Are We Behind With Our Steam Programs?

The complete opposite to you, passenger traffic is primary while freight fits in as and when.

Neil

It sounds relevant to me because Rich was talking about the need for reliability in mainline service.

http://www.chaski.org/railfan/viewtopic.php?t=590

"... stars on the main axle hubs of SP 4440 denoted friction bearings ..."

"... stars on the SP axles that had friction bearings ..."

http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?gl=UG&hl=en-GB&v=uK5r3XKRBsc

I got my information about the stars from Doyle himself. I'll ask again but I'm pretty sure he's told me numerous times that everything [on 4449] is roller bearing EXCEPT the drivers which are friction bearings ...

... it's correct that the Friends [of 4449] have installed roller bearings on all but the drivers. however, historically, the stars indicated the spring pad lubricators had been installed on friction bearings.

It's too bad the 4449 wasn't a later GS-5 or GS-6 model which was originally built with roller bearings throughout. Some years ago they had to go to a lot of trouble to upgrade the 4449 with roller bearings on all axles to make it acceptable for modern mainline service. [edit: I'm not sure that the main drivers were actually converted to roller bearings, as was talked about?]

N&W, the last holdout of mainline steam power, developed advanced automatic lubricator systems for their steam locos to reduce/streamline maintenance and improve reliability. So the later model steam locos with these kinds of improvements would be better candidates for modern mainline steam excursion service.

First, ONLY the two GS-5 Class locomotives (#4458 & #4459) out of the ENTIRE Southern Pacific steam locomotive fleet where roller bearing equipped. The GS-6 did NOT come with roller bearings.

Second, the eight main driving axle crown bearings are STILL pressure feed oil lubricated, babbitted crown bearings, just like SP originally designed and had Lima Locomotive Works build them. We no longer use the spring pad lubricators in the box cellars, instead there are the largest size Premier Sponge pads which maintain contact on the bottom side of the axles. We now use a much higher quality journal oil than what the SP used in the 1940/1950s, but the method is still the same, i.e. eight high pressure lube oil lines from the mechanical lubricator, to the top of each crown bearing.

All other axles on 4449, her tender, and the auxiliary tender are Timken roller bearings.

Interesting. It appears that multiple internet sources have copied incorrect information and assumed that the GS-6 locos had roller bearings like the two previous GS-5 locos. I guess it shouldn't be surprising that the GS-6's built in 1943 didn't get roller bearings, perhaps due to wartime restrictions on materials.

And apparently it wasn't practical to convert the 4449 to roller bearings on the driving axles. Could that be a factor in its acceptability for mainline excursions in recent years? Perhaps Union Pacific doesn't really accept the 4449 as part of their heritage, even though they merged the SP.

Other good info here:

Oil Lube vs Roller Bearings? https://ogrforum.com/d...4244/reply/lastReply

Ace,

It really wasn't/isn't a matter of not being "practical" to convert 4449's driving axles to roller bearings, rather it just simply couldn't be done without MANY millions of dollars plus, turning the locomotive frame up-side-down in order to machine the driving box jaws to accept the much larger roles journal cannon housings/boxes.

Concerning future "acceptability" for main line excursions, we don't feel that has been, nor will it ever be a problem, especially since we have driver crown bearing temperature monitoring sensors on each of the eight bearings with an in cabe read-out.  Besides, it is more about our crew professionalism & experience, not just "plain bearing dive axles".

As far as the UP considering 4449 as part of their "heritage", I guess you will just have to ask the UP executives about THAT. Our organization has never actually asked if we could operate 4449 on the UP system anyway.

Really?...Ok, thank you for the information.

Besides, Lima Berkshires are darned fine engines.

You copied the WHOLE thing, just to say THAT?????

There are 19,000 passenger trains against 1,000 freight trains ran each day in the UK. 

Freight represents only 5% of rail movements per day on our network.  There is a plan to  try and increase rail freight so that trucks are reduced on our road system.

Neil

Those are some impressive numbers Neil...will be interesting to see how things progress there if freight traffic does increase.

