I agree, but the other aspect of regulation is standards setting and reporting. A regulatory structure would (and I believe did in this case) investigate the cause and issue notices and recommendations. It is frequently this aspect of regulation that upsets many, because they are far enough away from the motivating event, or feel that it does not apply to them, that they resent the command to change procedures or invest in machine changes.

Correct me if my details are wrong, but I believe this incident occurred because the individual was attempting to adjust/change the valve stem packing, but could not see in the dark/limited clearances, and actually mistakenly unscrewed the valve bonnet (under pressure).

The valve was an older design that did not have safety measures to prevent this. I believe an improved or modern design has one of two elements: either a tell-tale hole drilled into the second thread, so that a steam trail will appear before the bonnet is unscrewed beyond its holding point, or a two piece bonnet where the bonnet is held by a threaded union ring, so that after initial loosening the bonnet will turn and leak but not continue to unthread from the valve body.

I don't recall if authorities required changing these valves on historic equipment, but I believe a strong notice recommendation was made to either replace these valves or modify existing valves with the tell-tale.

And as said previously, this is how "regulations are written in blood."

@Steve
I 100% agree, if you read my entire post you should have seen that. My point was to instill that the 1472 is vital to continued steam operation and vigilance to that is essential. However, personal vigilance is essential as well, even a 1472 compliant engine will show no mercy. You heard the same story as I did re: the valve. My point was that disregard for 1472 requirements lead to worse things. I'm proud to be affiliated with folks who are dedicated to the safe continuance of steam operation.
Let's let this die until the full story comes out and not jump to conclusions.
Be safe all
Fred Jordan

Got it. Thanks for the clarification.

With as quickly as the photos of DNE 28 apparently (hoax or not) under steam were removed from their original location (as mentioned earlier in this thread), I would suspect that asking the railroad directly wouldn't result in much of an answer. At this point, enough evidence exists that could land them in serious trouble ... they have nothing to gain by elaborating on what the photos show.

Likewise, if it was a hoax, one would suspect that all the fuss on various forums would have caused at least one of the involved parties to notice, and come forward with an admission and explanation. Having to face the repurcussions of a hoax pales in comparison with what the feds will do if the locomotive was steamed up in violation of the CFR.

As for letting the story die ... that is the LAST thing the preservation community should be doing. Failing to self-police is exactly THE reason why you end up with more federal involvement and scrutiny. Ask anyone employed in the railroad industry, who has had to deal the results of a cellphone-texting engineer who ran a red signal and collided head on with another train, how turning a blind eye toward non-compliance plays out.

The "Preservation Community".....I have just spit-up all over myself.

I do not look at this website as ANY extension of the "Preservation Community". "Self Policing"...oops...I just spit-up again.

Regulations help to keep people from making arm-chair decisions. I personally prefer opinion pieces. We all have one, but thank goodness we aren't allowed to execute our personal choices in the hobby.

After 7 pages of tripe...who cares? It isn't my business whether or not they steamed up or not. Even if it is all true...they steamed up for a few days...it really isn't my business. The choice they made...or didn't make...doesn't effect any other operators. Poor decisions only effect those who make them.

I always am impressed by how often some people impose themselves...on everyone else.

That sentence right there proves you're missing the valid point of the concern of some who ARE involved in the preservation and operation of steam. Regardless of our affiliation with any operation, I think its safe to say that we'd like to see steam continue for years to come and we don't need some greenhorns screwing that up...

For obvious reasons, some of our actual Railroad Preservation "Higher Ups" are not speaking out on this yet, but I am quite sure they have their opinions of this event, hoax or not, since it DOES have an indirect effect on ALL operations.

One mistake by these guys (who, if you look at the Railroads FB page, might show that they're not exactly "seasoned" steam guys) could have had an outcome that would have been very far reaching.

Sure, nothing happened, but guess what, that one drunk driver who made it home without killing anyone does not mean it is acceptable for everyone to drink and drive because the other guy got away with it.

The next thing you'll see is "well, if they did it on X railroad in July of 2012, why should we invest hundreds of thousands of dollars into our steam locomotive just to follow the rules? - they didnt!" .....then the next thing you hear is BOOM!

There are rules for a reason and, as stated elsewhere, they are often written with human blood.

Ask the families of the 16 innocent people killed in 1987, by engineer Ricky Gates, if poor decisions only affect those who make them. Ask those of us (including myself) who work in the rail industry full time what kind of impact one moron had on EVERYONE. Don't know the answer? It directly resulted in the current engineer's certification (and recertification) process. Prior to that accident, at the hands of one person who exhibited poor decision making, there was no federal standard.

