Chessie is Purring in the Journal

Today's Wall Street Journal contains an article outlining CSX operational woes, including plans be major shippers of Asian made consumer goods to "short haul' all roads by making greater use of the Panama Canal and Eastern ports of entry. This could actually be a +++ for Chessie.
But the article suggests that the "mice are still at play' but that there is hope that the 'cat will no longer be away'.

The Journal'site is by suibscription, but for those with access to that site, here is a URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1104 ... 37,00.html

For the rest, the Journal is at your local newsstand for a buck. Here, however, is a "brief passage":

• Wal-Mart Stores Inc., fed up with delays, says it is opening more warehouse space at Gulf and East Coast ports to lessen its dependence on the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach and the rail lines that serve them. Gap Inc. began shifting some shipments to other West Coast ports with less-congested railroads and through the Panama Canal.
  
  In a program called One Plan, CSX is revamping operations to cut the number of times freight cars are handled -- a measure of railroad efficiency -- by 600,000 a year, or 5%, and reduce the miles freight travels by 1% to 2%. So far, the effort has resulted in tighter schedules and more direct routes.
  
  The changes are starting to pay off. The average speed of CSX freight trains improved to 20.7 miles per hour for the fourth quarter by mid-December compared with 19.5 mph in last year's second quarter. Freight trains are leaving freight yards on time 53.7% of the time for most of the fourth quarter, up from 39.3% in the second quarter.

All told, the article seems like some "happy talk' straight from the spin-meisters in Richmond. Possibly others here have differing views; but that is what the Forum is all about.

Well as they would say Their's still room for improvement.

John

To clarify/correct (and maybe I'm being nitpicky on the first one):

Chessie is the nickname for C&O... C&O/B&O/WM, not CSXT. Secondly, CSX's headquarters (CSX Corp and CSXT [the railroad]) is in Jacksonville. Thirdly, the article was written by a journal staff writer, not CSX "spinmeisters." Fourth, there is no spin to the stats... go to the AAR website to see 'em. Lastly, having transcon containers bound for the US east coast arrive by vessel on... the east coast, won't do the railroad much good. In the case of NYC, CSX would lose the CGO-NYC haul, and the containers would most likely be trucked to destination.

I think I read somewhere,that most of the fleet of new container ships that have been built in the last few years,are larger than the Pana-Max Spec.And have to be unloaded at either the west or east coast of Panama,and carried COFC on the Panama Railroad.I would suppose an increase in traffic would result in a bottle neck.The loading and unloading wil add to cost and delay.Till Pana-Max ships can be found or built,these will never be as efficent as the larger vessels,and become redundant when the back log is caught up,or the economy has a downward correction.

If memory serves me correctly, Mr.Cowford, CSX stands for Chessie+Seaboard+X, as in combination.

Otherwise, your comments are duly noted.

Yes, CSX is from Chessie and Seaboard... but no-one calls the UP the Katy or the Mop... and you'd never refer to Guilford Rail as the Pine Tree Route. For better or worse, the moniker has been consigned to history.