Why Do Steam Locomotives Run Today?

Bobby Ogage posted:

What are the principal reasons that large amounts of money and effort are spent to put steam locomotives back on the rails today? In my opinion, the reasons are:

> Public financial support, enjoyment and education;

Maybe.

> Strong enthusiasm of people and organizations dedicated to preserving steam locomotives;

Absolutely!

> Personal challenge and satisfaction of some individuals for accomplishing a huge and unusual project;

Again, ABSOLUTELY!

> Preservation of historical machines;

Maybe.

> Marketing, advertising, employee recognition programs of large corporations, and especially current railroads.

Only on the Union Pacific RR.

 

If my company spent a million on a tv commercial and another million or two to put it on the air, how do I gauge the impact?  Spend a million on a 4-8-4 or a Challenger or . . take it around the country and get LOCAL COMMUNITIES involved all along the way, then lets see if you can gauge the impact.  A steamer in a museum is fine, a steamer on the rails well that's another story!  My 2 cents, spend wisely!    Russ

> Public financial support, enjoyment and education.

Without the public, steam locomotive operations would not survive in my opinion.

I guess the same question could be asked why do "xx" run today.

Antique/vintage cars/buses/trucks/tractors

Antique/vintage private/military aircraft

Antique/vintage private/commercial boats

Or any other item some people think is stupid to pursue.

Myself, I'm glad there are dreamers out there that want to preserve, support, and operate these great machines.

ChiloquinRuss posted:

If my company spent a million on a tv commercial and another million or two to put it on the air, how do I gauge the impact?  Spend a million on a 4-8-4 or a Challenger or . . take it around the country and get LOCAL COMMUNITIES involved all along the way, then lets see if you can gauge the impact.  A steamer in a museum is fine, a steamer on the rails well that's another story!  My 2 cents, spend wisely!    Russ

I think you hit the nail on the head.

Gerry

Bobby Ogage posted:

"...Without the public, steam locomotive operations would not survive in my opinion.

Absolutely 100% true!

The general public are the people who actually support the various steam operations around the country by purchasing excursion tickets and riding the trains.

For the most part, railfans don't buy tickets. They chase the trains, shoot a lot of (mostly bad) video and then complain about how the consist was painted, not enough smoke, too much whistle, not fast enough, one too many rivets on the tender, wrong shade of yellow on the lettering, etc.

If the steam locomotive operators around the country had to rely on railfans to buy excursion tickets, none of them would be running.

I really don't care what the ultimate reason for doing it is as long as it keeps happening. I can understand the railfan dilemma. When you're on a coach behind a steam engine, you can't see the engine. People love to see steam engines in action, not just sit in a coach and let the scenery go by. Chasing videos are really the best way to see the motion, hear the clanking when the engine is drifting, or the exhaust bark when under load. When you in the 10th car back in the consist you know none of this.

My wife and I took a trip behind 614 in 1995 or 6. The most exciting (and fleeting) part of the trip was standing trackside when they did three 70 mph runbys. That was impressive! So impressive that my wife commented that it was more exciting than seeing a night Space Shuttle launch. Of course we saw the Space Shuttle from five miles away and 614 from about 25 feet. I imagine that the Space Shuttle would have been REAL EXCITING if you were 25 feet away for a few milliseconds until you were incinerated. Incidentally, that was when I found out that steam engines at high speed didn't "choo-choo", they roared like a jet engine with a continuous exhaust sound. That was an eye (ear) opener. Most train films show engines at lower speed where exhaust sounds are differentiated. Not at 70 and I can't imagine was a T-1 Duplex sounded like going by at 100 mpg. It must have been awesome in the truest sense of that word.

Out of curiosity, does any engineering and/or performance analysis of steam power take place during the runs? I've seen photos of UP 3985 doing a container drag and they had to have known it could do the job before hooking it up.

I remember an FAA official in the 1980s who wanted to ground all the former military aircraft at airshows. Why? The CAF and other groups of its type  were going 'lawn dart' with several planes in that timeframe. Several crashed with the loss of all on board. The 'old boys club' of groups of that type found that people who probably shouldn't be flying anymore were flying large bombers and such, saying that they didn't trust new blood to fly them (never mind that it was almost  exclusively 19-20-years olds were flying them back in the day).

