Is there anything stopping a train operating company going back to using steam engines?

Question

Steam locomotives do have more character than modern trains, look much nicer & make nicer sounds and smells. They also have a romance about them.

I have travelled behind them on presevered railways & on main line enthusiasts specials, but could they be used to operate a modern main line railway?

Answer 1

I DO wish Yahoo would make it plain the country of origin of questioners as although this question is clearly posted on the UK&I site we STILL get answers from our American colleagues who know little of the situation in Great Britain and can only rarely give a useful answer to a British question.

HOWEVER, the answer to your question is quite simple and straightforward:
THE CLEAN AIR ACT.
This precludes the use of steam engines in a lot of areas - in London for instance, special permission has to be obtained from the environment agency as well as the TOCs (train operating companies) before steam locos can run in the London area - this is why so many "Steam Excursions" have to start in London with diesel haulage and pick up their steam loco at some out-lying point. "Block" permission is sometimes granted to things like bits of the old Orient Express services running into/out of Victoria but these are far from the norm which is why WHEN permission has been obtain from the EA AND the operating companies (they're not THAT fond of steam in case of breakdowns!) such a fuss is made by photographers (especially) to get to see them in action BUT, what about all the stuff they belch out. I DID mention THE CLEAN AIR ACT didn't I ! ! !

Answer 2

The trouble is that the steam locomotives are very high on maintenance and repair- some preserved engines may not be able to run in the future because cylinder castings need replacing. These are big jobs that workshops now are not equipped to deal with. That leaves building new engines. This would not only take years (look at the project to build a Peppercorn A1, for example- 20 odd years and still going), but would need the workshops to be completely re-equipped, something almost prohibitively expensive. Then when you DO have the engines, you have to train a new generation of engine drivers, fitters, stokers....
And to the design itself- if you want a new A4, forget it. The valve gearing is very inefficient. A new steam locomotive built today to run on British mainlines would probably look like a diesel or electric locomotive, that is it would run on power bogies ratehr than large driving wheels. Think more Builled's Leader locomotive of the 1940's/1950's rather than a Gresley pacific.
Indeed, some countries that have looked at reverting to steam traction have decided this approach holds most potential.

Just my thoughts.

Answer 3

Steam is fun, but it is also hard work (don't I know it!). It is labour intensive, and requires lots of skilled people and a significant amount of infrastructure. Diesel or electric locomotives do not require several hours work to prepare them for their day's work, and need much less, and less frequent, maintenance. The issue is really one of economics: there is nothing STOPPING a Train Operating Company from going back to steam, other than the fact that by doing so they would be committing financial suicide!

Very occasionally the economics work the other way, and when this is the case a TOC would be only to happy to use steam. The UK's best example of this are the steam-hauled summer services run by West Coast Railways between Fort William and Mallaig in Scotland (the "Harry Potter" line). There, the market is tourists who come as much for the steam traction as the scenery, and the finances work.

Performance isn't really the issue. If the technical development of steam traction had continued, there is little doubt that 21st century steam locos would be a good match for their diesel and electric counterparts, whilst special steam-hauled trains can match the loads and timings of scheduled diesel or electric, trains. However, when it comes down to it, diesel and (especially) electric locomotives are simply a lot more energy-efficient and require a great deal less effort. That's why the changeover took place, in the 1930s in the USA and parts of Europe, in the 1950s and 1960s in the UK.

So yes, you COULD use steam to operate a modern railway line, but other than in very special circumstances you'd be crazy to do so.

