Many a railfan claim that diesel locomotive lifeless and sterile machines but I disagree whole heartily with that statement. Sure diesels don’t have those convoluted moving part but they do have beautiful air horns, the wide variety of “noses”, the cab which gives it the appearance of a face, the sound of radiator noise, the diesel engine starting up like a beast waking up, diesel exhaust, or the most memorable part the roar of a diesel engine from miles away. Just my take on it.
Of course a Diesel has all of those attributes, otherwise people would have given up on railfanning a long time ago.
Part of the allure of steam is nostalgia, which can take many forms. On a trip on Delta, I told me wife that I we were about to board a “steam locomotive”, i.e. one of the last DC-9 Series 50’s left. I got this look and a remark, “Why didn’t you book us on a modern airliner instead of a relic?” when it appeared that we weren’t on a Series 50 but on a somewhat newer MD-88 – longer fuselage, the somewhat larger re-fanned JT-8D’s, strakes on both the nose in front and nacelles in the rear, that redesigned tail cone, oh, and not that completely threadbare carpeting inside and plastic cabin interior with less grime.
Part of the charm of steam is the pistons, rods, and valve gear, not to mention whisps of steam from the turbogenerator, the open valve drains. The other part is the sounds – the hiss of the blower, the creaking of the firebox sheets, the clank of the fireman’s shovel, the gurgling of the boiler, the chuff of the stack. The steam locomotive seems like a living creature, much more so than a Diesel ever could.
Yes, steam locomotives. Like at EAA in Oshkosh where they brought a Lockheed Super Constellation Turbo Compound up to the flight line, started each of four big radial engine with a big “chug-chug-chug”, with first flames and then big puffs of smoke coming out the exhaust pipes, with a ground crew standing by with those giant fire extinguishers, and then the roar as each engine “caught” and started up. Yes, steam locomotives – the last of the great prop-liners and the end of mainline steam were roughly in the same time frame, and at EAA we could have been watching a restored Pennsy T1 for all that mattered, and I also heard that the Turbo Compound engines were “a bridge too far” in extracting performance out of a piston (actually a piston-exhaust turbine compound) aircraft engine and were maintenance n
Paul quite right about the turbo compound. much of the problem was lack of cooling thru the engine shroud. The shroud on the DC-7s were worse than Connies ( L-1049 & L-1649-G & H ) and that really had the DC- 7 engines failing. That is why DC-6 aircraft lasted longer than DC-7s. It was all about cooling the turbos and appears that engineer designers have never learned their lessons from predecessors even on autos and locos as well/.
[quote user=“Paul Milenkovic”]
Of course a Diesel has all of those attributes, otherwise people would have given up on railfanning a long time ago.
Part of the allure of steam is nostalgia, which can take many forms. On a trip on Delta, I told me wife that I we were about to board a “steam locomotive”, i.e. one of the last DC-9 Series 50’s left. I got this look and a remark, “Why didn’t you book us on a modern airliner instead of a relic?” when it appeared that we weren’t on a Series 50 but on a somewhat newer MD-88 – longer fuselage, the somewhat larger re-fanned JT-8D’s, strakes on both the nose in front and nacelles in the rear, that redesigned tail cone, oh, and not that completely threadbare carpeting inside and plastic cabin interior with less grime.
Part of the charm of steam is the pistons, rods, and valve gear, not to mention whisps of steam from the turbogenerator, the open valve drains. The other part is the sounds – the hiss of the blower, the creaking of the firebox sheets, the clank of the fireman’s shovel, the gurgling of the boiler, the chuff of the stack. The steam locomotive seems like a living creature, much more so than a Diesel ever could.
Yes, steam locomotives. Like at EAA in Oshkosh where they brought a Lockheed Super Constellation Turbo Compound up to the flight line, started each of four big radial engine with a big “chug-chug-chug”, with first flames and then big puffs of smoke coming out the exhaust pipes, with a ground crew standing by with those giant fire extinguishers, and then the roar as each engine “caught” and started up. Yes, steam locomotives – the last of the great prop-liners and the end of mainline steam were roughly in the same time frame, and at EAA we could have been watching a restored Pennsy T1 for all that mattered, and I also heard that the Turbo Compound engines were “a bridge too far” in extracting performance out of a piston (actually a piston-exhaust turbine compound)
I always felt like the old Alcos had more personality and soul then the EMDs ever did. As a former Union pacific Conductor I can tell you every locomotive had its own personality. I especially liked having the old SP and D&RGW units on my train as they often spewed thick black or white smoke giving us some entertainment during our trips. It was usually a 50/50 chance they would get to where they were going still running.
I remember those old C30-7’s used to frequently blow fire out their stacks. They had a wonderful sound as well.
