College paper on steam locomotives

Hi everyone. I was assigned to write an argument paper for my class. The argument can be any one of our choice and I picked how the new FRA regulations on steam locomotives are too strict for operating steam locomotives. I would love to hear any and all feedback you guys have on the subject as well as providing me links to FRA codes that restrict steam locomotive operation. Your help will be greatly appreciated!

The regulations on steam locomotives can be found in the CFR 49 Part 230. If you google or Yahoo that you can find them in PDF form for ease of reading.
It will give you everything you need to know about everything from the 1472 (also called the 15 year) to out of service credit. That should be a good place to start for your paper.
As with most railroad rules and operational regulations, to the outside world it may seem to be a little extreme, but it's there for a reason. If you are looking for the reasoning behind the implementation of 230, I would look up the report on the Gettysburg Railroad boiler failure. It too can be found on line with explanation of exactly what happened and what lead up to the failure of the crown sheet. Happy reading....BLECK!!!!...I hope you have a lot of time and coffee...

P.S. Your local FRA office can also put you in touch with the local steam inspector. He (or she) may be willing to chat with you on the phone about some other questions you may have.....

Thanks Steamer69. I understand that the implementations are there for a reason but when picking a side I would much rather be on the side of steam locomotives rather than against them

Well, see this is where doing your research paper will help. Being on the side of the steam engines means having people working on them who won't blow it up. I am of the belief that safe operation with a good training program is the best thing you can do for an engine. This does not just apply to the operation of it, but to the maintenance as well. A well maintained locomotive, is a joy to run, while a poorly maintained one with fight you the entire time. Think about it this way, the operator (from management on down) are all part of the engine. It's important to not only be on the side of the steam locomotive, but on the side of the crews as well. An experienced steam crew, one that knows each other, and works well together is the best thing not only for them but for the engine as well.
The steam world (especially in New England) was for a very long time a closed group that was almost impossible for young people to get into. Thankfully that has started to change, and there is some incredible young talent being trained by good people to care for the locomotives when "the old heads" can't anymore. Being on the side of the engine is not just about one piece of equipment, but the total package. With out the crew the engine doesn't run, and without the locomotive, the crew doesn't learn. You'll see what I mean if you read the Gettysburg report....

I've been doing a lot of reading into CFR 49 Part 230 and what you said makes sense. While it may seem harsh to the outside world it all is only being done for strict safety. It wouldn't make sense to write a college argument paper against the safety of operating a steam locomotive. So I had to slightly change my argument. I read the 1472 or 15 year operating inspection which is I am pretty sure and correct me if I am wrong, a complete overhaul of the steam locomotive. I am going to focus on one tourist railroad and one steam locomotive in particular that is used only periodically despite much popular demand. They claim that the limited use complies with the FRA's 1472 day or 15 year operating days section as if to say that by limiting operating days they use the locomotive, they will prolong the complete overhaul. This is not true however because this section of Part 230 says that it is 1472 days of 15 years WHICHEVER comes first. Any opinion and corrections you can offer me will be greatly appreciated.

7470,
As you interpret it, the 1472 is kind of complete re-build. This rebuild is mostly boiler oriented, but can pass on to other aspects of the locomotive as well. Usually when a 1472 is required, the locomotive has other issues (like running gear, cellars, boxes, bearings...etc work that needs done). The most economical sense is to do all of this work at once due to the fact that if you are tearing the engine apart (pulling off the jacket/insulation etc) it makes everything a whole lot easier to do for the rest of the rebuild.
In terms of the engine you are going to talk about, I am going to make an educated guess based on your screen name. I have a few BIG beefs with their argument as you have stated, and I quote "one steam locomotive in particular that is used only periodically despite much popular demand. They claim that the limited use complies with the FRA's 1472 day or 15 year operating days section as if to say that by limiting operating days they use the locomotive, they will prolong the complete overhaul."
1. The part 230 you I sent you (and you have been reading) allows for what is called "out of service credit". This out of service credit can be put towards the time the locomotive goes between it's 1472 day inspection. You are right in assuming that it will prolong the 1472, but when it comes right down to it, if they want to run steam they will run steam. The quote above sounds like it comes from people who don't have a good steam program, and either can't or don't want to hire "real" steam guys to work on the engine. If that is not the case then they are CHEAP and headed for a Gettysburg of their own. Saving for the 1472 and having people who are certified to do it (like a lot of steam programs do) can alleviate a lot of these issues long before they become a problem.
2. Remember that the steam world (people that can really run/work on them) are a dying craft. To get people hired full time to work on it you have to be willing to pay for them, and the 7470's owners are C-H-E-A-P, cheap! the deferred maintanence program that they practice may be very good "smoke and mirros" now, but when it comes time to put the engine out, they have to scramble last minute to get the FRA inspectors there. Beware of programs like that which don't really show REAL progress on the locomotive. Reading 230 and the safety rules, you should see more of what I mean. You have all ready seen some, now learn some more. You young guys are the future of our hobby, passion, and the engines we have worked so hard to save.

You are correct that I have chosen locomotive 7470. You hit everything right on the head. I have been reading the Gettysburg report and seriously can't keep myself from reading it. It is so interesting (Although tragic) and I am learning so much more about steam locomotives through it that I didn't know before. I purchased the 1925 locomotive cyclopedia because I was told it was the best way to learn about steam locomotives. I have been doing so much reading about them but reading the Gettysburg report makes it so much clearer and sparks a much deeper interest.

it is funny that you mention cheap ownership and how places like that are heading for their own Gettysburg. Although we really don't have proof that 7470 is not properly maintained (and if you do please fill me in) I still can't help but get a sense that it is not. Just from the way it looks compared to other huge steam operators locomotives. and the scrambling to get the FRA inspections at the last minute. I can't help but get a feeling that maybe they are indeed heading towards their own Gettysburg like situation. Again this is all speculations perhaps they do properly maintain 7470 and have really experienced crew members but with the lack of use and prolonging the 1472 it would seem just the opposite. I would feel much better if the FRA gave the 7470 one really good once over for the safety of not only the crew but the locomotive itself. And reading the Gettysburg report also makes the 49 CFR section 230 seem really justified. I no longer feel that these requirements are too strict. If anything I feel that the FRA should do anything in its power to make sure that these safety measures are in fact being taken and proper training of the crew take place. I would love to write a paper on the safety of 7470 but I have no concrete proof to support either side, just speculation.

Respond with as much as you can if you want to I love talking about this stuff. Thanks for all the help you've been giving me.
-Matt

And I just decided on the subject again. Third times a charm! I am going to write how the FRA should have all of these stipulations so that generations to come can enjoy steam locomotives and I am going to use the Gettysburg report as proof of my entire document. I also want to stress how the FRA should require some type of steam boiler training to crews that operate steam locomotives because reading the Gettysburg report I read numerous times how professional training was not required.

Again fill me in on anything I am leaving out and correct me on anything I have misinterpreted.

How's the paper coming? Did you finnish reading any of the reports I sent your way? If you need anymore please let me know.

Hi steamer. I finished all of the Gettysburg Report and hit some of the FRA report. Hell of an interesting report the Gettysburg is. I finished the paper and sent it to my professor. He sends it back and I re-edit it one more time before passing in the final copy. I'll let you know how he comments on it. Thanks for all the help. Without you I really would not have had a strong topic.

No problem. Let us know how it went, and if you need anything else for the re-write, feel free to ask.

I got the paper back today. You were right about having more than just those two sources. Do you have any recommendations? The final revision is due day after tomorrow.

Hey, would you mind offering a PDF of your report?

It would be interesting to read.