Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

New info on demise of steam

5124 views
75 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February 2007
  • From: Shenandoah Valley The Home Of Patsy Cline
  • 1,842 posts
Posted by superbe on Monday, November 2, 2015 11:09 PM

Ed,

What you haave shown is a fact but it is also a fact that Ike made it happen and his German experience influenced it's design.

Here is a quote from Wiki:

The Interstate Highway System gained a champion in President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who was influenced by his experiences as a young Army officer crossing the country in the 1919 Army Convoy on the Lincoln Highway, the first road across America. Eisenhower gained an appreciation of the Reichsautobahn system, the first "national" implementation of modern Germany's Autobahn network, as a necessary component of a national defense system while he was serving as Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in Europe during World War II.[11] He recognized that the proposed system would also provide key ground transport routes for military supplies and troop deployments in case of an emergency or foreign invasion.

 
1955 map: The planned status of U.S Highways in 1965, as a result of the developing Interstate Highway System
 
I‑55 under construction in Mississippi, photo from May 1972

The publication in 1955 of the General Location of National System of Interstate Highways, informally known as the Yellow Book, mapped out what became the Interstate System.[12] Assisting in the planning was Charles Erwin Wilson, who was still head of General Motors when President Eisenhower selected him as Secretary of Defense in January 1953

Bob

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 7:57 AM

csxns
 
selector
Dwight Eisenhower had what was then a super-highway network

 

And he knew what that highway will do to the railroads.

 

 

 

The trucking industry interstates would indeed harm the railroads and in turn some railroads would receive bailout money from the Feds..

One of the best studies on the problem can be found in Trains Magazines of the 60s.  John Kneiling's (The professional iconoclast)  columns would be a good start.

 

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    October 2013
  • 104 posts
Posted by ggnlars on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 8:55 AM

Steam to diesel was mostly about efficiency.  The same is true about train to truck.  Drive any distance on the interstate system and you will encounter a number of trains of trucks.  They pay a significant amount of the upkeep.  

I had a friend, who was doing a study for DOT, tell me that the average freight car  traveled at a speed around 2 mph.  I think he was only counting cars in current revenue service.  The average truck speed in the study was about 25 mph.  Part of that difference is the lack of independence of the freight car compared to the truck.  Currently you have a motor and person with every truck, so the cost savings is a bit cloudy

Yes, electric drive allowed significant savings in facilities, but those were mostly one time events.  Competition with the real technology change requires much more will and innovation.  The country as a whole was more into asphalt and airplanes.  Other countries have been more progressive with their rail technologies.

I spent a lot of my work time considering the life cycle cost of various power systems.  When oil is the source of energy, a cost of $130-150 a barrel is enough to have a significant change in the LCC of on option compared to another.  That will happen long before we are "out" of oil.  Those sensitivities were not normally part of the decision process when the steam to electric decisions were made.  

Steam was also a tailored type product.  Can you imagine getting GM to build you ten special cars.  Of course you can't.  The price would just be too high today.  It was high then as well, but that was the accepted option, today it is not.  Diesel electrics came along at the same time as the move towards few models to serve a wider range of requirements.  

These factors created a window of opportunity for diesel electrics that has lasted for at least sixty years.  With today's speed of innovation, it will be interesting to see if it has another fifty years before another transition occurs.

So many trains, so little time,

Larry

www.llxlocomotives.com

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: west coast
  • 7,667 posts
Posted by rrebell on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 9:17 AM

Sorry but running out of oil may not happen as oil is being produced all the time, I'm sure not as fast as we are using it, but we are getting more efficiant. I remember when houses used heatng oil on the east coast, one of the most common fuels in the big cities, now that number is getting smaller and smaller, helped myself on conversion burners from oil to gas in the late 70's, then there was a gas shortage which stopped that, but only for a short time.

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 8,892 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 9:19 AM

7j43k
Wdlgln005

During the war only EMD was allowed to produce passenger units, the E6. Only EMD was allowed to produce freight units, the FT. Alco built switchers & the RS1. EMD used the time & experience to build a much better product in the E7 & F3. In the E8 & F7 EMD made another step forward. 

Hmmm.  Alco could make road switchers and EMD couldn't.  Does the word "ironic" apply here?

Ed

Irony maybe, but EMD got the last laugh.  From the wiki: "Alco products had neither the market position or reputation for reliability of GM-EMD's products, nor the financing muscle and customer support of GE. It could not earn enough profits. In the late 1960s Alco gradually ceased locomotive production, shipping its last two locomotives, a pair of T-6 switchers to the Newburgh and South Shore Railroad (#1016 and #1017) in January 1969.[7] Alco closed its Schenectady locomotive plant later that year, and sold its designs to the Montreal Locomotive Works in Canada."

