> Also it provides ammunition to the clean air
> fanatics. Railfans or no, these "photo
> ops" are bad all around. The railfans
> are most in need of education.

Bad all around? Isn't that a tad judgmental?

For the record, most of the folks taking these images are thoroughly conversant with the difference betwen proper and improper firing and do not need to be educated to understand it.

If the only test is accurately recreating the operational practices of the past, I would agree that profuse smoke is not proper. But the photograper's intent may not be to accurately simulate the typical operating practices of the past; instead, they may be trying to try to capture an image on emulsion which evokes a feeling or sets a mood.

You can disagree with the aesthetic choice, but hey, it's their art, and they were the legitimate, paying customers with whom the management was doing business that day.



Reno station
eledbetter@rypn.org

You guys are passing up a simple solution that will make everybody happy. Run all of our steam operations in the winter. All steam locomotives will leave a beautiful plume of exhaust on cold or rainey days. I rode behind the McCloud 19 on a 38 degree day where the crew kept the stack clean and there was more than enough steam hanging in the air to make the photographers happy. They stopped and did a photo runby with black smoke and I didn't waste a picture on it - it didn't look right for an oil burner to be smoking it up.
The only problem is the crews have to freeze their butts off getting the train ready for operation.

http://www.ncry.org
jmann@asyst.com

Back in the day, many cities employed smoke inspectors, whose main duty was to observe steam locomotives (although they also checked factories as well) for smoke. Most inspectors used a Winkelman Chart, which was a fan-shaped thing printed with shades of gray ranging from haze to totally black. They would hold up the chart and compare the emissions to it. In most cases, if heavy smoke was emitted for more than a few moments, the offending railroad or factory was cited by the city.

The Pennslvania RR actually retrofitted several coal burning steam locomotives for service in the city of Baltimore, where the inspectors were apparently extra zealous. The Western Maryland RR's passenger engines were also converted to oil firing.

An SP fireman I once knew told me that at one point steam switchers were moved to San Francisco to replace Alco diesels, since the steam locos could be fired with less smoke than the turbo-delayed 539 and 244 engines in the Alcos!

Finally, I was told by a Reading engineer that oil-soaked waste was tossed into the firebox during "Speed Picture Stops" on the Iron Horse Rambles to ensure a billowing cloud of black smoke.

K4s1361@hotmail.com

Remember that oil burners have to sand the tubes to clean the soot off to maintain good heat transfer so with an oil burner even the best fireman has a dirty stack a few times a day.

pdalleska@stuhrmuseum.org

After reading the above comments I couldn't help but reply. Only one reply above made any mention at all of the fact that some smoke is inevitable.
There are many reasons why a steam locomotive may emit smoke at times. The sign of a problem is when it is emitting smoke all the time. In the cab of the Milw. 261 is a sign dating from when the engine was new that says "Smoke is waste..."
But, the smoke the railroads were against was continuous smoke. Take a look at old pictures taken in the '30s. 40's or whenever. Many photos show engines that are working hard smoking up a storm. That smoke in the photo doesn't mean that a few seconds or moments later that same engine wasn't clean.
Smoke was made back "in the day" and it is made today too. It will always be so, as long as steam locomotives are running.
If you see a puff of black smoke eminating from a stack, you can't with any degree of accuracy start saying "There is a bad fireman in that cab." Or, "He must be having trouble."
Sometimes that smoke is just what happens, especially under a heavy load like starting after idling for a while.
Mark D.

Just to add an extra piece of food for thought,
On one of the operations I help out, the regular fireman does things that I was always taught not to do (i.e. lift the pop regularly, TRY to make smoke things like that). Not that he succeeded much because it's a light locomotive with a light train on not much of a grade. Any way he pointed out that any time the pop lifted or the smoke actually came out of the stack, you could look over the coal pile and see the cameras come out and the people smile and take pictures.
His theory:
We're in the entertainment business, not the transportation business, People have certain ideas about what they're going to see and they want to see it. (I actually have seem some people beg for smoke, and they WEREN'T railfans)

any way my theory is, it's all in what you want to show,

if your Strasburg, every thing there gives me the impression of standing in a busy small town depot along some busy branch line circa 1910.....I'd say clean stacks are the order of the day.

