Snipped from Trains Newswire at Trains.com, only reposting the pertinent important details; subscribers can go to the website for further details at http://www.trains.com/trn/default.aspx?c=a&id=7077 (added emphasis mine):

Well, for the most part this agrees with Ross's original post, that steam was not to be part of the original operation, so there are no surprises there. Other than that, it looks like everyone is having to play a waiting game, and hope some new blood comes in (as seems to have been the case on the Norfolk Southern).

Wait, how was steam not part of Ross' original post? When you have...

"Motive power will be a mix of modern diesels and classic mainline steam. On the steam portions of the journey there will be NO diesels in the consist. No " kissing your sister" here mister!!!"

-and-

"The biz. plan calls for the GBX to be all diesel powered for its first season ( 7/2/2012- 1/15/2013 ) and for steam to be added ( subject to approvals from Amtrak, CSX and Buckingham Branch RR, approvals that I am guardedly optimistic we will achieve) in the second season ( 3/17/2013- 1/15/2014).

When steam is added the GBX will be diesel powered WUS-Gordonsville and steam powered Gordonsville-WSS in both directions. There will be NO repeat NO diesels in the consist when steam powered.

C&O 614 will be one of 3 steam engines in the steam stable. We will need 3 engines so that we have one on hot standby and one in cycle maintenance in addition to the one in active service.

We are actively vetting many candidate engines to be 614's 2 stable mates with a goal of finishing that task by 11/1/10."

How can you say that his statement was "in line" with his original post?

Simple, Ross stated steam would not be part of the first season's operations, and that later steam operations would be subject to a number of approvals he was "guardedly optimistic" he would get from Amtrak, Buckingham Branch, and the big question mark, CSX.

I think this makes sense--show CSX and the rest you are a serious and competent operator first. Get the rest on board for the steam portion of the trip (assuming he can even get his engines to the Buckingham Branch on another route, likely NS and the interchange at Waynesboro, Va.), and you make a stronger case for steam, even on CSX. Hopefully it will lead to the replacement of what I would call the "wimpy" legal advisors who currently have the ear of management in Jacksonville, as Ross demonstrates to the world that, operationally, this is just another train and is nothing to be afraid of.

("Nothing to be afraid of?" Makes me think of the farmers and townsmen who were afraid of locomotives in the 19th century, who thought steam trains would make their cows go dry, stop hens from laying, and set barns and fields on fire; why, that fire-wagon was surely the work of the devil! Who could imagine railroad management, even allowing for the nervousness of lawyers, to fall for that almost 200 years later?)

Please allow me to make an attempt at avoiding a NNN feeding frenzy here.

The facts are very straight forward. At this time CSX has a system-wide no steam policy which has been in place and strictly adhered to for many years. Unless that policy is changed by CSX there obviously will not be any steam operation involved in the GBX as the vast majority of its mileage between WUS and WSS is over CSX property.

Mr. Jim Justice, the CEO of the majority owning company of this enterprise has often stated that he would like to have steam involved for the Gordonsville-WSS portion of the journey and it's his hope that at some future point CSX will be willing to allow this.

Again, as of now the GBX will be a straight diesel operation for its entire journey and that will not change unless the no-steam policy of CSX changes.

The bottom line again is...it's CSX's property and they and they alone have every right to set the rules of who is allowed to use their property and under what terms.

Please remember that the whole purpose of the GBX is to provide a world class train-travel experience for those guests of the Greenbrier who wish to access the resort without having to drive.

In the big picture scheme of things the motive power is relatively unimportant when compared to such issues as ambiance,quality of food/beverage, quality of the OBS staff etc.

Anyone hopeful that steam might someday play a role in this venture would be well advised to leave CSX alone and let things take their course!!

Sometimes...silence is golden!!

Ross Rowland

Thanks to everyone for keeping it civil. Remember our guidelines state "the exchange of information, advice, and suggestions, not to serve as a forum for debate." If there was any misunderstanding I think Ross has made it quite clear in his follow-up post.

Your Rookie Moderator,

Tom Gears

If it's not part of the plan, then a thread with 8,453 views certainly reads different. Part of the plan right now involves identifying candidates for the steam portion, or so I've read.

Can't steam be considered part of the plan if it runs on a segment that isn't CSX-owned and operated? What better way to encourage upper management/lawyers that steam does a job if it delivers a train to them once a week?

Will

From Ross's message above:

"The facts are very straight forward. At this time CSX has a system-wide no steam policy which has been in place and strictly adhered to for many years. Unless that policy is changed by CSX there obviously will not be any steam operation involved in the GBX as the vast majority of its mileage between WUS and WSS is over CSX property."

Are there any other arrangements that have to be made with CSX to operate this train, and if so, are they in place?

Yes would be a great answer, no would be understandable.

Bob H.

That's what I'm so confused about. There was an entire previous thread practically dedicated to what steam could be used, and Ross himself (yourself, if you're reading this) specifically said that your plans included steam. Now, however, you're saying that because CSX has a no-steam policy, "the GBX will be a straight diesel operation for its entire journey and that will not change unless the no-steam policy of CSX changes." It's just the way that the prior thread was worded, was that there were plans for steam, now you're saying there's no plans for steam at all...but there are plans? You can see why I am confused....

Not all parts of all plans evolve successfully. I'm more interested in the potential market willing to pay to ride this land cruise no matter what is up front, as an interested (but not financially) bystander. If it proves profitable, it might indicate a market return for such things as AOE.

Besides, I think the bulk of the "what engine" postings were foamation, not Ross making commitments.

dave

Is there any chance that steam (C&O 614, to be specific) might be used on the Gordonsville-Clifton Forge Buckingham Branch segment, or does the NO STEAM policy also preclude use over the leased segment also?

I think with the addition of the casino and an annual PGA event, the Greenbrier resort is doing all the right things to become a major upscale vacation destination. At the same time, it's not served by any major airlines (afaik) so, for those who live on the eastern seaboard the train is a very attractive way to get to the Greenbrier. Because of that, I don't believe this train would serve as a indicator for the return for the AOE as it will be more a form of transportation than recreation.

Hooray for backpedaling!

CSX has no problem with steam on their leased lines. RJ Corman operates his QJ on a lined he leased from CSX.

J. C. Mark is right about no direct air service to White Sulphur Springs. In fact, the airport there was closed some years ago, and is now part of a golf course!

Trains can be mighty useful things, especially when the competition really is pushing up the sod!