Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

thezvi.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 316 posts

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#11

Post by notwedtm »

sleibrock wrote: post #7

In Factorio design this is simply increasing the buffer size. If the truck-loadings-per-hour don't increase then it's not going to matter how large you make the buffer. Adding a secondary site for putting containers also seems like it's going to be a new challenge for the logistics company scheduling the rides (I have a friend who deals with train cargo scheduling). Truckers who are used to showing up at the port are…

You have idle trucks unable to increase the truck-loadings-per-hour because they can't complete a single job due to the lack of storage space for their empty containers.

Providing that storage space will allow the trucks to complete their circuit.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#12

Post by parsimo2010 »

sleibrock wrote: post #7

In Factorio design this is simply increasing the buffer size. If the truck-loadings-per-hour don't increase then it's not going to matter how large you make the buffer. Adding a secondary site for putting containers also seems like it's going to be a new challenge for the logistics company scheduling the rides (I have a friend who deals with train cargo scheduling). Truckers who are used to showing up at the port are…

There were supposedly trucks that couldn’t be loaded because they had no place to get rid of the empty container they currently had. So truck loading rate was low, not because of the speed of the workers and cranes, but because of the availability of the trucks. So this is supposed to allow the truck loading rate to go up by making it easier for trucks to become available.

I don’t know if that will happen, but this is an increased buffer size that is directly addressing a limiting factor. It might help.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#13

Post by darkerside »

sleibrock wrote: post #7

In Factorio design this is simply increasing the buffer size. If the truck-loadings-per-hour don't increase then it's not going to matter how large you make the buffer. Adding a secondary site for putting containers also seems like it's going to be a new challenge for the logistics company scheduling the rides (I have a friend who deals with train cargo scheduling). Truckers who are used to showing up at the port are…

Buffer size is critical in the case of things like the credit crunch that seized up the global economy back in 2008. Having room to maneuver makes it possible to address long term problems. Although it can also be thoughtlessly filled in service of short term needs with moves that don't actually provide a long term benefit.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#14

Post by walkerbrown »

> There was a rule in the Port of Los Angeles saying you could only stack shipping containers two containers high.

This is not correct.

Next though, CA DOT should do a one time waiver and extension of the 90-day BIT inspections on trailer chassis.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#15

Post by politician »

sleibrock wrote: post #7

In Factorio design this is simply increasing the buffer size. If the truck-loadings-per-hour don't increase then it's not going to matter how large you make the buffer. Adding a secondary site for putting containers also seems like it's going to be a new challenge for the logistics company scheduling the rides (I have a friend who deals with train cargo scheduling). Truckers who are used to showing up at the port are…

I mean, I also play Factorio and came away from reading the article thinking that yeah, increasing the headroom in the chests (aka container stacks) from 2 slots to 6 slots would definitely introduce slack into the system. The short haul loop to a staging and integration area would also help because it allows you to re-sort the inputs to maximize pickup efficiency and is also something I've done in Factorio games.

It might be fun to release a Port of Los Angeles savegame that challenges folks to unhork the port.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#16

Post by thrower123 »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #8

Some talk about 'building a new port' as part of the solution. I'm thinking that's a decade project and $100B or some such? PoLA tried to expand for a decade and the impact statements got bogged down and nothing happened if I remember right (my sister-in-law was doing the math on the statements)

I'd like to think that if we declared a state of emergency, suspended all regulations and deployed a couple battalions of Seabees we could still build a port in a matter of months, rather than years.

I'd like to think we still have those kinds of capabilities if they were needed, but I'm increasingly not sure that we actually do.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#17

Post by bhy »

From what I heard, the real issue is the ships are not bringing these containers back, because: 1. there's not so much good for US to export (volume-wise); 2. shipping price is so high that to save time, ships do not wait to load empty containers.

As long as US has a net import of containers, whatever buffer created will be filled up soon.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#18

Post by [deleted] »

sleibrock wrote: post #7

In Factorio design this is simply increasing the buffer size. If the truck-loadings-per-hour don't increase then it's not going to matter how large you make the buffer. Adding a secondary site for putting containers also seems like it's going to be a new challenge for the logistics company scheduling the rides (I have a friend who deals with train cargo scheduling). Truckers who are used to showing up at the port are…

[deleted]

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#19

Post by WJW »

thrower123 wrote: post #16
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #8

Some talk about 'building a new port' as part of the solution. I'm thinking that's a decade project and $100B or some such? PoLA tried to expand for a decade and the impact statements got bogged down and nothing happened if I remember right (my sister-in-law was doing the math on the statements)

I'd like to think that if we declared a state of emergency, suspended all regulations and deployed a couple battalions of Seabees we could still build a port in a matter of months, rather than years. I'd like to think we still have those kinds of capabilities if they were needed, but I'm increasingly not sure that we actually do.

Depends on what you consider a "port" to be. Sure, a shoddy good-enough-for-wartime place where ships can dock can be built in a few months. Building a decent container port with proper container cranes, train yards and the software to integrate it all in a couple of months? That capability has never existed.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#20

Post by _jal »

thrower123 wrote: post #16
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #8

Some talk about 'building a new port' as part of the solution. I'm thinking that's a decade project and $100B or some such? PoLA tried to expand for a decade and the impact statements got bogged down and nothing happened if I remember right (my sister-in-law was doing the math on the statements)

I'd like to think that if we declared a state of emergency, suspended all regulations and deployed a couple battalions of Seabees we could still build a port in a matter of months, rather than years. I'd like to think we still have those kinds of capabilities if they were needed, but I'm increasingly not sure that we actually do.

If you can develop the political will to treat the citizens of LA like we did the Iraqis in the second Gulf adventure, sure.

Just suspend the rule of law and send in Bechtel behind a bunch of guns.

Post reply on HN