Why does the Big Boy need a diesel helper? The answer from Ed himself.

@Norton posted:

The salient point for me is using a diesel to reduce maintenance on the passenger cars. I can appreciate someone not wanting to abuse something they spent a lot of time and money in its restoration. Anyone who has restored a classic car, in particular a classic sports car are they going to take their $10 million Ferrari 250 GT to a race course and drive it 10-10ths mixing up with a few dozen other vehicles and possibly turning it into scrap? They don't have to prove to anyone else but themselves how capable the vehicle is or their driving skills.

Pete

I think that is a very good analogy. The other thing is the tourist railroads don't exactly exert their engines either, in large part because of where they operate, they aren't running a full consist of heavyweight passenger cars at 60MPH or the like either , they run a relatively small string of coaches at pretty low speeds (in part because the track they operate on isn't all that long or built for that kind of speed, at least IME).

@bigkid posted:

Well thought out, but you are looking at this from the view of a rail fan or as if 4014 is in revenue service. In a sense, tourist railroads and museum roads are in revenue service, they are selling the restored engine via rides. Sure, non profits have to squeeze every dollar out of their operations but with a tourist railroad people want to be pulled by a steam engine. Friend of mine was involved with one of the operations here in NJ that runs (or ran, IDK if they are still doing it) steam, and when they ran a diesel bc the steam engine was down for maintenance or whatnot, their typical ridership dropped.

4014 is not in revenue service, it is a rolling billboard for the UP, and the fact is that people come to see the engine, see it steaming and its whistle blowing and the like, the people with kids gathered at a stop, people stopping by the side of the road, don't care about dynamic braking or if 4014 is 'really' pulling the train, they see the smoke, they see the drivers going, they hear the whistle and they are happy. They don't care because they don't know..and UP knows that. If running with a diesel gets them more miles between parts changes and the like, there is real value in doing that given its role. Rail enthusiasts who know these things aren't a concern to UP basically.

This to me is kind of like Broadway mavens, who when you say you saw and liked a show that had been running a while, they say "That is not the real show, you should have seen it with X playing the lead" or rock snobs when you mention you like some group and they sneer "They are so commercial, that isn't real rock and roll".....*lol*

Dear Bigkid,

From the perspective you've given, I agree with you 100%.

If this simply an oversized show then it is what it is and no further discussion is needed.

My initial view point is from a an engineer's perspective not a railfan.  A fully restored machine should be able to preform its intended design function without any Band-Aids being applied.    I saw these excursions with the aid of a diesel as a band aid.   Thus the question arose - as to why?

Has the helper for insurance purposes.  As in written insurance policy?

my take is this.  Ed statement to me is nothing but fluff.  Just my opinion on what I’ve read here and other forums.

1. the Big Boy is a fuel hog and to conserve on the trips from town to town the diesels assists.

2.  The conversion to oil wasn’t as successful as we were led to believe.  Statements made by Ed’s crew in 2019 says the big boy is easy to fire.  Really, because it’s being pushed maybe? Hot Water has stated here the challenger was a bear to fire. You telling me the big boy would be easier?  I find that hard to believe as a arm chair rail fan.

what ever the reason, as stated above, the big boy is a good PR moving billboard for the railroad.   I’m sure Ed has orders from the top to keep cost down.  A diesel would accomplish that.

@Allegheny posted:

Hello Hot Water,

I am not simply making up any of the figures I quoted.  Please click the links I posted and you'll see that I directly lifted them from that respective sight.   If they are incorrect then that site should be notified. The performance figures came from the Wikipedia site.

You noted that today trains aren't 5.5 miles long, this may be very true, but in age of steam this was the case as these locomotive were created for that very purpose.   These were work horses designed to do a very specific job to pull as many heavily laden cars as possible.   Whether it was 5.5 miles long or 4.5 or anything else in-between isn't the issue.

What is the issue why would this massive locomotive need a helper given it's designed capabilities?

In another posting one OGR member posted noted that in reality it's about saving the passenger car brakes.  If that is the real reason - then there isn't any further discussion required.   

