Will Revenue Passenger Steam in the US Ever Come Back in Some Form?

It is said that the 20th Century Limited's peak profit year 1928 yielded $10 million, that is still probably very small potatoes compared to whatever their freight profits were for that year.

Even if there was rail travel that was fast, safe, inexpensive, and a whole host of other things it would still have to compete with air and car as alternatives. Air and car travel rose up to be less expensive against train travel back in the day I would imagine, which is what basically killed passenger service. The Railroad's could tout the experience and scenery as well as "safer than air travel" for only so long. The other problem in today's world is overall interest in traveling by train. I know that myself and probably everyone else on the forum(maybe with few exceptions) would love nothing more than a great trip by train practically anywhere behind almost any motive power.

Some of us do get lucky to get even more whether it's a cab ride or such, even interacting with the crews. Anyway you look at it, passenger travel is the one cent Hershey bar compared to the big five dollar Hershey bar.

The Star Trek Transporter will be online before they bring back regular steam service.

@bigkid posted:

Would a discussion like this be worthwhile in the board room of UP? Nope. Would it be worthwhile if a group of the UP steam team has a couple of drinks in them after a team dinner and throws this idea around after lubrication? Sure, because it is fun, leisure time stuff, with absolutely no impact to the real world.

 I doubt that would happen.

Listen, I get it. It's fun to talk about "what ifs." But if you're going to play the what-if game, why waste the effort on the impossible?

We had a kid on the railroad--maybe 18--and he was a foamer in the truest sense. He sat down between a bunch of older timers having lunch and wouldn't stop talking. He was fascinated with the thought that we should dual-gauge the entire railroad, somehow get a narrow gauge engine and cars, and run both standard gauge and narrow gauge trains at the same time. He thought this was the most brilliant idea ever conceived. In so doing, he quickly made it known that he had no interest in real-world railroading, but was thinking about the railroad like it was a model. The old timers got up and left.

When most of us get together to think about what-ifs, there is at least some connection with the real world.

It is definitely a fun idea to kick around. Seeing regularly scheduled passenger steamers would be quite a sight in today's times, but with the way railroading is today, it's impossible, but we can still imagine! I think the closest the PRR T1 will get to pulling the Broadway Limited again is to arrange for it to travel on former BL trackage rather than a full on trip from NY to Chicago.

There is another real-world factor that mitigates against a steam passenger revival:  the novelty of the steam locomotive(s) would wear off quickly !!

Not quite what you're looking for but far better than anything in the US, an 84 mile, twice a day round trip behind steam.

Jacobite Express

@smd4 posted:

 I doubt that would happen.

Listen, I get it. It's fun to talk about "what ifs." But if you're going to play the what-if game, why waste the effort on the impossible?

We had a kid on the railroad--maybe 18--and he was a foamer in the truest sense. He sat down between a bunch of older timers having lunch and wouldn't stop talking. He was fascinated with the thought that we should dual-gauge the entire railroad, somehow get a narrow gauge engine and cars, and run both standard gauge and narrow gauge trains at the same time. He thought this was the most brilliant idea ever conceived. In so doing, he quickly made it known that he had no interest in real-world railroading, but was thinking about the railroad like it was a model. The old timers got up and left.

When most of us get together to think about what-ifs, there is at least some connection with the real world.

I could understand the irritation of old hands with a young kid at work coming up with that stuff like that (though having dealt with the enthusiasm of young employees, I personally would educate the kid as to the reality, if he then continued doing it, might walk away). 

In terms of why waste time on the impossible, my response would be it depends on how you define a waste of time. Lot of people think having model trains is a waste of time that could be better spent on 'real things' *smile*. People chew the fat over all kinds of impossible things, Walter Mitty dreams, what they would do if they had unlimited space and unlimited funds, it is a form of leisure and it is fun.  Heck, even if we discuss 'real' issues on here there isn't any real value to it, since none of us have anything to do with the kinds of things we discuss, we can't bring home manufacturing from China, we can't make a legacy engine cost a hundred bucks, we can't build high speed rail, design a better engine, etc. Of course there is real, valuable conversation on here in terms of how to enjoy our hobby, but there is also a lot of chitchat about things we enjoy talking about but have no practical basis other than the fun of chewing the fat

@Scotie posted:

Not quite what you're looking for but far better than anything in the US, an 84 mile, twice a day round trip behind steam.

