Short Line Data Systems Inc – ROCS Update July 2003

Website: www.sdsrocs.com

Greetings:

June was a very busy month for us, with version upgrades, updates, and new installations.  We’ll go through some of the goings on, and start looking at some of the changes coming for Version 7, which will be released in September.

Version Upgrades and Updates

SRNJ and M&E are now running version 2003.6B, which is basically the same as 6A, with the exception of the UMLER info request is now the Q22 type, which provides the full equipment information on a car.  Other improvements in 6A include better handling of inbound multiple car waybills, outbound bill of lading reliability improvements, and changes that increase the commonality between the versions that the different users have.  While this last improvement won’t do much for the user, what it does for us is it makes it easier to get new users up and running with fewer “typos”, and we have to do less “hard wiring” to customize a user’s system.  HRRC and ADBF have been receiving the reliability upgrades over the last few weeks, and will get the expanded UMLER as part of Version 7.

New Installation

We have just finished an additional installation at the M&E for the Octoraro Railroad, which is a line in Pennsylvania that the M&E will be operating for the next 120 days.  This is the first of a couple of new installations which should take place over this summer, and we will be announcing a new customer in next month’s update.

Version 7

Even though we have only just begun the summer, it is time to look ahead to the fall and the next release of ROCS, Version 7.  V7 will feature the new UMLER retrieval system, as well as full EDI 4050 compliance.  We are also going to introduce some new reports for the Car Hire system, including a new, condensed, summary report with both payment and reclaim on it.  We will be listing these and other new features on our website as we decide what is going to be in the package.

Some Observations

After listening to everyone at the ASLRRA meeting in Philadelphia and the NS meeting in Roanoke, I have some observations on the “black hole” and EDI situations that many Short Lines are in, and some suggestions for solutions.

The first thing to look at is why we have this situation.  Let’s be honest, there are some of us in Short Lines who are adverse to technology of any type, and they are usually the ones who also use the “if it ain’t broke, why fix it?” answer when they are asked why they don’t report EDI or TrainII.  There is also some belief that the longer they don’t report, the Class 1s will do it for them or give them something for free that will do it for them.

An additional problem is a lack of understanding of why TrainII reporting is needed at all, if they report interchanges and send in Bills of Lading.  The EDI system is similar to going on line and buying a plane ticket on Travelocity.  You get your spot on the plane; know what seat you are in and where and when the plane is going to go.  The TrainII system is like the flight tracing that you use when you are going to pick someone up at the airport.  Isn’t it better to find out that the plane is three hours late before you leave for the airport?  Or that the plane is circling due to weather conditions?  Well, this is the same situation with TrainII.  If the consignee and shipper know when a car is going to arrive, they can perform their jobs better, be happier with using rail for shipping, and increase their traffic by rail.  As some have said before, the last mile is as or more important than the first one, and in most cases, we (Short Lines) are the last mile.  If you report TrainII, everyone knows what is going on for that last mile.

Some of you are still thinking about my statements two paragraphs ago, and saying to yourselves “wait a second, the Class 1s used to do this for me, and they gave me a system for free.”  You are correct in both cases.  However, most of the Class 1s can’t or won’t do reporting for the SL anymore due to their internal costs.  The BNSF and Steelroads reporting systems are free for anyone who wants them.  While they are simple to use, they are by their nature very basic and the tool that the smallest railroads need to report TrainII.

Ok, then for the rest of us, what is the cost to do what we need to do?  For any of the four major systems out there (Intellitrans, RMI, RAILINC, or SDS), the amortized cost per car is in the $1-$2 range for the system, and in most cases you need someone to run the system for about 1 to 2 hours a day.  It really doesn’t make a difference whose system you use, the cost per car is a small percentage of the revenue the railroad receives on a car.

So it doesn’t cost much, and the tools are available, so what is the solution?  Do something yourself, and do it now.  Don’t get into the position that you have to run to one of the suppliers because it is affecting your business, or that you are losing business due to not being competitive with trucks or the Class 1.  This is really a simple solution to a widespread problem in our industry, and we are the ones who can solve it.

Well, I have taken enough of your time for this month.  I hope that everyone had a good Fourth of July, and stay cool during the dog days of summer.

Steven Friedland