Answer 4

Only economics. But,that can revive them as well ! Did you know that after Ronald Reagan broke the USSR economically, and they fell apart, that they actually went BACK to steam engines, as they didn't have the money to afford to buy diesel fuel from foreign sources anymore? That's right, Russia had to bring it's retired fleet of steam train engines out of retirement, as they had plenty of indigenous coal to power them, as they could no longer afford foreign oil for awhile. That had to be back in the '80's? I'm not sure when or if they're retired them again, I'm sure now they have the money and resources to use diesel again. But it CAN be done, when the economics are right, or in National emergencies, which it was in this case. The efficiency wasn't as good as diesels, but they had the manpower and coal resources to keep them running, and trains moving.
So, women don't mind coal dust and cinders on their pretty white blouses? Scooting across a passenger car seat in a silk pantsuit, picking up the coal dust diffusing thru the cars? Hmm? Romantic? Maybe. Irritating? DEFINITELY. You may THINK it'd be better, but the dust, dirt, grime, etc. all contributed to steam's demise. Once steam changed over to oil burning, what's the point when you can switch to diesel and burn it, without all the other steam hassles? Romance is the last thing on a Railroad's mind when it's operating, it's all about the dollars and customer satisfaction. Diesel is cleaner, quicker, easier on the tracks,and there was no economic justification to keep steam once all the factors were considered. Although we may miss the romance, that's all it'll ever be now.
- To reply to Citizen's list of problems - I think most of them could be overcome. Back in the day, tankers didn't exist, or were VERY crude. A steam train could now pull 6 tanker cars, half with water, half with oil, to satisfy a thru-train requirement. Could also pull a boxcar with a generator / air compressor, to satisfy "modern" requirements of passenger/freight electrical and air needs. Water was also scooped " on the fly " in the late days of steam, so a modern version could be done, or just pull tankers full of water. A modern Tender could now be used as a mobile electronic office, with all the required black boxes installed in it, and just used as a pass-thru for the fuel and water behind it in the tankers. Would this be inefficient? Maybe, as you'd have 5 or more cars as non-revenue tonnage. Maybe you wouldn't need as many oil tankers. Not sure how much oil a converted steam engine burns compared to a diesel, maybe needs more water than fuel? Anyway, with a bright mind or two, any obstacle could be overcome eventually.
- The Gremlin Guy -

Answer 5

Here is one of the main reasons why steam locos were abandoned, the loco is oil fired rather than coal but the main part of the story still holds.
http://www.sdrm.org/faqs/hostling.html

Steam locos have their place, it is basically in tourist railways or in cheap labour countries with plenty of coal but not much oil. The Chinese are said to operate up to 3000 steam locos right now. Even on tourist railways steam locos are being upgraded with better engineering to cut costs.

The reality is that modern design can remove much of the intensive labour and maintenance needed with steam locomotives, but the overall running costs still exceed that of Diesel-electric power.

Of course full electric locos are mainly steam operated, but the steam is in the power station.

Answer 6

Some rail companies are starting to use the steam locomotives as a way to get people interested in the railroads again as well as a way to promote their company.

Canadian Pacific will be running one of it's steam engines, The Empress #2816, on a one month tour starting August 17th-September 22nd. It will leave Calgary, Alberta and go through Winnepeg; Thief River Falls, MN; Minneapolis, MN; Milwaukee, WI; Chicago, IL; La Cross, WI; then back to Calgary, Alberta.

One of the reasons for why railways haven't went back to steam engines is because they are slower, require more fuel (coal, wood, water), and they have high emissions. Another problem is that is hard to find people who have the knowledge/experience to operate these engines. Costs of operation is another factor. Most of the "whistle stops" have been tore down or no longer usable. Most of the steam engines that are still available also use a different gauge of tracks (the distance between the rails).

I would love to see at least one steam engine running year round on each railway across the nation, just for historical and romatic reasons. I think if people found out how cool it is to take a train ride, more people would consider it as a means of transportation rather than driving.

Answer 7

In addition to other answers here.....
There is also the infrastructure to consider.
Steam locomotives require more than just coal and water to operate.
You would need to provide coal and water towers at motive power depots...and they are very labour intensive too.
The decision to change to modern motive power on British Railways in the 1950's was primarily due to the shortage of manpower available for the dirtier lower paid jobs around steam locomotives.

Answer 8

There was a prototype steam turbine locomotive built in the UK in the 1930s but although it was a success, British Railways did not continue the design. When the loco broke down in 1949 after 14 years' service it was rebuilt to a conventional piston engine.

Answer 9

It would be very difficult.

Modern rolling stock requires a lot of electricity, to power air conditioning, restaurant cars, and in some cases the doors.

There is also the problem that most coaching stock is air braked, wheras steam locos are really only equipped for vacuum.

It may also be difficult to fit steam with modern safety kit, such as TPWS, which is now mandatory in Britain, as well as the ETRM "black boxes".

Also, there is the cost of staff training, and infrastructure such as water towers to consider.

Nice thought, but I can't see it happening.

Answer 10

The biggest problem nowadays is probably the lack of experienced drivers with a steam licence. My Grandfather drove steam trains most of his life and I saw the handbook for the steam drivers licence, really tough job!!!

The other problem is the lack of water towers, coal depots and other maintenance facilities since they've all been ripped out and/or demolished long ago.

All this being said, I agree that steam was a much better way to travel. The sight, the sounds, the smells are all fantastic and, sorry to say, now of another age. Such a pity so few of our kids will get a chance to enjoy them.