Jacobite Express

Well, Grand Canyon Railway is 65 miles one way.  They started with steam but eventually went diesel.

Rusty

@john in western pa posted:

Back in the mid-eighties A few of us rode a deadhead move, behind 765, from Youngstown to Buffalo.  Mainline steam, chugging, steam-whistles, cinders, smoke, the whole steam experience... you know who was at the throttle!  WOW!

Four trips over two weekends from Buffalo to Corning, and return followed. Definitely  main line steam. Nickel Plate 765, with our favorite Engineer at the throttle, gave us  one heck of a ride and many Great Lifelong Memories. 

Thank you Rich.

 You are very welcome, but remember, I was just one member of a truly GREAT team!

@Rusty Traque posted:

...Once your on a scheduled train for a couple of hours, attention turns inward and the motive power becomes pretty much invisible.  The "feel" of riding in a sleeper or eating in a dining car is no different whether a steam or diesel locomotive is on the point.

And right there is a key reason why this will never happen. Once you are on the train and rolling along, you have no idea what's on the head end doing the pulling. And if you are the typical rail passenger, you don't care! You just want to get wherever it is you're going.

That's very true Rich. If it's regularly scheduled, it kind of loses its charm! I mainly created this thread as kind of a shower thought, but I never knew it would evolve into such a big discussion!

@GameBreaker64 posted:

That's very true Rich. If it's regularly scheduled, it kind of loses its charm! I mainly created this thread as kind of a shower thought, but I never knew it would evolve into such a big discussion!

There are a lot of good minds here to put some great information to this, and I'm not counting myself as one of them. Originally I was not going to follow this topic, but decided to watch. You know what, I am sure glad I did. There is so much brought to the table on just this one topic that it shows you what is out there. We could all wish for the greatest train experiences that we didn't get a chance to have, but I guess that is why we do our model Railroad's and try to learn from those who had it firsthand.

Lot of great comments in this thread.  If steam service came into regularly scheduled service, outside a tourist railroad like the Cumbres and Toltec, it would likely be some sort of niche service, not a mainstream revenue generator. Given that the only commercial passenger service we have outside commuter lines is Amtrak, it is highly unlikely they would see a niche service like a regularly scheduled steam run on one  of their routes as worthwhile. I could see something in a tourist oriented area, for example if for some reason the tourist parks in Orlando decided to get together to create a train service to their area (again, big if), having a regularly scheduled steam engine service might work as a promotional thing. Is that likely to happen? Nope, but it highlights the one reason if a regularly scheduled steam service happens, it will be for promotional reasons or the like, not main revenue service. 

Steam engines to many, even those who never saw them in service, are pretty amazing things (me, I love the ones with all the tubes on the outside, was a lot more fond of them than streamliners, they are more to me like a living beast than a piece of steel machinery, but that is exactly what they are, and the economics of them, things like maintenance, fuel efficiency, pollution (especially if using coal or even diesel to fire the boiler), cost and yes, being allowed to use rails with a steam engine, would likely doom any such service in mainstream service even if someone entertained the notion. Then again, you can always hope that somewhere out there there is someone like Sir Topham Hat, who declared that diesels were devious

I love steam. The BR&W by me has run steam since before I was born. I think they started somewhere around 1969 or somewhere close, can't remember exactly. I do know that they had #60 on the shelf for a number of years because of servicing to the engine as well as the EPA knocking on the door IIRC from what one of the guys I used to see regularly in the 1990's. Eventually they got things up to snuff or such and still run when the volunteer crew is available. Shut down for now though, only diesel freight is being worked on with this stuff going on.

The British Rail system has a "brand new" steam engine (Peppercorn), so at first glance, it might seem easy for us to do the same thing. It isn't, for a number of reasons.

First, they ran steam on the main lines for about a decade longer than we did, so they had almost another generation of people who knew how to run steam.

