Why DIESEL replaced STEAM TRAINS - a specific look. | Railroad 101
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 авг 2024
- We love our steam locomotives, they just weren't the best thing maintenance-wise...
Merch: hyce.creator-s...
Join my discord: / discord
Become an ES&D Train Crew Member and get extra perks!
/ @hyce777
![[SFS] The time I told someone to BREAK a train, instead of FIX it... | Stories from the Shop](/img/1.gif)
I think one of the most profound things you ever pointed out to me in this regard was that most shops on modern railroads don't *have* any machine tools... Diesel shops are set up to swap parts, steam shops are set up to *make* parts.
That's right! Blew my mind when I started working at Interbay. We had a drill press. That was the most advanced machine we had. Topeka, KS backshop where they do the huge 20 year rebuilds on the locomotives has *everything* and true machinists, but the rest of the shops don't.
@@Hyce777 Interbay WA?
@@ExiaLennelluc yup
@@Hyce777 how long ago was that, the round house is a shell of its former shelf, probably going to be shutdown this yr or next
Diesel shops are set up to swap parts. Whether the parts are available to be swapped is an entirely different matter. I don't know if railroads jury-rig as much nonsense as I've seen in automotive production. . . .
Old British drivers said it best when they switched over to diesel "For most; there was a brief sigh of nostalgia... and a huge sigh of relief"
That's a brilliant saying.
@@Hyce777 Almost like we have an ancient venerable tradition of making great poets and writers for centuries or something. :P
Until the diesel failed, because it British Rail.
@@gamerfan8445and it was usually because of crappy prime movers, (aside glance at Deutz, who still have problems making reliable prime movers, *sigh*).
The British Railways took a collective sigh of relief when they discovered the EMD 645
“And we did this because people were cheap and we died like men” made me smile.
My favorite line of this video! Andy
Steam choo choos have each their own personality for sure - and that extends to their parts lists. Diesels definitely make more sense just to move much freight around, but thank goodness there's preservationists who work crazy hard to keep the old girls alive and kicking so the rest of us can enjoy those quirky personalities. THANK YOU!! to steam railroaders everywhere.
Possible video idea: it would be interesting to see what has to be done for 30-day, quarterly, and annual inspections. The 1472 day seems to be summed up as: "blow choo choo into component parts, inspect, replace, put back together."
I have been desiring to do those very videos for each inspection, but I've ended up working through them instead of filming them, lol!
@@Hyce777Maybe you can get a head or chest mounted gopro, amd have it record while you work
@@jackgamer6307 been there done that leads to pretty shitty video. requires a bit of setup which is unfortunate.
@@Hyce777 that is unfortunate. Apart from a separate cameraman, I don't see how you could film work like that unfortunately.
Maybe set up a few cameras around the shop, looking at the loco from a few angles, and cut to whichever shows you working at the time. But that would be difficult too
@@Hyce777 well at least they can be guaranteed to come around again in the relatively near future! Lol we need a Hyce clone to hold the camera
And this more than anything is why diesels (and in other countries, electrics) killed steam. Sometimes steam was stronger, or faster, or more powerful than the new technologies, but rarely was it less maintenance intensive.
Only in Britain, where they managed to absolutely botch modernization, were the diesels harder to keep in service than the steam
@@andrewreynolds4949 Actually, poland as well. Poland still runs steam in revenue earning service to this day.
The Class 08’s,20’s and 37’s are quite good
Ummm diesels did not “kill” steam engines. They replaced them but not kill ‘em. Blame the designers!
I would also argue that versatility/flexibility was another huge factor.
Diesel-electric trains are simply more flexible than steam trains. You basically needed to build a steam engine for a type of job, but diesels are far more practical to just have a couple models and stack locomotives as needed to do the job.
But, yes, it was as never about what they are able to pull. It was always the other factors like maintenance, flexibility, reliability, ease of use, etc that made steam not commercially viable.
5:55 Actually, there IS one thing that needs to be lapped on a Diesel engine: the Valves (Exhaust only on a 2 stroke EMD engine and both Intake and exhaust on a 4 stroke GE Engine) its essentially the exact same principle of the Turret Valves on a steam engine, where a good valve seat is essential to proper operation. For steam its to prevent equipment from operating, but on a diesel its to have an airtight combustion chamber with good compression (Diesel is a compression Ignition engine; if the combustion chambers arent airtight, the engine will be hard to start if it even starts at all!
My great grandfather worked in the Ipswich railway workshops in Queensland, back in the days of steam. He was a blacksmith... which in the railway workshops meant him plus five other guys holding onto the end of a shaft, forging it in a huge hydraulic press. They did their own axles etc.
