How about bus-bashing for the streetcar fans? Back in the 60's the term "Gutterliners" was coined as a parody of the "Silverliners" name used by one of the LA area bus operators. I've also seen "Stinkbuggy" applied to diesel motor coaches.
As far as "steam bashing" is concerned, I sometimes remind the steam crew at my home museum that you don't have get up at 4 AM to start a streetcar or a diesel. But if they need a hand in wrestling some of the "heavy metal" involved with keeping the ol' Iron Horse in good order, I'm happy to pitch in.
I happen to like all three major forms of rail propulsion, and even the minor types, such as horse/mule railways and cable car lines. There's track space for every taste.

Some day in the future, when locomotives are powered by built in solar panels and hydrogen cells and dreams and rainbows and driven by centralized computer cores, my generation will look back on today and, with some sadness, recall the diesels that once pulled trains across this great land. We will recall how marvelous they were, how much character they had, how they almost seemed alive. We will argue they were still economically feasible, and that they didn't require that much extra maintenance. And we will come up with disparaging names for the new motive power, because back in the old days it was all so much better. What goes around comes around.

Seriously though, modern motive power is so different from the first generation power (what generation are we even on now, 5?) I am wondering, has anyone encountered 1st/2nd gen diesel fans who have disparaging names or unkind words for the newer units? Any fun catchphrases, like calling them dismals? Do other fans (aircraft, ships, etc) do this too, or is it just us foam?

I quit looking after the second generation. I lost interest when I could no longer watch an Alco or an F-M. Anything newer than an SD-40 looks and sounds like all the rest. If I hear a 567 revving up, I might take a second look. Having had some throttle time in first generation diesels, I must say there is some skill involved in running them, more than seems evident in fifth generation units. Your mileage may vary.

And most likely, these engines will be electric (most likely with catenary).

And speaking of that. Nobody bashes electric locomotives, do they? They seem to have a surprising romance. I don't recall seeing any steamers or diesels in RyPN sigs recently.

Have you ever talked to a neighbor of a steam railroad? Especially someone who has to wash their laundry or car again after the steamer came through, or the guy whose lawn or farm crop was set afire by the sparks from the steamer? I suspect you'll find a few unkind words to be had there...........

Or further, talk to the mother dealing with the little kid screaming about the cinders in his eyes. Or some "environmentalist" after the flues are sanded for the photo runby.

Nobody praises them, either.

--
Will

I have put out my share of fires caused by sparks from steam locomotives. Since I work for the railroad I have also been involved with a lot more fires caused by hot carbon from diesels or brake shoe sparks. Remember those pretty night pictures of carbon sparks flying out of the stacks of EMD's? They also fly out into dry grass and cause fires. They come out of Alco diesels too. I once had to respond to a complaint from a guy who had just got his car home from a rather expensive wash and wax and found carbon and grease streaks all over the hood, roof, and trunk of his car from an EMD 567. The only cure I know for sparks comming from locomotives is to put all the railroads under wire. When they quit using brake shoes the fires from those will cease. On the railroad it is just a part of life you have to learn to deal with.

Let's see, have I ever known anyone whose hanging cloths got covered by soot from a steam locomotive? Well my mother and father both lived beside steam railroads for most of their first 30 and 40 years respectively. Both grew up beside the railroad and on top of that my mother's homeplace when she grew up came complete with a steam sawmill in the front yard. She grew up playing on the lumber stacks, and around the mill pond. She often rode the mile or so to the one room school on whatever kind of dinky locomotive the logging railroad had. I heard plenty about dirty cloths. Many people from the depression generation accepted such inconvenciences a little better than people today. To them smoke comming out of a stack or noise comming from a factory or railroad meant jobs and a decent means of making a living.

How many people today actually use clothslines? Sometimes I think that my neighbor and myself are the only people left in the world who regularly hang cloths out to dry. Most environmentalists, like myself, understand that there are limits to everything. Like any other extremists you can never do anything to satisfy those whatever their cause so you have to deal with them and go on about you business. Today the old factory building is torn down to provide minimum wage green jobs so we can shop at the repacement, Walmart. Then we go accross the street where the mill houses once stood to get our death in a bag from minimum wage McDonalds. Progress?

As to the subject of diesel bashing, if relating my experiences over 27 years working on diesels on the railroad and 34 years working around locomotives in preservation is bashing then I guess I am guilty as charged. I am only telling you my truthful opinions. If we as so called historians can not accept the facts as related to us by those who were there how can we possibly expect the general public to understand anything of the thinking of past generations? EMD understood that creature comforts were important to those who were operating their equipment and provided consistantly more friendly user environments than their competitors. Imangine that, an automobile company taking the lead there? Alcos parts were usually bulky and their locomotives often difficult to maintain including those V belt driven accessories on their 6 cylinder switchers. Engineman generally liked the way RS 2 and 3's pulled and their method of transition gave them an advantage in drag service but the mechanical people had a different opinion of their 244 engines. Baldwins pulled well but were difficult to maintain, would not MU with anything else, and if creature comforts were rated on a scale of 1 to 10 a Baldwin diesel surely rated in negative numbers. About the only thing they were better than on that account would be steam locomotives. I have never worked on a FM unit. I once ask a friend of mine who had just worked his first time on a FM how it was. He told me if he had to run one of those every day he would go back to driving a truck.

For the record, I never said steam was better than diesel I never said diesels did not have their place in the real world or preservation. The fact is they are a part of railroad history and should obviously be included. What I said was that in my opinion no diesel I have ever encountered had more than 5 percent of the personality of a 1901 PRR 0-6-0. I also said that after having spent my career working on diesel locomotives I really do not like them very well. I also have no interest at all in the late model diesels. I like steam locomotives and always have. As I said before, if stating my opinion from my personal experience is bashing then I am guilty as charged.

Again, just my opinion.

John Bohon