https://wfirnews.com/local-news/fitzpatrick-future-uncertain-for-611-excursions
The Amtrak thing should work...
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Well, I'll take 611 with an Amtrak "panic diesel" tucked in behind her romping on the mainline than no 611 at all.
Who knows? With an Amtrak partnership there's no telling where 611 may run.
Anyway, Amtrak could use some positive press right now.
NKP 765 has continued to run with diesel protection on Norfolk Southern over the last several years, so hopefully 611 will be afforded similar access on lines that are not at capacity for freight.
NS is full of BS...they wouldn't be any more liable the the UP is for running their steam engines, it's just a piss ant way to get out of exursions.
How many single engine trains does NS operate on a daily basis conducting their own business???? I suspect quite a few.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD How many single engine trains does NS operate on a daily basis conducting their own business???? I suspect quite a few.
You would be correct!
The issue isn't whether there is a diesel tucked in behind, it's whether excursions can be arranges as "Amtrak special moves".
Allowing special Amtrak trains is written into the contracts Amtrak has with the host roads, usually a fixed rate per train mile.
If they are worried about needing protective power behind her then let them use the F-units NS has for their business train instead of keeping them at Altoona all the time.
As raised in the Flying Yankee thread, PTC requirements could threaten any mainline steam operation, at least with the steam locomotive in the lead and controlling position. While a partial PTC installation may be feasible, probably at considerable cost, that will still not satisfy the present mandate.
[quote user="GERALD L MCFARLANE JR"]
[/quote. Well said!!!
cx500As raised in the Flying Yankee thread, PTC requirements could threaten any mainline steam operation, at least with the steam locomotive in the lead and controlling position. While a partial PTC installation may be feasible, probably at considerable cost, that will still not satisfy the present mandate.
One thing to remember about PTC - it IS NOT required on ALL railroad mileage. In fact the majority of railroad mileage does not require the use of PTC. There are rules that define which lines must have PTC and which lines don't require PTC.
Shadow the Cats owner If they are worried about needing protective power behind her then let them use the F-units NS has for their business train instead of keeping them at Altoona all the time.
I'd take any first gen diesel over a modern unit. At least that way it would LOOK plausible.
Trains, trains, wonderful trains. The more you get, the more you toot!
Penny Trains I'd take any first gen diesel over a modern unit. At least that way it would LOOK plausible.
Just pretend the dismals have died enroute and the 611 is rescuing them!
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Firelock76 Well, I'll take 611 with an Amtrak "panic diesel" tucked in behind her romping on the mainline than no 611 at all. Who knows? With an Amtrak partnership there's no telling where 611 may run. Anyway, Amtrak could use some positive press right now.
With all due respect to Bev Fitzpatrick, I don't think that such a situation is necessarily, the "end of the world as we have come to know it". To work within the current railroad environment and with AMTRAK, might just open a bigger window onto the future of 'Fan Trips' (?).
UPRR utilizes, not only their corporate 'Heritage Diesel' fleet in conjunction with their Steam Locomotive powered trips, in a very successful manner; their Steam locomotives are apparently, also equipped with a control stand for their engineers to operate their trailing diesel power(?).
Remember, when #3985 running as Clinchfield #676, operated in foreign territory, without a trailing diesel,with only minor problems(?). It[a trailing diesel] seems like a positive for 'insurance', if something does go wrong. Witness the problems #844 had on its 'Missouri River Rambler' excusrion; they were able adapt, and cope with those problems; with ultimately, only slight delays(?).
NS has their own fleet of Heritage Diesels, working in regular train service, it does not seem unlikely, they could put an appropriate diesel on a trip with #611 ?
oltmannd BaltACD How many single engine trains does NS operate on a daily basis conducting their own business???? I suspect quite a few. You would be correct! The issue isn't whether there is a diesel tucked in behind, it's whether excursions can be arranges as "Amtrak special moves". Allowing special Amtrak trains is written into the contracts Amtrak has with the host roads, usually a fixed rate per train mile.
BaltACD One thing to remember about PTC - it IS NOT required on ALL railroad mileage. In fact the majority of railroad mileage does not require the use of PTC. There are rules that define which lines must have PTC and which lines don't require PTC.
Well, this is one thing we have to remember, although I'm sure most of us know it already.
Steam excursions on the big mainline 'roads exist solely on the sufference of those 'roads. One change of who's fanny is in the CEO's seat and it can all come to an end overnight with the stroke of a pen, an e-mail, or a phone call.
Hopefully 611 won't be put away for another 20 year sleep, but we'll just have to see how it plays out. Personally I think it'd be a gas to see her roaring up the Northeast Corridor.
Firelock76 Well, this is one thing we have to remember, although I'm sure most of us know it already. Steam excursions on the big mainline 'roads exist solely on the sufference of those 'roads. One change of who's fanny is in the CEO's seat and it can all come to an end overnight with the stroke of a pen, an e-mail, or a phone call. Hopefully 611 won't be put away for another 20 year sleep, but we'll just have to see how it plays out. Personally I think it'd be a gas to see her roaring up the Northeast Corridor.
