I grew up in Altoona during the transition from steam locomotives to diesels. How difficult would it have been for a steam locomotive engineer to transition to a diesel electric locomotive?
5 Likes
The braking systems would largely have been the same between steam and diesel locomotives, so a significant portion of their train handling skills would remain applicable. Applying power on a diesel is a relatively simple process, the main concern being to make sure the traction motors were not being overloaded and not slipping. I would suspect a seasoned steam loco engineer would likely make the transition relatively easily.
One new feature of diesels without a corollary on steam engines was dynamic brakes, but relatively few diesels during the transition were so equipped. Those became more prevalent in 2nd generation units.
The person whose job changed the most was the fireman. They went from a demanding, physical job to mostly being a passenger.
5 Likes
I would think the fireman role would become more appealing for certain people after the Diesels took over.
2 Likes
I think that depended on the model of diesel, its configuration, and the railroad that owned it. Twenty-plus years ago I read a fascinating article written by a former New Haven FA-1 fireman who (in a nutshell) said his job was akin to a riding mechanic and electrician and trouble-shooter for problems on the road. On railroads whoās diesels had steam boilers/generators for passenger car heating the fireman had the job of supervising that unit.
Eventually though the fireman did become a āpassengerā or at least a second set of eyes in the cab.
2 Likes
Whether they were effectively a passenger, an ersatz steam boiler tech, or losing their job entirely, the fireman was likely the one most affected. Remember as well that with M.U. of locomotives, fewer engineers were needed (fewer helpers) and thus fewer promotion opportunities for firemen.
2 Likes
When B&O nominally dieselized their feature passenger trains - in addition to the Engineer and Firemen they also had a Diesel Riderās position whose job was to make sure the locomotive(s) continued to operate to destination. Firemen were responsible for making sure the steam generator continued to generate steam. I donāt know how long the Diesel Riders were retained - I suspect until the start of WW II.
Subsequently, Firemen were taught the basic mechanics of the locomotiveās operation and the field fixes that could be applied in various situations. In as much as Fireman was the āapprenticeā position for becoming and Engineer - diesel or steam - there was a lot to be done and a lot to be learned as a Fireman in either form of motive power.
2 Likes
I remember being in the cab of some E and F units and seeing a pushbutton labeled āAttendant Callā ! Almost like having a porter on call 
Donāt know if it was a āthingā or not but it seemed like a lot of former steam āhoggersā went out and bought a white Kromer cap as soon as they got to the diesel assignments.
Old Head Crew by Bob Anderson, on Flickr
No more soot and valve oil for me!
cheers, Ed
5 Likes
What a fascinating and informative thread. When I first read the opening post, I presumed the answer was that it meant retirement for all of the engineers and firemen who ran the steam engines.
Rich
2 Likes
Railroaders are nothing if not adaptable - new things are introduced all the time, if you want to continue to get a paycheck you do what is necessary to conquer the new technology.
Railroad labor is not so top heavy as to be able to just write off a category of employee because āpartā of their job has changed. Employees get trained on what ever new aspects affect their job and its performance. However, the crafts that were required to keep steam operating were seriously pruned with the switch to diesels, no longer was it necessary to remove and replace flues and all the other āconsumableā aspects of steam engines.
2 Likes
I suspect the situation was complicated on the PRR by continuation of their relative lack of organized modern training. One of the reasons for the failure of the T1s in service was that a wide range of PRR enginemen ā at the top of their game, given the assignments ā did not appreciate how to start and run a locomotive with a modern front-end throttle.
I had a copy of one of the initial guides on running diesel locomotives provided by PRR. It contained a wealth of information for steam engineers without experience on PRR electrics.
1 Like
Taking that thought a bit further Iāve always suspected that the railroadās fairly rapid transition from steam to diesel had to have been helped by all the hundreds if not thousands of diesel mechanics and electricians trained courtesy of Uncle Sam during WW2 and now looking for jobs. It had to have had an influence, you donāt make diesel mechanics overnight.