I think you are confusing two things here. We know 4014 was designed as a heavy freight hauler designed to pull long, heavy freight trains over steep grades, and it did what it was supposed to. You are assuming that 4014 as it now exists is incapable of pulling long trains by itself or it 'needs' a diesel helper to be able to do what it does, and therein I think is the problem, it could very well be a false assumption.

I doubt that they are using a diesel because 4014 is a slug, was badly built, you name it, is a 'disney engine' as one person I saw on another place call it (ie looks like a steam engine, run by a diesel, like at Disney parks). When they got it running again they were rushing it to get to the 150th anniversary of the transcontinental railroad, and there I could see them needing a diesel as a backup, it likely had glitches and issues (I have rebuilt plenty of cars over the years, which are infinitely less complicated then this beast, and there are always post build issues no matter how carefully you do it).

I am no expert on steam engines, but I have read enough about them that I know their cost/mile was pretty high when in revenue service. When 4014 and the rest were pulling those huge trains, they needed a lot of maintenance to say the least, pulling long freight trains at speed on grades taxes the engine (true of any engine, of course). That cost was offset from the revenue they made, and especially during WWII with Coal an essential fuel they were likely getting top dollar for their loads, so the cost of maintaining this kind of running was paid for.  Maybe some of the people who have worked for railroads can chime in, but I can remember reading where the maintenance cost between a diesel and a steam engine was a pretty big ratio, it is why steam disappeared (along with mu allowing one train crew to operate multiple engines, etc).

4014 today is a show piece, someone else mentioned a rare sports car like a Ferrari Daytona convertible (be still my heart!), you aren't going to take something that is worth many millions of dollars and put it in a vintage race or drive it as a daily driver and you do it to preserve it. While I can sympathize with people who complain cars like this were made to be driven, I also understand why someone with something that cost them a million bucks to restore and is worth like 5 million would not want to take it out and 'tear it up', too.

4014 is not in revenue service and if running a diesel in the consist can save it wear and tear, extending its life, it makes sense they would do it. Like the Ferrari, auto nuts moan all the time that the great sports cars are not driven like they should be, that they sit in air conditioned garages and the like, and I sympathize with that. Train nuts want to see 4014 recreate the past, they want to see it proudly operating all by itself pulling a large train and of course I would love to see that, but it isn't going to happen. If running a diesel means that 4014 requires less maintenance , that parts last longer, it breaks down less, it can run for x years before needing major work instead of x/2, they are going to do it given corporate reality.I have no inside knowledge of UP steam, how it is budgeted, it is likely a line on the 10k under advertising and promotional costs. But I would lay pretty good odds that it is operating under pretty tight budgets these days, the fact that UP is not running its other engine(s) says a lot (not sure how many operating engines it has).

Put it this way, I suspect the guys who rebuilt this beast would love to see it pulling cars by itself, would love to see it pulling a huge freight consist, you don't work on steam engines cause it is a hot job, you do it because you love doing it. Dickens , for whatever he is or isn't as a person, isn't doing this because he is making a fortune, he and his team are doing it because they love doing it, the way his predecessor did. They have pride in what they have done and I would bet there were probably some pretty big arguments about Big Boy operating with a diesel (in large part because the steam team probably knew they would get the kind of criticism they have, that big boy needed a push, it wasn't really operating, etc) but corporate matters won out *shrug*. If it were truly built badly in 2019, given they had a year with like no activity, they could have corrected the mistakes and run it without a diesel; the fact that 2 years later they are running the same way tells me it was this is the way they were told to run it, likely because with the budget they have they couldn't routinely operate the way they seem to be now. 

It would be interesting if there is ever a competitor to the scale of the UP steam program, if the Daylight engine or some of the others can do long trips, do a lot of trips, how they will be run, I suspect you might see a lot of the same thing.

As an aside, my interest in UP began a few years ago when 1943 the Spirit of UP came through town. Furthered by seeing 4141 in its Air Force 1 colors. I have never seen a train headed by either one that wasn’t backed up by another diesel. Is that because neither can pull the train by itself, just for backup if needed, or company policy?

Pete

@Dominic Mazoch posted:

Has the helper for insurance purposes.  As in written insurance policy?

No.