In many respects, the comparison of contemporary main line steam operations between the US and UK is not a fair one. Whereas US trackage is, for the most part, privately owned by the individual carriers, the UK infrastructure is owned and operated by the national entity Network Rail with service provided by privately owned Train Operating Companies and Freight Operating Companies. Enthusiast groups in possession of locomotives with main line certification have the ability to work with authorized private operators to plan tours for which timetables are developed in conjunction with Network Rail and the trains run. No such access exists here in the states as the infrastructure itself is owned by the various individual carriers. You are at the mercy of the railroad which owns the track. As I'm sure Rich and Jack will agree, you can own the most impeccably maintained locomotive in the world but you're out of luck if you can't find a railroad willing to give you a chance to run it. Be thankful for companies such as UP and now NS who are receptive to the concept of running steam power on an increasingly busy US rail system.

Bob         

The original post was not enquiring about steam running on the main line, they were asking why the UK has more steam engines running than the US.

With regards to main line running here, we are lucky in that those engines permitted to access the network is indeed a bonus. It is nice to see them running as they would have done originally. But, this is not the norm, during the main summer season the greater majority of steam is operating on the privately owned heritage lines. The difference with the heritage lines compared to the main network is that the max speed is restricted to about 35mph as I remember.

So a question to ask now is this, how many equivalent privately owned heritage lines in the US run a good selection of steam services every day of the summer season as we do? 

Regards,

Neil

Just off the top of my head:

1) Durango & Silverton.

2) Cumbres & Toltec.

3) Strasburg Rail Road.

4) Heber Valley (although their locomotives are currently getting their 15 year inspection)

5) Western Maryland Scenic RR.

6) Conway Scenic RR.

7) Huckleberry RR.

8) Little River RR.

9) Cass.

10) Mount Renier Scenic RR.

11) Oregon Coast RR.

12) Texas State RR.

13) Grand Canyon RR.

14) San Louis & Rio Grande RR.

15) White Pass & Yukon RR.

That's all I can think of right now.

Yes, the original poster appeared to be interested in discussing the total number of operating steam locomotives; however, there were several references to mainline running which followed. I crafted my post in that regard as many fans in the states don't understand how extensive the differences are between the UK and US in terms of how their respective rail systems are managed, maintained and operated, all of which are major factors in determining the ability to operate steam today.

I hope to be able to travel to the UK to sample some of this wonderful railway activity for myself in the not too distant future.

Bob     

Thanks HW,

The perception I have been getting is that there are not the opportunities over there as we have here, which clearly isn't the case. 

So next question puzzling me now is why so many people appear to see that US steam is marginal in that they don't have choices in what is running and where? Do these lines have expansion programmes to build upon what they have or do they struggle to keep what they do have running? The other perception I see is that many people only want to see large locomotives restored and in fact are missing out on the diversity of what was made and to appreciate what is available.

Regards,

Neil

Neil,

Here in New Jersey, I certainly have plenty of opportunities from which to choose. Within a two hour radius, there are several railroads which operate steam, maintenance activities permitting: 

1) Black River & Western

2) Phillipsburg, NJ Delaware River excursions with the Chinese built 142

3) New Hope & Ivyland

4) Wanamaker, Kempton & Southern

If we consider museums, railroads which operate vintage diesels trolleys or trams, and expand the travel radius to three hours, my available options quadruple so I don't see the lack of attractions alluded to by some.

Bob

Bob,

I think that dispells my perception of what is happening overs there now, myth well and truly busted as the programme quotes often!

Are a lot of your heritage/tourism lines capable of running large steam locomotives if feasible or are they constrained by track capabilities for weight etc, which is a consideration here?

Regards,

Neil

I think the perception is that Britain has more mainline-type steam locos preserved and operating mainline passenger specials, simulating the good old days of fast mainline steam trains.

Because of the popular demand for mainline steam passenger excursions, the British built a brand new 4-6-2 steam locomotive completed in 2008, A1 class Tornado. Record-setting A4 Mallard is still operational, and three of the A4 class are currently certified for mainline use (according to Wikipedia).

