Container Convolution
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
by Ashley Taylor, AMI RTE AssocinstT
FOR some people the container revolution is an accepted fact, for others the container is at best only a mixed blessing. As one haulier put it, some operators have been suffering from commercial convulsions through trying to jump aboard the sort of bandwagon that does not always provide sweet music. The road transport industry has yet to arrive at a balanced view on this particular subject which is bound to be ventilated afresh at this winter's professional gatherings. Summing up my impressions of the reactions of hauliers and ancillary users I find that in the main general hauliers, whilst being willing to carry other people's containers, are often little attracted by this form of transport unless it has features of particular significance in their own normal spheres of operation. With manufacturers or traders the case is different since the value of the container can usually be checked quite quickly and effectively.
In all the arguments to which I have listened on this subject—and they have been many—the participants have been concerned chiefly with the stowage of the contents ("stuffing" being regarded as having an unprofessional ring), their insurance, handling, documentation and so on. Pages upon pages of figures have been produced to show the economies possible in given circumstances—admittedly a vital aspect—but relatively little has been heard of the value of the container in improving the quality of transport for specific products. This last point is the one that weighs really heavily with commercial users who are currently the most active in examining the advantages to be gained by an alternative to the traditional form of body.
One of the complaints often voiced by industry against hauliers in general is that basically they are selective, which really means that as good businessmen they would much rather concentrate on jobs for which they are specifically equipped and find remunerative than on trying to cover the whole range, of transport needs. Despite any such protestations there is in fact no lack of companies with broadly based facilities designed to cover a wide range of activity.
Key Warehousing and Transport Co. Ltd. of Hull, for example, offers a considerable variety of facilities with a mixed fleet of 38 vehicles of 16-ton, 24-ton and 32-ton gross capacity, plus ten containers and 40 Lancashire flats. Three trunk routes run on a reciprocal basis are Hull-Manchester, Hull-Birmingham, and Hull-Blackburn, whilst there are interchange agreements on shipping routes to Antwerp and Rotterdam in connection with unit loads. Dispatches to the Continent, which mounted to 1,447 units in 1967, increased to 2,308 in 1968. Mr. Tom Jackson, managing director, pointed out that there is relatively little call for general domestic traffic by container except for specialist purposes, one example of which might be cargo moving under bond such as whisky. Certainly in Hull the shipping aspect is paramount and Key offers a groupage service daily to the Continent and thrice-weekly via Gothenburg to Scandi
navia. In a recent month taken at random 58 continental groupage units were dispatched and 161 containers on door-to-door transits. For export operation the advantages of the container are indisputable and since ferry services are likely to go on increasing so overseas container work will expand.
Mr. Jackson commented that damage to containers was frequent and with so many different handlings there was no possibility of proving where it had taken place. Although containers may save time at the point of dispatch they cannot necessarily be off-loaded quickly on arrival at the destination, particularly if that point turns out to have no, or only inadequate, handling facilities. Then there are the customers who want the benefit of unit charges but, with their fork-lift operators on incentive bonus, do not want to load containers on their own premises with the result that collections have to be made by conventional vehicles and the cargo boxed at the depot. In the case of import cargoes from some countries little care seems to be given at the loading points to either total weight or the distribution of the load. In the course of my recent inquiries I have constantly been assured that containers benefit customers. But all the evidence suggests that for the haulier who does something more than transporting other people's boxes, constant care is essential if he is to avoid coming out on the wrong side.
I was interested to observe that axle-weighing equipment had been installed by the Key organization so as to preclude weight difficulties. Incidentally, casual observation in the Hull docks area revealed some big containers being carried by units (not belonging to Key) that to say the least looked unlikely to measure up to current legal requirements.
