Steam & Excursion > An impertinent question...

For the little projected-use that the 4014 is going to get, why not have left it as a coal burner?
Double headed with 844, multiple diesels “for protection” [ from what?], to shove 4014 along with enough steam to ring the bell and blow the whistle.

So, all the work to convert to burn oil is for what purpose?

A couple of tenders’-full of N&W  Pocahontas bituminous would be the best way to go.   
It is far better for the firebox sheets to be evenly heated by a decent bed of coals.  
It is far easier to modulate a coal firebed, than it is to try to be a steam generator with a single-jet, hot spot oil burne.
The temps to needed ( while being shoved) will not even heat up the refractory bricks, because the engine will not be allowed to pull,a decent load ...

The intense heat of a single-point, hot spot burner...that is continually cycled between pilot-state and roaring-hot, blow torch flames.
This is puzzling.

Coal firebeds are “kinder” to the firebox sheets, regardless of size of the locomotive.

Im just sayin’...

Wes Camp

A couple of thoughts from someone who knows very little about steam.  No idea if the steam crew considered such.  First, the elimination of trackside fires such as those caused by 3985 when it burned coal.  Second, I would think quite a bit less pollution with oil than with coal (think southern California and pollution issues, for example).

Steve

Wes,

When 3985 was a coal burner, the servicing and logistics of delivering/handling the coal was a nightmare on long outings, especially the trip to Sacramento, CA in 1981. The wayside fires was even a bigger issue. Both the U.S. Forestry Service and a number of politicians in California flatly informed the UP that for the 1991 Tenth Anniversary Railfair, the 3985 was NOT going to be allowed if it was still a coal burner. Thus, as a coal burner, 3985 was subsequently "restricted" to the State of Wyoming.

I can not imagine the problems of operating 4014 as a coal burner, more than 37 years after the 1981 event, what with today's environmental issues.

From the millions of miles covered by all the coal burners across this land, the two major causes of loco related fires were:
Open ash pan doors, or holes in the ash pan..
Loose, missing or defective smoke box cinder screening ....

In addition, Cast iron brake shoes ( locos and cars) used to be the major cause for line side fires..

In 1969, the 759, with no helpers, ran NYC  to Kansas City, Mo. & ret, and never lit a single trackside fire..in fact, all the subsequent trips by 759, none lit trackside fires..
No engine that I was responsible for, or assisted-on , ever lit any trackside fires...

That argument about coal burners setting fires is not supported by facts. & is without merit.

The restored 4014 will not do much than chase the pigeons out of the Cheyenne roundhouse ...
But, the restoration effort is to be lauded for their efforts ..its a very good thing...
However, operating the Big Boy will be severely limited.. both by clearance limits and other operational realities.

Sorry that the 3985.set all those fires, but there are causes that could have contributed to them, and been corrected...

W.

Wes,

Sorry to disagree with you in this case, but unless you have been around, or fired, 3985 as a coal burner, you have absolutely no idea how much red hot cinder material comes out of the stacks and land on the ground. The type of coal the UP used in their steam locomotives out in the Wyoming area, produces huge quantities of red hot cinders, no matter what the condition of the netting in the Master Mechanic's front end. Not to mention the very dry landscape in the arid western states, as compared to the lush green of the Midwestern and eastern states, that seriously increases the potential fire hazards.

What was the Provo to SLC count, like 26 lineside fires started in one trip, that wasn't going to last.

Out

Simple solution: burn different coal..
Burn better coal.

How many years did the UP run coal burning engines? Over a hundred?
How come every U.P. city and town out west wasn’t burnt to the ground whenever the UP came through?

W.

I agree with the statement that it’s much more lush east of KC. (Less chance of trackside fires) Having lived in Colorado and now Arkansas the situation out west can become a tinderbox. Out west with the wind and arid conditions oh boy!! In the east a cinder would likely self extinguish whereas out west it’d be a runaway fire quickly

Posted from iPhone

My experience has been primarily with oil burners.   The logistics of coal burning would be a pain.   Get the coal to the location or pull it with the engine, load the tender and deal with the ashes.
Oil is simple.  Have the oil truck meet you when you tie up at night, top off the bunker and Bob's your uncle.
I'm sure there are going to be plenty of teething pains with the 4014 but if it gets squared away it will make life easier.  It is so dry most of the time out west, the chance of causing fires is pretty good.   There's a video of a Chinese engine running at night on Youtube and it looks like the fourth of July.
Friend of mine used to shoot steam on Sherman Hill and the drill was take your picture and pull your jacket up over your head before the cinders hit.
I'm sure the 4014 isn't going to be worked hard.  In a way, that's a shame as it should be used.

Not mentioned is that railroads used to burn their right of way when they operated steam engines.  Those fires were attended to keep them from getting out of hard and were not started on windy days either.

T&P had a contraption called appropriately, weed burner.

Back in the '80s my wife and I rode some N&W fan trips with coal fired engines in Northern Virginia. The smart riders wore goggles...

Bill Deaver
Tehachapi, CA

How come every other coal burning Big Boy and Challenger didn’t have a trackside-hazard record as bad as poor 3885 ...?
There’s a cause for such problems, —- if other members of the class never set fires as badly as this loco did...

