had reached 100 mph by 1900. By 1939, 500 mph had been reached in the air and space speeds of 25,000 mph were now normal.

The railway goods system based on horse and cart radius deliveries had generated marshalling and shunting yards which could not cope with expanding traffic—hence the transfer to road haulage. The Freightliner system and the Motorway networks were designed to alleviate road congestion and loss-making railways but at the present rate of progress there was doubt whether they would ever catch up with demand.

The Transport Bill, designed to rationalize the nation's transport resources and to direct traffic to the medium best suited for particular services, must result in changed habits and methods. While in the long run it was hoped the provisions would be in the interests of the national economy, restraints and in some cases increased costs would be imposed on the distributor.

Mr. Chantrill considered that the additional costs imposed on the private sector of the industry would tend to make BR and NFC rates comparatively more attractive.

Some Freightliner services were already competitive and likely to become more so. Restriction of the radius of operation to 100 miles would affect situations competitive with national services. Where the latter showed favourable rates and service it would obviously be sensible to comply. Otherwise, loopholes existed for obtaining authorization for extended distances.


comments powered by Disqus