By comparison, most of our steam train excursions in the USA are slow-speed branch-line operations with old freight locos.

Yes, it is true that we do have a good selection of mainline Pacifics that are either in steam or in the process of being overhauled. It is because we have so many that some of the lucky ones will venture out onto our main networks on steam specials to stretch their legs!  But as I mentioned in another post, we will also see those same engines on heritage lines operating at a max speed of about 35 mph due to restrictions on track and operating license.

With regards to the Tornado, she wasn't built specifically for main line operation due to demand for being needed for this function, she was built because all of the Peppercorn class were scrapped without any surviving and a group of people decided that the only way of seeing one again is to build a new one from scratch. She can also be found on heritage lines when not on the mainline.

It would be like seeing a group over there coming together to build a new NYC Hudson, an icon which so many would appreciate to see.

Regards,

Neil

Huh? 844, 4449, 261, 3985 and 765 are certainly not "...old freight locos..." And I would not call the NS Pittsburgh Division main line around Horseshoe Curve a "...slow-speed branch line..."

I think this is a matter of perception. Right now the United States has more main line steam locomotives running more miles than at any time in over 20 years! 765 alone will run over 3,700 miles on NS in 2013. The 630 and 4501 (also running for NS) will run about the same number of miles. The Union Pacific locomotives and the Daylight guys will also run several thousand miles in 2013. The 261 will also be hitting the rails again in 2013.

I think the glass is half full.  It's too bad some of you think it is - and will always be - half empty.

And let us not forget the juries who can't objectively look at a civil case.  How many times have we seen corporations made to pay for the stupid or even unlawful behavior of the people suing them just because the corporation has deep pockets and the ambulance chaser has played up on the pain and suffering of their clients to the point where the jury fails to give proper weight to who was ultimately at fault.  The party who is really at fault should be the one to bear the responsibility and consequences, and not just the party with the deepest pockets.

Andy

By using the word "excursions", you have eliminated pretty much ALL the tourist, museum, and narrow gauge steam operations. Thus you think that 4449, 844, 765, and 3751, all run "slow-speed"???????

Good grief!

Yeah I don't think I would lump the engines HW mentioned into the category of slow speed freight hogs.  Considering that 3 of them are 80" drivered Northerns and the 765 with her 69" drivers are very capable of high speed running.

A few posts ago, I mentioned a few railroads which operate steam within striking distance of my New Jersey home. A local road which hasn't operated a steam locomotive in a number of years but at one time could be depended upon to run one on a consistent basis is the Pine Creek Railroad in Wall Township. A three foot narrow gauge line operated by the New Jersey Museum of Transportation, the railroad is laid in a big loop through part of Allaire State Park. I went into the archives and pulled out some slides I took in 1980. The occasion was the Pine Creek's annual Railroader's Day which is held the Sunday immediately following Labor Day. It's railroad policy to run whatever motive power is operational at the time. That year, we were treated a rare triple header for the first few trips. The locomotives were the "Lady Edith", an Irish 4-4-0T built by Stephenson in 1887, the 26, a 1920 Baldwin 2-6-2 and the 9, a two truck Shay built by Lima in 1927:

Here's the Shay on its own:

In recent years, trains have been powered by GE units but the shop forces are currently in the process of rebuilding a Porter which formally ran in Central America so steam is on its way back at Allaire.

Bob 

Hey you forgot this "old freight loco", heres video of it at a crawl.

I do recall 765 traveling at the "snails pace" of 51mph in 2011...

You guys are certainly getting excited about how you want to interpret the word "excursions". But you have spelled out yourselves that there are just a handful of large operational mainline steam locomotives in the USA.

Here is a list of UK mainline steam locomotives for 2012, most of them rated for 60mph or better, all operational or nearly so. Sorry, it's a substantial list for a much smaller country. I'm sure you guys will enjoy putting them down as "small" engines.

http://www.uksteam.info/tours/locos.htm

Both countries have much larger numbers of steam locos operating on secondary lines. Now please enjoy yourselves by misrepresenting what I've said!

