Dollywood is converting former White Pass & Yukon steam locomotives to burn oil instead of coal. Totally understandable, but I'm always sad to see another hand-fired coal burning engine get converted to oil.

In this case, the locomotives burned both coal and oil in working lives in Alaska - so both fuel sources are historic for the locomotives.

With the open air cars on this railroad - cinders were often a problem, so this will be a win for the guests at the theme park.

Not only the cinders on the riders, but after the Gatlinburg fire there is a lot of concern of the possibility of starting track side fires. I imagine their insurance underwriter had a lot to do with the decision...

Easier to get oil than coal, too, even there in the mountains. Sogh…guess we should be glad they haven’t dieselized yet.

Hi
Coal engines converting to Oil, seems now to be the norm,, it is a shame Coal is now losing out,, but with the wildfires,, oil is the best replacement, But I will miss the sweet smell of soft coal smoke..
The Valley railroad in Connecticut is starting there conversion to Oil fired locomotives with there Chinese locomotive # 3025,, with the other two locomotives to follow.. as I read on another web site...
Too bad to see coal go,, how long will be before we see,, NKP # 765 or N&W 611 make the change,,, Pat.

And let's face it - the climate change is real and will only make dry seasons and fire dangers worse.

I've enjoyed many rides behind oil fired engines - but there is something special about coal and wood burning locomotives.

Some could say "why do you care what the locomotive is burning" but you could also ask "why do you care what type of locomotive it is" or even "why do you care if it's a train?"

Dollywood was my first cab ride as a kid - it was fascinating to watch them shovel the coal. Plus if it's a coal burning engine it's easy to give the cab rider the firemans seat since they won't be using it anyways haha.

As a fireman on a coal-fired locomotive, I love the smell, I love the challenge, and I love having an obscure skillset from 100 years ago, but I have to face reality that the climate is getting worse, coal will become more scarce, expensive, and probably lower quality as competition dwindles. The conditions to create new coal will never exist again on this planet, and even if we put all our scientific efforts into making coal the fuel of the future, we will run out of it eventually.

Enjoy it while you still can. This is a thing that will go away.

How possible/probable is it for coal from the stack to start a lineside fire?

Other than the fire on the D&S in Colorado, has a coal burning steam loco ever been assumed to have started a wildfire? I do remember a few issues with 3985 on the UP before it was converted to oil.

The Southern and NS steam programs never seemed to have issues with it nor has TVRM. Also, the R&N doesn't seem concerned nor the 765 and 1225 operators.

Is this just an "out west" dry grass issue?

Both coal and wood fired locos can start line-side fires from sparks. That's why there are screens in the smoke box or stack. They cut down but don't eliminate sparks up the stack. Oil firing has less propensity to blow hot bits out the stack.

Whether or not a fire starts depends on weather, available kindling, and overall environment you operate through. It can happen anywhere.

I can't speak as knowledgeably about other biomes or regions of the country, but even here in the humid Northeast there seems to have been a common understanding in the steam era that coal-burning steam locomotives will occasionally set fires. For example, the 1912 textbook Forestry in New England by Hawley and Hawes includes an explicit discussion of fire risk along railroads (p. 136):



The authors go on to discuss the unsatisfactory performance of spark arresters, and recommend maintaining a clean right of way and regular fire patrols in dry conditions.



I have a stack of old Maine state forest commissioners' reports from the 1900s that include tables of forest fires reported in the previous year for every county in the state, and the official cause recorded for more than a few of these incidents was "Railroad". (One in particular that caught my eye as a fan of the Maine narrow gauge roads was a 2000-acre fire in 1903 in Madrid in Franklin County, which would have been somewhere on either the Phillips & Rangeley RR or its Madrid RR logging line subsidary.)

-Philip Marshall
(PhD in forest ecology)

While not the intent of this thread - Dollywood may have chosen to convert to oil anyways - it is a reminder that it's important for all operations to operate as safely as possible.

I love Durango - but they should have been patroling and watching the area better. That mistake has cost the entire industry alot of money in insurance, oil conversion, etc.

It's why it is important to point out safety issues - a whistle blower can save lives and save an entire industry. Plus.... it's way more fun to blow steam whistles!!!! :)

I'm seeing lots of videos of opening weekend at Dollywood... I think they may have put the oil on the tracks? Slipping and sliding like crazy! haha.

But always good to hear steam in action :)

somewhat on the topic... I just read a really interesting thread on the narrow gauge about how the 20 operated on the D&S. Several of the fireman talked about how they had to fire differently on different parts of the line, and how they had to fire differently then on the Cumbres.

That's part of the art and the reason it all matters. That skill itself is part of "Railway Preservation"

Now on the topic of this thread - Dollywood has multiple reasons to convert to oil - I'm not faulting them at all and I'm glad they are investing the time and money to keep steam trains running. Dollywood could save lots of money by converting the train ride into a diesel and just taking it around the little loop around the fair.

It is a problem virtually everywhere when dry conditions exist. When particles of burning coal get below a certain size, and depending on how hard the locomotive is working, they can be literally sucked off the grates by the draft and blown out of the stack. When they land, they can still be red hot and easily kindle a fire if there is dry tinder available. Various types of spark arrestors exist, some more effective than others, but none is 100%. Many railroads, including the museum that I belong to, have a fire train, with firefighting equipment on board, staged and ready during dry seasons. In some cases, the fire train will actually shadow the steam train, if the threat is high enough. And yes, even in New England, we do occasionally cancel steam train service, if the fire danger is just too high.

Oil can also start fires, but that is often from firing mistakes, and the flaming oil is typically coming from the combustion chamber itself, not the stack.

Rust can do that too. It would seem like the rusty surface would provide more traction, not less, and for a bit it does. Then the rust crushes into tiny little particles that are like ball bearings.

They sure did, for lots of reasons. Hot cinders are an obvious one. Another big factor that isn't mentioned as often is cast iron brake shoes. They got red hot and threw sparks often. Hotboxes could also be a problem, though those were fairly infrequent.

It was kind of like how we see fires along the freeway from carelessly tossed cigarettes, people just said "that happens sometimes" and accepted it.

Another factor is that out west, cinders and small fires along the right away were common. So much so that I have to wonder if the smaller fires kept the brush from accumulating large debris piles that would cause larger and more destructive fires.