.

Mr Anderson wrote "After grinding out the weld on this flange, the mirror shows how little of the sheet's thickness was included in the supposedly "full penetration" weld."

So it is no different than a fillet weld for stay bolts that many championed on this board.

Robby Peartree

Very different.

If you look at how the material takes the load then you realize they are very simular.

Robby Peartree

While I myself fall under the younger and new generation..

I think we have a major accident looming, and its only a matter of when or where. And this is not necessarily just steam related. Seeing how certain organizations and volunteers operate on or around equipment, it is downright amazing that somebody has not been killed yet.

Back to the steam aspect.. I have been to a number of steam shows in the Midwest, and I must say, being around some of these traction engines just scares the hell out of me. I have seen so much backyard and forum engineering these days, I am surprised one of those has not gone off..again.

That's certainly reasonable.

However, I have another idea, which likely won't be pursued. What about doing a high res 3D scan of the firebox, and then presenting that online in VR. Maybe even have one showing the firebox shape before the failure and then after.

No, I'm not suggesting they'll find any big secrets missed during the investigation. But it might serve an educational purpose? Or maybe "Don't expose the damn crown sheet!" is really the only story here.

Could be a cool use of technology though.

If used properly and actually done, yes. Myself, I always thought that making new trainees (and old ones too) look at every page of Robert Reed's photographic book "Train Wrecks". If you don't follow the rules or procedures, that could be you.

Based on some of the findings of the FRA from years of accident reports, I would say that the problems that are being mentioned are possibly widespread. The FRA found that the majority of the incidents that were reported to them usually involved persons with a reasonable amount of experience with railroading. The phrase "familiarity breeds contempt" comes to mind. It behooves all of us to remember that when we set foot on railroad property, we are entering an atmosphere where danger is ever present and that is unforgiving of mistakes/inattention.

A good day on the railroad is any day that no one got hurt, nothing got broken and the job got done.

If that's someone's takeaway from the Gettysburg incident, they're missing 90% of the lesson, and I know people who are mistaken in thinking "Yeah, Gettysburg, don't expose the crown like those idiots" or worse "What's Gettysburg?".

You teach a monkey to run an injector when the water shows low in the glass. What separates competent steam people from that monkey is not just keeping water in the glass, but understanding why and how to do that, and knowing the sytems and physics that keep a boiler safe and allows them to run an injector. In turn that understanding helps when things aren't working correctly, and allows a person to troubleshootand and make the decsions neccessary to solve an issue that arrises in a safe manner. That may mean canceling trains and shutting the engine down, which nobody want to do.

Gettysburg wasn't a simple case of the "The crown was exposed" it was a multitude of misteps and misunderstandings of the technology at hand that added up. Half the issues came from shop personnel not knowing "you have to clean sight glass passages" or being ignorant of many maintenance procedures in general. Just to run the checklist quickly: Poor maintenance, ignorance of the hows and why's of said maintenance, poor crew training, ignorance from the crew on the technology in general, fatigue, and possible communication shortcomings. How many of these can your operation check off? Does it depend on who's in the cab?

It is time to renew a steam culture that's based on core knowledge and understanding of the technology and it's psychics, not just in boilers and injectors, but in every facet, system, and appliance on the locomotive. All too many fireman training programs out there focus on "Put a scoop of coal there, don't have holes in the fire, keep the pressure up, keep water in the glass- and blow it down every morning." Ultimately with people just out to "get enough days to qualify" (Note the absence of a basic steam school or written test).

If the person in the left hand seat doesn't have a strong comprehension of the whole picture of the Gettysburg incident, I'll be backing away a long long distance. And the rest of the crew could be outstanding steam men, but that one bad apple was all I can see to this day. One quote from a newly qualified fireman in one well reputed outfit will always stand with me "I know to keep water in the glass and on the crown, but what *is* the crown sheet?" (I wish he had been joking)

Note the FRA has strict regulations on locomotive maintenance (Pt. 230), but there is really nothing on standards for who sits in the left seat. It's time to shape up the industry's act and make sure everyone on a steam crew (volunteer or whatever) are competent and professional when they step up in the cab, before the next accident/mishap, or the FRA will be sure to shape us up with more regulations, or an end to what we do completely.

Your group may be the prime example to uphold, but all it takes is one less than ideal steam operation, or even one incompetent person in an operation, to end it all.

Understanding and comprehension of the sytems, how they work, and why, are starting to be lost upon new steam crews, regardless of age. I feel the writing is on the wall, and many of us ought to step up our training and qualification programs, or else...

I know this is largely a rehash of what has been said already, but the importance of this incident and the implications it has on us and how we teach new steam people today cannot be understated. This stuff really isn't rocket science, unless you choose to delve that deep.

The point is, a Gettysburg or worse can happen to you, or anyone else, if careful training and proper maintenance isn't the standard and isn't properly taught to the next generation. That is why it's relevant today. Read the report, then reflect and learn.

