And what is for them to gain by sharing that info?

Exactly like you said you want to minimize every chance of people saying "good thing it didn't explode!".

If a movie theater said "We're sorry, the film showing tonight is canceled", would people really care that it was because the project bulb burned out or the projectionist called in with a hangover?

People just need to chill out.

Which people? People asking questions is wrong?

I was on an Iron Horse Ramble and we were told 2100 had a broken coupler spring and would be replaced at Reading. Sure enough when we got to Reading 2102 was waiting on the wye with steam up. 2100 cut off and headed for the Shop and 2102 finished the trip. We needed a Baldwin AS-16 over Tuscarora Grade where the T-1's were supposed to doublehead.

So sometimes they DO tell you.

Phil Mulligan

Obviously it was a minor issue as evidenced by the quick return to service.

As to the actual problem...thems that are talkin don't know...thems that know ain't talkin.


Ross Rowland

Just posted to their FB page:

Crew discovered a broken staybolt when they banked the fire Friday night. By Saturday morning, the firebox was cooled enough for a worker to enter. They determined it was a flexible stay, and they actually had a replacement on hand. Staybolt was replaced, engine was re-fired and was ready to go Sunday morning.

Pretty impressive work by Scott Lindsay and crew.

Here's the link.

https://www.facebook.com/norfolkandwest ... TvAGRgdjsl

Not so much a 'minor issue' as professionals doing their best effort.

In case you're curious about why I think organizations are tight lipped, it's because you get takes like this from randos.

He’s not wrong. Obviously I agree with 611’s decision - safety first. But nothing about his opinion is wrong, and he’s free to say it.

That comment actually makes the opposite case. It's a reply to the official story on the repair, but it's just some dude. For many, his comment may not even be visible. It certainly won't enjoy the same level of engagement that the original post itself will.

Nature abhors a vacuum. Why let speculation invade the space when your voice can be the first and the loudest in establishing the narrative? Any organization should want to control the message, but you can't influence that if you don't participate.

Letting armchair critics or chum dictate your marketing/communications is also ill-advised. It's not about the jerks, it's about everyone else who is silent, but nevertheless letting their perspective of an organization be informed. When you look at the view counts versus reply counts on threads here, TrainOrders, etc –– the view count will always outpace the actual people making comments, and that's because there are plenty of wallflowers who are there to observe, learn, and form or reinforce an opinion.

There will always be critics or malcontents, but being concerned with those folks instead of actual legitimate or bonafide supporters, donors, passengers, etc is not a great strategy.

I can appreciate the desire for reticence and quibble with messaging or timing, and in this case, I'm fairly sure some of the same people who would have been in a position to deliver the message were actively involved in the process of repairing the locomotive, and there couldn't have been a definite timeline established for a return to service, or an expectation set for a follow up given the hundreds of paying passengers they had to take care of first. But how you respond to sudden hardship or unexpected challenges actually stands to define your organization more than any carefully prepared press release.

There can't be a real dialogue, narrative, or message established by your organization if you do not participate in it.

I am sure he would be equally desirous of sharing the liability for a catastrophic accident from the bad staybolt.

Life was much cheaper in the age of steam than it is today.

One bad staybolt doesn't create a catastrophic failure. It does, however, shift its load onto adjacent staybolts which then are more prone to failure sooner so dealing with them on an as-found basis is, in our litigious society, a very good idea. I think there was an old story about the PRR boiler explosion that happened when the firebox let go due to several broken and plugged staybolts all in the same area, which is what happens when timely repairs aren't handled when the problem is still small.

It's a lot of Monday Morning Quarterbacking, and unless you've been in the hotseat to have to handle one yourself when 'something' happens, be happy when you're told and understanding when you're not.

I 'almost' had to cancel a high-profile mainline excursion when the host railroad discovered 2 of the 5 leased cars has expired COTS dates on them. They literally got reinspected and stencilled MINUTES before departure..... everyone remain calm......we're working on it.....

Also have been on the receiving end in the 'bad old days' of the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic when a 3-hour drive to Cleveland ended up with a 'surprise' substitution of a CSX GP40 instead of the 4070 on the point, when it was reported that the 'air compressor failed'. Nobody knew anything until the train arrived. Still sticks in my mind as a rather bitter dissapointment although I understood. And that wasn't the first time, or that last, that 4070 didn't answer the bell. Never did get to see it under steam.

A photo of the crew removing a portion of the boiler jacket was posted this morning.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/611Tracking/permalink/2571145543067752/

Looks like the broken stay must have been in the combustion chamber. I was thinking earlier it must be a bear to locate the corresponding outside end of a broken flexible stay based on the inside location, especially on a boiler with this many stays and full jacketing including the firebox sides.

You guys with plenty of hands-on experience, how do you do it? I can just imagine pulling off multiple pieces of the boiler jacket, digging through the insulation, and removing numerous caps before you stumble onto the right stay.

Against my better judgement I will enter into this conversation. Mostly because once I saw the press release and I had this thought. If it was truly one broken bolt, why did they not run then engine and fix it later. This only holds true if I understand CFR 230 correctly, which I read as stating if you don’t have two broken staybolts located within 24” of each other, then you can keep the locomotive in service for a maximum 30 days before fixing it.
I see two answers to this:
One is I read it the press release wrong or they had more than one bolt broken within a 24” area.
Second is they just aired on the side of safety. They wanted to examine the defect and make sure there is nothing else (potentially more serious) going on. They have a new partnership started with the host railroad that has them out on the mainline mixing in with freight and passenger trains. If that bolt would’ve led to something more and they stranded their train out on the mainline, that could’ve done much more damage to their reputation and future opportunities to operate on guest railroads then missing that one Saturday. Sure, you will end up with unhappy customers and railfans on that missed day, but at the end you hopefully strengthened your relationship with you host railroad showing you take safety and train reliability more seriously than a day of running.
At the end of the day, it boils down to a risk/reward scenario.