Is Gettysburg completely done?

Stationary Steam · **Posted:** Tue Dec 22, 2009 9:09 am

I have mixed feelings about Trip Advisor. On one hand its a good thing to have, on the other I wish that some who post there had a clue about the world outside their little middle class "live in a housing development, shop in big box stores" sheltered world.

Randy Hees · **Posted:** Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:28 am

Trip advisor and other user generated reviews like Yelp present a problem...

On one side they are providing information about your site... on the other they are frequently inaccurate or present a very narrow view... People are more likely to post if they didn't like something, or if they liked it they seem to need to put in some criticism to show that they were paying attention...

One strategy is to advocate that people post to such sites, believing that the more casual visitor is more likely to post a positive review... and that the number of positive reviews will overwhelm the negative.

Also, is your web site up to date, so the public can find hours, location and current activities. If not they will turn to older outdated user generated reviews...

Ron Travis · **Joined:** Sun May 15, 2005 2:22 pm **Posts:** 1543

Bobharbison wrote:

Ed Kapuscinski wrote:

I've gotten the impression that their safety record is pretty horrible actually.

Didn't they just recently have a boiler explosion??

Well, if "just recently" includes 1995, then yes. Otherwise no. I wouldn't consider it to be a boiler explosion at least as it's traditionally thought of, and the NTSB called it a "firebox explosion" (whatever that is). A "crownsheet failure" would probably be the most common term for it. Alternately, I suppose you could call it "Coming as close as possible to blowing up the boiler without actually having it launch off the frame and land in a nearby cornfield..." No matter what you call it, crewmembers were severly injured and they came very close to a full fledged explosion that would have possibly killed the crew and/or passengers and certainly would have had a serious negative impact on the industry, even worse than this incident did.

The NTSB report is here: http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/1996/SIR9605.pdf

Short version - Water glasses are you friend, learn how to properly use them and keep them clean. Training your crew is a good idea too.

However... That was a different operator. The railroad is run by a different company, and operates all diesel powered trains due to obvious bad PR in the local area. After that incident, steam train rides would have probably been about as popular as "run-away stage coach rides, with nitoglycerin on board for added fun!"

It's really not fair to hold any of that against the current operator.

On the other hand, I will say that the last time I rode the train I did notice certain areas that could have possibly stood improvement in quality and/or safety. The "H.E.P." for example, was, well, let's just say, "creative".

Thanks for posting the accident report on this crown sheet failure. It is very interesting how a long, complex chain of events led to this tragedy. It is also interesting how lucky it was to split the hair leading to a crownsheet breach rather than a full-blown explosion, and yet, even with that good luck, the outcome was quite dreadful. It really points up the dire consequences of letting your guard down in boiler water management.

I read a lot of the report, and I have a general question. This may be addressed in the report, but I did not yet encounter it. I will read further, but I thought I would ask here now. From what I understand, the crownsheet overheated and bagged down to the point that it began to tear away from the staybolts. With the development of this breach, the steam blew into the firebox. Then the heat of the steam and the fire blowing back out the fire door connection and grates raised the temperature inside of the cab. Was the sound like a muffled 22 caliber rifle described by one of the firemen caused by the initial breach and commencement of steam jetting into the firebox?

How common was it for a crownsheet to fail like this without continuing on to the full explosion where the sudden drop in pressure from the initial breach would lead to the instant flashing to steam of the superheated boiler water?

co614 · **Posted:** Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:41 pm

IMHO the general condition of this locomotive ( I inspected it very shortly after the incident) and the total property clearly evidenced GROSS incompetence/fraud on the part of the management of the railroad and total incompetence on the part of the FRA people charged with seeing that the many rules being violated were enforced.

The design of that locomotive saved the day from becoming a FAR greater tradegy in that she was built on purpose to fail as she did in the event of a dry crown sheet vs. a catostrophic explosion which would have been the result in most other steam engines then operating.

Very fortunatly it resulted in new FRA reg's vs. a total shutdown of the industry. I still find it surprising that none of the clearly guilty actors were sent to prison!!

IMHO-Ross Rowland

Tom Richards · **Joined:** Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:04 am **Posts:** 137

"The design of that locomotive saved the day ..."
Who designed it, Ross?