2 Likes
The care and feeding of diesel electric locomotives are less labor intense than steam by several orders of magnitude. From cold it would take a number of hours before a steam locomotive could operate - and the cold could cause serious problems in dealing with the water required to make steam. When in terminals there were the needs to remove ashes from the firebox and also to maintain some level of a fire while the engine was waiting its next assignment.
I donāt know when required diesel-electric inspections and maintenance were governmentally required - at present locomotives are required to get a Quarterly Inspection every 92 days, which is a intensive inspection of all the facets of safe locomotive operation. It is the Operating Departments ideal, that locomotives only hit the shops every 92 day - with only ārunning repairsā (brakes shoes and adjustment, fuel and sand) being required during its 92 days in revenue service.
Steam, for the most part, ran from crew change point to crew change point and then required several hours of servicing before being used back to its origin crew change point. Diesels, however, were put on a train at origin and operated through multiple crew changes to destination with getting the running repairs previously mentioned as the only service along the way.
I donāt know how much of the post War hiring was done with Veterans that had serious diesel experience.
1 Like
The reports of the Butte, Anaconda & Pacific electrification said that the steam locomotive engineers quickly learned how to operate electric locomotives. From what I understand about the job of being a locomotive engineer is that knowing how to manipulate controls is only part of the job, with the major part knowing the rules, the territory and how a train responds in the territory.
1 Like
My one opportunity to run a loco was a little GM SW-600 on the Wisconsin Great Northern up in Trego WI. The guy training me explained the controls - brakes, throttle, reverser for direction change, lights, bell, horn. He pointed out that a steam engine would have pretty much the same set-up; all the other dials and controls and such in a steam cab was related to things relating to the fire, water, and steam. So if anything, running a diesel would have been much simpler for a seasoned steam engineer.
1 Like
Ingrained procedures can be difficult to break. In theory railroads would have been better off hiring and training new crews (or hiring motormen) but that was a real world impossibility, so some number of unwinding traction motors, accidents, etc. occurred.
1 Like
With the expenses required to keep steam operative, the railroads considered traction motor overspeeds and burnouts a relatively minor expense in comparison to what it took to replace the failed diesel with steam.
For simple operation of diesels during the change over period - the only things as qualified steam engineer would need to be trained on was the location and operation of the diesel throttle mechanism and reverser as opposed to the throttle and reverse mechanism that existed on steam. The actions of the air brake valves would be similar if not identical. On both types of locomotives after a air brake application is made to the train, the brakes on the locomotive would be ābailedā off so as to not overheat the locomotive wheels (with steam - overheating the drive wheels ācouldā cause the tires to expand and come off the drive wheels). The basics of locomotives are remarkably similar between steam and diesel - the fine points of each develop over the time that engineers operate each form of motive power.
For continued diesel operation during the change over period there would be continued training of engineers (and firemen) on more and more fine points in the care and feeding and diagnosis of operating issues. Even today, in the 21st Century there is continued training of engineers to further enhance their abilities to operate their motive power.
2 Likes
I would add handling dynamic brakes as one more thing a steam hoghead would need to learn for operating diesel locomotives. This was another major improvement with diesel locomotives over steam in both reducing maintenance expenses and improving safety.
1 Like
Many carriers did not believe Dynamic Braking was worth the cost of the āoptionā and did not order it for the diesels they bought.
1 Like
I think the idea of hiring new, clueless people is BS. Transitioning from steam to diesel, or electric, would be a lot easier than transitioning to steam.
To efficiently operate steam power, the engineer also had to handle the reverse gear, regulating how much steam is admitted into the cylinders. Starting out or when going slow under heavy load, the lever would be ādown in the cornerā admitting the most steam. As speed picked up, the lever would be brought back towards center, letting the expansion of steam do more of the work.
The closest thing diesels had was having to make transition of the electrical equipment, and that was soon made automatic on most diesels.
Jeff
3 Likes
AND the location and operation of the Deadmanās Pedal!
1 Like