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Northfield Center TWP, OH
  • 2,538 posts
Posted by dti406 on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 9:31 AM

Tax and accounting rules helped with the demise of steam on the railroads.

Locomotives were to be depreciated over 40 years as that was the useful life of a steam locomotive.

Diesels were shown not be as long lived as a steam locomotive with an estimated useful life of 15 years.  President Truman had the IRS change the rules in the late 40's so they could be depreciated over 15 years versus the old rate of 40 years which hastened the production of diesels and although some lasted more than the 15 years like the GP7/9, GP38, SD40 with rebuilding many were scrapped after 15 years like all the Baldwins, Alcos, Fairbanks Morse, and early GE's.

Rick Jesionowski

Rule 1: This is my railroad.

Rule 2: I make the rules.

Rule 3: Illuminating discussion of prototype history, equipment and operating practices is always welcome, but in the event of visitor-perceived anacronisms, detail descrepancies or operating errors, consult RULE 1!

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • 7,500 posts
Posted by 7j43k on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 9:51 AM

riogrande5761

 

 
7j43k
Wdlgln005

During the war only EMD was allowed to produce passenger units, the E6. Only EMD was allowed to produce freight units, the FT. Alco built switchers & the RS1. EMD used the time & experience to build a much better product in the E7 & F3. In the E8 & F7 EMD made another step forward. 

Hmmm.  Alco could make road switchers and EMD couldn't.  Does the word "ironic" apply here?

Ed

 

Irony maybe, but EMD got the last laugh.  From the wiki: "Alco products had neither the market position or reputation for reliability of GM-EMD's products, nor the financing muscle and customer support of GE." 

Ah, but I was wondering about the "opportunity" (see Herb Tarlek) during the war. Imagine if someone at Alco realized that railroads would be wanting something like a GP9 pretty quickly.  AND that EMD couldn't make them during the war.  And they could (RS-1.........).  What a great "opportunity" to position the company for that event.

Or so it seems.

So their job would have been to make the RS-1 super reliable and able to MU.  And to get right to work on an RS-2..........

 

Ed

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 11:00 AM

Ed,The RS-1 was one of the best made ALCOs for several reasons and it could do a yeoman's job from main line to  branch line and could be used as a switcher in freight and passenger terminals. GM had nothing that could compete. ALCO even had their RS-2 out before  GM's GP7. The BL-2 was a failure since GM's sales department did not like it,the mechanical department did not like and most of all the railroads did not like it.

So,ALCO 2 GM 0 in the road switcher market.

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 8,892 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 11:02 AM

7j43k

Ah, but I was wondering about the "opportunity" (see Herb Tarlek) during the war. Imagine if someone at Alco realized that railroads would be wanting something like a GP9 pretty quickly.  AND that EMD couldn't make them during the war.  And they could (RS-1.........).  What a great "opportunity" to position the company for that event.

Or so it seems.

So their job would have been to make the RS-1 super reliable and able to MU.  And to get right to work on an RS-2..........

Ed

Ok got a migraine today so not firing on all cylinders but how would the competition between Alco and EMD affect the demise of steam.  It seems like the war board was dictating things there?

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    June 2007
  • 8,892 posts
Posted by riogrande5761 on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 11:13 AM

dti406

Tax and accounting rules helped with the demise of steam on the railroads.

Locomotives were to be depreciated over 40 years as that was the useful life of a steam locomotive.

Diesels were shown not be as long lived as a steam locomotive with an estimated useful life of 15 years.  President Truman had the IRS change the rules in the late 40's so they could be depreciated over 15 years versus the old rate of 40 years which hastened the production of diesels and although some lasted more than the 15 years like the GP7/9, GP38, SD40 with rebuilding many were scrapped after 15 years like all the Baldwins, Alcos, Fairbanks Morse, and early GE's.

Rick Jesionowski

My Rio Grande Diesels Vol 1 & 2 indicated the D&RGW got an average of 20 years out of their diesels including early ones like the FT and F7.  The GP30/40 series lasted more like 25 to 30 years.

Also, from what I've read, steam engines were maintenence intensive.  I wonder if those long lives included major rebuilding or replacement of major parts, much like many EMD products have had extremely long lives through rebuild programs.  All that is part of the generalization too.

Rio Grande.  The Action Road  - Focus 1977-1983

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 11:57 AM

The War Production Board certainly gave a boost to EMD's mainline passenger and freight prime movers, and to Alco's switchers because they limited those builders' production of other designs. This was probably because of prioritization on the part of the W.P.B., and not due to a conscious decision to favor one builder over another. EMD switchers used the same prime movers as their passenger units (two per E unit), so this didn't really hamper EMD's switcher development.  It certainly did slow development of Alco's larger prime movers. As of wartime, Fairbanks Morse hadn't entered the locomotive business. Their production was virtually all for nonrailroad military purposes, but the war gave them a good opportunity to develop their 1500 hp and 2000 hp O-P engine, so that they were prepared to begin locomotive design as soon as the war was over. During the war, Fairbanks Morse O-P prime movers went into all of the Navy Fleet subs that weren't fitted with EMD's. I don't know whether Alco prime movers were considered.

