Recently there has been a great deal of discussion on another thread regarding the merits of operating steam motive power vs. other motive power at railways and railway museums. There were several differing points made, which are presented below:

-Steam motive power does not result in an appreciable difference in sales/customer satisfaction, but we continue to operate it for our own enjoyment and the enjoyment of others who do.

-Steam motive power does result in a difference in sales/customer satisfaction, but only when it is marketed as an important part of the experience.

-People cannot tell the difference between steam motive power and others, so it doesn't matter which pulls the trains.

-Museums have a responsibility for educating the public, and if operating steam helps fulfill the museums mission statement, it should be used.

-Collaborating to market steam as a group might help museums.

-Improving individual marketing of steam is also worthwhile

-If there are others which you believe should be included, and I have omitted them, I apologize. Please add more as you see fit.

From all of this I see the need for the following:

-Real market research regarding the role steam motive power plays in audience decisions as a whole. This research should not be the product of one museum's experience.
(This will help us understand the market as a whole)

-Research from individual railways who have run steam successfully regarding the role steam plays in audience decisions.
(This will help us understand the impact that marketing and using steam could potentially have)

-Research regarding steam related exhibits at museums
(This helps to understand the role education plays in audience decisions)

-correlation of the above information

-Collaboration to see if this information could be made useful and available to help individual railroads and museums better market steam motive power experiences.

-Collaboration on group marketing to improve audience knowledge about steam motive power and create more informed market.

It seems that the perfect organization to take on such a project would be the ATRRM.

Other ideas? - What else am I missing?

Steve

Steam does have merit, but so do diesel electric locomotives and electric locomotives.

In order to get reliable answers, we first need to define certain things. What is "the market"?

What factors drive the decisions that customers make to come to our museums? How can we attract new customers?

I would suggest that the scope be broadened from what railways have run steam successfully to what railroads run successfully-period.

ATRRM is a good forum in which to address some of these issues, but it has a long way to go to be what it can potentially be. For many members, steam is a largely irrelevent question. I sense that collaboration is slowly developing amongst the train operators, but it is nowhere near the level that is seen amongst the street railway operators. I regularly attend the Parts Committee meetings and receive the updates and have yet to see any of the train operators participating in those forums.

One underappreciated aspect of museum operations is the preservation of diesel electric locomotives-Gen I and Gen II locomotives are now museum pieces. Who out there has an operational Baldwin diesel or Fairbanks-Morse?

Steve,

First, let me thank you for starting a new thread. I had been ignoring the other one because it was so far off topic, I didn't even realize that the discussion was about anything other than a small tourist operation in PA.

So, merits of steam vs. diesel. I think I have a strong background on this one.

At Grand Canyon Railway, we run the same train, every day, 364 days a year. Approximately 10 times a year, we attach a steam locomotive to the front. It's the same cars, on the same schedule, to the same destination, for the same ticket price. Only difference is the motive power.

Most days, we have a few people wander up to the front to take a picture with a fairly modern diesel passenger engine. On steam days, there is usually a decent size crowd gathered to watch the departure from Williams. At the Grand Canyon, several of the passengers come up to the front upon arrival and just before departure to get their picture taken.

However, despite the extra attention, this actually translates into very few additional ticket sales. We can compare passenger counts on those select Saturdays vs. the preceeding and following Saturdays, and there is ususally only a small increase. I'd guess around 15%, or enough to add one extra car. Compare this to a 400% increase in fuel cost for the day, plus the cost of water and water treatment, brake shoe wear, additional crew, etc....

Luckilly, the company likes the PR value of the steam engine and uses that to justify the cost. The 'Greenest Train in the Country' has resulted in lots of National Press and won Environmental Awards. So, it continues to be supported.

Eric

Eric,

Your mention of the GCR brings up another factor to consider. In the case of the CGR, the primary attraction is the destination. For other railroads, the scenery is nondescript at best and the ride has to be the attraction. All in all, as you point out steam on the GCR has a nominal financial value at best and no financial value at worst.