My grandfather (his son in law, and aa machinist/diesel mechanic) went to visit him at work a few times and recalls seeing them welding a broken side rod from a locomotive by touching the two ends of the break together, striking a monstrously powerful arc between the two to heat them and then ramming them together to form the join.
Gnarly stuff, and obviously hugely labor intensive.
I used to work for John Martz Luger carbine maker from Lincoln, CA and one of the things I did was barrel lapping of new barrels. He didn't want to do the job because he didn't have any patience; I did as I had the patience and the skill to do lapping. Lapping is labor intensive but the nice part of lapping nowadays is one can buy various lapping compounds for all purposes.
Nice exhibition of the old parts and what needs to be done to keep the old locomotives running.
It sure is nice that we've got compound that we can just grab. We use Clover for steel, and Timesaver for bronze. Had no clue barrels needed to be lapped, but that does make sense.
But do you lubricate it with Dawn dishsoap????
One of the main reasons why diesel replaced steam is quoted time and time again as "maintenance costs", and after seeing this video, I can see why! Even though later on many steam locomotives had standardized parts, they still had the "multiple uses" ideal, while the diesels almost right off the bat had the "throwaway parts" ideal. Very interesting. Loved this video, Hyce. Cheers!
Maybe not “throwaway parts”, but “replaceable parts” definitely. There are many parts on diesels that must be replaced when worn, but there are many others that can be refurbished
So taking environmental factors & carbon footprint including the production & delivery of fuel into account.
If steam powered locomotives were to be drawn up from scratch vs diesel & electric! What’s got the most going for it when it comes to cleanest , dependable & lifetime cost effectiveness???? & supporting infrastructure ?
@@concernedaussie1330 Depends on operating environment, but the simple answer is "not steam"
@@concernedaussie1330 Electric by far has the fewest moving parts, so on a per-loco basis, that. Plus power for them can be generated in completely clean ways - geothermal, solar, hydro, nuclear, etc.
@@davidfuller581 those forms of electric would require large expensive infrastructure to supply the power from fixed locations would it not ?
Surely a steam powered turbine/generator on board to power electric motors would require far less foundational/infrastructure ???
No copper wires & on going maintenance to supply.
Potentially even provide moblie power supply incase of natural disasters??? Or major power outages ???
Run on bio fuels or solid fuels ie wood or other compressed waste & even coal as a emergency back up.
I'm thinking vast distance infrastructure , over flood , fire , seismic or mountainous terrain could complicate things.
The same technologies could be used on current railroads with no change needed . Upgrading the whole rail network with little compilations . Only water & fuel that's grown or sourced locally.
Just my thoughts.
Kiss: keep it simple stupid 😁.
Btw pre heated hot water could be used , with pre heating could be done by tapping heat sinks from the hot bitumen roads . That's a totally wasted solar heat generating panel system that's already present & abundant.
All this steam vs diesel debate makes me wonder what would happen if someone made a modern steam locmotive. Like fully designed a new steam loco with modern principals applied to it. Would be interesting to see what happens
I think it would be still inferior because burning solids is harder than burning liquid, and steam locomotives would still need a lot of water (or a giant ass radiator). Everything that is liquid or gaseous would be burned in a ICE, or in a gas turbine. These are more efficient. Even with modern Steam Turbines.
“This steam locomotive is powered by clean burning natural gas (insert picture of a green leaf on the tender)”
@@gdub350 🤣🤣
Just ask Bulleid
There's a guy and his dad on youtube that do exactly that. Steam makes sense for them as they have a big (presumably farm or orchard) with excess wood.
It’s a labor of love though!! I worked on H-53’s in the Marines and I believe at one point we were at nearly 40 maintenance hours to 1 flight hour, but seeing the big girl take off was such a reward so I imagine when 20 is running again it will be a great feeling
In 1991, a Navy A-7 pilot told me that if the costs of getting a B-52 ready were linked in real time to Donald Trumps’s bank account, he would be broke by the time the wheels lifted off the runway.
I wish my dad was alive to watch this. He fired steam, and qualified as engineer, a year or two before the B&O ended steam in 1956.
He fired and ran Pacifics and Midados running at 80 mph on the Washington Branch.
I bet Hyce would love to have that experience once or twice.
All the old steam heads I used to work with say they'd pay decent money to have the steam experience a few times again, but would quit if they had to go back to steam on a daily basis.
I have a photo in a B&O history showing the Mt. Clare shop crew that built a 4-8-2 locomotive.
There must have been a thousand men and a few women standing for that photo.
They probably used the fire-box and boiler from a 2-10-2 "Santa Fe" type.