-Sam

I have a problem relying on psychics preventing boiler explosions..... perhaps they cold predict them though.

OJT is only as good as the J and the trainer permit. Many people with a lot of education and experience aren't great teachers. Many operations don't provide the breadth and depth of different conditions to allow for the context leading to specific teachable moments, until something unusual happens leaving a lot of people looking around at each other with WTF? expressions, unsure of what to do next.

Is it possible to create some sort of standardized training that isn't so standardized it can't be applied widely?

Is this a piece of wire sticking through, as in this seam was wire welded i.e. MIG? I was under the impression that MIG was not approved for pressure vessel welding. Am I mistaken? If not, then there are bigger problems than poor fit-up. And, yes, I am aware that sub-arc is approved however it isn't the same as MIG.

It was done a hundred or more years ago.

It was called the International Correspondence School textbooks. (And there were competing companies, but ICS was the Amazon of its field in the era.)

There are many of us that collected these things for appropriate subjects--or pulled them from the dumpsters years later. I maintained an entire separate shelf at the Md. Rail Heritage Library for them, and occasionally some shop guys would be doing research in them. The basics haven't changed.

But that was then. This is now, where people expect to watch interactive lessons on a smartphone, or learn (successfully, mind you!) how to repair a car transmission or engine from a YouTube video.

An enterprising party (HRA? A video producer?) could make a series of video lessons encapsulating the basics of steam loco operation, with interactive quizzes at the end.

And there has to be some adaptability. I remember attending fireman classes for one operation years ago where the teacher droned on for three classes about the basics of keeping the coal fire properly even, "little and often," not letting piles build up, and all I could think was "Why is this guy beating coal firing into my head when the only coal burner they have is going down for overhaul and the other two steamers are oil burners?" Oil and coal burners are almost as different as sports cars versus SUVs in temperament. (And last I knew there was still at least one wood-burning operation....)

I'm no expert on this subject, but this course in locomotive firing put out in 1944 by the Education Department of the State of New York appears to be pretty comprehensive. (Of course, it doesn't cover oil firing.)
https://www.railarchive.net/firing/index.html

ICS was a big player in the correspondence course market and the larger railroads often offered courses of instruction to employees who were looking to advance their careers. The courses were often open to relatives of employees, particularly those of railroaders who had been killed on the job. The possibility of advancement was a major incentive.

As for steam preservation, we might find a good model for regulation of the companies that offer commercial locomotive restoration or maintenance services by following the example of the aviation industry. Aircraft maintenance is highly regulated, but the basic framework could work for railroads. Before a mechanic turns a wrench on an airplane, he or she must attend approved courses at an FAA licensed trade school and pass a licensing regiment to obtain an A & P license. That's only basic training. Repair Stations must be licensed by the FAA and prove that they operate under the standards set by the FAA and other industry governing agencies. Something like this for railroads would not be any issue for the professionally run shops and would serve to force more questionable shops out of the business.

We cannot afford to have another Gettysburg or a Galloping Ghost-aviation's equivalent to Gettysburg. Both incidents involved experienced people who should have known better not properly maintaining their equipment and ignoring best practices. Ten people lost their lives because the mechanics did not replace a worn lock nut that would have cost less than ten cents to replace. Gettysburg happened because an improperly maintained locomotive was permitted to be put in service.

In 1947, Reading Company published an instruction book "Firing the Steam Locomotive" for prospective firemen. Featured, of course, were the new T-1 4-8-4's.

They sold original copies on the Iron Horse Rambles, and there are also reprints in circulation.

https://www.fireup2100.org/product/firi ... ocomotive/

Phil Mulligan

When I worked in the shipyards in Seattle, we used dual shield welding for just about everything. Our machines were running some serious amperage (up to 450 amps) with 1/16th inch wire running through the gun. You could weld 1" plate on a single pass and go through a spool of wire in a hour. Your traditional MIG runs .035, .040, .045 wire with most welders topping out at 120 AMPS. That is good for 1/4"-1/2". Many shops use this along with many contractors.

I have never heard of any restrictions on Mig welding including boilers. We did not use stick welding except on rare occasions. On one shift I did need to do a lot of fill and dusted off some rods. Using 1/4 inch rods, at 400 amps, lit up the shop like the flash from a atomic bomb. Radiation and light was so bad I had to wear dark cutting googles under my welding hood. So stick welding is hardly ideal for anything over 1" and will take a long time.

There is no question in my mind that Mig should be used when ever possible. Mig certainly has issues and the far majority of welders are going to fall into the 120 amp and below category running usually .035 or .040 wire. This wire and amperage is problematic when running uphill welds and most welders can not do it. So must welders run downhill instead which gives a good looking weld but very poor penetration. No way I would do downhill welds on anything important. But you can run very good welds going uphill with stick welding.

So in a nutshell if you are going to Mig something thick like a boiler you better be bringing out the big guns and demonstrate that you can weld uphill and overhead before the project starts. I find stick welding a bit more predictable when doing harder work such as overhead welding but it takes much longer.