I will point to my own experience at TVRM where our ride was either behind a steam locomotive or vintage diesel electric locomotive. I did not notice any appreciable difference between the ridership based on motive power. What determined the ridership was how much time the visitors had to spend. Our market was (and still largely is) tourists passing through town on the interstate-families with children. In and of ourselves, TVRM is not really a destination but more of a roadside attraction to the general public.

Similarly, GCR itself is not a destination to most of its' passenger but a means to get to the destination-the Grand Canyon of Arizona. The train provides transportation and alleviates the need for them to drive to the canyon and deal with parking and associated matters. The onboard entertainment provides a necessary service, entertaining passengers while the train passes through rustic (but not particularly spectacular) scenery.

While the GCR is a very fine operation and provides essential services to the National Park, to an extent comparing it to the average tourist railroad is a bit like comparing a Rolls Royce to a Citeron. It's market is very different (in some ways) from that which other tourist roads cater to.

I wonder if people are using backwards logic when they say that the public doesn't care what's on the head end.
Let's look at 2 potential examples:
A: Scheduled and advertised steam-powered train
B: Scheduled and advertised train with diesels up front
Wouldn't it follow that the people who'd show up for the option B trip would be less likely to care what the power is, to even show up and ride?
And wouldn't it also follow that people who come for the option A trip would include both those who don't care (as it's a train ride, that's all the care about) as well as those who love steam and came just for that?
The option B trip wouldn't likely include those who love steam more than anything.
So, where's the judgement coming from that the public doesn't like steam? All I know is many times I'm trackside shooting the BNSF/UP main between Seattle and Portland, some random member of the public will come up and ask if, "the steam train is coming back?" meaning one of the 4449 moves in recent years through there. I have never been asked if the UP business train with E units is coming through.
I rode the GCRR with my long-suffering wife the final year they ran daily steam. We took a dome car up and the business car going back (and were the youngest people by a wide margin in that car on the return). We changed our return tickets after a night at the El Tovar (well worth the expense, with a corner balcony room) to make sure we went back on a train pulled by 29 instead of a diesel. In the off-season, I was told it was no big deal and that people did that all the time so they could ride steam both ways as our tickets had steam only one way.

In the dome, I noticed plenty of people who didn't appear to be 'railfan' types sneaking up into the dome to get shots of the head end power. I also talked with a local at Williams who said people go nuts over the train movements when steam is on the head end and they flock all over the place. He had no clue if that translated to tickets or gift shop sales, though he figured steam probably brought plenty of extra people for his business.
The people I talked with at GCRR were convinced they did better with steam. When 29 hauled the daily train back to Williams, everyone seemed to stop. I saw plenty of non-foamer types grab and camera and hot-foot it to the nearest tracks at the sound of the locomotive.

It is clearly evident that the vast majority of guests are not motivated primarily ( if at all) by whats pulling the train. With the real life examples such as Eric Hadder's at the GCRR, mine at the NH&I, and many others there's no need for a " market study" as the real market is showing us the baseline truth.

Yes, in very special cases such as mainline "steam" excursions that in important part cater to the ever shrinking foamer community the motive power is an important part of the product offering,..... but even here they're rarely the real McCoy as there's almost always a diesel right behind the steam locomotive, pulling all sealed window coaches so that its near impossible to tell what's pulling the train anyway.

For us dyed in the wool foamers let's hope that enough steam survives (thanks to its media appeal) so we can get our " fix" from time to time!

Hope springs eternal.

Ross Rowland

NHVRR runs a very pleasant and short trip through nice but not exceptional rural pine woods scenery, one day per month, 5 trips scheduled, and steam outperforms diesel by (at year old count) about 25%. I'm sure somebody there has newer figures. I'd be surprised if they weren't similar. Many callers want to know if steam is running before scheduling their visit. The train is 5 open excursion cars / caboose. Two locomotives are required to run the train, as the road engine from one trip is deadlocked behind the train when the next one takes over. So, the steam locomotive pulls every other trip and lays over taking water and being available for waiting passengers for the next train to inspect before their ride. So, there are seldom purely diesel rides from that perspective. Ridership dropped off when 17 was down for pitted flues this spring.