There had been no' suggestions that handling of freight by container would be efficacious in every instance, commented Mr. E. M. Haim, director (operations), Ferrymasters Ltd., in a recent discussion (CM, July 4 1969), but saturation point was still some considerable way ahead. Servicing of the unit load by the road haulier was not a new thing but the present concept was sufficiently recent for there currently to be no rules and no acknowledged authority to whom everyone would bow. Comment on the subject, he said, must of necessity be based on personal experience and on the individual's involvement in a specific part of the chain of operations. British-based through-transit operations were broadly aligning themselves in separate groups, either as through container forwarders or as international door-to-door carriers. While there was a field for both, opinions differed regarding the effects, areas, and merits of each and on the genuine comparison of total costs.
Where container carrying as such was to be the policy there were a number of shipping lines and other organizations who would provide hauliers with skeletal chassis built to the requirements of their own container fleet. In such circumstances, whilst being relieved of part of the capital investment, the haulier must consider the restrictions on his working flexibility that this practice imposed—and he must read carefully the small print in the interchange agreement designed to protect both parties. Where the operator was obliged to provide his own carrying chassis, and this would probably be in the majority of cases, he must decide the design best suited to the various customers he served. The skeletal type, whilst being advantageous in weight and initial cost, might well adversely affect his ability to plan loading with normal domestic freight on return journeys as was possible with platform chassis.
Many variables needed to he taken into account, said Mr. Hair's, even in the compilation of a unit rate from time-mileage vehicle costs. The operator had to ask where the empty container was to be collected, what were the lifting facilities, what facilities the consignor had for loading a container promptly, who supplied the carrying trailer and what happened to the vehicle on arrival at destination (particularly if the trailer had to be surrendered)? All of these factors could influence the profitability of the rate quoted.
The overall-coverage haulier had a better opportunity to achieve maximum loaded use and minimum dead mileage since his unit after discharging one load could proceed immediately to the nearest collection point. This flexibility was denied a single-route carrier serving one port of shipment. The multi-route haulier had the disadvantage of being less able to standardize his load-carrying equipment and needed to provide a mixed fleet to cater for the varying regulations of the countries he served and the differing requirements for ship stowage and terminal handling. Mr. Hains said he hoped that these problems would gradually diminish so that carrying units would ultimately be covered by a small number of all-purpose modules. In fact that trend was already evident. For himself it had been an eduation to work with the fleet that had reached further towards this ideal than any other, some 30,000 trailers, all with precisely the same base-module, interchangeable throughout the world and married to their own fleet of purpose-built container ships. Whatever the equipment, concentrated utilization was vital if the haulier's organization was to remain effective and competitive. In the Continental field achievement of this standard necessitated the close supervision of aspects such as minimizing customer's delays and ensuring accuracy of border-crossing documentation. Together with this must go vigorous overseas marketing to give best possible two-way loading, efficient port /terminal services, and effective cargo /handling equipment.
When one turns to the use of containers by manufacturers and traders it can quickly be demonstrated that the governing considerations are entirely different. There are usually well-defined lines, with the container either fitting or not fitting into the picture. Often, as has been indicated earlier, the availability of the container may improve the quality level of the transport for a specific product.
And whereas international operations, or even domestic general carriage by hauliers, demands a multi-purpose unit, and for obvious reasons the multi-mode ISO standard container is usually preferred, when it comes to specific industrial applications a company can choose forms of container more closely tailored to its own needs. For some people this "in-company" choice turns out to be the form of container which is better known as a demountable body.
There are many variations on this theme, some of them having been dealt with in CM over recent years. I have recently taken a look at several, which involved widely different types of traffic.
A company that has consistently extended its container (or demountable body) operations is Hygena Ltd., a kitchen fitment manufacturer with headquarters at Liverpool. The company's first container was put into use in 1963 and delivery has just been taken of No. 48. Examination of the possibilities was initiated in 1962 in conjunction with A. C. Penman Ltd., of Dumfries, an associate member of Hygena's parent company, Norcros Ltd. Delivery of the first prime mover, a Dennis Pax V four-wheel rigid with a Penman container, took place in January 1963. Around 75 container loads per week are now delivered throughout Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Consignments vary from singledrop loads to 20-plus drops per load. Mr. P. S. Burch, transport manager, tells me that they have arrived at a working ratio for their particular purposes of three containers to two prime movers.