Second, watch a you tube video from Geoff Marshall as he reviews their current rail system, and you'll notice modern trains running past Victorian-era stations and signal boxes that are still very active. That's because their historic preservation laws severely limit what they can and cannot eliminate from the infrastructure in the name of modernization. In contrast, over here, when steam left the rails, we were able to build things like left-hand signals, and signals with bi-directional heads, both of which were impossible when steam was the real deal, and which a modern steam engineer would have to deal with. Not to mention modern hig level platforms for accessibility, which a steam engine might not clear. British Rail already had high level platforms back then that were designed with steam trains in mind, while many of our stations had low level platforms then, and were retrofitted with high ones in the last 20 years.

Third, and it's related to the second reason, things like hotbox detectors weren't designed with steam locomotives in mind, and they can and do trip when steam engines travel over them. That creates safety issues.

Fourth, If a steam engine operates over track that has cab signals, the engine has to be retrofitted with a device that can accept them. This might solve the second problem, but not everybody's cab signals convey information in the same way.

Finally, even if we hooked up that new T1 to a bunch of vintage Broadway Limited cars, what would happen when the train reaches Harrisburg? There aren't any operating GG1's left, nor any plans to restore a survivor, and if they did, it would need a whole new set of motors and transformer, owing to new electrical power systems on Amtrak. There also isn't really anywhere at Harrisburg to do the engine change anymore, and I can't see them doing the change at 30th street, given the train has to reverse direction here for the remainder of the trip to New York.

I would like to see mainline steam too, but we have to come up with a practical plan that overcomes those things.

@Trainman2 posted:

The British Rail system has a "brand new" steam engine (Peppercorn), so at first glance, it might seem easy for us to do the same thing. It isn't, for a number of reasons.

First, they ran steam on the main lines for about a decade longer than we did, so they had almost another generation of people who knew how to run steam.

Second, watch a you tube video from Geoff Marshall as he reviews their current rail system, and you'll notice modern trains running past Victorian-era stations and signal boxes that are still very active. That's because their historic preservation laws severely limit what they can and cannot eliminate from the infrastructure in the name of modernization. In contrast, over here, when steam left the rails, we were able to build things like left-hand signals, and signals with bi-directional heads, both of which were impossible when steam was the real deal, and which a modern steam engineer would have to deal with. Not to mention modern hig level platforms for accessibility, which a steam engine might not clear. British Rail already had high level platforms back then that were designed with steam trains in mind, while many of our stations had low level platforms then, and were retrofitted with high ones in the last 20 years.

Third, and it's related to the second reason, things like hotbox detectors weren't designed with steam locomotives in mind, and they can and do trip when steam engines travel over them. That creates safety issues.

I don't see how that is a "safety issue", as various parts of large main line steam locomotives have been "tripping" hotbox detectors more more than 40 years, such as SP 4449, UP 8444/844, UP 3985, Mil 261, Frisco 1522, NKP 765, etc., etc., etc.. In most cases, part of the train orders/track warrants, and special instructions in the Employee Timetables, state that the steam locomotive itself is exempt from having to stop & inspect, if the detector finds the problem on the engine.

Fourth, If a steam engine operates over track that has cab signals, the engine has to be retrofitted with a device that can accept them. This might solve the second problem, but not everybody's cab signals convey information in the same way.

Not that big of a deal, as the UP steam locomotives were originally equipped with their cab signal equipment back in the late 1940s & early 1950s, and then up-graded with the current solid-state systems for both UP main lines and former C&NW ATC equipped main lines. Even Ross Rowland's C&O 614 has had the New Jersey Transit high-end cab signal equipment installed, while NKP 765 has had the NS (former PRR) cab signal equipment installed.

Finally, even if we hooked up that new T1 to a bunch of vintage Broadway Limited cars, what would happen when the train reaches Harrisburg? There aren't any operating GG1's left, nor any plans to restore a survivor, and if they did, it would need a whole new set of motors and transformer, owing to new electrical power systems on Amtrak. There also isn't really anywhere at Harrisburg to do the engine change anymore, and I can't see them doing the change at 30th street, given the train has to reverse direction here for the remainder of the trip to New York.