We do market the steam service in all our materials - even if you are pulled by diesels, you see , hear and smell working steam. This formula isn't for everybody but it works for us.

It will be interesting to see if, when we have 110 up and running, two steamers outperform diesel and steam combined. Until such time as we are filling the trains no matter what pulls it, I think steam makes a real difference and has been a driving force behind the growth of the organization since it started.

Your place isn't everybody else's place, and your situation isn't anybody else's, so we can't draw comparisons between us with a high degree of accuracy. I'd certainly disbelieve and simple, universal black and white opinion offered regardless of specifics.

dave

I believe some group piped video from a camera on the engine to the cars so you could watch the engine perform on a TV screen.

Maybe the vast majority of guests aren't motivated by what's pulling the train. I don't know because I don't believe it's well researched enough. In my experience and observation on several railways, both here and in the UK it has made a difference. I also believe it takes a group of early adopters to push something to a tipping point where people show up regardless of the reason the early adopters did.

In some ways the reality is that steam isn't the number one draw. Take the Grand Canyon or the Mt. Washington Cog. Clearly the scenery and the anticipation of the destiniation is the clear winner, but on the average small, boring, run of the mill shoreline it could make a difference. It could also make a difference on a railroad that is marketing a heritage experience rather just a ride.
I liked Alan's point about diesels and electrics too. If an experience is built around any type of motive power, and marketed successfully it could become a draw.

In any case Ross, you both state that steam is a media draw and that guests are not motivated by pulling the train. If steam draws the media, then it certainly draws people. It's our job to figure out how to get those butts into the seats. I don't really come to this from a foamer perspective, so perhaps I don't understand that mindset. Most of the folks who I have spoken to with no more than a passing interest in railroads are at least intrigued by steam locomotives. In my generation between the "makers", "the DIYers", the "back to the land" types, and people with a genuine love for history there seems to be plenty of room to educate and market to them, and only some attempts to capture that market.

Thanks also for your feedback Dave. All of the experiences mentioned are great reflections of why it would be important to have multiple perspectives in any research. We tend to get comfortable and familiar with what we have at the expense of learning what others do or do well. It is never a mistake to understand your audience better!

Take care,
Steve

Please do not discount the importance that The Thomas and Chuggington shows have had upon young railfans. My kids interest level goes up dramatically when steam is involved. I think the sight, sounds, and overall impact that steam has upon people has not diminished. I was born in 1958, way too young to be a part of everyday working steam, yet I have always been a steam fan. I did not miss many snow trains at Mid- Continent, but stopped attending when steam disappeared. We lived in South Dakota for three years and made a pilgrimage to the Black Hills Central a couple of times each year. Many post trip hours were spent winding along the old road to Keystone and unloading kids at grade crossings to wave like lunatics at the engineer and passengers. Now living in Southern Georgia, our train watching is limited to catching CSX at the grade crossing once in a while close to our house. The enthusiasm level from my kids is just not the same, and I constantly hear questions about when they can see the steam train again. The closest steam is the Cannonball Express down in Florida, and I think the engine is not operating right now. We will spend the money and make the trip to see steam, but not an old diesel, which to a child looks and sounds just the same as the local CSX units headed to Valdosta.

