| Railway Preservation News https://www.rypn.org/forums/ |
|
| Threads. steam locos and railroad management https://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2637 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | L Beckman [ Mon Feb 04, 2002 1:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Threads. steam locos and railroad management |
It is always interesting to see how threads posted on RyPN often end up going off on tangents with little or no reference to what started the thread in the first place. Not that it is not interesting or wrong; you sometimes learn a lot about a completely (or nearly completely) different subject! Recently I posted a thread about steam locomotives that I thought perhaps should not have been built. That thread eventually touched on flat spots on roller bearings, World War 2 causing steam to be around for longer than it should have, the number of diesels units required to replace steam units, the economics of operating steam in general and various other things. Since these were brought up in a thread I started, I thought I would try to answer a few of them, at least as I see it. First of all, it is true that some railroads could not purchase diesels during WW2 due to restrictions set by the War Production Board. What is ALSO true however, is that steam development technology virtually stopped during this period. Although ALCO was pretty well committed to the development of their line of diesel locomotives, Lima and Baldwin were not. This is especially true of Lima. For instance, Lima later designed a 4-8-6 locomotive but was not able to sell any due to the dieselization that was already well in progress. Lima was the builder that gave us "super power." If they had been able to use those precious lost four or five years, it is possible that 2-8-6, 4-8-6, 2-10-6 and 4-6-6-6 locomotives could have been designed with all roller bearings, welded boilers, Giesl smokestack ejectors, poppet valves etc. that would have made steam a much more viable alternative. We will never know now for sure. Secondly, railroad management embraced the diesel probably incorrectly. What management looked at after the War was over, was a number of old and tired steam locomotives. But NEW steam (the NYC Niagara's; the N&W J 4-8-4's, the C&O Kanawha's, the NKP Berks, etc.) did a good job of competing economically against the diesels of that era. A lot has been said about getting rid of labor intensive steam facilities. But what IS true, is that these facilities were ALREADY IN PLACE and operating, in most cases, successfully and economically. Nothing had to be built for new steam; IT WAS ALREADY THERE! What railroad management chose to do was: 1. Destroy these facilities. 2. Prematuraly scrap the new efficient steam locomotives along with the old and tired examples. 3. Buy expensive new diesels. 4. Put up expensive NEW diesel facilities. Now it is true that diesel technology was less labor intensive than steam. But let's take a quick look at a couple of them. First was the idea that if a steam locomotive couldn't handle a certain size train, a second locomotive had to be added (thus another engineer and fireman.) On diesel, just add another unit; no extra crewmen! In the preservation era though, it was discovered that a diesel COULD BE SUCCESSFULLY OPERATED FROM A STEAMER! If this technology had been used during the steam to diesel transition era, many steam locomotives could have continued to operate for much longer and given the owning railroads a much better return on their original investment AND fewer very costly diesels would have needed to be purchased. As to the fact that duplicate facilities would have had to been retained, remember, the steam facilities WERE ALREADY THERE! What is amazing is that NOT ONE MANAGER even tried this system! Secondly, steam locomotives are labor intensive. Although this is true, the skilled labor was already in place. Railroad management needed to address the issue of making it more efficient. The Norfolk and Western for one, managed to get their steam power run through lubritorims at a much quicker pace. Most rail management just waited for the diesels to come. I do not argue here that the diesel did not have advantages over steam; obviously it did. But I DO say that the loss of steam technology development during the War Years coupled with a rail management that has always had the attitude that "less is better", brought an end to steam much sooner than it needed to be. I could say more but have used to much space already and for that I apologize. Les Beckman (Hoosier Valley Railroad Museum) midlandblb@cs.com |
|
| Author: | HRMO'Biph [ Mon Feb 04, 2002 6:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Bravo! and diesels bankrupted the RRs too! |