I wonder why Steamtown doesn't sponcer or host visiting mainline steam locomotives and excursions. That portion of pa is rich in railroad history and would dove tail with thier mission statement. I have fond memories of steamtown excusuion thru the Delaware water gap. Be great to see excursion return to the Poconos.
ROBERT WILLISONCuyahoga scenic railroad which have different insurance requirements and operating rules.
The Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad operates inside the Cuyahoga Valley National Park so I assume their under the same rules and regs as other national park railroads such as the Grand Canyon Railway and Steamtown.
Steamtown has hosted 765 in the past and I think 261 has been there as well, but I could be wrong on the latter.
No reason they couldn't host 611 as far as I know, unless there could be a problem with it getting there or clearance problems once it gets there.
Some rumblings starting up on RyPN about Amtrak excursions on CSX; I raised the question whether Amtrak could 'compel' steam operation under their arrangement. An interesting possibility, at least.
Interesting certainly, but I doubt it could happen. CSX has a hard-and-fast rule of no antique railroad equipment on their property at any time or for any reason and I doubt that's going to change anytime soon. Maybe Amtrak could push the issue but I don't think Amtrak would believe it's worth the trouble.
From what I've read if CSX had their 'druthers they'd get Amtrak off their lines too.
Video of MILW 261 at Steamtown in 1995 - turn the sound up:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfASfYxNmZg
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=milwaukee+road+261+at+steamtown&qs=PF&cvid=a91e4741574f45d5b044911a0fe80dc1&cc=US&setlang=en-US&PC=DCTS&ru=%2fsearch%3fq%3dmilwaukee%2broad%2b261%2bat%2bsteamtown%26form%3dEDGTCT%26qs%3dPF%26cvid%3da91e4741574f45d5b044911a0fe80dc1%26cc%3dUS%26setlang%3den-US%26PC%3dDCTS&view=detail&mmscn=vwrc&mid=8768244B7F4D25F5BFF48768244B7F4D25F5BFF4&FORM=WRVORC
For a while it had "Lackawanna" emblazoned on the tender and was renumbered 1661.
With 74-inch drivers it did a great impression of a Lackawanna Q4 Pocono:
https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=8hOya%2f3R&id=F575ED824C6EC39331FC5F29BC4BE8F36612CB4B&thid=OIP.8hOya_3RpDmqCYK02Im6LwHaFC&mediaurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.railpictures.net%2fimages%2fd1%2f1%2f0%2f3%2f7103.1359932771.jpg&exph=699&expw=1026&q=milwaukee+road+261+as+lackawanna+steam+locomotive&simid=608053309653975829&selectedIndex=0&ajaxhist=0
Thanks for jogging my memory! If the Steamtown 261 excursion on the first video takes place on July 22, 1995 what you're hearing is the actual whistle of a Lackawanna "Pocono," courtesy of the collection of Lackawanna fan Henry Peterson. Also mounted on 261 was a "Pocono" bell and air horns.
The excursion ran from Scranton PA to Binghamton NY, and it was the first time since 1953 that the sounds of a "Pocono" were heard in Scranton.
Firelock76CSX has a hard-and-fast rule of no antique railroad equipment on their property at any time or for any reason and I doubt that's going to change anytime soon.
Hard to say. But at a CSX without E.H.H. many things are more possible today than they were a month ago.
Yeah Becky, anything's possible, but that "no antiques" rule pre-dates Hunter by quite a few years, so we can't blame him for that one.
That simmering hostility CSX has had for Amtrak goes back quite a few years as well, can't blame Hunter for that either.
We CAN blame Hunter for killing Canadian Pacific's steam program, which was a real class act. Hudson 2816 is one classy-looking locomotive, must have broken a lot of hearts up north when it was put away.
So is the NS Steam Program on the RIP Track? Nothing on their website
More like on the scrap track, if there's no mention of it.
What it means though is NS isn't going to sponsor any steam excursions. This doesn't mean they won't allow them, depending on circumstances.
We'll just have to wait and see.
I would suppose this will impact 765 and perhaps 2100, although there is the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic line right there at 2100's doorstep.
Of course, ferry moves to an excursion site are not excursions, so perhaps there will be other opportunities yet.
We'll keep our fingers crossed.
I would think NS would be okay with ferry moves, provided the equipment passes mechanical inspection. No passenger liability needed...
NS has quit the excursion sponsoring business and sold their excursion coaches.
Amtrak excursions are covered over the host road according to the agreement with Amtrak - each road covers their own losses. Amtrak would cover passenger liability - the big cost for excursions, otherwise.
So, presumably, 611 could power an Amtrak excursion over NS lines. It just adds one more party at the table.
kgbw49 I would suppose this will impact 765 and perhaps 2100, although there is the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic line right there at 2100's doorstep. Of course, ferry moves to an excursion site are not excursions, so perhaps there will be other opportunities yet. We'll keep our fingers crossed.
When the 765 comes to Cleveland it's CSX that usually does the hauling. So.....no difference as far as the steam in the valley excursions go? I mean, CSX and NS are just about as bad these days to steam, so.....
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.