There's a better example to extrapolate from, and it's common enough and good enough that it would be a wiser comparison:

Various major British excursion/"heritage" lines, such as the Severn Valley, North Yorkshire Moors, Keighley & Worth Valley, Nene Valley, etc. offer:
*Regular excursions with whatever motive power;
*Steam Weekends with intensive service with either multiple steam locomotives or even "everything that can run"--including shunters at the terminals, dounleheaders, goods trains in between the passenger trains, etc.
*Heritage Diesel Weekends, where all service is handled by vintage diesels, often visiting from other lines or private owners. (Imagine a line like Strasburg or elsewhere running trains behind F units, Alco FAs, Alco switchers, a Baldwin road switcher, and a Lima-Hamilton, with a GE 70-tonner switching at one terminal and an EMD GP30 at the other. Hell, let's throw in an Amtrak P30CH for good measure!)

Now, compare the same location and three different offerings. (Yes, you may also add in a special event like Thomas, a real-ale festival, or an antique car rally for good measure.)

Hi,

I think that the issue of if steam vs diesel vs electric is affected by what region of the US you come from - this is an additional constraint.

I live in Atlanta GA. There is one northbound and one southbound passenger train daily here - and only if you live along SOU/NS from NE to west.

There is no "traditional" public transit - MARTA is a heavy rail all cars powered transit that is in about 25% of the city.

Here, it seems that diesel at Stone Mountain and Six Flags is just fine.

A neighbor who moved in from North Jersey was not interested in and tourist train that did not include a steam locomotive because he " could see diesels any day." In the NE, there is a lot of electric MU. electric loco/car and diesel/car transit service so he was correct for his experience.

There are no regularly operating steam powered trains (operating at least weekly) in GA. In Pennsylvania, there are many.

FWIW.

Doug vV

A very important part of this discussion is.... what is the nature of the particular operation in question.

There's a world of difference between a for profit, full time employees operation and an operating "museum" type operation.

Numerous real world, current, examples of the former clearly show that steam does not justify its substantial added costs and its absence is not critical to producing patronage sufficient to making the business viable. That's the essential question when you're talking about those operations that are a serious "business", which happen to use riding on a train as their product.

Museum type operations are an entirely different thing and if presenting living history is part of their mission then having working steam could/would be an important part of their product. As most of them are at least in part staffed by volunteers and bottom line profits are not critical the added costs of steam can be justified.

As to the future of "real" mainline steam ( real= no diesel(s) in the consist, at least a few open window coaches on the head end, several multiple photo run-bys at well selected locations, track speed running, several premium first class PV's, realistic mileage, not a death march) I'm afraid the prospects are very poor. IMHO the sad truth is that we need to be grateful for what little there is in this domain even though it doesn't come close to meeting my definition of "real". Sometimes kissing your sister is better than no kiss at all.

Merry Christmas to all.

Ross Rowland

GCR's scenery is all right but rather nondescript-nothing much more than a pine forest. The scenery that attracts the riders is the destination, not the ride. Grand Canyon is also sort of an oddball in that it is viewed as a conduit for the majority of the visitors to the national park. The focus for Grand Canyon National Park is to plan for visitor growth-improving visitor facilities while reducing and possibly eliminating private motor vehicles in the long term future. That is why the park service has been investigating the possibility of adding rail service from Tusayan and Grand Canyon Airport in addition to encouraging more visitors to take the train from Williams. GCR is principally a peoplemover and a very nice one at that.

Many years ago Western Railway Museum ran spring wildflower trains through an area with unique vernal pond flowers. I asked passengers how many had ever before ridden in a car with steel wheels running on steel rails. Only about 40% said yes. This was in spite of San Francisco, Sacramento, and San Jose having streetcar-light rail operation, Amtrak, and Cal Train in the vicinity. These people didn't care what was pulling the train.

So the point is that if you want to sell your ride to the public, you need something more than just a train ride to attract people. Type of motive power won't do it.

I first began working in railway preservation at a trolley museum in 1958 in an area where streetcars had operated until ten years earlier. Probably 80% of the visitors were on a nostalgia trip. They were showing their children and grand children how they went to school and traveled around the area. This market has almost entirely vanished today.

At many railway museums today a study of the potential market for visitors is sadly lacking. Members seem to prefer arguing about what color to paint a locomotive.