I talked with someone at NASA who'd attended a seminar from the NTSB about allowing deviations form the norm to become the norm as nothing bad had happened before (a huge problem NASA had in the shuttle era, leading to the Challenger and Columbia orbiter disasters) and they used the infamous crown sheet failure/ boiler explosion at the Gettysburg RR as an example. The NTSB person was asked what'd happen if a tourist train or mainline steam excursion suffered a similar event tomorrow. The NTSB person replied, in effect, that steam would be done in such an event. The tourist operations, he said, wouldn't be able to maintain the increased standards for steam operation that would surely follow something like that.

AGHRMatt posted:

Out of curiosity, does any engineering and/or performance analysis of steam power take place during the runs?

No. That was only done twice. Once many many years ago with a "test car" behind T&P 610 while in excursion service on the Southern Railway, and again just a year ago with a Norfolk Southern "Test car" behind N&W 611.

I've seen photos of UP 3985 doing a container drag and they had to have known it could do the job before hooking it up.

Of course they knew, as the original tonnage ratings for UP 3900 class locomotives were well known and documented, plus they knew the grade of Archer Hill, eastbound out of Cheyenne.

Trainman2001 posted:

...that was when I found out that steam engines at high speed didn't "choo-choo", they roared like a jet engine with a continuous exhaust sound. That was an eye (ear) opener...

If it sounded like a jet engine with a steady roar at the stack, whoever was running the 614 didn't have it hooked up right. Even at high speed, a properly hooked up steam locomotive should sound like a rapid-fire machine gun.

As an example, listen to the sound of the 765's exhaust in the first few seconds of this clip, just after the whistle stops blowing...

THAT'S how a steam locomotive at high speed should sound!

OGR Webmaster posted:

THAT'S how a steam locomotive at high speed should sound!

A-men!

How fast was that train going? The 765 is a freight engine. 614 is a passenger engine. It was 22 years ago and it might have sounded like that, but it's exhaust was even more continuous and grayer. It was just a light gray continuous plume blasting out of the stack.

It's a funny story about that day. I had just started back into model trains again, and had bought my first engine. I didn't want to have to ask the CEO/CFO about every purchase I needed to make to create a railroad empire and wanted to establish a budget that I would stick too. If I needed to exceed it, I'd talk it over with her. We weren't getting too far in this discussion on the day we took the ride. When the train was blasting by my wife cracked up realizing that the engineer of 614 was also its owner. In other words, he was playing with trains too, only his was worth a few million dollars. She realized that my budget was not the worst thing that could happen and we've been sticking with it ever since. He later lost that engine in a nasty divorce. Lesson here: don't get divorced.

The title of that 765 video is "NKP 765 at 70 mph." There ya go.

My friend Ross Rowland owns the 614. He was probably running it on that photo run. He did not lose the engine in a divorce. NJ Transit held it "hostage" for a while after those Port Jervis trips due to some unpaid bills, but that's all in the past and Ross still owns it. It's on display in Clifton Forge, VA now.

Well... Rich... there you go. I'm glad he still owns it, but wish it was still roaring on the rails. How fast does 765 go? To me, you keep steam engines alive because they're magnificent machines that have their insides on their outsides. Modern motive power is so sterile with everything hidden. Steam engines were mechanical and relatable. And their power was right in your face. I'm glad that 765 is running too. I remember seeing 614 stored at the New Hope and Ivyland RR before it did those excursion runs. Before I moved from Pennsy, NHIRR was also restoring a late model Alco 4-8-4 that used to be with the Nacionale de Mexico. It was a light 4-8-4 that lacked some of the more sophisticated appliances even though it was one of the last steam engines produced in the USA. I don't know the disposition of this engine now.

NS and BNSF now have basically the same policy with regard to steam. They will allow steam excursions to run, but Amtrak has to be involved so that their big, multi-million dollar insurance policy is in play.

UP runs their own corporate program with their own engines. Foreign line locomotives are not permitted on UP.