I used to work for the Big Nothing in Denver, mostly at 38th Street. Spent some time at Rice Yard as well. My first job as a clerk was at the storehouse using fork-lifts to load and unload things like traction motors in box-cars.
B&O 1970-1974
BN 1974-1981
Reaganomics hit and railroading was no longer fun.
I'm not American, nor was I around for Reaganomics, so my understanding is quite poor, what did they do to make railroading no longer fun/enjoyable?
I think something that is somewhat overlooked is the rise of efficient and compact traction motors. If you had a steam train today, it would be an oil-burning turbo-electric - like UP briefly had. Which could arguably be less complex than a diesel engine (though lacking in other areas). A lot of the complexity of classic steam trains is really to do with the transmission. Getting the power from the pistons to the wheels and being able to throttle the power and reverse it and so on - something that traction motors completely solve.
My instant thought when I saw the notification for this video.
0:00 "This is gonna make me really mad."
11:00 "Well, I learn more history, and facts that I never knew about."
Steam requires mechanical artists to keep it running.
Diesel requires parts changers.
Being a mechanical artist is way more fun though.
The reward is satisfaction.
I'm kind of interesting to hear your opinion on why Diesel replaced steam, because I've only ever really heard the British opinion of it. The Beaching report said we have to. But in short, it's cleaner, and more economical.
By the end of steam, most of the parts of steam locomotives in the UK were already at a point where you could just take spare parts of a shelf and fit them. Engines had specifically been redesigned so that multiple different models used interchangeable parts.
In fact, that's a key feature of the new P2 2007 Prince of Wales. A lot of the parts are interchangeable with the Tornado, so they only need to stock one spare part for either engine, instead of one for each engine.
“People were cheap and we died like MEN.” 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 love it.
If steam had stayed around into the modern day, keeping multi use equipment, it would make sense for the railroads to have extra parts to swap, then have a crew just to repair those parts, and take less time in the shop
Some railroads did just that. With large classes they could easily swap wheels, boilers, motion rods, and all sorts of parts with ready refurbished spares, and then refurbish those parts ready for the next one
True it would not bes as bad as it is now, but there are still much more individual parts on Steam vs Diesel. Lots of components are interchangeable between cylinders or cylinder heads, the traction motors usually are, the turbos as well.
grrr diesel killed the choo choos!!!!!
Video killed the radio star.
Elon killed the the birbiness that was twitter.
@@flamedude_1111 video did kill radio, very sad
@@CakePrincessCelestia GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Grrr totally agree with u
So diesel replaced steam because diesel was cheaper to fix and work on (manpower wise). also, that multiple diesels can be controlled with a total of 2 people compared to multiple steam engines that use 2 people per engine. However, a steam engine can still do the work that they were built to do after 80 years or more, but the railroads don't use them because it just too expensive to use and required a lot of manpower. Am I right or not?
That's pretty much it!
There are a lot of ancient diesel locomotives still around too. They’re just much less efficient and capable, and more difficult to continue repairing. But it can be done if you know what you’re doing
@@andrewreynolds4949same goes with electrics, we still have working electric locomotives that are 100 years old or more. its that releiable.
Mark, I always look so forward to your tutorials. This episode helps me continue to appreciate the massive amount of work it takes to care for these steam locos. You did such a beautiful job on machining the new seat and parts! All this reminds me of antique home plumbing fixtures and their similar maintenance requirements. Though maintenance intensive, I really like the mentality of repair over replacing. Custom on the choo choo for sure, but oh such superb quality. I loved seeing 20’s bronze stem assembly, so ultra fab! I can understand why railroads went diesel. Like you so aptly mentioned Mark, planned obsolescence. Regardless, so wonderful to see all this hand work still being done in a preservation context. Oh I so enjoyed seeing this (and the magnificent shop at the CRRM); wish I was there to help and learn from such experts! Thank you Professor for another wonderful class. Double cheers to you!
Cheers right back at you Patrick, as always. :)
@@Hyce777The last UK steam locomotive passenger journey was the 17:00 evening service to Carrickfergus on the 30th of March 1970 hauled by WT class number four (preserved) and only withdrawn in July 1971 after working the M1 motorway spoil trains and as a station pilot.
For this reason I am fascinated with obsolete technologies as pedagogical tools
"the only thing better than perfect is standardized"
Citation please? Sounds kinda Henry Ford.
@@peregrina7701 i remember it from a technology connections video
My dad was a marine steam engineer. I picked up a lot from him. I own, run, and work on marine diesels. What most people don't realize about the steam era, it was a lot of maintenance, more work and discomfort for the crew. Diesels made life easier. Steam engines need consistent maintenance. But a diesel will go decades with oil changes and occasional maintenance.