I would like to see mainline steam too, but we have to come up with a practical plan that overcomes those things.

@Hot Water posted:

 

The hotbox detector issue isn't that big a deal if it's a few excursions a year, as you say with track warrants. But imagine, as the original post says, that you had scheduled steam service, like every hour, or even every half hour like at Strasburg. Now there's room for error, and complacency. Not sure how other railroads work, but the one I worked for had their hotbox detectors wired up to the dispatcher's station. I can imagine the headaches it would cause if we had one that was tripping once or twice an hour.

Also, if the cab signals are the type you mention, that indeed wouldn't be a problem. Even The Blue Comet had those type of cab signals. But again, if we want to run scheduled steam passenger service, a commuter line would be the best place, and some comuter lines use speed zone cab signals, not wayside signal repeaters. And if a train violates the speed zone, we could certainly fit the steam engine with an automatic train stop, but steam engines don't accelerate or decelerate as smoothly as their diesel or electric counterparts. 

@Trainman2 posted:

The hotbox detector issue isn't that big a deal if it's a few excursions a year, as you say with track warrants. But imagine, as the original post says, that you had scheduled steam service, like every hour, or even every half hour like at Strasburg. Now there's room for error, and complacency.

How do you figure that? Hotbox detectors are designed to detect hot bearings on railroad equipment that is only a foot or two above the rail head. The bearings on steam locomotive drive wheels and side rods are much high than those of standard railroad equipment. Thus, current hotbox detectors can't even "see" the main driver axle bearings.

Not sure how other railroads work, but the one I worked for had their hotbox detectors wired up to the dispatcher's station.

Correct.

I can imagine the headaches it would cause if we had one that was tripping once or twice an hour.

If the Dispatcher isn't aware that a steam locomotive is operating on his territory, then all he/she has to do is radio the offending train and inquire as to why they didn't stop for the detector.

Also, if the cab signals are the type you mention, that indeed wouldn't be a problem. Even The Blue Comet had those type of cab signals. But again, if we want to run scheduled steam passenger service, a commuter line would be the best place,

I can NOT imagine why you would think THAT!

and some comuter lines use speed zone cab signals, not wayside signal repeaters. And if a train violates the speed zone, we could certainly fit the steam engine with an automatic train stop, but steam engines don't accelerate or decelerate as smoothly as their diesel or electric counterparts. 

Apparently you have not been in the cab of SP 4449 nor UP 844 when either are called to accelerate their passenger train quickly.

A little perspective via one of my favorite British Rail films: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC1BEc04i-0

One of the first things said is that this has to be done every 12-16 days of operation.  

Personally, I like the idea of putting modern prime movers and electrics into classic diesel locos.  Heck, do it to some GG-1s!   

Mitch 

@Hot Water posted:

If you want to see steam in passenger service, in the U.S., then go to:

<snip>

3) The Durango and Silverton Railroad.

To name just three 100% steam operations.

Not for long, perhaps.

The D&S recently took delivery of some of the former White Pass & Yukon GE diesel-electric engines. Suspected use will be in excursion service during dry months when fire is a hazard.

As for their steam: After converting one of their steam engines to oil, it's also very likely more will follow.

Times are 'a changin' on the D&S, courtesy the 416 Fire (and litigation that followed), and the regional NIMBY uprising.

Andre

@Trainman2 posted:

...steam engines don't accelerate or decelerate as smoothly as their diesel or electric counterparts. 

100% wrong. Where are you learning this nonsense?

At low speeds, a diesel has a slight advantage in acceleration. However, once you get above 15-20 mph, a steam locomotives horsepower advantage comes into play and it can accelerate a train faster than an equivalent horsepower diesel. The smoothness of the acceleration depends on the skill of the engineer, not what’s generating the power.

A passenger train is stopped using the TRAIN brakes, not the locomotive brakes. The locomotive has nothing to do with stopping a stretch-braked train, other than pulling on the train enough to make the final stop very smooth. And once again, that depends on the skill of the engineer, not the type of locomotive.