One thing I will say is that the Diesel locomotive isn’t a memory, a note in the annals of history, not the even the machine that was or could be, but it is all of those things and it is the machine that is, the machine that does, and the machine that continues to be. So if the steam locomotive is human then the Diesel locomotive is divine…
Steam locomotives were alive! Just about everyone in town knew if they were struggling, loafing, stuck, etc. Young whippersnappers today don’t know the emotional involvement that we old-timers remember of lying in bed listening to a locomotive struggling to start a heavy load, drivers slipping, taking up the slack, trying again. Then, when he’s finally out of the yard and on the main, he gradually picks up speed as the sound fades into the distance, blowing for the crossings. Then comes that warm feeling: “He made it!”
It’s the SOUND that get’s me.
Maybe its just me but I don’t get whats special about a tube of iron on wheels
I, too, prefer diesel to steam, though I sit in just as much awe as the next railfan whenever a steamer passes by. I had the rare opportunity to work on steam (and diesel) locomotives during the 2009 Ely, Nevada RailCamp, and it was really something else to feel the living, breathing aspects of a real working steam engine. There is just a certain air about a steamer that diesels can’t produce. To refer to a steamer as a ‘tube of iron on wheels’ is just a bit too naive or uninformed, to me at least. 
I prefer diesel because of the sound, the clean, powerful lines (especially on EMDs like the SD50 and SD70ACe), and because I just prefer the sound of a well-tuned diesel horn to that of a steam whistle. (I’m in love with the RS3L and new cast K5LLA, and the K3LA isn’t bad either)
There are few things in life that can give me goosebumps every time, and the sound of an SD50 pair throttling up and pulling a train out onto the mainline is one of those things.
For some of us, there is significantly more special about a ‘tube of iron on wheels’ than a steel box on much smaller wheels. My $0.02.
Frank
Except in many more shapes than a box comes in more colors and sizes
I’d argue an SP Cab-forward doesn’t look at all like an SP Daylight 4-8-4, and that’s just one railroad. One big knock steam fans had when diesels came in is “they all look alike”. That’s not really true, but you need to understand buying a diesel was like buying ready-to-wear clothes. You pick your color and a few options, but otherwise an RS-3 is an RS-3 regardless of which railroad owns it. A steam engine was like buying a tailor-made suit, the railroad and builder worked together to create an engine that was exactly what the railroad wanted.
I’ve heard one of the problems for Baldwin when they offered diesels, was that they tried to offer too many options, and lost out on the savings brought about by standardization.
For your consideration in November 1966 TRAINS:
The case for the soulless diesel diesels have as much soul as steam by Joyce, Anthony BR britain frontispiece |
p. 48 |
|---|
Where can I find that article can’t seem to find it myself
The big knock against Baldwin the the diesel era, was that their MU equipment was pneumatic oriented rather than electrical as all the other manufacturers had adopted, therefore, Baldwin engines could only be MU’d with Baldwins. The other manufacturers products could be mixed and matched as necessary to handle the business.
I appreciate the steam locomotive and what gave to us. The steam locomotive was useful and was novel to look at, but it is ugly in the sense that it is a greedy machine that takes from us and requires of us. Not saying petrol is perfect or that the diesel engine is perfect. But the steam locomotive takes from us whether it be coal miners dying in mines, firemen braking there backs shoveling coal, or the countless hours of maintenance they required. Heck even the modern steam power plant take from us with its pollution or high maintenance and coal miners still die in mines with black lung or dangerous radiation from nuclear power plants. So steamers may or may not be human but humans are often are often greedy and take.
Humans are alleged to have souls. I am somewhat dubious.
Some humans claim that all living things have souls. I am extremely dubious.
A machine that has power, propulsion and control systems and actually moves under its own power isn’t lifeless,' but it still needs human input to work. As for sterile,’ (devoid of microscopic life-forms) you have got to be kidding. If it has a soul, the soul is that of the human controller.
That said, a modern North American diesel locomotive has the `soul’ of a portable diesel generator, except that it’s mounted on wheels with traction motors geared to the axles. I can get more excited about a lineside relay box.
Steam locos had their machinery out where anyone with one functional eyeball could see it. Even an ancient 0-4-0T - kettle has more visual appeal than ANY diesel, no matter how large, powerful or noisy. OTOH, the boiler side of a Shay is downright boring.
I know that steam locos are inefficient, dangerous (diesels don’t have boiler explosions) and way too expensive to be viable railroad power today. The same can be said for clipper ships. But they have far more power to stir MY soul…
Chuck
The explosive volatile nature of oil & gas also make its exploration, production, and transportation dangerous.
The explosive volatile nature of oil & gas also make its exploration, production, and transportation dangerous.