I grew up in the 1950s, in a town with a major locomotive maintenance and rebuild facility. When steam was phased out, hundreds of local jobs went away over the transition. Diesels didn't need that kind of maintenance. And no more double or triple headers. You just connect diesels together and run several engines with one crew.
But I do miss steam engines. As a kid, I remember the steam whistles on summer nights when the windows were open. Signaling each crossing, to and from town. Each engineer had their own sound. You may not know the engineer, but you knew his whistle. Like most boys, I wanted to be an engineer... until diesels came.
Diesels need a lot of respect though.
I was really cool to watch you make that part
I think steam didn’t get to its full potential before diesel came along.
It would be amazing for steam to be hauling the trains of today
The work that folks like Porta and others did later on after the death of steam in America confirms this. I'd love to see what true modern steam would look like.
@@Hyce777 I’d imagine some electric examples, like that one train of thought video.
I just thought about the look of modern company steam engines like Amtrak and BNSF lol.
Now I want to draw paint scheme examples oh no
Just imagine having nuclear powered steam engines for a moment... I mean, plans for that actually existed.
I love the idea of modern steam. I wonder if using solar power to heat up the boiler could work? Concepts are really fun to think up!
So here's a question - with modern tech, is there anything thats _easier_ to do in maintaining steam than back in the day? I'd imagine primarily better machining equipment.
Not really, actually; the machine tools haven't really gotten better, save for CNC being a thing. CNC is great, especially for batch work - but really not useful for steam, because each part has to end up being so custom. I could see a space where a railroad like the D&S, which runs several of the same class, could get benefit of CNC making the rough part and then a machinist finishing the custom diameter and etc. manually, but it's really not that much of a savings.
Porta water treatment reduces the rate of corrosion quite a fair bit, and if you're making a boiler from scratch, GPCS stops the coal particulates from scratching up your metal, but that's not that helpful for pre-existing locomotives.
@Hyce777 With modern carbide tooling you can make a part faster than back in the day when they mostly used HSS or even carbon steel tools. That only saves actual machining time though, all the measuring, fitting and fettling is the same... and in my experience takes longer than the actual machining.
The main thing that has changed between now and then is actually quality and consistency of material - the steel we can make today is much stronger and more resistant to fatigue due to holding fewer unwanted inclusions, and more wanted inclusions, and being better homogenized to distribute the inclusions more evenly. So, realistically, making strong steel parts for locos now would be easier than it was back then, though it probably wouldn't make that much difference overall.
@@KidarWolf Lost-styrofoam for casting, instead of sand casting.
The hospital I used to work at had Three O type boilers which supplied hot water for heating and hot water for everything else. Each one of them would be down for one month for maintenance every year. I still hate the thought of having had to crawl into the fireboxes of those damn things to patch the masonry, and inspect the pipes.
Something I'd love to see would be an honest attempt at a steam locomotive with all the advances that have been made possible in last hundred years and with the appropriate concessions to maintenance cycles to make them competitive with diesel locomotives in that regard, such as the use of regular parts wherever possible to facilitate "shotgun" maintenance by technicians; the individual parts could (I think _should_ in fact) retain their ability to be remanufactured because this allows application to scale easily, the smallest operators could do maintenance as you do, bringing the unit down while the individual part is reconditioned or swap it out at a supplier like you do with a car alternator and get the unit back up shortly. Larger operations could have spares ready to go easily and could shop out the rebuilding of worn components, while the largest concerns would have their own part-rebuilding facilities either on-site or off as appropriate to their situation.
Ideally three designs would be made, the first holding closely to "classic" steam locomotive appearance and function; direct-drive from pistons, steam-dome, boiler shape, etc. The second would only be held to the basic appearance of a long boiler and connecting rods on the drivers, mainly to allow for the use of a turbine as this is probably a critical concession to economy. Electro-motive drive could even be used to keep the turbine running at favorable speeds. The third design would make no concessions to appearance at all and would probably end up looking like an M-1 or an ACE-3000 but it would potentially be the most economical. The ultimate question would be, does this exercise result in something competitive or would the initial outlay of cost be too great due to the inclusion of exotic materials needed to ensure safe operation for long periods?
Working in a shop trying to keep three steam engines operating is kinda funny because now when we have to do a 92 day on one of the diesels it’s almost a welcome relief. I think we’ve had to make 3 custom part for a diesel in three months and it was just a bracket and some stack covers
Can you make a history tour of the Whistles inside the museum
That'd be a fun video to do!