Yes, I have seen the 3985 in operation - twice in 21 years. I've seen the 4449 operating about five times in 36 years. Wish they were around my territory more often.

I agree, that is an impressive list for a small country or not. I think what is sad is when you look at was running once that no longer is such as....

N&W #611

N&W #1218

FRISCO #1522

C&O #614

C&O #2765

COTTON BELT #819

NKP #759

READING #2101 (fire damage)

READING #2102

All large main line power...sad.

I'd like to know the comparison of  daily freight moved, I'm sure that has a substantial effect on the amount of available rail or time for that matter.

Its probably an apples and oranges when it comes to lifestyle, economics and the role trains play moving goods versus having excursions in the US or UK.

I mentioned in an earlier post that our daily traffic is about 19,000 passenger trains compared to 1,000 freight. I'm not sure how this helps you?

Regards,

Neil

There is no one steam program.

1. Corporate programs

2. Private programs

Plenty of steam but no rails. As far as corporate programs, it seems that there is a growing recognition that honoring their heritage makes sense in direct proportion to the profitability of their freight revenues is into the black side of the ledger,, of as long as the operation of same bread and butter freight movements are unaffected by steam use. "Borrowing steam" rather than full corporate programs to maintain them is a sort of reasonably frugal compromise. 

Private programs do not get the fiscal support from donors that they require to do an end run around having high revenue streams to maintain steam. So again there's a private-corporate partnership there in borrowed steam. 

A lot of talk without donations to support private groups landed operations where they are. look at the amount of relaid trackage revived by private groups in the U.K compared to the U.S..the Brits are willing to roll up their sleeves and put their money where their mouths are..to a greater extent than we are. Why that is has to do with an appreciation of history than is comparatively marginal here. Instead we as a country are more enamored of the latest technology..We need rails rather than more steam.

An excellent example of can do attitude and making usable trackage a priority instead of an afterthought is here:

http://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=32663&sid=901cfa2d1c58b53fcf5a92d0748d8833

Yes I saw that, I was curious as to the freight comparison  with the US. So far I've found that the BNSF RR here in the States runs more than 1000 trains themselves. BNSF is one of 7 class 1 railroads, in addition there are dozens of regional railroads.

Doesn't leave alot of "room" for a steam excursion to run back and forth. Our rails are busy with freight moving goods.

For the US, it might make more sense to put our steamers at the head of freight trains, but then theres always that whole "global warming" thing.

Not to mention stopping every 150 to 200 miles to grease the rods and refill the mechanical lubricators on the steam locomotive!

I'm surmising here as I don't know the issues involved, but I guess there are a number of factors involved like can a steam special fit into an existing freight timetable and maintain the same speed so as not to impede on the tail trains behind, perceived reliability by the railroad company (if a locomotive is passed fit for mainline work then this shouldn't be an issue) not to fail, what's in it for me by the railroad, maximising a sell-out for the charter to at least break even etc, etc.

Regards,

Neil

This is true, the 3751 was to come east for Trainfest in 2011 but couldn't because of traffic volumes over Cajon.  The freight traffic will come first, thats what generates the $$$ and why they are in business.   

Would people donate (more) money if they knew the $$$ would acutally go to the said project.  There have been so many givers "burnt" by non-profits in the past that it has let many people cautious of giving to ANY of them.  More openness of their books might be a start to rebuild trust.

Specifically which "locomotive projects" are you referring to?

It varies by location.  Some are capable, others not so much.  It has everything to do with axle loadings, clearances, curvature, condition of track, etc.

The main issue is transport costs (and perceived benefit) of moving engines from one place to another.  Most of the railroads don't see the benefit in doing such, and its prohibitively expensive to do it by road.  Then, even if you got them there, it's not like you are going to make your money back, so it doesn't happen.

I believe that should be the C&O 2716.  The "2765" is happily operational, of course.

Still, there is a fraction of the amount of large, mainline steam engines compared to 20 years ago.  The reinstating of the Norfolk Southern Steam Program has helped immensely, along with some other smaller operators (Reading & Northern), but it's a far cry from the 80s/early 90s....and before.