@bigkid posted:

I doubt that they are using a diesel because 4014 is a slug, was badly built, you name it, is a 'disney engine' as one person I saw on another place call it (ie looks like a steam engine, run by a diesel, like at Disney parks).

This is off topic, but Disney operates one of the largest fleets of actual steam-operated locomotives in the world (17 total).

I would imagine that part of the need to reduce wear and tear on the Big Boy, as previously noted, results from the length of its tours (in thousands of miles), significantly more than most other restored steam engines cover on their tours. The Big Boy roams the West, and distances to cover are far greater than those east of the Mississippi.

Another factor that must drive the need to reduce wear and tear is the fact that it makes so many stops on its tours. On its 2019 tour it made 32 stops just in Texas! I don't know how many total stops and starts it made during that tour, but all of these stops and starts must contribute to a lot of additional wear on the engine. That's a lot of braking, and a lot of starts from stops.

Also, whenever I saw the Challenger and the 844, they had a diesel in their consists as well. So all this aiming at something unique about the Big Boy operations seems a bit off-target. Ask UP why it uses diesels on ALL of it's steams engines, not just the 4014. Apparently, that's how the UP operates its steam programs for their long distance tours, and clearly they feel there's a need to do it that way on their railroad.

@breezinup posted:

I would imagine that part of the need to reduce wear and tear on the Big Boy, as previously noted, results from the length of its tours (in thousands of miles), significantly more than most other restored steam engines cover on their tours. The Big Boy roams the West, and distances to cover are far greater than those east of the Mississippi.

Another factor that must drive the need to reduce wear and tear is the fact that it makes so many stops on its tours. On its 2019 tour it made 32 stops just in Texas! I don't know how many total stops and starts it made during that tour, but all of these stops and starts must contribute to a lot of additional wear on the engine. That's a lot of braking, and a lot of starts from stops.

For what its worth, the brakes are NOT used on a steam locomotive, unless it is running light, i.e. all by itself. The brakes on the train perform the "stopping". Concerning starts, generally only the Engineer's arms are involved.

Breezinup, your mileage and start/stop arguments don't hold up.

• N&W 611 ran tens of thousands of miles on NS when their steam program was active. Same for N&W 1218.
• SP 4449 ran all the way from Portland, Oregon to Owosso, Michigan and back in 2009.
• The 4449 also traveled almost the entire United States on the Freedom Train back in 1976.
• 614 ran thousands of miles in service on the Chessie Safety Express in 1980 and 81.
• 2101 ran thousands of miles on the Chessie Steam Special in 1978 and 1979.
• NKP 765 ran over 3,000 miles in 2014 and more than 4,000 miles in 2015.

The 4014 is not running any more miles than most of the other main line steam locomotives have run in the past.

@Hot Water posted:

For what its worth, the brakes are NOT used on a steam locomotive, unless it is running light, i.e. all by itself. The brakes on the train perform the "stopping".

Just going by what Ed said in his statement.

"Consider the standard passenger train operating during the steam era. The passenger cars rarely traveled over several hundred miles before they were inspected by the eyes and experienced hands of well equipped Carmen. They changed out worn brake shoes and attended to the servicing needs of the train. When we go out into the field, we do not bring additional staff for this purpose. Trust me, without dynamic braking you will grind the brake material down rapidly considering how many stops we are making each day."

It appears he does use brakes.

@breezinup posted:

It appears he does use brakes.

Yes...the brakes on the CARS, not the brakes on the locomotive. It's called "stretch braking."

You never use the independent brake on a steam locomotive unless your are running "light" (engine only.)

@breezinup posted:

Just going by what Ed said in his statement.

"Consider the standard passenger train operating during the steam era.

Well, he's comparing apples and walnuts! This is no longer the "steam era", and current passenger cars, as well as freight cars, no longer cast iron brake shoes. The entire UP executive passenger car fleet are all equipped with disc-brakes, which had non-metallic brake pads, and are VERY easy to replace when on the road. Such replacements, are NOT there responsibility of the 4014 steam crew, but are handled by the one or two men accompanying the passenger equipment, who also take care of all the air condition and 480 volt power throughout the train.

The passenger cars rarely traveled over several hundred miles before they were inspected by the eyes and experienced hands of well equipped Carmen. They changed out worn brake shoes and attended to the servicing needs of the train. When we go out into the field, we do not bring additional staff for this purpose.