I literally had no idea what a nightmare steam maintenance was! Thank you Hyce. It’s cool to have someone like you with daily, lived, hands-on experience whose knowledge is so extensive doing the video AND narration, i.e., you don’t drive up, walk around the subject and leave with clean hands! Kudos!
Its almost 1 AM in my country but im still gonna watch it
2:30am here ^^
Up here in Minnesota, I got to tour a steam shop and for real, the amount of labor required to run a steam engine is insane. They are incredibly complex pieces of equipment to run.
Thats one thing I think no one gives credit to the industrial revolution for. Before the revolution, labor was cheap and technology was expensive, after, Technology is cheap and labor is expensive.
Great video! I've lapped a few valves into my van's engine head but this is something else 😂 Curious to know, how did you discover the turret shut off leaked? Is that part of the annual inspection? I assume usually it's wide open to feed the appliances, or does it ever get shut off as part of normal operation? Or maybe there is a routine check of its function for safety?
We shut it off daily as a part of night-night processes. That's why we knew it leaked.
@@Hyce777 I love that you call them "night-night processes", it's implying you put the loco to sleep everyday :D
I am by no means a train lover. but i do love watching people with a passion for what they do.
do like machines and things tho.
but sub earned :D
seems a lot like Aircraft that have have annuals and then every so many years even deeper inspections. And yeah for every flight hour you have 2 to 3 hours in the maintenance hanger
I have to agree with ya on the design principle changing over the years. Nothing is designed to last like it used to. Great for less down time but I feel like a lot of this modern equipment will be lost to time just because after it’s obsolete it will become impossible to repair.
Mark, you are looking fabulous today
What killed steam locomotives had nothing to due with maintenance. It was having to stop very frequently to take on water to make the steam. Time is money. The railroads even experimented with scoops and water canals between the tracks to take on water while on the move but it didn't work out.
I know a Santa Fe steamer when I see one, and the one on the thumbnail looks mighty fine if you ask me
Can you talk more about feedwater heaters? We all know what they do but operation is a little less covered.
The I.D. threads look good. If you need machining help ping me. I'm about a hour away.
I completed my apprenticeship as a machinist/toolmaker at British Rail Engineering in Derby, making parts for repairs was common place. We also made parts to repair steam locomotives that were still running for tourist purposes. These were mostly one off parts.
I watch some videos of people who restore old diesel earth moving equipment, and despite these machines being 60 years plus, most often it's still a case of ordering replacements, which arrive still in their original box from that time, which blows my mind. I imagine diesel loco engines are the same.
Maintenance certainly, though some of the research since the 70s threatens to bring maintenance time down some 80%, and emissions of the more harmful gases per unit of fuel burned are significantly lower, so for a new railway with a CEO that actually cares about the environment, I could see a steam-electric combo fleet being useful, mainly electric with steam for lines that haven't been electrified yet and publicity specials.
The most efficiënt stean locomotive (that completely modernized German thing) achieved an efficiency of 11 or 12%. No way anything is gonna be more polluting than that. Diesels are much cleaner these days than the 1960s two stroke stuff too. Electric is best of course, especially on wind/nuclear/solar energy.
@@mfbfreak Glad you asked. First, 52 8055 wasn't even the theoretical best when it was new in 1998, it was a conversion and didn't get the chance to have every little piece designed from scratch. For instance, it doesn't use Lempor or Lemprex ejectors (I think is uses either Kylchap or Kylpor). Estimates put the best theoretical thermal efficiency of steam at about 18% with what technologies we currently have.
As fot the comparison, these numbers come from Roger Waller's work around 1998 comparing a diesel and a steam locomotive, both built in 1992, operating on a Swiss rack railway likely without many modern steam features in the latter case. In terms of g/kWh of nitrous oxides, the diesel locomotive emitted 18g, while the steam locomotive put out 2.5; the numbers for carbon monoxide (0.8/0.4) and sulphur dioxide (0.6/1.8) are less impressive but still total far less than the diesel locomotive. This is also only speaking of trains with only one locomotive; for heavy duty Class II freight operations, you'd be comparing two or three diesels for a single steam locomotive (see Challenger pulling a 143-car pig train) and maybe an electric yard pilot to help it push off.
There's also the potential of torrefied biomass, which burns cleaner than ground coal in tests conducted, and while it's also true that R80-B20 diesel fuel burns very clean too, it's also true that it's really not made in enough quantities to fuel long-distance locomotives on, at least not yet.
But yes, electric is best. I'm not really sure there exist many routes where electrification is a no-go, honestly, but there are situations, and power outages do happen.
Rr drinking game: everytime a steam locomotive reminds you why they were replaced by diesels, take a shot.