Well put, but allow me to add a few other observations. 1. I have always wondered how many RR companies went broke trying to pay for complete dieselization? From the mighty Pennsy and NYC, to the little MKT, a whole bunch of guys were virtually bankrupted by the shortsited policies on getting rid of steam and the "evil" shop craft unions. Would there have been the PennCentral failure and ultimately Conrail if cash reserves had not been destroyed by the massive investment in new technology? 2. Archaic ICC steam regulations, influenced by the political motive to keep guys on the job, didn't take into account modern steams ability to run farther and longer before being taken out of service for inspection. Prior to Staggers, any regulation of the industry was under the microscope of the then powerful labor interests.(No flaming, I am pro labor) 3. We'll never know all of the back room shenanagans GM pulled with upper management. Remember National Cities? 4. Dieselization was the beginning of the "Starve yourself into prosperity" mindset that governs RRs today. Elimination of steam was the blueprint for cutting laborcosts by eliminating jobs, cutting tax and liability exposure by eliminating facilities, and the wall street voodoo accounting practice of using the vast one time influx of cash from scrapping "unneeded assets" to pad income and investment performance for a given accounting period. lorija799@aol.com |
|
| Author: | Allen [ Mon Feb 04, 2002 11:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Bravo! and diesels bankrupted the RRs too! |
Let me add another 2c. One place that often gets overlooked is the massive shift from man to machines in MOW. When my grandfather started with the "Bums an Outlaws" (B&O) in 1946 (at 20, straight out of the army... if you are a WWII vet, he may have processed your discharge) there was a 100 man track gang responsible for approximately 50 miles of 2 track line (between Pittsburgh and New Castle, Pa) . By the time he retired in the early 80s , 3-4 men and a lot of machines (that tended to break down) tended the same stretch.....which had also deteriorated considerably, and been mostly single tracked. He told many stories of the winter storm cleanups in the early 50s, when multiple MOW gangs were called in to shovel the heavy snow out the entire Pittsburgh yards (which BTW were located where Heinz field, and the Carnegie Science Center are now) BY HAND! Just try to picture in your mind hundreds of men shovelling gons full of snow, and the gons then pushed into the river for the snow to float out....over and over and over. At the end of his career he was highly critical of the cuts the (by then Chessie System) made in MOW. He called it an accident waiting to happen. He also hated that while they decreased the track gangs, they added additional layers of "muddle management", until there were "more 'goldbricks' shuffling papers than guys shoveling ballast." IMHO To quote his favorite saying, "That's a helluva way to run a railroad!" |
|
| Author: | Steve C [ Tue Feb 05, 2002 6:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Threads. steam locos and railroad management |
> I remember reading once that for a period of time in the late 40s, NYC's Niagras ran up an astounding record of averaging 29,000 miles a month over a stretch of 8 or 9 months. Huge coal capacity and the ability to pick up water at 80mph and staying of the crack limiteds between NY and Chicago helped, but any way you look at it, this was a truly amazing feat. I understand that N & W's Class Js also had periods of over 17,000 miles/month, and considering their operating environment, that is probably as impressive as the NYC's. sacarlso@scj.com |
|
| Author: | Greg Scholl [ Tue Feb 05, 2002 8:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Threads. steam locos and railroad management |
And many engines such as the N&W 611-613 which were built in 1950 only ran for about 8 years(The crack passenger trains were deiselized in the summer of 1958). So they still had a lot of life left in them but were scrapped anyway. My dad has an 8mm shot of the Powhatton Arrow going through Portsmouth Ohio with leased diesels, and then a few shots later a J on standby in the yard. They couldn't wait for their own diesels to arrive so they leased ACL and RF&P Cab units to replace the great 600's. Saunders was not well liked by steam fans! Greg Scholl Videos and such sales@gregschollvideo.com |
|
| Author: | Kent Haag [ Tue Feb 05, 2002 7:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Threads. steam locos and railroad management |
> I wonder if all the talk about diesels ruining the railroads as opposed to keeping steam, or slowly introducing diesels, is dreamy thinking. Why would a corporation not want to reduce costs by trimming payroll, unneeded operations and getting rid of worn out equipment. When a newer and cheaper and more dependable technology is available, and a railroad has the opportunity to purchase it or replace their worn out steam with new, improved steam, there is little question about good business practice. When the microwave was introduced, no one wanted to buy new super toaster ovens.(oops, that gives my age away--someone else explain to the pups what a toaster oven is) Diesel and modern signaling systems are really the only big innovations railroads have introduced in a hundred years.(I'll hear about that statement)It is possible that the railroads would have gone bankrupt earlier if they kept steam---maybe dieselization gave the RRs a fighting chance. But finally, its not diesel or steam, its the buffoons and majokes running most of the railroads and out of date Federal supervision which did in the railroads. haaghistory@yahoo.com |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|