Forums

[Anonymous]

does anyone think that steams should not be abolished if so reply please
thanks chris

[Allen Jenkins]

If you look at this as History, no, if you look at this as a way to laugh in the face of environmentalists, yes. I've long been waiting for somone to authoritatively point out that a steam locomotive under a load, will not produce black smoke, however the hogger chooses to "run for the camera," and that is the only obstacle to the future of the steam program, as I see it. Enjoy them while you can, ACJ.

[Anonymous]

There are only a handfull of steam loco's out there, they are hardly the problem anymore.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by macguy

There are only a handfull of steam loco's out there, they are hardly the problem anymore.

thats not the point there being destroyed via sraping what would you say if i said i will destroy all diesels eh! [}:)]

[BentnoseWillie]

Frankly, I don't understand the question. If you're trying to debate dieselization, you're 50 years too late.

If you're talking about more recent declines in steam excursions in North America, it's got little to do with choice. A pressure vessel has a limited lifespan whether it's in a building or on wheels, and the remaining steam engines operating in North America are old. That's a big reason why the insurance issue has held so many formerly-active steam engines back. Sooner or later, the end will come for all those boilers - what happens next is a matter of capital. The brightest lights for North American steam are the Chinese engine delivered for excursion service in the early 1990's, and UP's steam program, provided UP are committed to keeping 3985 and 844 (or engines like them) on the road when the boilers can no longer be life-extended. Unless, of course, the preservation movement in North America can rally around a new-build project, like what we saw with Britain's "Tornado".

If you're lamenting the scrapping of engines that have been stored or left on public display, that's a money issue again, but a smaller one - raising the ongoing resources to keep an engine on display is a smaller job than keeping one active, but it's just as long-term a project. Thankfully, there isn't any shortage of preserved engines in museums, where they'll be available for generations to come.

[Anonymous]

I'm not talking about dieselization! I'm just asking people for opinons on a project! the project consists of a topic that i have chosen (and this is the project i have chosen). i am doing for my teacher assessment level i need some data i am doing a report on this topic

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by BentnoseWillie

Frankly, I don't understand the question. If you're trying to debate dieselization, you're 50 years too late.

If you're talking about more recent declines in steam excursions in North America, it's got little to do with choice. A pressure vessel has a limited lifespan whether it's in a building or on wheels, and the remaining steam engines operating in North America are old. That's a big reason why the insurance issue has held so many formerly-active steam engines back. Sooner or later, the end will come for all those boilers - what happens next is a matter of capital. The brightest lights for North American steam are the Chinese engine delivered for excursion service in the early 1990's, and UP's steam program, provided UP are committed to keeping 3985 and 844 (or engines like them) on the road when the boilers can no longer be life-extended. Unless, of course, the preservation movement in North America can rally around a new-build project, like what we saw with Britain's "Tornado".

If you're lamenting the scrapping of engines that have been stored or left on public display, that's a money issue again, but a smaller one - raising the ongoing resources to keep an engine on display is a smaller job than keeping one active, but it's just as long-term a project. Thankfully, there isn't any shortage of preserved engines in museums, where they'll be available for generations to come.

This is agaist steam train isn't it!

[BentnoseWillie]

QUOTE: This is agaist steam train isn't it!

On the contrary - it's a lament for the dwindling number of preserved and active steam engines in North America. You asked "does anyone think that steams should not be abolished", and I tried to answer without knowing if this was a query about ending operation of preserved engines, or a debate of dieselization.

Now that we've cleared it up - no, I don't think that preserved steam operations should be abolished, but I'm not certain how the trend in North America is going to be reversed, given the advancing age of the remaining preserved engines and the limited resources available for maintaining or replacing them. Given the success of the "Tornado" construction project, I forsee a brighter future for steam preservation in the UK at this point.

[Anonymous]

Ok, seems you're question is very vague on what you want to know, so please clear it up.

As for Steam, it will never go away and in fact is beginningit's come back in Europe. Newer engines have appeared with new technology being used to the point that one person can operate them. It's only a matter of time before some manufacturer in the US Starts producing newer Steam locomotives that encorporate new technologies and techniques (such as a small deisel generator producing electricity for an electric boiler heater).

Although the uses in the US are limited to certain regions not suffering a water problem (the northeast, north central areas), so it'd be more likely we'll have mixes of new better Steamers and deisels within this country. Something has to be done to counter the high pollutants that Deisels produce, and steam is one alternative, as Pure electrics are to expensive due to the cost of electrifying the routes.

Jay

[Anonymous]

okay thats getting better, does anyone think that steam should/not be abolished? is that any better [#dots]

[BentnoseWillie]

That's basically the same wording we started with, which could mean:

(a) Should the licensing of steam-powered excursion trains for operation on mainline railroads be banned?
(b) Should the licensing of preserved steam engines for operation in museums be abolished?
(d) Should the construction and operation of new steam engines be banned?
(e) Should dieselization have occurred? (We ruled this one out)

Or about a dozen others pertaining to the preservation, operation or construction of steam railway locomotives in mainline, shortline, excursion, or museum service. So are any of the above close to what you're trying to get at?

[Anonymous]

I want to know any opinons on steam trains being permanently abolished for a school project which is about pro's and con's (for or agaist). Question rephrase: What do people think about steam trains being abolished? (I am aware that steam trains only exist at present as tourist attractions/in museums/in private ownership.)

[BentnoseWillie]

Okay, so you want to know what we think about the abolition of steam trains in mainline service? I think that it was inevitable. Diesel-electrics and straight electrics replaced steam engines because they did the job more efficiently. Steam had its day, and diesel-electrics will too. The downsides were temporary job losses as people adjusted to a changing job market - just like they did when steam power replaced horses - and the esthetics that make steam engines more appealing to some. Technology marches on.

If you're talking about abolishing the operation of the engines that are left, I think that barring new ca***o build or do major servicing on the engines we have, that's inevitable too - see what I said above about teh age of the boilers.

[Anonymous]

I certainly do not think that steam should be abolished, nor do I think that such a thing will ever happen. I would reccomend that you check out these websites for more information for your project.

http://www.trainweb.org/tusp/index.html This website talks about past and current attempts to build modern steam locomotives and revive the railroads' interest in steam power.

http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/steam/internat.htm This website talks all about steam locomotives that are still operating in the world today for actual service, as opposed to tourist railroads or museums.

[Anonymous]

As I said above, steam will not go asway, in fact with the cost of oil going up, Railroads are going to start seeking alternatives to diesel fuel. Pure electric Engines are to expensive to justify building (the costs of electrifying the routes) and would only be feasible in urban settings (or close communities).

Then there's the enviromental factors, the Governement wants to cut down on the amount of Pollutants being put into the air, so here we're faced with another dilema for the railroads, pay big money for enviromental waivers or seek alternatives.

It's obvious that railroads will seek the fastest and cheapest means to avoid high operating costs, Thus steam is a very viable option to them. Modern techniques in steam allow it to burn less fuel, have good traction power, and most can be operated by 1 person as well as be MU computer controlled (unlike previous older steamers that required a crew in each engine).

Maintence costs might be a bit higher than a diesel engine, but the fuel savings would counter that by a factor of at least two. Railroads will probably want Pure Electrics where than can, barring that they will rpobably turn their attention back to steamers for some areas and maintain Diesels for the areas that they can't feasibly run steamers (water conservation concerned areas). overall Railroads will adapt and apply anything to keep the operating costs down and the profits up.

Jay