Cass, a logging railroad were management wasn't to worried about how much fuel was saved or lost as long as the logs came down the hill, then do as you please (as they still do today)

It's all in how you want to paint the picture.



btrue@vt.edu

Although it's almost been beat to death I'll add this given that I worked in combustion research for a few years. The smoke you see is particular matter (soot) and results from the incomplete combustion of the fuel. The more homogenous the air and fuel mixture the less particulate matter results as a by-product of combustion. Spark ignition engines have a fairly homogenous mixture of air and fuel (the air and fuel mix somewhat prior to spark) and hence emit very little soot --- diesels have a much less homogeneous mixture and emit almost an order of magnitude more of soot per lb of fuel. This is because fuel at high pressure is injected into a cylinder and there is very little time to mix before auto-ignition begins. Hence you have fuel rich areas that produce high quantities of soot. So with that in mind you can see how unpredictable combustion in a steam engine firebox would be --- the fireman would have very little control of the air and fuel mixture. It's pretty much a free-for-all in there. Okay sorry for the details, but I've gotten so much good info. on this board from others I thought I would share what little bit I know.

> Remember that oil burners have to sand the
> tubes to clean the soot off to maintain good
> heat transfer so with an oil burner even the
> best fireman has a dirty stack a few times a
> day.

I've read about sanding out the tubes in oil burners for years, but never really thought about just how that is done. How is the sand introduced? Where is it stored? How much is typically used? Is this done with coal or wood fired engines as well?

Thanks for any insights.

Todd


TKMSMullens@wmconnect.com

> I've read about sanding out the tubes in oil
> burners for years, but never really thought
> about just how that is done. How is the sand
> introduced? Where is it stored? How much is
> typically used? Is this done with coal or
> wood fired engines as well?

> Thanks for any insights.

> Todd

The sand is stored in a small box usually on the front of the tender. A scoop about the size of a gallon jug is used to move the sand from the box to the firedoor. While the engine is being worked hard a small peep hole in the firedoor is opened and the sand is sucked off the scoop and through the boiler by the draft. The abrasive action of the sand flying by cleans the soot off the flues. The amount used depends on the locomotive and how dirty the flues are but one to three scoops is typical. Sanding is repeated about every ten miles or so depending on the operating conditions. On coal and wood burners the cinders being sucked through the boiler performs the same task so sanding is unnecessary.

John


jhbohon@yahoo.com

I have some experience firing oil-burners out West and noticed that if the company buys really good fuel-oil and not the cheap stuff, the darn thing doesn't suit up very much and you don't have to sand but once a day...that is if the locomotive spends most of her day working.

Now that my original question has been beat to death, I have another one.

Last time I was at Cass (about 4 years ago), I noticed some brown smoke coming from one of the Shays. Don't recall which it was. They were doubleheading the Bald Knob trip. The brown smoke occurred when we were stopped to take on water at the spring about halfway between Old Spruce and Bald Knob. The engines were standing still and not working at all. The smoke went from dark gray to a vivid brown for a couple minutes, then went back to gray.

What would cause smoke to go brown for just a couple minutes like that? It was a really rich, vivid brown, and very thick.

mconrad@msmgmt.com

I have removed a response to this post by D. Newman; it was a personal inquiry/criticism best handled offline, and I encourage Mr. Newman to communicate with Mr. May directly.

eledbetter@rypn.org

We ran a photographer's charter special this past weekend at SVRy. It was near 20 degrees at 0530 when we restarted the fire in 19. The morning runbys were spectacular with lots of stack steam and NO smoke.

By midday, the humidity had dropped considerably and we were requested to make varying degrees of smoke from light to black. It was not desirable on the cab crew's part, and it consumed enormous amounts of water as we kept popping off. I'm sure it sooted up the flues as well. In our training program we learn NOT to generate smoke. A light wisp on one or two strokes is permissible.

Since 19's recent boiler work and rebricking of the firebox (an excellent job by our CMO Scott Hutton), I found it is possible to adjust out even that light wisp, therefore having a clear stack, and keep up steam on the uphill grade into Sumpter. 19 is a beautiful steamer!

dan

http://www.svry.com
svry@pacifier.com

Dan, I appreciated your remarks on firing and soot. I continue to wonder why some diesel trucks can start off with clean stacks and other are very dirty and sooty. I've not heard of any research indicating a link between diesel smoke and cancer or other deseases, but I can't see how that diesel smoke can be good for any living creature. I try to avoid smoky diesel trucks and either pass them as soon as possible, or pull over and let them get far ahead of me. I also recirculate the air in my vehicle when behind a smoky diesel truck (or Mercedes), although I'm sure most passenger vehicles still admit some outside air no matter how the heater controls are set.

http://www.svry.com
svry@pacifier.com

At SVRy we are currently working on the premise that if our oil burner steams well, don't sand. If she starts steaming poorly, then sand the flues. The less sand to do the job,the better. Problem is some of the sand gets between the bricks and causes the bricks to loosen, heave up and get out of position.

dan


http://www.svry.com
svry@pacifier.com