He's fibbing again! There are ALWAYS representatives from the UP passenger car Heritage Fleet Dept. that accompany those cars.

Trust me, without dynamic braking you will grind the brake material down rapidly considering how many stops we are making each day."

Sort of, but you can NOT stop a train with just one diesel unit in dynamic brake. Besides, the MU'ed diesel unit is part of the steam locomotive consist, and when the train brakes are applied, the locomotive independent brakes are "bailed off", so ONLY the air brakes on the passenger cars stop the train. Stretch braking is also the smoothest way to stop the passenger train.

It appears he does use brakes.

Not on the locomotive, he doesn't!!!!!!

Just my opinion but, trying to explain how these big excursion operations work to a toy train guy, and then have him argue about it, is becoming tedious.

I'm know you're correct, given your expertise. Always of interest getting an inside look at steam operations.

Regardless, the fact that 4014 has a diesel in its consist is apparently not unique in the UP steam program. As I mentioned before, when I saw the Challenger before (twice), it had a diesel in its consist. The 4014, which I also saw twice, had a diesel one of the times. So 4014 is not unique, and clearly the UP has used diesels with all its steam engines, not just the 4014. It appears they prefer doing it that way, for reasons they apparently feel are justified, whatever they are.

Incidentally, Steve Lee was at the throttle the times I saw the Challenger, long before Ed Dickens came on board, so the policy isn't something Ed Dickens came up with.

Some here seem to be calling out Ed for this decision but how do we know its not UP administration. Might they be concerned 4014 would break down and spoil the celebration? AFAIK UP is only Class 1 railroad that still owns and operates steam engines. N&W was ready to scrap 611 and 1218 before they were saved. Who’s left? Tourist railroads can call their own shots.

Pete

Brake shoes don't wear out as quickly as Ed would have you believe.  If that was the case look how many brake shoes or pads, if disc brakes, would have to be replaced on freight cars after a run.

@breezinup posted:

I'm sure you're correct, given your expertise. Always of interest getting an inside look at steam operations.

Regardless, the fact that 4014 has a diesel in its consist is apparently not unique in the UP steam program. As I mentioned before,

"....whenever I saw the Challenger and the 844, they had a diesel in their consists as well. So all this aiming at something unique about the Big Boy operations seems a bit off-target. Ask UP why it has used diesels with ALL of its steam engines, not just the 4014, at least on its long-distance tours. Apparently, that's how the UP operates its steam program, so it seems they feel there's a need to do it that way on their railroad."

I hav no idea who made THAT quote, but I can't tell you how many trips I made with the UP Steam Crew (prior to September 2010), and there was absolutely NO DIESEL in the consist. Virtually ALL trips with either 844 or 3985 to locations such as Chicago, Minneapolis - St Paul, Kansas City, St Louis, Houston, and other eastern or southern locations on the UP system did not require any diesel dynamic braking assistance. Only those long western state moves, with the long and steep mountain grades had diesel dynamic brake assistance.

Incidentally, Steve Lee was at the throttle the times I saw the Challenger.

Correct. Steve retired an the end of December, 2010. However, Steve was not the only Engineer on either 844 or 3985, and when we doubleheaded 844 with 3985, Steve was always the Engineer on the lead locomotive, i.e. 844 (at least during the 17 years I worked with them).

@Norton posted:

Some here seem to be calling out Ed for this decision but how do we know its not UP administration.

That's a lot of the reasoning.

Might they be concerned 4014 would break down and spoil the celebration?

The track record of "break-downs" is far worse on their diesels than the steam locomotives.

AFAIK UP is only Class 1 railroad that still owns and operates steam engines. N&W was ready to scrap 611 and 1218 before they were saved.

Not true.

Who’s left?

Rather than "own" their own steam locomotive/locomotives, the BNSF Railway has opted to contract for different steam locomotives, whenever they deemed it appropriate.

Tourist railroads can call their own shots.

Pete

@Hot Water posted:

That's a lot of the reasoning.

You are implying you know differently. If so who did make the decision to add a diesel to the consist.

