The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

ness of the carriers. In some in- stances, such as on the Great Lakes, it may even be advantageous to ac- tually enter the motor truck field and, by a combination system, offer all-year service. One of the operators that has dealt aggressively with the situation along these lines is the Cleveland & Buffalo Transit Co. which has been serving the shipping and travelling public on the Great Lakes for the past 36 years. Large terminals are maintained and operated at Cleve- land, and Buffalo. Four large com- bination freight and passenger boats of the side wheel Great Lakes type are operated daily during the navi- gation season between Cleveland and Buffalo, Cleveland and Port Stanley on the Canadian shore and between Cleveland, Cedar Point and Put-in- Bay on the Ohio shore. The problem of handling freight tonnage arises chiefly on the Cleve- land-Buffalo run as practically no freight is handled on the _ other routes operated. Each boat has a single freight deck extending for- ward and aft from the engine room to approximately midship and direct- ly under the first main cabin deck. Entrances to the freight deck are through side ports of sufficient height and width to accommodate the ordinary stock size passenger au- tomobile and motor truck. The ter- minal warehouses at Cleveland and Buffalo handle carload and less than carload freight delivered to and re- ceived from local city shippers, rail- road connections by car and barge lines at Buffalo. Business Affected by Competition The advent of the motor truck and the passenger automobile into the transportation field had made in- roads upon the company’s traffic business. To offset the reduction in the less than carload lot freight with its higher classification rates, the management has been steadily solic- iting and handling increasing volume of carload freight. In addition to the changed traffic conditions an- other important factor was the ad- vance in wages paid to labor which directly affected the cost of handling all freight. After careful consideration, the management decided to investigate the advantages offered by the latest type of freight handling equipment. It was hoped that a thorough exam- ination might show a possibility of reduction in the cost of handling which would partly offset the changed traffic conditions and the advance in wages. At the close of the 1929 season the Mercury Manufacturing Co., Chicago was consulted and a com- plete examination was made of all the tonnage handled, the physical conditions pertaining to vessels and terminals, the type of labor em- UUUEUEVOVUUUUUULCAUAUUUU LULETUULLUAHUU LLL At the Buffalo Terminal of the Cleveland and Buf- falo Transit Co. Hauling Sugar on Boardwith Tractor. Twenty-five 100- pound sacks per trailer PUUTTUATOTUTALUMAUAEAT UAHA ERLE EAA CH ployed and wages paid, the service ing cost. rendered to the shipper and the cost 3. Present and proposed meth- of handling for a complete season. ods of operation at both Cleveland In December, 1929, a report was and Buffalo. Cleveland & Buffalo Transit Co. Cost and Production Chart for Cargo Handling Terminal—Cleveland Month—November, 1930 Tons Un- ‘Tons Total Total Total Tons per Cost Date Men loaded Loaded Tons Hours Money Man Hour per ton 1 62 363 110 473 410% 192.22 1.15 407 2 48 su bre 23 340 260% 121.23 1.30 .358 3 5T 350 165 515 461% 216.00 pba eb 419 4 52 336 82 418 365% AT 2.15 Lat 411 5 57 410 92 502 409% 192.53 1.22 .383 Daily Average Cargo Handling Results Actual Old Proposed Results Cleveland Method Method 1930 INGOT GOTS. iris s cieats ck obi tases aegeeenee 376.0 376.0 488.6 INNO OL IO TS ioc cece fcareccecnaoat coeur 51.9 42.2 54.1 Total: MAM — WOME are cecceseseccsecnse sees 525.65 376.07 522.46 TEA DOP CXDENSC sevccccsccswescyedectnnsenns $244.42 $187.05 $243.12 TONS DEY: MAN NOUN. 2. .5.;5..-s.-9<o- B (pile! -999 -935 COSE Der TON .cecvscscevstes cee tote tes eons $ .6542 $ 5081 $ 4975 Buffalo POG CONS i cccsccecvcssdsscspeeet cece seesscese 372.6 372.6 488.9 INO: (OL IMEI io cedescuctesssuncedessstossseess 62.9 48.0 63.0 Total MAN NOUS ....ccrecereeceeeesseees 528.44 404.95 509.90 LADOLr CXDENSE ~.....cccecevcnsensesecesoes $301.86 $232.19 $287.84 Tons per man hotr ....... Eves eapaytcis -705 -920 ' 958 Cost PEL TOM .......ccccocrsccrscccereseooeee $ -8143 $ .6339 $ 5886 submitted giving complete details as 4. General summary of average follows: daily operations for both Cleveland 1. Proposed equipment invest- and Buffalo. ment. 5. Recapitulation, showing gross 29. Estimated equipment operat- savings—depreciation—interest—net TATTTAUUUUQOUUUAAAULUULLUCLUCUATECLCLLUL Miscellaneous Freight on Trailers Taken on board ship by Tractor at the Buffalo Term- inal of the C& B Transit Co. ATT UNUUUUOUIUAHTLULULLULLULULUE ELL MARINE REVIEw—June, 1931 47