Railroader: Shut up liver! You'll be fine!
Hey Hyce! Awesome video as always, but why were American railroads so quick to replace steam while in other places it took decades?
We move the most freight; tonnage is critical.
The US was much richer than Europe during the period (still is, but less). This gave more money to upgrade and meant upgrading would save more money, since labor costs (wages) were higher. So the US was ahead in R&D in the 1930s.
Then there's WW2, where the diesel-only companies (GE and GM-EMD) were allowed to keep making diesel locomotives. Everyone else stopped making them for the duration, just not the source of most of the world's oil at the time. The US also built a lot more ships with locomotive derived diesel-electric powerplants. So when the war ended and Europe's railways were worn out or bombed, they couldn't afford to switch. But US railroads could, and the locomotives were already rolling off the assembly lines.
@@morat242yeah it was a money thing. but we in europe basically killed the steam engine with electric. diesel wasnt a huge deal unless we are talking branch lines.
I get why diesels took over the steam locomotives services but I love the steam locomotives whistle, stack talk, chugging chuffing sounds, it takes longer to get steamers to have full pressure of steam
Honestly if i could choose between driving a steam train vs a modern electric/desiel train. I'd pick the steam train any day of the week
I bet it is 1000X more satisfying to finally get a steam train rolling vs just easily making a modern day train run
I bet powering up a train and getting it to roll must feel so amazing, like your motivating this huge beautiful beast to press on
In short, steam trains have far more personality and life in them. I completely understand why steam trains aren't the norm anymore, but honestly I'd rather pick personality more than regular efficiency
Which is why I'm glad heritage railways exist
@@jackbluehq6653 I totally agree with you bro
Look at any modern advertisement involving a train. Odds are, it's a steam engine. Coors "Silver Bullet", for example.
I can't agree more with the video description. The theme park I work at has 3 locomotives (and only 2 of us full-time to maintain them) and while I love the engines top pieces, I dread the annual inspections. But I wouldn't have it any other way. Great vid!
The amount of work you guys do is amazing, it really makes you appreciate how hard it was to keep steamers working! It's all fantastic. Keep em running and have a good one.
The complexity of steam trains blows my mind. There's a very good video released about Big Boy by Animagraff released recently showing the sheer complexity of the thing. Operating the railways must have been a herculean task back in the heyday of steam.
It's absolutely true that a diesels maintenance requirement is a tiny fraction of a steam locomotives. However, another major factor is wear on track infrastructure. In the steam era, a track gang was typically stationed every 10 miles of track. Improvements in crew mobility and the quality of the rail certainly were factors but the replacement of the reciprocating pounding of the steam locomotive with the diesel was, by far, the greatest factor in the disappearance of the track gangs. Also, I'm a fan of the Buffalo, Rochester, & Pittsburgh Ry, later B&O. The Mosgrove bridge over the Allegheny River was a severe operational bottleneck due to weight restrictions. The railroad used 2-6-6-2 extensively and also had 2-8-8-2 for pusher service. However, 2-8-0's in multiple unit freight consists and light Pacifics in passenger service were the norm on the south end of the railroad because of this one bridge. After dieselization, any and all diesels could cross the bridge. The bridge is still in use today by the Buffalo & Pittsburg. This 120 year old bridge, that was too light for for all but the railroads smallest steam locomotives only 20 years after it was built, is in use daily with multiple unit lash-ups of SD40-2's, SD45's, SD40T-2's, SD45-2's SD60M's, and whatever else they may currently have on the roster or are leasing. JM2C :-)
We may see the steam-a-fication of farm equipment again if Mackwell locomotive gets his in production I already told him that if the tractors hit the market and I get my carrage shop and horse drawn farm implement shop up and running I'd like to be a dealer for the modern steam tractors to the Mennonites,huderites&Amish my friends continue to this day to use steam tractors to fill Amish silos at their farms running off waste materials
I am so excited to see what Mackwell comes up with! They're making operation and boiler things way more convenient, though the engine will still be a steam engine... I am interested to see how they come up with a solution that helps keep maintenance down. :)
It is always amazing and fantastic to look at the required work to maintain a steam cho cho.
Keep doing the great and amazing work Mark 💪🏻
This video really highlights something that everyone needs to aware of in the use and design of virtually everything we use in a industrial society.
Can it be fixed at all?
What parts are available for repairs?
What tools are needed?
*What repair documentation is there?*
If you hear the words "custom fit" then you need to change your mindset on how that item is used and maintained from the time it goes into service and when the call for a replacement part is needed needs to be made.
What happens if your phone/TV/computer quits? It usually can't be fixed; you must buy a new one. TVs used to be fixable, down to the individual component. Now, you don't even know what's going on in the box.