Pete

@Hot Water posted:

Only those long western state moves, with the long and steep mountain grades had diesel dynamic brake assistance.

Well, OK, so that's the reason diesel helpers are used, or at least part of it. And indeed 4014 has been making long western state moves.

@breezinup posted:

Well, OK, so that's the reason diesel helpers are used, or at least part of it. And indeed 4014 has been making long western state moves.

Yet,,,,,,,,,,there is STILL the diesel/diesels even when it came to Chicago, Milwaukee, Minneapolis - St. Paul, plus all the way down through the southwest.

I don't pretend to understand the inner workings of the UP program, but when the 844 came to Phoenix in 2011, it had the SP heritage SD70 in the consist. 

@GG1 4877 posted:

I don't pretend to understand the inner workings of the UP program, but when the 844 came to Phoenix in 2011, it had the SP heritage SD70 in the consist.

Note that that was after Steve Lee had retired.

In 1993 when the Challenger excursion stopped in my hometown of Villa Grove, IL, the Challenger was the sole locomotive.

An eon before PTC.

@vash44 posted:

In 1993 when the Challenger excursion stopped in my hometown of Villa Grove, IL, the Challenger was the sole locomotive.

An eon before PTC.

Same when she came thru Seymour, IN.

@vash44 posted:

In 1993 when the Challenger excursion stopped in my hometown of Villa Grove, IL, the Challenger was the sole locomotive.

An eon before PTC.

UP 3985? Before I became interested in steam, but I've read about those days. Such a cool story and a great engine, with Bob Kreiger and the guys fixing her up, freedom running her.  Sure wish that's how the situation was now.

BTW, Bob is an officer with UP's Historical Society. If you want any actual facts about UP Steam Shop and its engines, Bob's a really friendly guy to ask.

I just try to get some enjoyment out of what is available today. I leave the complaining and criticizing to others.

@breezinup posted:

I would agree with those who indicated that the crews who operate a steam program for a corporation have a far different set of considerations than those who operate in an independent volunteer organization. With a corporation in command, watching expenses, including doing everything possible to preserve the engines and reduce operating costs, is paramount to the steam crew. As soon as someone in the corporate office deems the operation too expensive, and the "return on investment" inadequate, the plug will be pulled. Volunteer organizations don't have that hanging over their heads.

Having had a lot of experience with management of large corporations in my career, I'd say that these active steam engines are really from the chief executive level.  I has nothing to do with what those who don't understand the costs of a railroad refer to as "bean counters". 

In the UP case, John Kenefick was a rail fan.  That was obvious when I was interviewed by him at the NYC in 1959.  He made a decision that preserving steam was a good thing to do.  Same with a few other railroad chief executives.

The costs are trivial in the context of a big railroad today.  It's all about whter it's what the man at the top believes.

Malcolm Laughlin

A couple of thoughts…

1. When I saw NKP 765 at The Horseshoe Curve, it had a diesel behind her.  So what’s the big deal if UP puts one behind 4014?
2. All this talk about saving money… taking a diesel out of revenue service can’t help the bottom line.
3. Maybe the diesel is a junker from that big line of stored units in the desert? If so, then I doubt they use it for reliability reasons.
4. Running a steam locomotive seems like hard work.  Something my father and grandfather did.  This generation doesn’t seem to like that too much.  Maybe having the diesel around lets them be lazy… and sit in an A/C’d cab?
5. My guess is UP wanted to milk the steam nostalgia now, cause once 1361 and 5550 are done, no one is going to care about a tired old freight locomotive.

j/k

After seeing all three UP steamers, 4014 is my least favorite.  844 and 3985 seemed to say SPEED. 4014 looks like a 3900 with too many wheels, and looks clumsy while running.

But that is me.  At least UP has steam running.

@rplst8 posted:

1. When I saw NKP 765 at The Horseshoe Curve, it had a diesel behind her.  So what’s the big deal if UP puts one behind 4014?
   The 765 has had a diesel behind her for only two reasons:
   
   1) To stretch the coal mileage on long deadhead moves.
   
