1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136 
CONTAINER SNAGS, FORECAST: BR WILL MOVE A MILLION IN 1970
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
TRAN SPORT economics, Freightliner developments, warehouse security and load packing were the four subjects discussed on Wednesday at the opening session of the annual conference of the National Association of Warehouse Keepers.
In the day's first paper Mr. M. H. J. Webb, fellow in management studies, London School of Economics and Political Science, surveyed the physical distribution system as it involved the two major activities of transport and storage.
Spending on transport of goods by road had increased at a compound rate of 8.5 per cent per annum between 1955 and 1964 —when it was estimated to be £2,010m or the equivalent of 43 per cent of gross company trading profits in the UK.
Big benefits ahead After examining the economics of warehousing functions Mr. Webb contended that most distribution systems had been evolved rather than designed. Even in those few which had been designed, a fundamental redesign was likely to bring immense advantages in the near future.
As retail and wholesale chains took over an increasing proportion of the distribution of manufactured goods, the proportion remaining might become so expensive for manufacturers to distribute that they might be prepared to sub-contract distribution rather than opt out altogether.
The railway share of the total transport market depended on how they bettered their competitors in exploiting new technologies and marketing fields. That was the basis on which the Freightliner concept was evolved, said Mr. W. A. Kirby, assistant freight sales manager, British Railways, when presenting the second address entitled: "The container way".
British Railways had to aim at a service better than road haulage and at better charges on a door to door basis.
During the first week of Freightliner operation in November 1965,30 loaded containers were carried. The current rate is 3,000 per week and Mr. Kirby disclosed that BR confidently expected to carry +m containers in 1968 and lm in 1970.
It had been calculated that with a fully integrated system between British and Continental centres the saving in transport handling and packaging by the use of containers could be as much as 40 per cent. But such a new distribution system, Mr. Kirby warned, needed a new approach, particularly towards documentation, customs arrangements and charging practices.
Mr. Kirby told delegates that before the introduction of the Harwich/Zeebrugge cellular chips BR would be running a London/Paris Freightliner service. A most important recent development was the decision of 11 European railway systems to put containers and their control into a joint enterprise, paving the way for a unified European container system.
In the first paper of the afternoon's session Inspector Webster of the Derby County and Borough Constabulary addressed the delegates on the subject of crime prevention and security of warehouses.
Storage, transport and packing are firmly linked in a chain of activities which moved goods from distributor to consumer and therefore these three functions were very much the concern of all. So claimed Mr. J. C. Stodart, head of transport advisory section. Port of London Authority, when introducing his paper at the afternoon session entitled: "Packing-1967".
There was, he said, a distinction between "packing" and "packaging". Within the distribution industry the process of wrapping goods for sale to the consumer was defined as packaging—whereas packing was concerned only with the protection of goods against the hazards of storage and transport. Packaging, Mr. Stodart agreed, could include an element of protection. Examples of mechanical hazards—the damaging effect of shock, vibration and crushing—were given. Mr. Stodart said that the shock hazards for packs transported by road were estimated to be as follows: Small packs up to 251b in weight—equivalent to a drop of 3ft; medium packs between 25 and 2501b-2ft; large packs over 2501b-lft. The crushing hazard for road transport was estimated as being the equivalent of packs of the same size and weight being stacked up to a height of 6ft in C-licence vehicles and 10ft in common carrier vehicles.
Container and pallets would both reduce the shock loading, Mr. Stodart continued, but neither would affect the vibration hazard appreciably.
Until containers were fitted with some form of humidity control those concerned would be well advised to review the degree of protection against humidity which their packing gave. But Mr. Stodart gave a word of warning on the subject of containers and pallets as to the much advertised possibilities of reductions in packing bills. At least 80 per cent of our export general cargo shipments were less than half the 12-ton load of a 20ft ISO container.
So the implication was, Mr. Stodart contended, that 80 per cent of shipments would have to travel from point of production to a container consolidation centre by conventional transport—and the same in reverse at the other end.