The container adopted is the Luton design which when secured on the vehicle gives it the appearance of a pantechnicon. The Penman parking system uses a fixed ramp with inclined rails. Beneath each container floor are four pull-out arms, two at each side, each housing a roller. When the vehicle is in position in front of the metal ramp the driver removes his holding clamps. then proceeds to reverse between the ramps. When the rollers contact the initial slope at the front of each ramp the container begins to rise from the platform of the prime mover, as reversing continues the container being completely lifted into position and locked ready for loading. So far the company has used only the fixed ramps mentioned, both for loading bay and parking purposes, but negotiations are now taking place with a view to employing hydraulic ramp principles so as to be able to locate the container at different levels.
Flexibility in working and quick turnround are the obvious advantages. Mr. Burch tells me that it is possible for a driver to arrive back at the base. complete his documentation, service his prime mover, change over his containers and be outward bound again in less than 30 minutes.
To minimize any delay in delivery should there be trouble with a prime mover Hygena Ltd. has acquired four manually operated legs that can be taken to the scene of any breakdown. The container can then be changed over, the operation taking 1+-2 hours depending upon conditions on the site. Containers have proved to possess few disadvantages in this type of operation, one being that since overall height is 13ft. 10in. at some delivery points drivers may find it impossible to reverse into the loading bays. For the same reason re-routing may on occasion be necessary in order to avoid low bridges.
Hygena Ltd. is convinced that this is the container age. The company is always on the look out for improvements suitable for its particular industry and additions to the fleet will clearly be in accordance with Hygena's now-accepted containerization policy.
The advantages of containers to one of the world's largest producers of day-old chicks, Thornbers of Mytholmroyd, Halifax, Yorkshire, are many. Each year approximately 7-million chicks are delivered direct to farmers located throughout the British Isles and the company's aim is to ensure that each batch arrives safely and in the best of health. Each of its containers carries 16,200 chicks in controlledenvironment conditions, a constant temperature of 80 degrees Fahrenheit being maintained, irrespective of the climatic conditions, by the use of powered ventilation and heating.
According to director Mr. Ralph Thornber; the main advantage of containers over box-type vehicles is that of flexibility. "A life-expired chassis or engine does not mean the end of the complete vehicles," he says, "for containers should normally outlive the working parts many times over." Another important advantage is that Thomber's specially built containers are far easier to clean than traditional forms of transport, the lines both inside and out being kept straight and uncluttered. Regular cleansing is, of course, of the utmost importance to the Thoniber chick delivery operation. Day-old chicks need the same hospital-like care as that lavished on the human species. Accordingly, each container is thoroughly power washed, disinfected and fumigated each day without fail. This ensures that the chances of contacting and possibly spreading disease from farm to farm are kept to the very minimum.
According to Mr. Thornber, no problents whatsoever have been encountered since the company moved over completely to containers some 12 months ago. Indeed, so pleased are Thornbers with the way the container service is operating that future chick-delivery fleet expansion will take this form.
From the organization's title centre, Fleetwood Fish Transport Ltd. makes deliveries throughout the country, using depots at Liverpool, Gloucester and Northampton. The fish is boxed in accordance with individual orders and an immediate advantage is that greater quantities of boxed fish can be carried in containers than on a flat vehicle. Mr. K. Richmond, secretary of the company, tells me that they regard containers as more hygienic than conventional vehicles. In particular, glass— reinforced plastic construction is felt to be better than light alloy since there is no retention of fish odours. The quality of the fish is maintained by the employment of insulated containers and by the use of dry ice in hot weather. In view of the need for maintaining a high level of productivity, containers have a considerable advantage in the time saved by not having to sheet and rope in the manner formerly necessary. A final point is the reduction in the possibility of theft of boxes of fish.
Although many more studies of the situation might be quoted they would in my experience serve only to emphasize the views already recorded. For the manufacturer or trader the value of containerization is not difficult to assess. For the haulier who aims to become involved to a greater extent than simply carrying containers, the task of obtaining adequate return on a substantial investment presents many problems, especially since at this stage in the development of the situation, change in the pattern of work is only to be expected.