   2) When additional power was needed to maintain the operating schedule. This is why the diesel was there on the Horseshoe Curve trips. The 765 could have handled the train around the curve by herself, but not at a speed that would have been sufficient to meet the operating schedule. Even with the diesel behind her, the 765 was worked hard on those trips, with the diesel being used only enough to keep the speed where it needed to be. I know...I was there...with the CEO of the railroad (Wick Moorman) sitting right behind me.
   
   
   Note where the throttle lever is. When it's all the way back by my shoulder like that, it is wide open. The diesel behind the tender is in Run 4 - half throttle.
   
   
2. All this talk about saving money… taking a diesel out of revenue service can’t help the bottom line.
   There are thousands of unused diesel locomotives in storage around the country, on all the major railroads. This is not a factor at all.
   
   
3. Maybe the diesel is a junker from that big line of stored units in the desert? If so, then I doubt they use it for reliability reasons.
   You're not serious, are you? The diesel units being used are first-line units.
   
   
4. Running a steam locomotive seems like hard work.  Something my father and grandfather did.  This generation doesn’t seem to like that too much.  Maybe having the diesel around lets them be lazy… and sit in an A/C’d cab?
   This makes no sense at all. The steam crew still has to work in the steam locomotive cab.

@Rich Melvin posted:

 

• All this talk about saving money… taking a diesel out of revenue service can’t help the bottom line.
  There are thousands of unused diesel locomotives in storage around the country, on all the major railroads. This is not a factor at all.
  
  
• Maybe the diesel is a junker from that big line of stored units in the desert? If so, then I doubt they use it for reliability reasons.
  You're not serious, are you? The diesel units being used are first-line units.

Rich,

Thanks for your reply, and the photo. Very cool.  My post was mostly tongue-in-cheek and were addressed to the UP's steam operations, but your responses beg the question...

At over $1 million a pop, that's a lot of money sitting out there in the desert on UP's storage line, so why can't they properly fund their steam program?  They have the money to buy new locomotives, but yet they have hundreds or thousands just sitting?

Seems odd.

A video I shot onThe Curve in 2013.  What it doesn't show is everyone got out and had to push!  LOL!  Just kidding.

@rplst8 posted:

At over $1 million a pop, that's a lot of money sitting out there in the desert on UP's storage line, so why can't they properly fund their steam program?  They have the money to buy new locomotives, but yet they have hundreds or thousands just sitting?

All the Class 1 railroads have power stored. It's a combination of business levels being down and the movement to PSR, Precision Scheduled Railroading. PSR has allowed the railroads to get a bit more efficient, so less power is needed.

@rplst8 posted:

Rich,

Thanks for your reply, and the photo. Very cool.  My post was mostly tongue-in-cheek and were addressed to the UP's steam operations, but your responses beg the question...

At over $1 million a pop, that's a lot of money sitting out there in the desert on UP's storage line, so why can't they properly fund their steam program?  They have the money to buy new locomotives, but yet they have hundreds or thousands just sitting?

Seems odd.

I think like some you are confusing two very different things. As Rich noted in a prior post and in another one below, the UP has those engines sitting idle because they don't need them at the moment. They bought those engines likely based on traffic levels they anticipated (and keep in mind that kind of capital spending is often done long term, if you anticipate X volume levels in 5 years and think you will need Y engines due to some engines being retired and then extra volume, you will buy them in anticipation (plus I assume that with engines they are built to order, you don't go to the GE Engine lot and say "I'll take that one" *lol*

One article I read on that said that part of it is PSR, that with the way they do shipments now they didn't need that many engines, the other is that demand for key products has been down, especially oil during covid (that might pick up a bit with demand for oil sky high at the moment).

In any event business is always a kind of guessing game, sometimes you guess right (okay, or your analysis failed to take into account......), other times you over or underestimate, it happens.

The steam program is not mainline business, it is not a revenue generator directly (it generates Goodwill that can in turn help the bottom line or help where public opinion is important). Spending 1 million bucks on an engine to pull trains is tied to revenue and profit, it is from the capital budget directly tied to rail operations. The steam program is likely under marketing and PR and customer relations, it is very different.  It isn't like someone said "Oh, I spent 1 million on a new engine, let's take it from the steam budget". Rather when they budgeted both long term and for the fiscal year, they allocated money to the programs, likely on a priority basis. So their capital budget would take precedence involved with running the trains along with 'support' infrastructure (office staff, office buildings, IT not involved with train control likely, etc).

