CSX....issues

Yes, I started a new thread about CSX derailments. Sue me![}:)][:D]

I’m looking for a little perspective on CSX’s derailments issues right now, and what they mean in the big picture of things.

Is CSX right now where KCS was some years ago? They had a bunch of derailments all on top of each other. KCS, as I’ve read,figured they had hit rock bottom, and worked their way out of it.

Is CSX right now where PennCentral was, in it’s darkest hour,unable to stop the derailments-even on parked trains? We all know where PC went from there.

Is CSX right now in a tough spot due to Wall Street investors’ opinions having too much influence on how the railroad is run?

Is CSX in the middle of a streak of bad luck? If so, surely this will pass.

Any other thoughts?

Please note: Don’t turn this into a “CSX sucks” thread. Those folks already have their own website.

Thanks

Not even Sygmond Frued could help the issues that CSX has…

I know nothing about CSX other than how to spell their name. But to put in my [2c] when you talk of derailments on any railroad, I believe someone told me it is cyclical to a degree. Cold weather, hot weather, etc.

At least this will give you something to ponder until the real people answer this.

Mook

[(-D]

They don’t have issues, they have volumes…

all this is is just CSXs turn in the derailment barrowl so to speak… just alittle bad luck steak… evey railroad goes thought it and it just happens to be csxs turn at the moment…in a few months you will be picking on some other road becouse they had 2 back to back or something like that… you wash dishes for a living…your going to break a few once in a while…

csx engineer

I would agree with you, csxengineer98.

Here are some accident rates (per million train miles) for various railroads:

RR 2003 2004 2005 2006
CSX 4.79 4.88 4.40 3.36
BNSF 3.34 3.56 3.40 2.90
UP 4.20 4.98 4.77 4.29
NS 3.41 3.34 3.21 2.25
CP 2.85 2.87 2.65 1.30
CN 4.93 4.14 2.98 4.55
KCS 12.66 15.23 14.07 6.68

I didn’t think I was picking on CSX as such. If that’s how it seemed to you, I apologize. I stated a different thread, because I felt some on other threads were picking on CSX. That’s just my perception. Do you think that the information age, ( the news media and the internet mostly) contributes a lot how people perceive this? Is it just me, or does CSX get more national attention for a mishap than the other Class 1’s get for similar mishaps?

From January 2003 through October 2006, the top ten reasons for a CSX accident are:

  1. Switch improperly lined (133)

  2. Shoving movement, absence of man (91)

  3. Wide gage (defective/missing ties) (61)

  4. Traverse/compound fissure (60)

  5. Shoving movement, failure to control (48)

  6. Detail fracture - shelling/head check (48)

  7. Switch previously run through (46)

  8. Auto hump retarder failed to slow car (46)

  9. Buff/slack action excess/trn handling (43)

  10. Harmonic rock off, etc. (40)


I get the impression that most of CSX’s problems do not come from lack of maintenance.

I should mention too, that it seems, to me at least, that CN gets quite a bit of grief over railroad mishaps as well.

You left out a BIG one, which I think we’ll find out soon enough, was that the weather had more to do with two of the derailments. All along the east coast they had a recent batch of really warm ( for this time of year) tempatures, then it dropped dramaticly. This is one way broken rails occur.

Please give us the source of your data. Are these reportable incidents by FRA criterion, or if not what, is the definitinon of an “accident”? Are you reporting on employee “lost time accidents” which would include those resulting from trips and falls, etc. Absent this information, I am highly skeptical of the accuracy of your data and its pertinency to the frequency of derailments.

Mark

All weather caused accidents put together accounted for 33 of CSX’s accidents over this time period. However, based on the way the data is broken down, I doubt that a broken rail would be listed in one of the weather categories. In other words, I don’t think that they look at “why” a malfunction happened, only at what malfunction caused the accident.

Ps. Of 1835 accidents reported by CSX over the period, 844 (or 46%) of them were attributed to “human factors”. For all railroads, 39% of accidents were attributed to human factors.

No, this would not include “lost time accidents” such as tripping or cutting your foot off with a power saw. These are accidents as reported to the FRA, and the statistics are published by the Office of Sa

Oh, I forgot to mention. The data also does not include grade crossing accidents.

http://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/OfficeofSafety/Query/Default.asp?page=inctally2.asp

Skeptical you m

So then, Defective track conditions (items 3,4,&6 added together) are the number 1 problem? (169 of the total)

it wouldnt matter who the road was if there is a run away… derailment where there is a cemical fire and evactuations…or falling off a bridge onto a road… any of them causes WILL make national news… and it just so happens that csx had all 3 in 2 days… like i said… just some bad luck…

csx engineer

Accidents are broken into five categories. For CSX, here is the breakdown:

Track Roadbed and Structures 25.5%

Signal and Communication 2.3%

Mechanical / Electrical 9.6%

Train Operation / Human Factor 46.0%

Misc. 16.6%

Each category is further broken down into a plethora of exact causes. See the top ten list for examples.

Incorrect - Man Failure 1+2+5+7+8+9 = 407

Training an ever younger work force takes time and experience. Good decisions come from experience…Experience comes from bad decisions, if you are fortunate enough to survive them.

How can you be so sure that #8 is not due to faulty retarders (as opposed to human error)? it DOES say “auto” retarders.

“Switch previously run through” is a damaged track condition as well isn’t it?

For that matter, I guess THEY ALL ARE DUE TO HUMAN ERROR, since people are responsible for setting track maintenance goals, no?

[:)]