In the steam-only past, not every 4000 and 4-6-6-4 set line side fires as badly as THIS engine...there IS a reason..
How hard would you ha e to work 4014 to get fire out the stack?
Where you gonna get that train, pulled by a single loco, in 2019?

The reality of thousands of other steamers, in the past, is less worrisome than the fears of what MIGHT happen especially since the greatest load is going to be supplying the steam needed to blow the 4014’s  whistle..

​W,
 

wcamp1472 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How come every other coal burning Big Boy and
> Challenger didn’t have a trackside-hazard record
> as bad as poor 3885 ...?
> There’s a cause for such problems, —- if other
> members of the class never set fires as badly as
> this loco did...
>
> In the steam-only past, not every 4000 and 4-6-6-4
> set line side fires as badly as THIS
> engine...there IS a reason..
> How hard would you ha e to work 4014 to get fire
> out the stack?
> Where you gonna get that train, pulled by a single
> loco, in 2019?
>
> The reality of thousands of other steamers, in the
> past, is less worrisome than the fears of what
> MIGHT happen especially since the greatest load is
> going to be supplying the steam needed to blow the
> 4014’s  whistle..
>
> ​W,
>  

My simple answer is the vegitation along the right of way wasn't as prevalent in the glory days of steam then it was when 3985 was setting fires in the 80's

Another consideration might be that the current crew has no or very little coal firing experience.  Assuming a fireman is working with a stoker, what are the differences to be aware of between coal and oil firing?

Back in the steam day, the trackside got coated with cinders, especially on grades - so vegetation didn't have a chance to grow.  And, if you look at old photos, it isn't hard to see that RRs in both the east and west took great care to clean out the trackside area, including liberal weed spraying.  And, the west didn't have the long droughts they have had since 1981 back in the steam days.  
Walk an abandoned grade, such as the path over the WM in Maryland, and you can still today see a coating of cinders, 60+ years later.

Also, there is no doubt oil is much easier to obtain and load trackside on long trips - especially out west.  Could you even find a provider of 20 tons of coal in California today?

  There were fires back then. Until 1957 ( I was 11 ) my parents farmed near a little town in northern Co.. Dad had a short piece of his place that was next to the tracks. The fires were fewer than you would think and not as intense because the right of way did get burned off occasionally. I remember the grain farms to the north of us kept a fire break tilled up next to the tracks and the hwy.. Some still do that . Drive hwy 85 and you can see that even today. 

wcamp1472 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Simple solution: burn different coal..
> Burn better coal.
>
> How many years did the UP run coal burning
> engines? Over a hundred?
> How come every U.P. city and town out west
> wasn’t burnt to the ground whenever the UP came
> through?
>
> W.

  I think a big part of the debate is reality vs perception. I believe both sides of this are correct,fire danger can be mostly elminated by employing many of the age old and proven techniques promoted by Wes. On the other hand,the western states,especially California with what occurred there this past year,and Colorado,with their own events outside Durango, might have a different perception toward coal burning locomotives. As much as we criticize,and in many cases rightly so,the political leaders we have,it is their responsibility to make decisions to protect their constituents. If their perception is that a coal burning,cinder throwing steam locomotive poses a fire danger,which in reality they do,they should,act accordingly in the best interest of their constituents. As much as one may prefer a coal burning steam locomotive,me included,the greater good is paramount.

    Tretn m 






wcamp1472 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How come every other coal burning Big Boy and
> Challenger didn’t have a trackside-hazard record
> as bad as poor 3885 ...?
> There’s a cause for such problems, —- if other
> members of the class never set fires as badly as
> this loco did...
>
> In the steam-only past, not every 4000 and 4-6-6-4
> set line side fires as badly as THIS
> engine...there IS a reason..
> How hard would you ha e to work 4014 to get fire
> out the stack?
> Where you gonna get that train, pulled by a single
> loco, in 2019?
>
> The reality of thousands of other steamers, in the
> past, is less worrisome than the fears of what
> MIGHT happen especially since the greatest load is
> going to be supplying the steam needed to blow the
> 4014’s  whistle..
>
> ​W,
>  

I like all of the burn coal it has started fires only if its mishandled, well gee that is not true and another thing its not a matter of not starting a fire just when.  There are videos to support coal fires started by 3985 I saw once on line I think. It showed the grass burning very well and if you look into the big snow slide that happened to the NP in the cascades in the book it even notes that fires started by the RR were part of the slide problem. The pictures of the slide taken afterward show that there was a fire above the tracks in that area.  I dont think that the UP wants the liablity of one either the D&S  is going to pay for theres am sure also change over to oil fired during dry times is coming.

Getting the perfect type of coal just to run it is another problem and as far as hot spots seems that was cured long ago when they did it before.  Just my take and very tired of hearing the need to burn coal for no real good reason but hey the call is still we never started a fire, the folowing needs to be added, YET.

Thanks to all for your well reasoned responses and recollections.

It’s good to get a 4000 restored and operational.

That’s the Big Story coming at us.
These spurious subjects are quaint ... especially since it’s 2019!!!

Here we are discussing steam locos..😁🏁

W.

Posted from iPhone