• Home
• Used vehicles
• Product news
• Dealer news
• Compliance
• Buying advice
• Archive

Towards smoother freight flow

IOT OXFORD CONFERENCE By S. Buckley, Assoc.! nst.T DEVELOPMENT of unit loads and an improved intelligence system for operators are factors which will facilitate a smoother flow of freight. But such developments must have the triple goals of precision, simplicity and flexibility.

These were salient aspects discussed at the Institute of Transport conference entitled "Towards Smoother Freight Flow", held at New College, Oxford last week-end. It was pointed out that more radio communication was needed—both in transport control and in a more organized dissemination of news about road traffic conditions, on a nationwide network.

Split-load problems

Many solutions to smoothing the flow of freight traffic lay in the use of sophisticated equipment. But at the end of the line it was necessary to have someone who could read and write—the human element would remain as long as transport existed.

So commented the president of the Institute, Mr. R. H. Farmer, when introducing the course to delegates on Friday evening.

Any fool, he said, could move a full load from A to B. The problem was to achieve a smooth flow with a split load to several destinations.

Because of our modern mode of living, people wanted goods in penny numbers. Therefore the transport system to meet those needs must be complex.

The most restrictive factor in the free flow of freight was the ability of the consignee to accept, said Mr. R. L. E. Lawrence, general manager of the Sundries Division of British Railways, when presenting the opening paper of the conference on Saturday morning.

Too often massive efforts were made to dispatch and trunk-haul urgent consignments only to find that there was queueing and congestion at the receiving point, resulting in disproportionate delay in the complete transit—particularly as it applied to export traffic. This was a defect in the drive towards a smoother freight flow in inland movement.

But Mr. Lawrence agreed that interruptions to the smooth flow of freight could and did arise at all stages of transit. Delays which occurred at customers' premises had two main causes—the layout of premises and the natural desire of consignors to gear their dispatches to production processes.

Premises and equipment devoted to loading and dispatch were often survivors of the horse and cart era. This meant obsolete handling equipment—or none at all— and congestion and delay arising from lack of space for collection and delivery vehicles.

Equally serious, Mr. Lawrence continued, was the practice of manufacturers and traders bunching their dispatches, especially towards the late afternoon, with consequent congestion and delay in the processes of loading afid subsequent movement. This delay arose at the points of dispatch, and was transmitted into the flow of inland transport away from the main centres during the evening hours.

Similarly, many firms would not take delivery before 8 a.m. or after 5 p.m. even where there were two or three shifts working. But Mr. Lawrence acknowledged that there was slow and significant progress towards obtaining acceptance (and in some cases dispatch) of traffic outside these middle hours.

Bunching of less-than-vehicle-load consignments was carried forward into the depot where the goods were sorted on to the trunk vehicles so that—despite a careful harmonization of trunk services—there were inevitable "left-overs" of late collections.

Apart from advancing or spreading dispatches, he thought the main remedy was later departure of trunk services or, at least, better synchronization of such services with the "facts of life" of collection and delivery.

Road transport operators, Mr. Lawrence considered, had done all they could in this respect—except for occasional slowness in saving time by using motorways. But in the aim towards faster freight services one wondered whether the railways had done all they could to put back the departure times of their trunk trains to clear the traffic assembled in their forwarding depots.

The major interruptions to the free flow of trunk movements, apart from mechanical trouble or adverse weather conditions, arose from heavy traffic fluctuation and route congestion. The first could be partly overcome by early advice from the consignor to the transport operator so that he could adjust and redeploy his resources accordingly.

Flattening the peaks

Sophisticated techniques, including the use of computers, Mr. Lawrence told delegates, were being developed as aids to matching transport facilities with traffic requirements.

This attack on traffic peaks applied equally in easing route congestion so as to do everything possible to identify and allow for bottlenecks, making the best preplanned and on-the-spot use of alternative routes.

Here, Mr. Lawrence contended, there was room for more radio communication, not only between transport units and their control centres but also in a nationwide network giving information about road traffic conditions.

Intermediate transhipment of less-thanvehicle-load traffic should be planned by operational research so as to keep transfer —and thus delays—to a minimum. Careful selection of transhipment centres, planning of services and—above all—adequate supervision and records should be used to avoid delays in forwarding transit traffic.

Telecommunications, Mr. Lawrence continued, could play an important part, particularly in giving advance information so that connecting ,services could be adjusted to deal with the traffic efficiently.

