Gruesome photos of the 1971 scrapping of a Mikado, appropriately named as it is a D52 class of the Japanese National Railway.

http://www001.upp.so-net.ne.jp/noz/d52_ ... 2-idx.html

I must be getting older. 1971 seems like yesterday. Hard to
imagine that it had nothing but scrap value. Those box
cabs in the background are nearly as interesting!

Hard to believe that steam loomotive technology could be universally regarded as entriely antiquated. There sems to be no place where the steam locomotive is valued as anything but junk or a curiousity, these days.

My father told me of a oppertunity he had to run one of these 2-8-2's while wearing his Navy issued summer white dress uniform. He was amazed by the immaculate cabs and the firemans skill due the fact that not once did he and the crew (also dressed in white) get soiled or soot encrusted.

[quote="Richard Glueck"] There sems to be no place where the steam locomotive is valued as anything but junk or a curiousity, these days.[/quote]

For your enlightenment visit:

http://www.whitepassrailroad.com/

I checked out the site, but other that operations as a tourist line, what are you focusing upon? Lots of tourist roads are steam active. My point was that nowhere in the world is the steam locomotive prized as a stable form of reliable transportation. They are phased out as soon as something with internal combustion becomes available. It seems strange that on the eve of building really efficient, capable steam locomotives in the late 40's-early 50's, the technology stopped -period. I'm particularly surprised that China has not chosen to press steam technology to it's limits. The standard locomotive design is the one being phased out as antique.

I checked out the site, but other that operations as a tourist line, what are you focusing upon? Lots of tourist roads are steam active. My point was that nowhere in the world is the steam locomotive prized as a stable form of reliable transportation. They are phased out as soon as something with internal combustion becomes available. It seems strange that on the eve of building really efficient, capable steam locomotives in the late 40's-early 50's, the technology stopped -period. I'm particularly surprised that China has not chosen to press steam technology to it's limits. The standard locomotive design is the one being phased out as antique.

The WP&Y does not value the steam locomotive as "junk or a curiousity" as you stated. That was the focus of the response.

Another steam lok is presently being restored and will operate this summer to extend service to Carcross Yukon. The WP&Y bought two new steam loks in 1947 and would have purchased two more in 1952 if Baldwin would have built them. It was Baldwin's inability to meet their steam lok needs that forced them into the diesel era.

Perhaps Richard's point, Mike, is that when the WP&Y could have bought modern steam from a European supplier, they bought EuroDiesels instead. SLM / Sulzer can build new highly clean and efficient steam for WP&Y today. If old locomotives are more desired, many restorable American built 3 foot gage examples are now available from Cuban lines through a legal Spanish agent. The motive power philosophy of any railroad 50 years ago doesn't seem to be the subject of Richards posting, rather, the economic and technological choices they are making today, even in countries where coal is abundant and labor costs are inconsequential. Or did I misunderstand him?

dave

[quote="Dave"]when the WP&Y could have bought modern steam from a European supplier, they bought EuroDiesels instead.
dave[/quote]

EuroDiesels? Please tell us more.
I was referring to the White Pass & Yukon, were you?

You understood me perfectly. The technology to build a really functional, clean, competitive steam locomotive has never been embraced, and it's a little difficult to understand why not.

I understand Mike's view too. Those railroads which have steam are using it to attract tourists, rather than as a hauler of commodities. People love steam locomotives for their character and role in history.
What we have, we try to cherish (in most cases).

" The technology to build a really functional, clean, competitive steam locomotive has never been embraced, and it's a little difficult to understand why not."

Following WW2 the huge oil refining capacity which was built to win the war had to be put to some use or very rich men would stop getting richer. Thus we had the development of the 'throw-away' private automobile and the spread of the diesel locomotive. Diesels were easier on the crews and once adopted, there was no turning back.

This may change, however, as oil becomes more scarce and expensive in the future.

Odd that Baldwin would not build steam for WP&Y in 1952 when they built steam for the G&Q in Ecuador in 1953.

Also, most of the NG steam in Cuba is 30", not 3 foot.

Perhaps one could build a steam engine that is cleaner, more powerful and more fuel efficient than a diesel locomotive, but it would almost undoubtedly be more costly to operate. Anyone that has ever worked on a steam locomotive will agree with me that they are the most cantankerous, frustrating and all around annoying pieces of machinery on the planet. The railroads simply could not afford the downtime, maintenance costs, and extra crew costs of operating steam, even if the per mile fuel costs were lower.

Now, I love steam locomotives, but the fact is that diesels are the chosen solution to all the problems that steam represents, and as a result, it has never been necessary, nor cost effective to develop a "super" steam locomotive that "might" eventually be more efficient than diesels.

Steam power does have a future in populated 3rd world countries where labour is plentiful and cheap and where the cost of expensive imported diesel locomotive parts and fuel is more than the cost of a simple machine shop to keep the steamers running.