My guess, is that those fools burying their heads in the sand and pretending that this doesn't somehow affect them, will be the first to complain when some fly-by-night organization screws it up for everyone, and operable steam becomes such an expensive endeavor that it all but ends the practice completely.

Unlike conductors and engineers, locomotive firemen are not federally certified. All it will take is one incident, and that could change real fast.

This discussion board IS an extension of the preservation community. Most of us are either currently active in real projects or have prior experience in projects.

There is no admission test and yes, there are some members who are purely observers, but by and large most of the discussion is authoritative.

Overall this is a very special discussion board and the volume of voluntary contribution by active preservation sources is a testament to their love of the field and the general bond of enthusiasm shared by all.

All you have to do is track the identities of the participants to see how they represent the field.

I have personally been a witness when stupidity and cutting corners set up an extremely hazardous situation on one locomotive, and sidelined another one. As previously stated, those rules were written in BLOOD. That's no ghost story. Many of us who work on these things can tell stories of burns, scrapes, and bruises and we are doing everything right. Ignorance of the power of steam under pressure by a few endangers all of us.

If they'd blown the thing up, I suspect that would have effected every other operator out there.

IC382,



That is so far from the truth as to be laughable. Except that it would be a tragedy.

Do you understand insurance at all? It's all about the concept of shared risk. What is a risk to one is a risk to all.

The first thing that would happen after the next boiler goes BOOM is that every tourist railroad in this country would lose its insurance. Bang--a whole industry dies. That's not a joke.

Add up all of the tourist railroads and railroad museums, and you still have a tiny, tiny industry. What affects one affects all. There is not a shred of sentimentality in that fact; it's hard business decisions made by insurance company actuaries who figure out the insurance company's risk, charges premiums accordingly, and when exposed to a significant risk, they dump the insured to protect the company's bottom line.

Trust me, you don't operate without FRA compliance. And you don't operate without insurance. However much you may wish it was otherwise.

Mike

Again...phone call...

...consistently...many participants speak from fear/concern/negative...first...guilty until proven otherwise...

Every time a locomotive, car, railroad, etc. has a cracked this, a broken that, an overheated whatever...many of you run to judgement.

The Cloquet Terminal Railroad is not a fly-by-night railroad. I can not imagine how professional railroaders/business men would chance substantial fines to play with danger for a few days.

It was investigated and found to be a simple, if tragic, case of human error. Kurt knew his way around steam, he'd been around it his entire life. He and his father worked together at the Mt Rainier Scenic RR for a while. I enjoyed working with both of hem.

He chose to wrench on a valve, and spun the stem and bonnet out of the threads. The resulting release of steam burned much of his body, and he lived for about a day before the injuries proved fatal. I've heard rumors as to what may have happened, and it's a logical explanation, but it's only speculation.

The recommendations from this accident are quite simple, and nothing new: "Do not put a wrench to valves when they are under steam pressure". Kurt obviously knew that, but he made a mistake that cost him his life.

> Again...phone call...

Well, as others have said, if it's so simple, why haven't you called them?

As for why the rest of us haven't called them, I guess we're smarter than that. They've pulled the photos, so obviously this isn't something they want made public. Just exactly what kind of response do you think you'll get from a phone call?

I can think of numerous possibilities...

Answering machine.
No answer at all.
Hello? You're who and you wanna know what? Click!
What steam locomotive?
I don't know...
Sorry, you'll have to ask so and so...

About the only answers I don't see you getting is "Well, yeah, we didn't want to talk about it, but since you called us, I guess we have to tell you... We (A) said "screw the FRA" and fired it up for ***** and giggles. (B) Have been working on a top secret restoration project with steam men imported from Cuba/Poland/China so that nobody would know. We're going to go public on August 1st, but if you promise not to tell anyone, we'll tell you now... (C) are really good at Photoshop/CGI and were really bored, thanks for asking....

OK, so let's roll the clock back 30 years... What would have been done to restore a steamer to operation?

Was there ever a time you simply put a hydrostatic test on the boiler and if she held that was good enough? Before all the new rules, how did you decide when to change the boiler tubes? Did they ever do "form 4" calculations for a restoration project back then?

If they had come to the conclusion that FRA regs didn't apply, could they have done something along those lines today? For example, performed a hydro at 125% of operating pressure? At the moment the discussion sounds like they had two choices, full 1472 workup or "screw it, fill 'er up and toss a fire in 'er!" Is it possible they did some kind of evaluation work, assuming this isn't all a Steven Spielburg production?



If you fill the boiler with steam (and presumably water) from a stationary source, does it "know the difference"? 150 PSI is still 150 PSI, right? The only difference I see is that you can't overheat the crown sheet with an outside boiler, so no failure from that regard.