At the end of the war, all the builders scrambled to fill orders that were flooding in.  AC&Y was well satisfied with the Alco switchers they had bought in the early 1940's. They intended to dieselize as quickly as possible, and wanted to place orders with Alco for road engines. Alco was swamped with orders from other roads, so AC&Y talked to F-M, who was anxious to make sales of its new line of locomotives. So AC&Y became known for its F-M road switcher fleet "through the back door", simply because Alco couldn't supply them.

Tom 

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 1:01 PM

ACY
Alco was swamped with orders from other roads,

Tom, GM's GP7 was the start of ALCOs  market domination downward spiral and when GE  pulled out of the partnership with ALCO the die was cast for ALCO's locomotive poor reliability and maintenance issues.This ALCO would  never recover from as GM started dominating the market.

FM opposed piston prime mover was better suited for ships then locomotives.

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • From: Northern Va
  • 1,924 posts
Posted by yougottawanta on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 7:02 PM

ggnlars wrote "I have been told that one ot the reasons the N&W was the last to switch had to do with their customers being coal suppliers."

I have read that also. One other factor was a change in upper management ( forget their names ?) The head guy ( name ? ) made a statement as long as he was in charge N&W would run steam. When that poisition changed thE new guy started changing as fast as orders could be filled.

YGW

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 7:10 PM

yougottawanta
When that poisition changed thE new guy started changing as fast as orders could be filled.

That new guy was Stuart Saunders.

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 160 posts
Posted by bing&kathy on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 7:40 PM

rrebell

The lack of diesel engines was not a cause. Railroads were considered a #1 priority for the war effort.

 

   The RR was #1 priorty during the war. The DM&IR was one of the prime ones. Steel to build the massive Yellowstone engines was ranked number one over steel for tanks, ships and more. My father was deferred from military service because he was a road engineer for the DM&IR. A lot of women took over many jobs like steaming ore or doing servicing of the engines. Ore trains ran as soon and as fast as they could. No "off on miles" just haul that ore.

God's Best & Happy Rails to You!

Bing  (RIPRR The Route of the Buzzards)

The future: Dead Rail Society

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 7:54 PM

Number one priority ahead of guns, ammo, ships, planes, tanks, personnel, et. al.?

No. There was no "number one priority". The War Production Board had to make some very important decisions as to what had to take precedence in each particular instance. They made mistakes, but they mostly did all right. That's one reason the Allies won.

Tom

  • Member since
    August 2004
  • 2,844 posts
Posted by dinwitty on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 9:00 PM
The secondary purpose of the Highway system in the event of a war emergency is they can land aircraft on it and or take off from it.
  • Member since
    February 2010
  • 384 posts
Posted by Redore on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 9:22 PM

Much like N&W, Missabe loved their steam locomotives, especially the almost new, very well designed Yellowstones.  In the mid 50's with the sources of various parts disappearing they bought enough parts stock to keep the Yellowstones running until at least 1970.  In 1957 the first SD-9's were delivered.  By 1960 or so, all those parts were scrapped.

 

At one time Missabe employed over 5000 people.  The war between diesel and steam wasn't won by diesel on the road, it was won in the shops.

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • 384 posts
Posted by Redore on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 9:25 PM

dinwitty
The secondary purpose of the Highway system in the event of a war emergency is they can land aircraft on it and or take off from it.

 

Remember that the interstate highways were started in thec 50's, the system didn't begin to approach completion until the late 60's, well after steam locomotives were gone.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: west coast
  • 7,667 posts
Posted by rrebell on Tuesday, November 3, 2015 9:36 PM

ACY

Number one priority ahead of guns, ammo, ships, planes, tanks, personnel, et. al.?

No. There was no "number one priority". The War Production Board had to make some very important decisions as to what had to take precedence in each particular instance. They made mistakes, but they mostly did all right. That's one reason the Allies won.

Tom

 

Yep, read your history books but remember, railroads were used to run tanks etc. to the coasts. Now not all railroading had priority but troop transports and other millitary cargo did. Without the railroads the ships and tanks etc. could not be built or delivered.

  • Member since
    April 2007
  • From: Northern Va
  • 1,924 posts
Posted by yougottawanta on Wednesday, November 4, 2015 12:50 PM
Larry Wrote
yougottawanta
When that poisition changed thE new guy started changing as fast as orders could be filled.

