Is this about historic preservation and operation of historic equipment, or is it about making this stuff more user freindly so hobbyist can "play?" BTW one of the best firemen I know and like to work with is a software engineer...the level of competance required is more a factor of dedication to developing your skill and knowledge than spending upteen hours sweeping the cab floor to get a chance to run the injector.

And one thing we all seem to be missing...a very low tech device (soft plug) kept this "incident" from becoming an "event". This alone should prove that there is no need for exotic electronica in the cab.

This incident had a simple cause and there is a simple solution. Unqualified and inexperienced people don't get to run the choo choo train. Period. Both Pine Bluff and Austin had people available with the experience and skills needed to make the 745 trips safely, and I know that these people were known to LASTA, but it was more important that everyone got to play.

Truth be told, if this were 1936 instead of 2006, two old boys would be hunting a job, and the 745 would be out of the shop in less than a week. This was an incident that we all need to know about and learn from, but the soft plugs did their job. It was no Gettysburg.

Jim, I'm glad you opened this thread. I found it interesting that there was much talk about ego in the thread about 745, yet by the third page, I felt many of the content authors made it sound like every person needed ~10+ years (an exaggeration) or countless hours on the footplate before you should be allowed to operate. I really appreciated the person who shared the mistakes they had seen or been part of - this crowd can often be more critical than constructive.
I certainly don't mean to belittle the magnitude of the 745 incident, I just agree with you strongly that the plugs worked, the rest of us should learn the lessons to be learned and discuss them for the better of our industry.

Not only had it occured to me that the soft plugs worked but I have also thought all along we may be lucky this was an oil burner. It was much easier and faster for the crew to shut down the oil fire than dump a coal fire. The oil fire also meant nobody opened the firedoor. That alone may have prevented injuries to the engine crew.

John Bohon

It may appear easier to remove the heat source on an oil burner, but in reality it is not as simple as closing the oil valve. The refractory brick making up the fire pan will give off enough residual heat to do damage long after the fire is out.

One of the items I like to teach to new trainees is to develop a scan pattern of the indicators in the cab, this helps to avoid focusing on any one gauge or indicator for too long.

I never thought of it that way Mike. Can you tell I have not spent much time around oil fired locomotives?

Thanks.

John Bohon

John,
Sharing and learning from others is one of the great assets of this board, whether it be a fresh perspective or technical knowledge, it is one of the reasons RYPN can be found at the top of My Favorite's list.

Well, the firebrick do hold a lot of heat, but when the fire goes out, there is no more heat being introduced into the firebox, and there should be enough distance in a properly lined firewall to not cause much damage. A lot of folks don't realize that behind the firebrick it is relatively cool. Also the water and steam released by a drop plug would lower the temperature of incandescent firebrick fairly quickly.

Still, there is no excuse for melting out a soft plug.