The current (and recent past) regime at CSX sees no value in steam trains, so they don't permit them on their lines at all, even dead in tow. They just don't want to be bothered.

However, it was not always this way. Back in the 80s and 90s, the 765 ran a lot of trips on CSX and couldn't get anything out of NS. Today that pendulum has swung in the completely opposite direction. It's all about the people in charge.

OGR Webmaster posted:

If it sounded like a jet engine with a steady roar at the stack, whoever was running the 614 didn't have it hooked up right. Even at high speed, a properly hooked up steam locomotive should sound like a rapid-fire machine gun.

According to Ross Rowland, he and Paul Nichini were the only two engineers on the NJT excursions.

Railfan Brody posted:

According to Ross Rowland, he and Paul Nichini were the only two engineers on the NJT excursions.

Right. Except Ross has always had a tendency to equate "noise" with "power", thus he tends to operate his locomotive with the reverse gear closer into the "corner" in order to produce much higher back pressure, which results in a LOT more "noise", i.e. "roar at the stack". NOT like the machine gun exhaust of 765 or 4449 (both Lima products).

Bobby Ogauge,

I passed by this topic for a few days, wondering why you were asking the question.  Then I finally opened it up today, and saw you were really opening a healthy discussion by stating some of the reasons you have thought of.  Don't judge a book by it's cover!  Shame on me!!!

I am really glad to read the comments here, since we have a vast amount of first hand knowledge in our midst.  

I would like to add a comment similar to Myles' (Trainman).  Back in the '80s and early '90s we lived in Virginia about 10 miles from the old Southern route from Alexandria to Charlottesville.  As those old enough to know what it was like before the Internet, information was hard to come by.  I learned at late notice that the NS was going to run an out and back trip from Alexandria headed by the 1218.  I followed the train and was able to get some photos (color slides-remember those?) from various locations, then finally turning back home.  After supper, I took my wife and 1 year-old daughter (at the time) up to Bealeton for them to see the train on it's return.  There were about 20 other people waiting.  We were close to the tracks as Myles was, and when the 1218 came by, the engineer blew the whistle.  The sound was deafening, much more shrill (as I recall) than Rich's video of the 765.  I immediately was worried that our daughter's ears could have been damaged, but she didn't even flinch, let alone cry.  The power of the 1218 was tremendous!!

For the same reason anyone climbs Mt Everest, if you think about it, should you have such an inclination.  Also, why would anyone spend over one million dollars of own money to rebuild the "Leviathan" steam engine ( find it at Union, Illinois when not running excursions) from original blue prints?  I have friends in Antioch, Illinois who helped on the build of this engine, and witnessed first runs in Union after certification by the Feds.  Let us all thank God there are those wishing to take necessary steps to keep steam motive power alive and part of our experiences in life.

Jesse    TCA   12-68275

I think it is worth stating that many organizations that run steam are able to do so because of the devotion and support of volunteers. I have seen a real mix of younger people looking to learn and retired individuals looking to expand their hobby to everyone in between.

I think it takes a number of things, and it varies on who owns it, for the UP for example it is a way to extend their brand, while restoring the Big Boy has nothing to do with how much freight they can carry, they see it as a running billboard for their railroad, and it establishes goodwill because it kind of says "we aren't a railroad run by and for beancounters". Plus of course there are employees there and managers who probably are entranced by the old steam, you can be they have some highly placed railfan types there. Believe it or not, but if the UP ever runs into some sort of situation where they need public support, having done the steam stuff could help them, as opposed to some corporate type who is universally reviled.  ROI on something like that is difficult to measure, but the same is true for the ads that the UP and other railroads run, CSX runs ads in local tv markets here, and it is kind of hard to measure the value, since do shippers actually get influenced by an ad, do stock analysts and the like push the stock cause of an ad? I think that most of these go along with the idea of goodwill and can't really be measured. 

Why is there so many differing opinions about steam locomotives which represented a massive component of the industrialization of the USA, and a tacit acceptance of spending equal amounts of cash to restore old airplanes, of which there are many more examples extant than operating steam engines? It's probably due to nobody owns the air, but the big five own all the rails that can support class 1 steam engines. Bean counters have no soul... or so it may seem.

