Steam & Excursion > ATSF 2926

It is incredibly exciting and heartwarming to see this grand engine, worked on for so many years by a dedicated crew, come to life recently.  I don't know what their future plans are, but I hope they can obtain access to some mainline running, either in NM, or throughout the BNSF system.  What an amazing P.R. engine that would be for BNSF, along with ATSF 3751.  Double-headed Northern-class engines--imagine that?  That would bring huge crowds to the RR--it could really be used to express new messages to the public about the history and importance of rail transportation for our nation.

I'm sending them a donation today to help them continue with their amazing work.  I wish them the very best.  If they can re-located to the old roundhouse with turntable in Albequerque, then that would be fantastic.  They could use such a place to help them keep doing their good work.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/21/23 18:45 by coach.

I agree.  
I wish I could support more of these groups.  While I live 1,000 miles from New Mexico, and am not involved in any way, I have been a dues-paying member of the 2926 group for several years.  That way I make at least a modest contribution every year and get to hear about their progress. In addition to their fine restoration work, the 2926 group has done a fine job of communicating their successes and challenges. When a group communicates well, and you can see what is being accomplished, it reinforces that the group is worth our support.  I am looking forward to seeing what they do in the future and I hope to visit the Albuquerque area some day to see the 2926 in person.

And remember this type of work takes Volunteers to do the heavy lifting and with out them they get not traction.  Most Museums need good techies to get the word out on the web with great content. 

I visited 2926 about a week before she ran on her own steam the first time (July 2021).  My visit brought back many memories I had of seeing these big locomtives hauling both passenger and freight trains across Kansas.  A lot of those volunteers have been at it for over 20 years and many of them were retired Santa Fe employees.  I hope they are able to attract and train enough new volunteers (maybe 2 or 3 genrations younger) to keep the old girl in good shape and active..  I've been a member for years and have donated several times even though I'm 1500 miles east of Albuquerque.  I'm optimistic that they will get a permanent home at the roundhouse and get started operating on the Raton-Belen line.  Hopefully they will be able to operate on BNSF if they can get a stable income of some sort.  I wish them the best.

The only company's that come-out "ahead" in terms of
cash-profits, are the insurance companies.

They charge $$millions in premiums, for just one trip,
and after the trip, they keep the cash!
Such a Deal.

Want another trip? 
Put up the additional millions to pay the premium..( i.e.: "cost" of the insurance).

So, that's why there are very few mainline trips any more.
Its just too costly, there's no way to cover all the expenses, 
if it costs millions for insurance !!

Over the past 60 years, I don't know of a single passenger that
was killed as a result of riding any excursion.  

So, "risk probability" is the basis for pricing insurance products.  
Excursions have no known record of folks killed,
so insurance companies presume their 'risk-probability' as very high !!

So, they feel justified in charging high premiums, 
because they reason that their risk is extreme & sky-high ...
rather than the fact that the record of statistics is ZERO 
deaths of excursion passengers, as a result of buying a ticket 
and riding.

The millions in premiums also includes very high commissions 
to the agents that write the policy..
He's gonna get 10%, anyway.

W.


 

Wes, you've been corrected on this already. Can you name one insurance provider working with the steam industry? Can you name a broker?

Steam operators aren't spending "millions" on their premiums. This is just nonsense. I think you're conflating the total umbrella protection afforded by annual policies with insurance companies and the annual payments for those policies, which are not the same thing.

While most carry general liability, physical damage, and railroad liability (or protective, in some cases), the minimum coverage may vary between two and ten million (or whatever minimum protection a host railroad requires). The operators are paying a percentage of the total coverage, not the millions themselves. For instance and entirely as an example, if a host railroad requires you to have two million, you pay $20,000 for the entire year for the pleasure and can amortize that cost over dozens of operating days.

The issue then isn't the percentage of the premium that operators pay, it's the minimum requirement of the host railroad and whether that is compatible with the business plan and revenue-generating abilities of the operator. This is what made Amtrak's umbrella coverage so useful once upon a time. Your beef isn't with the insurance companies, who genuinely want these organizations to be successful otherwise they have a smaller client base, it's with potentially onerous requirements set forth by third parties.

Thank you for the clarification.
I stand 'corrected'...

Wes Camp

wcamp1472 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Over the past 60 years, I don't know of a single
> passenger that
> was killed as a result of riding any excursion.

> Excursions have no known record of folks killed,
> so insurance companies presume their
> 'risk-probability' as very high !!

I have to call you out on that. 

What a stupid ignorant thing to say. Insurance policies are not there to solely cover the death of a "passenger" or in any way based solely upon the death of a passenger. 

You want someone to blame for the high cost of insurance policies? Blame John Q Public for not obeying the crossing protection. Blame the lawyers that come out of  the wood work upon any railroad related accident. Blame the justice system for allowing frivolous law suites. Etc, so forth and so on.

Are the insurance companies taking advantage of a sue happy environment, absolutely. But that does not mean you can make up your own story either.

It is an undeniable fact that an excursion train is going to bring out all the crazies. That adds greatly to the overall risk and cost of insurance.

LongliveSP:

Mr. Camp has been here answering questions and giving his opinions just like everyone else on this forum, He also has a resume in the industry. He stood up and said, “ I stand corrected” Who the hell are you? The end of the world?

I don’t know Mr. Camp nor have I ever met him, but I enjoy the information he freely provides in a congenial manner. You would do well to try to be more like him.

Regards

Posted from iPhone

longliveSP you seem to make so much of your comments personal, there's no need for that here, Wes doesn't
and should expect the same in return, it's called respect. I have the utmost repect for Wes, I don't have as much
steam experience as he and his is mainline and mine is out of a lean-to in the forest but we share a similar love
for the machinery. Low spark baby, light up or leave us alone!

Out 

Re: Nathansixchime...

I appreciate the more logical explanation as to insurance 
practices.

Nathansixchime is right: that I should stick to facts more,
and keep my prejudices to myself.  My article about 
insurance practices should have been more explicit 
in making it clear that I was expressing my prejudices and
opinions & speculations,  not from from any actual experiences I have 
had in dealing with RR carriers and their obligations to their company
and stock holders for proper management of maintaining profitable 
businesses.

Insurance and it's part in overall business expenses is not an area 
that I have any personal experience ---- either in daily operations, or
in negotiating the many aspects of securing operating conditions
that allows running steam-powered excursions over privately
owned railroads' rights of way.

I appreciate nathansichime's much more rational explanation,
compared to my 'rant'.  He countered my prejudices with FACTS....

His taking the time to set the record straight is greatly appreciated.
I will confine my future contributions to areas of railroading that I have
firsthand knowledge, experiences and familiarity with.

Again, thank you, ....6chime, for your clear response.  It brought 
a higher level of understanding to the many folks that read this area of 
TrainOrders.  

My spouting-off about my opinions was out of place in this discussion
and did not add to folks' better understanding of the facts.

Thanks,
 
Wes Camp



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/25/23 01:52 by wcamp1472.

Drknow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LongliveSP:
>
> Mr. Camp has been here answering questions and
> giving his opinions just like everyone else on
> this forum, He also has a resume in the industry.

Yes absolutely he posts tons and tons and tons of great information. 

But that is why my response was quoted and for a specific thing he said. THAT sadly takes away from all the good things he posts.

Which, BTW, he has now sort of recanted although has not edited and removed the offending part.

> I don’t know Mr. Camp nor have I ever met him,
> but I enjoy the information he freely provides in
> a congenial manner.

I agree.

> You would do well to try to be
> more like him.

I always try to better myself. But when a well known professional and expert says something contrary and wrong, are you suggesting that not be corrected?