The steam program of course has its own budget, but it in turn is a line item in another budget. When you plan in an area, you usually have MBO's you want to accomplish (call it goals), so Ed and the PR and Marketing flunkies figure out a proposed use of Big boy or other units in the fleet. So if they figure out we are gong to do 3 trips in 2021, they budget for it, then figure out an overall budget that includes non event related things, like the cost of maintaining the roundhouse, personnel, insurance, all those things. Sure, many of these are paid for by 'corporate" UP (the roundhouse costs for example, insurance, payroll, materials, etc) but they are 'charged' to the steam program.  With all that they come up with a proposed overall budget, run it up the flagpole, and duck and hope no one shoots back..(well okay, I exaggerate; they no longer shoot back, they send sarcastic emails).  The PR/Marketing department will likely have an overall budget pool given to them by corporate coming out of the CFOs office and the steam budget will be allocated out of that (it really depends on how UP budgets; I am not an accountant or financial person, and every company has its own way of doing budgets. Usually they project revenues for the next year, project costs based on MBO's on a corporate level ad work from there).

That million dollar engine is way removed from the steam program when it comes to budgets, that kind of thing is decided far apart from each other. when they decide capital spending it can affect the PR budget which in turn would affect the steam program, but it is many steps removed.

And again the answer is that the steam program is not aligned with corporate revenue generation or operations so its budget is going to be limited...and yes, if the PR department gets its budget slashed because they were allocated less, or the company goes through a rough patch, the steam program would lose allocated money.

It is why what Ed said made sense to me. If by using a diesel he and his bosses figure they can get 3 trips in instead of 2 for the same money, they will go for it.

For those saying "This is a CEO level thing", you are both right and wrong. I am sure the CEO of the company is aware of the steam program, but they aren't going to be intimately involved with it either. a CEO is like the president of the US, it is really the office of the CEO, while they do of course make final decisions on things, and if his minions come to him and say "you know, we are running into a bind and we need more pencils in accounting and green eyeshades, why don't we kill the steam program, it is a frill", the CEO will be involved (more likely, the PR department will extol the virtues of the steam program, the CFO office will call it a frill the company doesn't need, and the CEO will decide).

On the other hand, I doubt very much the CEO is involved in the steam operations budget, this isn't a private family run company. They might be the final decision maker if they are deciding whether to keep it or not, but in running a company 95% of the decisions don't involve the CEO (might even be more). This is where the beancounters come in, they analyze cost data coming out of the steam program, and if it is running above budgeted figures they will squawk. If Ed says "we have been running Big Boy and decided to give a big show with it pulling a 5 mile train upgrade at speed" and it ends up requiring 30 grand in costs to maintain the engine and such as a result, they will squawk, believe me, and they would take that out of some other element of the budget to keep costs in line.

About the only way a capital expenditure, like the 1 million dollar engine, would affect the steam program would be if in a given year, let's say, the UP is contracted to buy x engines, and revenue is down, they may slash the PR budget which would slash the steam budget (along with other ones, like swithing from 2 ply toilet paper to 1 to save money). Actually those engines sitting there idle could cause them to slash the steam budget, if the cost of inventorying those engines is large enough (and I don't have the foggiest notion what it costs to have an engine sitting idle), it could cause a ripple down to the steam program.

@MartyE posted:

A video I shot onThe Curve in 2013.  What it doesn't show is everyone got out and had to push!  LOL!  Just kidding.

wait a minute is that two diesels pushing the 765???

The big boy made the exact same sound when going up the cajon pass and you said the diesel was doing all the work

So which is it?

@4014rider posted:

wait a minute is that two diesels pushing the 765???

Does it SOUND to you like 765 is being pushed?????   Also, the diesels are not roaring away either.

MartyE that was an excellent video. Thanks for sharing.

@4014rider posted:

wait a minute is that two diesels pushing the 765???

Did you read THIS?

Plus, Norfolk Southern put those two specific Heritage Units (PRR and Conrail ) on this train to pay homage to the history of the railroad we were running on.