Trainman2001 posted:

Why is there so many differing opinions about steam locomotives which represented a massive component of the industrialization of the USA, and a tacit acceptance of spending equal amounts of cash to restore old airplanes, of which there are many more examples extant than operating steam engines? It's probably due to nobody owns the air, but the big five own all the rails that can support class 1 steam engines. Bean counters have no soul... or so it may seem.

You just answered your own question. All you need to fly an antique plane is:

1. Airplane in flyable condition
2. Boatload of money to fly it
3. Pilot qualified to fly said plane
4. Runway long enough to take off and land

3 and 4 are relatively easy to find. You don't have a situation where nobody will allow you to land because your plane has props or a type of brakes that the airlines don't use anymore (an analogy for steam and friction bearings, of course).

But as to why planes and not trains? Well, airplanes are a sign of wealth and have always attracted the rich. Just go to the Reno air races or go to the tent events at Oshkosh and you'll see wealth on the display, the likes of which trains fans couldn't dream of. Just like a concors event for old restored classic cars (the rare ones, not a hot rod show), money oozes out of the pores of those who attend. You just don't get that with trains.

We need to get more rich people interested in railroading from a historic perspective. Warren Buffet comes to mind. He has a marvelous layout in his home. He bought BNSF with the sole purpose of keeping for 100 years and making it work. BNSF was a major sponsor of the fantastic HO layout in Chicago's Museum of Science and Industry. We just need more like him. In fact, the USA would do well with a lot more like him.

Trainman2001 posted:

We need to get more rich people interested in railroading from a historic perspective. Warren Buffet comes to mind. He has a marvelous layout in his home. He bought BNSF with the sole purpose of keeping for 100 years and making it work. BNSF was a major sponsor of the fantastic HO layout in Chicago's Museum of Science and Industry. We just need more like him. In fact, the USA would do well with a lot more like him.

For what it's worth, the BNSF management has been VERY supportive of 4449 and her operations on BNSF lines.

If you have never experienced big steam operations, go find one - it's an amazing experience. A good friend of mine and I chased teh N&W 611 and the year later I was a car host on two runs. Unfortunately, riding is not the same experience as standing by the tracks when she blasts by. She slipped badly on a hill (NS let her do the duty solo with about 20 loaded passenger cars), a couple of back up and restarts, quite a show, even back in car 16.

For the railroads that understand it, they realize that these days, to most Americans, the railroads are invisible. So steam excursions put a face on the railroad. NS and UP really get it, as for CSX, they remain invisible. The good will that the NS and UP get from their runs is priceless. And some important history is kept alive for a couple more generations.

Jim Waterman

Jim Waterman posted:

If you have never experienced big steam operations, go find one - it's an amazing experience. A good friend of mine and I chased teh N&W 611 and the year later I was a car host on two runs. Unfortunately, riding is not the same experience as standing by the tracks when she blasts by. She slipped badly on a hill (NS let her do the duty solo with about 20 loaded passenger cars), a couple of back up and restarts, quite a show, even back in car 16.

For the railroads that understand it, they realize that these days, to most Americans, the railroads are invisible. So steam excursions put a face on the railroad. NS and UP really get it, as for CSX, they remain invisible. The good will that the NS and UP get from their runs is priceless. And some important history is kept alive for a couple more generations.

Jim Waterman

Lets not forget about BNSF!

Jim Waterman posted:

For the railroads that understand it, they realize that these days, to most Americans, the railroads are invisible. So steam excursions put a face on the railroad. NS and UP really get it, as for CSX, they remain invisible. The good will that the NS and UP get from their runs is priceless.

Is it truly Priceless for the railroads? Do they really perceive any kind of value for putting money into running Steam on their railroads? Or, at the very least, risking a breakdown on a heavily-traveled freight main line?

I don't understand how most train fans and model railroaders do not understand that railroading is a simple business. Railroads got out of small less than car size loads a long time ago in favor of unit trains and container traffic. That alone should tell you exactly what they're really thinking of and the things they truly value.

Naturally, there are railroads that will allow Steam on their lines. But in those cases, even then, the most understanding railroads wouldn't allow it with a great frequency. As much as we think it is great that Union Pacific runs their own steam, we have to remind ourselves that they don't run Steam very often.