It was vital that dispatches should not be in excess of the known capacity of consignees to receive and unload and that conditions of terminal congestion should be known to transport operators. Mr. Lawrence admitted that with so many interests involved this was a difficult task.

Another development which should provide a most effective contribution was the upsurge in unit loads, varying from palletization to high-capacity containers, being conveyed by all forms of transport.

In subsequent discussion Mr. Lawrence insisted that the transport industry had to reconcile itself to the social trend toward a still shorter working week. Exhortations to stagger working hours and so facilitate a smoother flow of traffic had achieved Precisely nothing.

Undoubtedly, he admitted, smaller units were more flexible in providing agency services—always provided there was a clear understanding between agents. Otherwise there would be chaotic comnetition.

• Common documentation would hell) freight flow, and he disclosed that he was having consultations with BRS on this matter. Transhipment was inherently a weakness but it would always be needed because of the wide spread of industry in relatively small units.

National wage scales tended to work against productivity in freight movement, Mr. Lawrence concluded. He was strongly in favour of local wage scales to facilitate smooth traffic flow, but he was doubtful as to their acceptance.

Pre-loading necessary More work for road operators was forecast by Mr. J. K. Ambler, managing director. Atlas Air Express (Atexco Ltd.) when giving the second Paper on Saturday.

If air freight was to expand still further then such freight must be ore-loaded---whether pallet or container—off the airport. That, he contended. could well be done by road operators.

This was because Heathrow. London. handling 85 per cent of UK air freight. was reaching saturation point. But it was essential that all components of this combined exercise should be economically viable, and more co-operation was still needed between airlines, airports, and agents or hauliers.

As to the ideal site and size for freight airports. Mr. Ambler recognized the airlines obiection to "neripheration". But he believed there was a case for using some smaller airports for freight only and this could come about by the 1970s.

He doubted whether there would be a dramatic breakthrough on air freight costs despite the advent of 80/100-ton loads in jumbo jets on limited routes. But he was convinced that the advent and growth of containerization would create a supratransport organization—not just an agency to serve existing forms of transport.

Because of delegates' interest, questiontime was extended after group discussion on Mr. Ambler's paper. Regarding the status of transport managers (which he considered too low), he suggested the current state of trade could compel companies to look more closely at distribution costs and, in so doing. at the value of a transport manager's contribution to the company's viability.

Three prime goals Through-transport depended upon the efficient marriage of the various sectors of transport, with the triple goals of precision, simplicity and flexibility. This was the theme elaborated by Mr. K. St. Johnston, director, Overseas Containers Ltd., when presenting the concluding paper on Sunday afternoon, entitled "Sea Transport".

For through-transport to be effective, precision was essential—otherwise the system would not work. Nor would it work unless the system was simple. Additionally, it would be saleable only if it was sufficiently flexible to cover the majority of customers' requirements.

This implied operational and co-ordinating control, but the aim of such control was efficiency—not monopoly.

Flexibility implied choice, Mr. Johnston continued. The customer would decide where he wished to inject his goods into the system and, dependent upon his choice, an appropriate through rate would be charged. This would be an amalgam of the cost incurred in the various sectors of the transport chain.

Mr. Johnston contended that, despite changes; the role of progressive forwarding agents would continue to be important both in acting as the shipping department of smaller firms and as consolidators of freight.

The object of setting up an inland infrastructure of clearance depots was threefold: simplicity for the customer, obtaining the effective control necessary to programme the smooth flow of goods; and securing benefits of scale from the freight movement of large standard units.

The implications of containers to those forwarding freight, he maintained, extended well beyond the boundaries of transport cost. It could affect marketing and distribution methods, inventories and even production. Therefore, interest in containers must be maintained on a broad management basis and not merely confined to transport.

Sectionalization of transport in the past had been relatively inefficient, Mr. Johnston concluded, but there was now the opportunity—through extensive mechanization— to remove these inefficiencies and hold costs stable.

Bigger sundries What is sundries traffic? That was a question posed during the general discussion, when Mr. Lawrence disclosed that his railway sundries department was looking into the possibility of raising the commonly accepted limit of 1 ton to 3 tons.

Replying to a suggestion that the present multiplicity of container types and sizes might create more problems than containers themselves would solve, Mr. Johnston agreed that lots of people were going to get their fingers burnt in their development. But with the advent of the container, transhipment was no longer a dirty word in transport and a better service could be given.

Doubting whether continuing interference in transport by politicians was necessary, the president insisted that the premise that road and rail were diametrically opposed was not longer valid. Too often, politicians took advice from anyone but those experienced in transport.