So, I think something we can ALL agree on is that the majority of us are steam junkies, and have seen a steam locomotive some in some fashion, whether that be in a theme park, city park, a tourist railroad, a railroad museum, etc....
That brings me to the topic of this thread: Does having an operating steam engine help to make a tourist railroad more successful? Now, obviously, the equipment you operate isn't the only factor, but tourist railroads usually attempt to provide the experience of a train ride like it would've been at the turn of the 20th Century, and at that time, diesel locomotives were pretty much if not completely unheard of. Besides, Steam tends to be more marketable than Diesel.
So, What do you think?

New Hope Valley RR - the guys east of you near Raleigh - did a marketing study when their steam locomotive died on the clock in 2017. They have done a lot of work in marketing to try to increase visitation during the dismal diesel interval now under way while 17 gets her 15 year overhaul, fairly successfully, but their marketing person can probably hook you up with their previous study. The gist was that since they don't have spectacular scenery and run with converted flatcars so they can't provide a historic time machine, steam was what made a significant impact on attracting visitors.

If you have the Grand Canyon out the windows probably not as big an impact. I think appropriateness to mission brought out through your product - provided you chose a mission with high marketability to start with - is more critical, but if appropriate, steam can make a difference.

It sincerely depends on the railroad and its environment and marketing.

Lines that depends on scenery--examples include the Potomac Eagle, the Verde Canyon RR, the Conway Scenic, Mt. Washington Cog, and the Grand Canyon Railway--have demonstrated that they don't need steam.

Other lines that depend upon appeal to history--the Strasburg, Valley RR, Camp Five, Cass, Steam Into History, etc.--aren't going to get away with running diesels for long.

Then there are operations that are either a strange hybrid of the two or have successfully broadened their marketing to include both "steam trains!" and special events where the loco barely matters. Steam can be a poor choice for many dinner trains, for example.

The Western Maryland Scenic gets a lot of traction (sorry) from its "Mountain Thunder!" marketing, but in fall foliage season the power hardly matters.

Back in the 1980s, when the Wilmington & Western was still promoted as a steam railroad, I was told by its officers that when they had to substitute diesels for its steam locos when all the steam was laid up for one reason or another, ridership routinely dropped 50%. Nowadays, with a combination of all manner of special events many weekends and "historic, authentic" B&O SW1's of the type the RR used on the line, that's undoubtedly much less of an issue. I would suspect the same can be said for the likes of the New Hope & Ivyland and similar lines in tourist meccas.

The reality is that the absolute youngest person that can have ANY memory of ordinary, everyday revenue steam is at a minimum collecting Social Security in the US, if not at least 80+. Nostalgia doesn't work any more. It's about the experience, be it a beautiful vista, campy entertainers, or a time capsule.

I go to Cass to see the steam, I go to Grand Canyon Railway to see the scenery. Some places, it's all about the steam, others, it's all about the ride.

I think a lot has to do with the equipment being pulled by the steam locomotive. If you are going to use air conditioned, sealed window coaches, pulling them with a steam locomotive makes no sense at all. Most passengers won't really notice what is pulling the train, once seated.You might as well go for a ride on New Jersey Transit or SEPTA. To get the total steam experience, you need steam era equipment; open windows, the whistle and bell, a few cinders, the smell of valve oil and coal (or oil) smoke.

One of the Eastern operators, in my opinion, made a big mistake in selling off their combine. This car had open baggage doors and extra openings in the side. That car, and the Dutch doors, kept me literally on my feet when riding. Now they put the first class cars right behind the power which is now all diesel. Even if there was a steam locomotive, it wouldn't be obvious to the usual rider, four, five, six cars back, with sealed windows.

It has to be a total package, steam locomotive and the train itself. You have to paint the entire picture, set the whole stage. Of course, a good compromise would be newer coaches and some sort of well thought out open car, with the ability for passengers to move from car to car. And not a 'chicken wire and 2 by 4' flatcar; I've seen enough of them over the years.

EDM
Soapbox, NJ

The B&O Railroad Museum quite a while back used to offer rides on one of its RDC-1's out the "First Mile" and back, especially on days deemed to be lower-patronage. Far more economical than running a 567 engine and several cars, especially on only one engine. A page straight out of the Budd RDC sales brochures.