SZuiderveen · **Posted:** Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:31 pm

Tom Richards wrote:

"The design of that locomotive saved the day ..."
Who designed it, Ross?

Direct quote from the NTSB report, NTSB/SIR-96/05, :

Quote:

In accordance with Canadian Pacific policy, the crown stays, which supported the
crownsheet from the boiler roof sheet, were alternating rows of straight-thread and
button-head crown stays. The first five rows from the rear tubesheet
knuckle (next to the tubes and flues) were straight-thread crown stays followed by
rows of button-head crown stays. The boiler had been made that way so that if the
crownsheet failed because it was not covered by water, it would be pushed off the
straightthread crown stays first. Consequently, although the crownsheet would buckle, it
would be retained for a time by the buttonhead crown stays. Thus, if the crownsheet
failed because of too little water, the failure would occur progressively and in stages,
rather than instantaneously and catastrophically.
Other than being designed to make a failure a progressive, rather than an instantaneous,
event, the boiler did not have any low-water protection devices.

Steve

SteveRG · **Joined:** Fri Sep 15, 2006 3:28 am **Posts:** 270

I remember seeing pictures of the ill fated engine in question in pieces somewhere in Ohio I think. Are they attempting restoration on this loco?

co614 · **Posted:** Wed Dec 23, 2009 5:03 am

Thanks to Steve Zuiderveen for posting the above which clearly answers the purposeful design that saved the day (and maybe the industry?) at Gettysburg. I can personally witness that the crown sheet "performed" exactly as designed!

The locomotive is now owned by Jerry Joe Jacobson and only Jerry knows when/if it will get restored to service. When I last talked with him his near term priorities were to concentrate on finishing his new roundhouse/shop complex and then get busy with the restoration of NKP 763. Therefore I'd guess that restoration of the CPR engine is a good ways away??

Of all the engines I've had the privilege of working on the CPR G-5's were the finest, second only to 614 and a close second at that!! Personally, I hope to see her back in service someday.

Well it's off to the roundhouse for a last days running. We're going to be blessed with a fine weather day and I hope to meet some more Rypners today.

Be safe and a very Merry Christmas to all!!

Ross Rowland

ctjacks · **Posted:** Wed Dec 23, 2009 11:55 am

I rode the Gettysburg RR behind 1278 the summer before the big accident. They ran the whole trip without a fireman! The only people in the cab were the engineer and a little girl, who I presume was related to the engineer. I was in the cab while the engine was in the yard, and today I feel lucky I wasn't involved in the accident.

After the trip I thought I should contact the FRA and note what I thought was a total disregard for any accepted standards for operating a steam engine, but I didn't. Today I would do so.

Chris.

Bobharbison · **Joined:** Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:42 pm **Posts:** 3011

> It is very interesting how a long, complex chain of events led to this tragedy.

That is usually the case in events like this. Occasionally something happens totally "out of the blue", but most accidents are a result of a chain of various events including human error, equipment failure, mistakes, incorrect choices, not following proper procedure, distraction etc.

My son is interested in airplanes, and subscribes to magazines like "Flying". They're interesting to read, and time and time again, they talk about how an accident could have been avoided if only one link in the long chain of events had been broken. There's a lot that can be learned from that.

They also stress something over and over again. Rule #1 in any airplane situation is "FLY THE PLANE". (i.e. Keep the plane under control and on the right course etc.) Way too many folks have been killed by flying into the ground or the side of a mountain while troubleshooting small issues such as comm failures that almost certainly would not have resulted in a fatal accident.

Railroaders can learn from the "Fly the Plane" mantra, and make sure we don't do something like let the water glass run dry or let our speed increase to dangerous levels while discussing something like a HEP problem in the coaches etc.