 

That new guy was Stuart Saunders.

Imagine if he had not been successful. There would probably be a door matt with his face on it for Roanoke citzens to wipe their feet on.

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Wednesday, November 4, 2015 1:51 PM

yougottawanta
Imagine if he had not been successful. There would probably be a door matt with his face on it for Roanoke citzens to wipe their feet on.

 He wasn't popular there at all.. Thousands of men lost their jobs as soon as the steam erecting and heavy repair shops closed.

 

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: North Carolina
  • 1,905 posts
Posted by csxns on Wednesday, November 4, 2015 3:38 PM

rrebell
Without the railroads the ships and tanks etc. could not be built or delivered.

And a lost war.

Russell

  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Wednesday, November 4, 2015 3:48 PM

rrebell

The lack of diesel engines was not a cause. Railroads were considered a #1 priority for the war effort.

 
No, actually the military was the No. 1 priority. Diesel engines for Navy submarines was more important than for locomotives, just as steel for tanks and armored cars was more important that steel for freight cars - which is why many WW2 era boxcars were built with wood sides instead of steel, which had been the standard for new cars for some time.
Stix
  • Member since
    February 2002
  • From: Mpls/St.Paul
  • 13,892 posts
Posted by wjstix on Wednesday, November 4, 2015 3:49 PM

rrebell
 
ACY

Number one priority ahead of guns, ammo, ships, planes, tanks, personnel, et. al.?

No. There was no "number one priority". The War Production Board had to make some very important decisions as to what had to take precedence in each particular instance. They made mistakes, but they mostly did all right. That's one reason the Allies won.

Tom

 

 

 

Yep, read your history books but remember, railroads were used to run tanks etc. to the coasts. Now not all railroading had priority but troop transports and other millitary cargo did. Without the railroads the ships and tanks etc. could not be built or delivered.

 

That's true, but they were delivered by trains pulled by steam engines, not diesels.

Stix
  • Member since
    February 2010
  • 384 posts
Posted by Redore on Thursday, November 5, 2015 2:29 PM

Remember what the Missabe hauled, a signifigant part of the iron ore needed to build all the ships, tanks, trucks, and the factories and tools needed to build them.  You bet they had a high priority.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: west coast
  • 7,667 posts
Posted by rrebell on Thursday, November 5, 2015 6:59 PM

wjstix
 
rrebell

The lack of diesel engines was not a cause. Railroads were considered a #1 priority for the war effort.

 

 

 
No, actually the military was the No. 1 priority. Diesel engines for Navy submarines was more important than for locomotives, just as steel for tanks and armored cars was more important that steel for freight cars - which is why many WW2 era boxcars were built with wood sides instead of steel, which had been the standard for new cars for some time.
 

The reason the diesels went elsewhere was not the need but the fact the railroads had analternitive power sources availible, the subs did not, don't speculate, read, in particular things from the war dept at the time, though not all that stuff has been declasifed in this country (it also helps to have talked to people like OSS agents).

  • Member since
    March 2015
  • 1,358 posts
Posted by SouthPenn on Thursday, November 5, 2015 8:42 PM

dinwitty
The secondary purpose of the Highway system in the event of a war emergency is they can land aircraft on it and or take off from it.
 

I believe that is just an old wives tale. The only places that you could land a plane safely is a long way from where you would need troops and supplies.

Ike used the German highways to move troops and supplies. The interstate system was designed so that it could be blocked of ( limited access ) and the military could have the entire highway and all lanes to move troops and supplies.

South Penn

South Penn
  • Member since
    March 2015
  • 1,358 posts
Posted by SouthPenn on Thursday, November 5, 2015 9:12 PM

I remember a neighbor that worked on the railroad trying to explain to my Dad why the diesels needed firemen on them. ( he was a fireman ) I think the reason was called 'feather-bedding'.

I think one of the biggest losers in the switch to diesels was Baldwin. ( and the people who lost their jobs ) Hydraulic drives?? Pneumatic controls?? The management group there really blew it.

South Penn

South Penn
  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: OH
  • 17,574 posts
Posted by BRAKIE on Thursday, November 5, 2015 11:21 PM

SouthPenn
I remember a neighbor that worked on the railroad trying to explain to my Dad why the diesels needed firemen on them. ( he was a fireman ) I think the reason was called 'feather-bedding'.

Not  really the fireman had a job to do..He would walk between locomotives and check gauges in the cab and engine compartment of the trailing engines and he would relay hand signals as needed. The engineer would call signal indications and the fireman would repeat them.

Featherbedding would get you street time or a termination of service letter..The real meaning of "featherbedding" was sleeping on the job.

Larry

Conductor.

Summerset Ry.


"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt  Safety First!"

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!