The only problem: In an urban setting, to quote directly director Courtney Wilson, "It was just too much like riding a city bus! There's not enough to distinguish it and make it a special experience!"

So if the C&TSRR went diesel and the D&SNGRR stayed steam which railroad would the public or rail fans choose to ride? Both have beautiful scenery, both have authentic comparable steam power. I’ve traveled on both numerous times and found both to have some excellent points. I would ride the Steam railroad and not the other railroad.

All of the most successful tourist lines / historic lines operate Steam. Durango, Strasburg, Cass, TVRM, the Valley RR, Grand Canyon, White Pass, etc. I think having a Steam locomotive helps significantly in marketing. Now how often you run steam can vary...

The most successful lines like Strasburg, Durango, Cumbres Toltec, Grand Canyon, Cass, Black Hills Central, TVRM, Valley Railroad (and others) all run, or did run steam daily, at least seasonally. Grand Canyon only recently stopped running steam daily a few years ago. The majority of those are for-profits.

Grand Canyon is a unique one because they serve as legit transit to one of the 7 wonders of the world, so naturally they are going to have riders that don't care about steam. They have also invested in some lovely dome cars that offer a more streamlined train era experience. Personally, I wish they would offer a legit steam train experience with the old heavyweights and no diesel helper when they run steam excursions, and keep the diesels on the streamline set and market 2 different experiences. Charge whatever extra it costs and see if it sells.

Similarly White Pass & Yukon still runs steam and charges extra for it. While many of the passengers just want the scenery, there are still many willing to pay extra for the steam or they would stop running it.

Actually... what is the most successful non-steam tourist line? Potomac Eagle? Wine Train? I wonder how their numbers stack up compared to steam lines.

I'm a it concerned about the majority of these posts reflecting railfan's perspectives when it's really about the general public's perspective since railfans will ride just about anything anywhere (and let the operators know what they are doing wrong afterward) while the general public makes or breaks an operation by choosing to patronise it rather than something else without a specific interest driving their decision.

Depending on the operation, what the general public wants, and what a railfan wants can be the same thing. If people just want to look at scenery, there are usually scenic drives nearby that rival or beat what a train offers. I feel like the general public wants, to some extent, a "Vintage" feeling experience when they go for a train ride. What that means will vary a bit from line to line. Does it have to be totally historic accurate? No. But the more historically accurate it is will feed the overall vintage feel of the experience.

A lot of what is being discussed here is what we've been calling "the immersive experience," in which you feel you are in a time machine.

You can search on this site for several references to "immersive experience." One of them is this thread--and it's not the only one.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=41074&p

"Does owing a steam engine help make a railroad successful?"

Well, no, not on its own. Badly promoted or mis-handled, it can send you broke. A steam loco is a bit like the old joke that you don't own a boat, you own a hole in the sea and then you throw money in it. But there's no denying that steam locos are way more popular than diesels.

The GCRY comes about as close as you can to not running steam while technically still running it. They run one trip per month generally speaking. You have to seek it out, and plan accordingly. Most folks booking trips will never know that option exists. https://www.thetrain.com/events/steam-saturdays/

In the grand scheme of that operation, that one trip a month not significant. The vast majority of their customers don't ride behind steam. If the demand was there, I presume they'd run more trips. They're a diesel operation with regular special events, not a steam operation.

The Mt. Washington Cog Railway went from all steam to all diesel except for the first run of the day. For the diehard steam fan, you'll have to get up earlier to make the steam run. Last time I was in New England, I just missed the steam run, took the next diesel trip up and caught the steam run downhill. I didn't notice any difference in the passenger load between the diesel and steam run, but they only run 1 passenger car at a time. At the Mt. Washington Cog Railway, I think it's the history and steep climb to the top that attracts riders, not necessarily the motive power.

Well the original question was "Does owning (and presumably operating) a steam engine make a railroad successful."

1. Grand Canyon operated steam daily in season for years and years. It was only recently that they went to the once a month schedule. Did Steam help the Grand Canyon get as popular as they did? I can't say for sure but I'm thinking it made a difference.

2. If the interest wasn't there, and it wasn't good for their promotions, they wouldn't run steam at all. Which is the point of this thread...

I also disagree that a railroad has to run steam more than once a month or it's a "diesel operation." Seveal operations like Niles Canyon, Wilmington Western, Monticello RR, etc. run steam pretty sparingly.