@@ReggieArford This is why Right to Repair is so important. You the end user should be able to access to what your need to maintain your property.
It's good for the end user's wallet.
It's good for the environment.
It's good for society in general to make common the skills needed to repair various things again.
Nice vid, if diesel parts are so easily replacable can you do an indepth explanation of the saying that EMD stands for Every Model Different?
Awesome video Mark - thanks for all your work keeping our locomotives running!
this does help underscore why some railroads every very big on standardizing parts IO suspect had steam not going awya we would see standar sizes for things like cylinders used by many railroads perhaps they would ahve moved to the so called "steam motors" that were more self contained steam engine that would drive the main wheels via jackshaft or even turbine hydropic eclectic locos
Can't lie, I'd probably watch an hour of Hyce machining a new part for something
Just glad there are people still willing and able to do this work.
yup still love the mechanical tid bit vids....keep them coming
Wait until you learn about the Einheitslocomotieven 😛 perhaps you already do haha but that’s the first thing that came in mind when said everything is custom 😅 cheers, Greg! 7:47
can you cover the different types of diesel locomotives?
That's a good idea!
@@Hyce777 especialy now that Derail Valey simulator got the three main types
@@kornaros96 Still can't wait for some serious money $hifting in the episodes. The o6o just came at the right time and took all the glory instead XD
Its also the on going maintenance as you go. My father remembers the days when there was a man at the train station with a big oiler that had to lube all the joints for the rods. It had to be done every 100km or so
I feel like if someone was to design a NEW steam locomotive, from the ground up, using modern machining techniques and common parts, as there are tons of steam use parts made and used today with a lot of industrial applications, and made it nuclear powered rather than fossil fuel it would quickly become the locomotive of choice across the continent. And when i say nuclear, i dont mean like nuclear power, but like a large Radio Thermal Generator, dont need to have as much of a risk during a crash.
Thank you for what you do ❤
I knew steam was labor intensive, but wow!!! good video btw.
To make thread cutting easier, flip over the tool and run the process backwards. You will still get correct left/right-hand threads, but because tool is auto-feeding away from the chuck you don't have to worry about smashing it into the part.
Nice ‘n early to the show! Lets goo
Fuel economy and labor were also part of the reason. Diesels are much more efficient than steam. They also save on labor because they don’t need a fireman. And they need less maintenance because they don’t have connecting rods, so the wheels can be much better balanced, reducing the wear and tear on the bearings, and there’s also fewer parts that need lubrication.
Hard to believe that brand new steam engines are being built even today.
Very interesting video keep up the good work!
I would think the same can be said about piston engined airliners being succeeded by jets. Much like diesel locomotives, jetliners didn’t need quite as much downtime for maintenance as their piston-powered predecessors as their engines didn’t to be overhauled as often as piston engines. Today’s jet engines can have a TBOH (Time Before OverHaul) in excess of 20,000 running hours, whereas the big piston engines typically had a TBOH of less than 1000 hours. There’s also the fact that jetliners cut travel times in half over prop-liners, and the jet fuel they used is also cheaper than aviation gasoline, or avgas.
I find it funny this video was uploaded just after I watched an older video where Hyce talked about the power differences between diesel and steam.
Excellent video, as usual for the "Hyce" ! A+ . Maybe steam is soooooo labor intensive is because if you screw up big time you can end up with a massive boiler explosion, and we all know about how horrific those are. BTW, kudos on the new (?) clean shaven look. 😁👍👍👍
Yep! On the trams, all vehicles get a basic inspection every 14 days max; without it they are *not* allowed on the road, even out of service.
Brought in one tram, it needed it's 14 day... went into the shop at 0630, came out at 0645. I watched the boys do all the inspections, they were FAST, but efficient and thorough.
Steam is beautiful and nostalgic. But there are reasons why they're not the norm on a mainline anymore.
I think there were some experiments with using the most powerful kind of steam engine that exists, a railroad nuclear reactor. But everybody figured out pretty quickly that the safest way to run a railroad on nuclear power was to build the power plant somewhere safe with full-time professional staff and then power the locomotives with overhead line. I guess in a way most electric locomotives are at least partially steam powered because almost all power plants are steam engines, exceptions being places like Switzerland where it's all coming from hydroelectric. In the Netherlands they say all of the power for the railroads is wind and solar, but you can't really say that when it's all traveling through the same grid.
That would be a whole interesting topic to cover in a video IMHO.
Even with the reasoning laid out its still hard to watch that clip of 3985 hauling 143 freight cars, doing with 4 pistons what would take 48 pistons today and not think "why TF did we ever replace steam?"