Seth Jackson · **Posted:** Wed Dec 23, 2009 5:32 pm

I was talking to one of my engineers one day during a firing trick, and the subject of Gettysburg came up. I think I mentioned it since I'd recently read the NTSB report. He was very familiar with the accident and the aftermath, knowing a lot about steam himself, and having been around other operations. He told me he got a cab ride on the 1278 sometime before the accident, and although he'd been in many steam loco cabs, on duty and as a passenger, he said this was the one time he was actually SCARED and desired to get off the locomotive. The string of maintenance & operating failures at the (then) Gettysburg really makes you appreciate an operation that runs a tight & safe ship. God bless and Merry Christmas. Seth

Alexander D. Mitchell IV · **Posted:** Thu Dec 24, 2009 12:25 am

Seth Jackson wrote:

He told me he got a cab ride on the 1278 sometime before the accident, and although he'd been in many steam loco cabs, on duty and as a passenger, he said this was the one time he was actually SCARED and desired to get off the locomotive. The string of maintenance & operating failures at the (then) Gettysburg really makes you appreciate an operation that runs a tight & safe ship.

Once again, I reiterate: The Gettysburg, in that era, was THE most "authentically run" throwback to the old-time shortlines of "Mixed Train Daily," "The Last of Steam," "Slow Train to Yesteryear," etc.--WARTS AND ALL. It was what you wanted to show someone that waxed nostalgic for the "good ol' days" when life was cheap. Imagine a "southern" short line or logging pike being run by Cletus the Slack-Jawed Yokel, who when the boiler tap spits neither water nor steam sticks a coat hanger up the tap to unplug it, or when the injector clogs up says "Hey, lookie likes I gots me some lunch...." and pulls the fish that's clogging the feed line out of the tender and throws it on a shovel to fry up.......

I swore, I was actually wondering if, had they managed to have a derailment that would end up being their last run, whether they would have left the derailed loco sitting sideways (or whatever) on the track where it derailed until some scrap fiends came along and cut it up during the next war-driven metal shortage........... as happened to the Bridgeton & Harrison two-footer after its last run.

I for one am mighty glad that I actually managed to experience that "style" of railroading over thirty years after most such practictioners had given up or gone away, but unlike, say, the "time capsule" experiences of the EBT, Nevada Northern, or Cumbres & Toltec, I don't think I would recommend the experience to anyone else today, save for the bravery of a trip to Cuba or Indonesia......

Charlie High · **Posted:** Thu Dec 24, 2009 1:41 pm

I was aboard that train. My daughter had purchased dinner tickets for Fathers Day and our destination was the Deer Lodge in Mt. Holly Springs. Imagine a teen age girl let alone the rest of the passengers seeing the two firemen black from head to toe with scalded flesh hanging from their arms walking in shock back away from the engine. Then imagine the railroad instead of bussing us back to the station, keeping us on the train for hours till a diesel could be brought out to switch out the 1278 and taking the train to the restaurant at the end of the line so they would not have to refund our money. It was horrifying and none of us had an appetite or enjoyed our meal. We got back to the Gettysburg station at 1:00 a.m. that morning.

John Bohon · **Joined:** Sun Aug 29, 2004 1:04 pm **Posts:** 625

The truely sad thing about the Gettysburg Railroad is the potential that was lost to a string of poor opertors, especially the first. My now retired boss was President of the Strasburg when the Gettysburg began as a shortline. He has told me several times that the folks at Strasburg thought the Gettysburg was the one railroad that could possibly compete with Strasburg and take customers from them. It quickly became obvious that would not be the case. To me the loss of the potential at Gettysburg may have cost us one of the more prosperous steam railroads in the east. Who knows what could have happened? Given all that has happened over the years I think the only future the line holds is as a freight railroad. Even much of that potential has been squandered in the past.

John Bohon

Ron Travis · **Joined:** Sun May 15, 2005 2:22 pm **Posts:** 1543

I heard about this Gettysburg accident when it happened, but I never knew the details. I believe, that it was initially reported that the crownsheet was equipped with a fusible plug as a safety feature, and that the plug had melted due to low water. I am not sure if such fusible plugs have been used, but it sounds like this boiler design for gradual, controlled failure of a crownsheet rupture accomplished the same thing.

In any case, I am surprised to learn just how much the writing was on the wall portending this accident. The routine shutting off of the feedwater pump because it leaked water onto the rails, compromising traction, is an astounding accommodation of a minor leakage problem. Likewise with the running with low water for better steaming, although I have heard of that being a common practice with some engineers throughout the steam age. How long was the Gettysburg in operation during this phase of careless inattention to proper maintenance?