CSX:Looking for a Silver Bullet in Sept.'s TRAINS, What you guys think about the article?

[Anonymous]

Dave,

When did CSX implement thse moves tp downgrade their old ACL and SAL mains.

I read in DeBoer's book about intermodal railraoding that SAL then SCL were grat pioneers in the intermodal movement. They were the first to get Big Brown(UPS) to first put their trailers on the rails.

What happened to CSX's dedication to high speed intermodal operation???

Was it the pennywise pound foolish costing that infected so many RR's in '80s and '90s??

[daveklepper]

Scrapping the Petersburg - Raleigh Seaboard main line and at the same time single tracking the ACL was one of the dumbest moves any railroad made anywhere. If CSX wanted to downgrade the Seaboard, they should have kept or restored the ACL double track. They then could go after the hotshot intermodel business.

[Junctionfan]

n_stephenson:

What does CSX plan on doing with the growing traffic in Ohio? Anything planned to get those Chicago/ New York/ Boston intermodals through quicker?

[Anonymous]

I found the Article about CSX very interesting and I learned a lot. I think that CSX is a very good railroad, but they need to stay on course and not get out in left field and do crazy things. For example, they have tried to change management several times, and what they need to do is keep the leadership they have now and try and keep things going at a good pace. Michael Ward seems to be finally starting to get things on the right course, the problems aren't over or solved yet, but I believe he has the ability to keep CSX going on a good course that will give a good balance of Competition in the east between two of the finest railroads in the world CSX and NS. Progress should be done slowly and cautiously. Progressing too fast can cause unexpected problems, and I agree "n_stephenson", in order to have a good railroad system in the east, NS and CSX needed to get Conrail, but I think they did not implement it correctly. The merger should have gone slower and David Goode and John Snow should have worked more with each other to make sure that the Conrail split went smoothly for both companies. I think David Goode and John Snow both learned a good lesson about the merger, I hope that from now on Goode and new CEO M. Ward will make better decisions that will provide the east with better and improved railroad systems from now on.

[MP173]

Thanks for the report Nate....

How do you like dispatching so far? I have been listening in on the Fostoria web based scanner and that is one busy line. It seems to be dispatched out of J'ville.

I seem to recall you are handling the ST. Louis line. What kind of challenges is there on that line? Is there still a run thru with CN (IC) at Effingham?

ed

[Anonymous]

As a CSX employee I have witnessed a lot of good and bad. Recently I have seen a lot of good news as CSX is planning to spend over 1 billion dollars in their infrastructure, which makes me feel more secure about my company's future. A RR in trouble is not going to dump a bunch of money back into the physical plant, just look at some of the past Class 1's that went the way of the Dodo. The dispatching center that i work at in Indy is getting a completely new operating system and the building is getting an interior "facelift." I think CSX and NS made a good move in taking over Conrail, but the takeover was not proprerly implemented. It takes a lot of foresight and analysis before a takeover of that magnintude can even be seriously considered. Both CSX and NS reeled after failing to see the big picture over the Conrail takeover, but I believe that both companies are recovering nicely and can now focus on improving service. The main concern for the past several years was just fighting the financial burden of the takeover, but now that debts are starting be paid off things are looking up.
Carload business is huge for CSX, but it hasn't been handled well. Let me tell you, it is a big deal to management, but the implementation of new technology has created bugs in the system. And obviously not all managers are created equal. Some are very good at keeping operations smooth, but sacrifice the customer to do so, and vice versa. Life is full compromises and going one route can the burn the bridge to the other. One thing that I think is very unfortunate for RR's is that management changes too frequently and one group of managment doesn't get the chance to prove themselves before another group with a completely different game plan replaces them. A lot of time is then wasted with the new team "undoing" what had just been done by the originals. That's another problem with RR's. RR's are run by business/profit minded people who want instant results. They look at statistics and figures to judge how well a company does. The problem is that the RR's, and many other businesses, don't fit into that rationale very well. There's really two different sides to most companies. The Paper side, and the Operations side or reality. Companies that are succesful have a good balance between the two sides. That's my Joe Schmoe view. [oX)]

[nanaimo73]

I really enjoyed the article. I was surprised at how little double track CSX had. It is too bad the split did not happen a year or two earlier, and CSX and NS could each have saved a billion dollars in debt. $8.4 billion instead of $10.2 billion would have left more money for locomotives and track rather than Conrail shareholders pockets.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by smalling_60626

I thought it was a fair article and I felt some sympathy for CSX's plight. Here's what I gleaned from the article: Owing to the high-maintenance infrastructure that nonetheless consists almost entirely of single-track lines, and NS' dominance of Conrail while they were divvying up the lines, it just seems that poor CSX is going to be a day late and a dollar short.

Perhaps one reason for the "single bullet" judgment is that when new management comes in with diametrically opposed ways of doing things, they have to boil down their efforts into a cutely-named program. It only looks that superficial. I feel for CSX.

I have not read the article yet. I have had some experience with management changes. I agree with the statement that after a management change "things" take a while to get back to normal (if they really ever do). New management always brings in "new" (yeah right, shall we just say "repackaged") ideas and has a way of turning things inside out. [:(] If you are not part of the "yes men" then you are out of a job. I have seen the same thing happen at several jobs.

With the economy FINALLY doing better maybe the situation at CSX will improve.

[Anonymous]

I thought it was a fair article and I felt some sympathy for CSX's plight. Here's what I gleaned from the article: Owing to the high-maintenance infrastructure that nonetheless consists almost entirely of single-track lines, and NS' dominance of Conrail while they were divvying up the lines, it just seems that poor CSX is going to be a day late and a dollar short.

