et&wnc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Look, I get that D&S had to do
something
> after that crazy fire situation they got blamed
> for (which like many of you, I wouldn't bet my
> left that they caused) but I get this uneasy
> feeling that before we all know it, the D&S will
> be like the Grand Canyon was; a line that was
> mostly steam, then one day it was diesels most
> days with steam only on special occasions.
That was indeed the point of my previous post about what I am currently seeing on the D&S schedule. There never was a choice of "Diesel Train" or "Steam Train" on the schedule before and now there is. With 3 D&S steamers converted to oil-firing and 1 on loan, one would think that there would be sufficient "safe" steam power for 461 and 462 to BOTH be steam-powered, with diesels filling in during boiler washes or unforeseen mechanical issues. The fact that they are advertising the diesel departure makes me suspect that no matter what, at least some of the schedule is planned to be diesel going forward. Perhaps they are testing the waters to see if most folks really don't care what is powering the train.....and I suspect they'll find most don't.
The Grand Canyon isn't the only example of diesel-creep. Here in my neck of the woods, the Mt. Washington Cog Railway, which used to field 7 steam locomotives and was an all-steam operation until 2008, now has only 2 steam engines and they run 2 trips a day with steam. I have to give them credit. A least steam is a daily thing and they go out of their way to show off the steam engine on the two trips it does run. On the Grand Canyon, they're only running one trip a month.
/Kevin Madore
