I am interested to know the training programs that are used today for training fireman on differenttourist railroads and museums. I am interested in both classroom and hands on training. I would also be interested in what areas people are interested in developing to add to their programs. Thank you for your time and thoughts.

Robby

Robby;

The province of Ontario now has provincial government certification for "steam
traction operators".

When we have one of our boilers in steam, one of us certified people must be around
at all times. One certificate is good for locomotives, traction engines, etc. This
came about because of the Case boiler failure in Ohio a few years ago.

http://www.tssa.org is the website of the organization. They do all kinds of safety
things, like amusement rides, elevators, oil tanks in homes, etc. etc.

Most sites actively take volunteers and will train them. You may have to work on
other things before being allowed to fire; but, learning the ropes before being put
in charge is not a bad thing. Go to a local steam railway, and ask the crew.

John Stewart
Ottawa, Canada.

Dear Mr. Stewart,

I appreciate your thoughts. Perhaps I need to explain why I asked the question. You should know that I spent about eight years with Grand Canyon Railway As a hostler helper, road fireman, and road engineer. I am now working for the Nevada Northern Railway Museum in Ely. Including my experince with SP 3420 in El Paso Texas, I have seen a lot of different ways to train crews As this is probably one of the significant ways to control cost I am interested in what other people do to train their crews. As I can not visit all of the operations I hope we can start a discussion here on this important issue.

Robby

I only have had experience with the M&H steam program, but I think it was a good one. Excellent, in fact. I got alot out of it. A fairly detailed description follows:

Shop work was a big part of the training. The first class of firemen were very involved in the 91's restoration. The restoration process was regarded as an excellent way to teach theory and mechanics of how a steam locomotive operates. So we would frequently stop the work for a half hour or so while our head steam man would show us how things went together and how they were supposed to work. Plus it had the additional value of impressing upon potential crew members how much labor and sweat goes into maintenance and repair, so everyone was more likely to take care of her. I think some inexperienced people (like me) were even a little skittish about hurting her when she first ran, kind of like new parents with their first-borns.

The M&H steam program philosophy also held that the steam crew should be good railroaders in general. So, although not necessarily required, prospective crew members were always encourgaged to go through the trainman program and qualify as brakemen and conductors, thereby developing a general knowledge of railroading, a comfort level with working on the railroad, and most importantly, a respect for safety and so-forth. Time constraints prevented some from doing that, but it was always looked upon favorably.

Because the M&H is not an insular railroad, they are subject to FRA rules. So firemen, at minimum, had to complete a certain amount of class training and pass an examination on safety, operating rules, and so on. They were also subject to drug tests and all of that kind of stuff.

Classroom training on steam locomotive mechanics was also part of the program. At the conclusion of classes, a examination was given. I don't know that there was ever a specific pass/fail point on the exam, but everyone by this time had enough drilled into their heads that I don't believe it ever was an issue. The examination was also a useful diagnostic tool. With it, you could spot areas that someone might need more instruction.

By this time in the training, it could be safely assumed that a fireman trainee was familiar with how a steam locomotive works. He could be expected to know things like what an eccentric strap is, where it is, what it does, and what lubricant to use on it. Then student firing could begin in earnest. The theory was in place, and it was time for hands-on.

A student fireman was typically paired with a more experienced student or qualified fireman, or two new fireman trainees would work under the close supervision of an engineer or experienced fireman. They would begin by just focussing on adding water to the boiler or shoveling. As they became more comfortable with the routine, they would start doing both, and hopefully learning how both functions work together. They would also learn the lubrication routines and get hands-on experience doing same. They would learn how to get the fire and locomotive in general ready in the morning and how to put the loco to bed at night. They would learn the inspection routines, too.

Eventually, the head of the steam program would see that a student fireman knew the job pretty well, was able to work with minimal supervision, and perhaps most importantly, had developed a certain level of confidence and comfort with firing. The head of the steam program would then ask the student fireman to solo for the day, doing nearly all of the jobs that a fireman could be expected to do. If the student performed satisfactorily and with confidence, he could expect to be qualified.

Steam engineers had to be qualified diesel engineers on the M&H, and I'll not go through all of that now. Then they had to qualify as steam firemen, although the first few engineers to go through I think may have been allowed to concurrently qualify as firemen and engineers. This was due to a need to get a few people up to speed quickly.

There was no real timeline that I could point to. Different people went through at different rates, depending on their abilities, availability, and drive. I think though, that it is key to point out that steam firemen, and really any operating position on the M&H, had to know their jobs before they were qualified. The philosophy was that once you were qualified in an operating position, that didn't mean you knew everything, but you did know enough to do your job without having to be constatly watched and without having to ask questions about how to do something every five minutes.

I hope that helps. It was a windy discertation, but I am actually quite proud of our program, and I feel priviledged to have been able to go through it. And I feel like I accomplished something by going through it successfully, and by helping others to do the same.

*

In 1947, Reading Company published a book, Firing the Steam Locomotive, that was a training manual for firemen. It ran 120 pages, 8 1/2 in x 5 1/2 in. The first 8 pages discussed Safety.

In 1947, R. Co. had 30 new T-1 4-8-4's, 10 rebuilt Pacifics and had authorised 10 new 4-6-2's for 1948.

To All,

I appreciate your thoughts on crew training. Trying to see what works fwill hopefully improve my understanding of the different ways to train crews.

Robby