I'm not saying that railroads are heartless and evil corporate greed Hogs, but they are simple businessman. We shouldn't get terribly upset at them when they don't want to run something that doesn't provide the income that their large, long trains do.

"We shouldn't get terribly upset at them when they don't want to run something that doesn't provide the income that their large, long trains do."

Not only that, but the interest in these industrial antiquities will gradually become minimal to none.  Those who actually have nostalgia based upon experience for steam are now almost all in their 70s and older.  To younger people steam locomotives may mostly seem like noisy, messy and polluting relics of a bygone era, however dramatic.  Within the next quarter century, there may simply be not enough interest to maintain these expensive, impressive devices in operation.  Electricity is cleaner than steam, and diesel fuel is less polluting than coal.  Over the coming decades, the entire carbon based fuel economy is likely to be substantially replaced by non-polluting sources such as wind, tidal and solar, supplemented by nuclear and perhaps some natural gas.  This will be an economic and health related change since carbon based, combustion requiring transportation kills and maims people by causing vascular, heart and lung diseases.  Steam locomotives will likely be seen only in museums within the lifetime of people now alive.  Sic transit and all that.

Not so sure the description of young people as seeing steam engines as noisy, polluting relics of a bygone era is that accurate, I think that people who never saw a steam engine in service still find them fascinating, the way they find a horse and buggy fascinating, or other things from past eras. To be honest, even for people now in their 70's, their exposure to steam was minimal, by the time someone who was born into the post war world was likely to be travelling or really be conscious of trains, steam was already pretty much gone. 

There is no doubt that we are moving off of a fossil fuel economy, but I don't think that will necessarily affect running steam locomotives the way we are talking. We aren't talking building steam engines for revenue service, we are talking engines used for excursions and whatnot, and the amount of pollution they generate is so small I doubt anyone would care. There could be questions about what such engines would run their boilers on if sometime in the future coal or oil is no longer available, but that could be solved if desired. 

bigkid posted:

...even for people now in their 70's, their exposure to steam was minimal...

A very good point, Bigkid. I will be 71 in October. I have ONE recollection of seeing a steam locomotive in my childhood. It was a small steamer (0-6-0 maybe?) parked dead on a track in a steel mill. I have no memories of any operating steam locomotives from my childhood years, nor did I have any significant interest in trains as a child. Yes, I had a Lionel train set as a kid, but it was a family thing, only set up at Christmas.

Even so, the fascination of steam locomotives, from both mechanical and historical viewpoints, was enough for me to become interested in steam locomotives as a 36-year old adult, and serve on a steam locomotive crew (NKP 765) for 34 years. I have now retired from the 765's crew, but there are many young men and women on that crew today that will carry the torch for another generation.

I'll tell you why steam engines are still running today...because they are cool!!!

Mr Union Pacific posted:

I'll tell you why steam engines are still running today...because they are cool!!!

That isn't WHY they are running. That may be a RESULT of them running, however.

Because they can. They attract crowds, which normally increase sales in the area for the day. There till very impressive. 

Mr Union Pacific posted:

I'll tell you why steam engines are still running today...because they are cool!!!

They sure are! Such simple machines, but so cool!

I wish more folks felt this way. My modest donations to restoration programs don't go very far. lol

As for seeing steam running, my parents (who are both in their early 80s) saw daily steam running in their hometown until they left in the early 60s. What they saw can be seen at 10:32 here.

At the age of 47, I saw steam running into my teen years, in the same town on visits there.

>>The most exciting (and fleeting) part of the trip was standing trackside when they did three 70 mph runbys. <<

>>To me, you keep steam engines alive because they're magnificent machines that have their insides on their outsides.<<

And to me, they're just ****ed exciting to watch!  Stuffed and mounted, they might as well be made of concrete.

Well said OldGuy,  and I think it's fittin' that they don't have to work so hard anymore.  Now they get to do fun stuff like excursions or ridin' folks through parks and all giving us all a glimpse of the past.  I sure appreciate the dedicated folks who keep them running.  That's why they run today.