During the change it was said that with steam five hours were required to find the problem and five minutes to fix it. With diseasels it took five minutes to find and dive hours to fix it. Or. Ice versa
When I was a kid, an old railroad man told me that the difference between steam and the first diesels was it took 10 minutes to diagnose and a week to fix a steam locomotive, and a week to diagnose then 10 minutes to fix a diesel.
Huh. Makes sense through and through though. I suspect part of the reason we've failed to make the connection to how much upkeep is required, is because very few people nowadays work in or have machine shop experience. I have a vague interest in this sort of thing, but would have no idea where to begin, because I wasn't taught any of these things, and missed the train through high school where courses were provided, "if you were interested." Now after college, hard to find someone willing to teach, when schedules align, and when there's cash in hand.
Only 50 seconds in, I'll watch the video but I know the answer: operating costs. Diesels are way lower maintenance and can be brought online and offline much faster. Sure in some situations you might need multiple diesel locos to replace one steam loco but adding an extra diesel loco to a train is much less of a big deal than a double header steam train. No Ash, no water just fuel a few crew and go.
The first diesels had at best marginally better fuel efficiency than steam and in some cases slightly worse but they were still cheaper to run. As time passed they became extremely efficient and cheap to run. In outback Australia you have Iron ore trains that are completely crewless and most freight trains need only a couple of crew, even for multi engine trains.
Completely unrelated to the topic of the video (very neat by the way), but I was wondering if you could do some more Loco 360's on some of the other locomotives at the museum. Particularly the Shays and DL&G 191. Great video!
Love this video. I, for one, would like to see a lot more machining.
Nice video as always Hyce.
Very interesting. Well done.
Electrify all the rails and replace desal Austria started 50s America can to. We went straight from steam to electric
So one point of contention here.
Steam engines were built pre assembly line standardization.
Diesel electric were built post assembly line standardization.
A steam engine if it were to be commissioned today, would be designed for production on an assembly line and built with standardization of parts.
That said, steam is always going to take way more care and feeding as opposed to a diesel electric. So many fewer moving parts means way less things to wear and break.
As great as diesels are (and yes, they are indeed great), steam locomotives are amazing machines. And the fact they aren't part of the normal daily experience for the majority of us makes them special.
Diesels are amazing too!
Modern parts interchange could be applied to steam locomotives. However, that is not going to solve the larger problem, which is daily maintenance, such as cleaning out ash pans and grates, frequent lubrication due to constant loss oiling, and the frequent need to water and fuel. All these daily activities required lots of people and infrastructure. That's not to mention the advantages of dynamic braking and multiple units that diesel engines offer.
"People were cheap, and we died like men." 🙂
...and thats why SLM machines have all screwed valve seats: unsrew them, take a pass on the sealing surface on the lathe on both the seat and valve, then lap it for 5min with fine lapping compound. worst valve about half a day of work, including polishing all parts before putting them back together
This video covers one of the cost items in why diesel locomotives replaced steam locomotives. The cost item was that steam locomotives needed a lot more maintenance than diesel locomotives. There are two other cost items involved where steam locomotives cost more than diesel locomotives. One of these was that steam locomotives were less fuel efficient than diesel locomotives. Steam locomotives burned more fuel for distance traveled than a diesel locomotives, which cost additional money. Also steam locomotives needed large refills of water for the boiler and diesel locomotives did not need refills of water. The water cost money. So from these three areas of cost it was inevitable that diesel locomotives replaced steam locomotives. However because of the popularity of steam locomotives for show and excursions a small percentage of steam locomotives have been restored back to service and are still in use.
WWII Absolutely ramrodded interchangeable parts into the world for good. The liaison from Rolls Royce to Merlin commented something about how the workbenches at Packard didn't have vices because if you needed to modify the part then the part wasn't to spec. Diesel - electric had much lower maintenance hours because of the ability to just replace parts with like parts.
And that was on top of the fact that Diesels had 1 consumable to supply. Fuel. Where a steam engine had fuel, water, and steam oil. Diesel-electrics could also be fired up quicker and were much safer to leave idling. The switchover was inevitable.
Helo i thinck that the reason for steam having such high maintenance time is becuse of the time the steam train was made from what i understand from this video in that time making new parts were a beter choice econimicle than buying a whole new standersize module my thoery is that if steam trains were made today with todays metaling technology and economy the maintenance would be much esier becuse isntead of fixing the broken valve they would just buy a whole new turet
Great insight!
I just figured out what self lapping actually means, thanks Mark!
Well I mean one aspect is that there is no surplus of steam parts, everything has to be built because no company mass produces them