Re: Oil versus coal

John Cole Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> John West Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Having grown up with oil fired steam engines I
> > can't get to excited. Yes coal is more
> > historically correct but if the economics and
> risk
> > management push the D&S in the direction of oil
> > that is no big problem for me. An oil fired
> > engine is just as interesting and dramatic as a
> > coal fired engine, it just smells different.
> And
> > if oil fired allows the D&S to take the wet
> soot
> > makers off the stacks, I might even prefer oil.
> >
> > JBWX
>
> That might be the future, but at least I hope the
> fireman get proper training in firing oil fueled
> engines. A good fireman will have a clean stack
> and that might some of the black smoke pollution
> R/R naysayers up that complain about the smoke and
> smell.

It is possible to run a clean stack while burning oil but the firemen has to know not only the engineer's style but the railroad's characteristics. The Loop was either balls to the wall or idle at the stations. It's amazing the boilers held up as well as they did on the Loop. The Silverton line actually might be more challenging to learn. Also, finding the right place to sand the flues might be a challenge! I remember the loop had to pay some dry cleaning bills because the wind wasn't blowing in the normal direction when the crew sanded! JP