Perhaps one reason for the "single bullet" judgment is that when new management comes in with diametrically opposed ways of doing things, they have to boil down their efforts into a cutely-named program. It only looks that superficial. I feel for CSX.

[bobwilcox]

Next month their will be a similar article by Fred Fraily talkikng about the NS since the Con Rail split. It will be very interesting to compare the management style of the NS and the CSXT.

My experience working with the CSXT marketing people was that they were always getting a new game plan from above and could not stay focused on taking care of the customers.

[Junctionfan]

If CSX could have aquired the CASO line in the Conrail split up, they would have been had the ROW to upgrade the line for quick double stack intermodals between Chicago and the east coast.

I don't know what happened during the split up that neither CSX or NS got but CN and CP but it was definately a line they could have used to reduce some of the bottlenecking in PA and Ohio.

[Cheviot Hill]

Intermodel? Maybe. To bad the old B&O from Baltimore to Cincinnati is mostly gone. That would of made a good route for intermodel all the way to St. Louis.

[Anonymous]

Does anybody think that CSX will develope to become a high speed intermodal conveyer belt outside of the former NYC/Conrail territory??

It seemed in recent years CSX had been demarketing themselves out of a few intermodal corridors.

[MP173]

I have not been a big fan of CSX, either as a railfan or investor fan. Other than the CPL signals, it was a pretty uneventful railroad here in NW Indiana.

However, they have really put a pretty good mainline together from Chicago to Williard and move some serious freight.

I listen in almost every evening between 9and10pm (kind of a nightcap) to the Fostoria web based scanner. Combining that with the bullsheet website, gives me a pretty good overview of what they do.

The article was great. I had thought Trains had been far too biased in the past few years to covering the western roads and had desired in depth coverage of NS and CSX. Cant wait for the coverage on ns.

Where does CSX go from here? It appears their management has not been the best. How can a company (any company) have any momentum when the top management changes as frequently? It appears a great admission was made when CSX brought in Tony Ingram (ex NS ExVP) and then hired the same consulting firm as NS had.

I am not a shipper. I do not have inside information to company information. About all I have is this forum and my scanner. I listen very closely and observe the operations of NS's Chicago - Fort Wayne line. That line is one tightly run operation. Trains appear to be run on very tight schedules. The trains that run are good sized...gotta have some serious revenue being generated.

The best thing CSX can do is generate an operating plan and implement it. The infrastructure issues are interesting. But, I dont think NS's lines are much more superior.

A couple of weekends ago I was in Kentucky and spent a few hours on the Rathole. I talked with another railfan, Buddy, who indicated they were running 40 to 50 trains daily...on single line CTC. That is pretty good utilization.

ed

[SALfan]

I'd like to hear what people who work for CSX think about the article. If any of you who replied above do, please forgive my ignorance. Is the article accurate? What good stuff did the article leave out?

From an outsider's viewpoint, the article was interesting. Even from what I saw in TRAINS before this article, the RR seems to have been in turmoil for years. I can tell you from bitter experience that when an organization reorganizes and people are moved into new jobs, it takes about 6 months for individual productivity to reach what it was before.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

I feel that the article was well-written and shows again what can happen when corporate cultures clash. It wasn't "red team vs. green team" (PC), but it didn't help CSX in getting where they needed to go. Hopefully, CSX will now get some needed stability in upper management and stick with their plans for improving operations and the bottom line.

[Anonymous]

Just read on CSX website, they have big plans for spending capital for infrastructure improvements in 2006... It doesn't say what they are as of yet?

[Anonymous]

I think TRAINS and Tom Murray did a good job of providing an overview of what's happening here in the northeast and the weakest of the Big Four.

I do believe that the thinking in Jacksonville was that "If only we could just get Conrail's New England/New York Area to Chicago/St. Louis intermodal franchise and the New Jersey's Chemical Coast we would be sitting on easy street" But they did count on David Goode of NS to have the b*lls to put up a good (no pun intended) fight. Never underestimate your potential adversary!

I was really surprise to learn on how much of CSX's revenue (55%) is good old carload traffic. That really blew me away!. At the time of the Split the thinking around here in the NYC area is that NS was the boxcar RR while CSX was the intermodal RR now it seems the reverse to some extent is now true.

Though I heard this analysis maybe once or twice Tom Murray is the first one I have seen put it in print for all to see. The point I am referring is the fact that Conrail was primarily a high density multitrack mainline intermodal RR and the pre-CR CSX was primarily a low density(in terms of capacity) single track network. Definetly a clash of operating cultures in the making.

When Ron Conway and his management team got fired a few years back I thought that he got a raw deal but I see now that the the old pre-CR CSX could not be operated like the old Conrail system. For one thing it was an open secret around here that unless you were a big multicar per day customer Conrail did everything to get rid of (your) carload traffic.

One thing I wi***his new CSX will do is to redouble track and clearance for double stack traffic the B&O "Royal Blue" route between New Jersey and Wash DC and completely redouble track, not just long sidings, the old Atlantic Coast Line main between Richmond and Jacksonville. And also keep the parallel Seaboard Airline main in good shpe as relief valve and detour route due to the heavy occurance of hurricanes in the area. Then CSX will be in fact a genuine alternative for I95 truck traffic and not the "make-believe" hype they put in company press releases.

Good job, Tom Murray and TRAINS!!!