# Sad day, loss of a great US steam operation



## NHSTEAMER (Jan 2, 2008)

As posted on another forum it is a very sad day for steam railroading. Although not yet confirmed 100% it seems that the Grand Canyon Railway has made the decision to cancel all steam operations. Also it has be stated that they have already laid-off a large amount of there shop crew. Sad to see another Railroad derail there steam program, I am lucky I made it there last weekend as it seems to be the last.


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Bill 
What a disappointment, particularly since they just arranged for another locomotive. Quite a blow for steam and tourism. Glad we had the pleasure to make the trip. Interesting that the website does not indicate this, maybe if it was public there would be a great lost of attendance.


----------



## Gary Armitstead (Jan 2, 2008)

This IS sad news!/DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/shocked.gif


----------



## vsmith (Jan 2, 2008)

Oh, thats a bummer, any reasons given? 

Lets hope its just a temporary move during the slow winter season. I hope they can keep the operation afloat without them, the steam engines were a great draw. We went last year, its a nice trip. We were hoping to go again sometime early next year, I guess the fuel cost for the oil they fuel the locomotives with the necessary labor costs to maintain them just got too high. If it was just fuel prices, I'm surprised they didn't just raise the prices, maybe there were other issues like the boiler certifications and Kafkaesque insurance liability requirements.


----------



## NHSTEAMER (Jan 2, 2008)

Her is the link to some more information I found, seems like it is permanent not just for the winter. The railroad changed hands again and the new owner (Mr. Anschutz) has shut down steam at another railroad. 
[www.altamontpress.com]


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Interesting read on the Discussion in the thread: 
What i don't get is why they laid us off based on seniority not skill level. GCRY just lost all its steam people, all of their night crew is gone, its 2 big diesel mechanics, 2 of its best machinists, and a damn good welder. all that's left is the electricians and the car shop guys.


----------



## vsmith (Jan 2, 2008)

Wow, I really wonder about its future viability without the steam draw, Those steam engines were a MAJOR part of its marketing PR and its draw. I sure hope the new owner doesnt screw with what else works well on the line, like the Dome Car service and such. 

Be interesting to see where their steam roster ends up now. 

What was the other RR this Mr. Anschutz shut the steam down at? Any word on how well its doing finacially afterwords?


----------



## NHSTEAMER (Jan 2, 2008)

I will pass this on, although I do not know much about it. According to what I have read this gentleman at some point owned the DRGW and the SP? I am not sure if there was a tourist railroad named the SP that is just what I read, someone here may know more about it.


----------



## markoles (Jan 2, 2008)

Bill, 

I read something similar. Apparently this guy had something to do with the Ski Train. 

Sorry to hear that steam will be gone from this operation. I had the opportunity to ride it in 1997, but because no steam was running that day, and we had been riding trains for nearly 2 weeks, we would skip it and ride the bus instead. 

Mark


----------



## San Juan (Jan 3, 2008)

If these rumors are true then this is a disaster, just a complete disaster /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/crying.gif 

Hard to see this happen after visiting the line in 1983 when it was at the brink of removal to riding the line the first year of operations in 1989. The transformation the Grand Canyon Railroad went through to reach its pinnacle of today has all been for not in my opinion. 

Steam was pivotal. I doubt diesel only will have the same pull, even with the vintage FPAs. Shame since the steam infrastructure was all there and vast amounts of capital were spent on this just to end so abruptly. I understand the economics if they had gradually reduced to no steam over the next few years, but to cut it all off when the full infrastructure was in place makes no sense to me at all. The only thing that I can possibly think of to rationalize this decision is that #4960 was due for major work. Then the decision starts making more sense. But this write up on their website describes just how much was spent to keep the locomotives running, especially the steamers: 

Grand Canyon Shops 

If this really is the infamous Philip Anshutz, then Mr. Anshutz you're well on your way to ruining yet another railroad. 

I'm so shocked I can't really say much more in a civil tongue so I'll cut it now.


----------



## vsmith (Jan 2, 2008)

I suspect it may have more to do with the costs of labor to maintain the engines, workers liability and insurance costs and the ongoing costs to keep the locomotives in daily working order. The bottom line keeping a steam engine in working order can be very expensive in all these catagories, given the steam engine was due for a costly major overhaul. Sad if thats the case, that the new owners are more concerned about the bottom line dollars then the value of having real steam engines working the line as a tourist magnet. I would have thought they would have tried to find some middle ground instead of such a Draconian action.


----------



## rpc7271 (Jan 2, 2008)

I find this hard to believe. The GCRR receives a large subsidy from the National Park Service to operate as it is an alternative method of getting to the Grand Canyon. If people stop riding the train to get there they will loose a large part of their operating funds. They do have diesel locos but i won't be riding any of them.


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Could be with budget cuts in federal funding combined with new ownership made the steam program go away as we have discussed. But if one looks at the model of the Strasburg RR in PA the GCR had the right combination: great shops, good attraction and tourism. So, it could be made to work if one wanted to make the correct investments.


----------



## Robbie Hanson (Jan 4, 2008)

Here's a link on Mr. Anschutz--he apparently bought the D&RGW, then the Southern Pacific, and then sold out to Union Pacific. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Anschutz


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Robbie you are quite correct in his ownership of the various RR. I think it all comes down to money and the cost to operate and comply with the FRA rules for steam. They are high maintenance item even tho the dude has tons of money. Its a same for someone of his caliber to quit running steam. A lot of folks disliked him when he owned RRs. /DesktopModules/NTForums/themes/mls/emoticons/sad.gif Later RJD


----------



## spodwo (Jan 2, 2008)

Those steam engines never did just run the cars up to the Grand Canyon. Everytime I saw them -they had diesels along for the ride. The cars they pulled and the number they pulled would have been too much for the Grand Canyon RR steam engines. We can blame someone but the truth is - it's a cost thing more so than anything else...and reliabillity. See my photos here: 
http://lizardattitude.homestead.com/LiZardDtTiTuDe_realtrains08.html


----------



## insanerocketkid (Jan 2, 2008)

To be honest, spodwo, they could very well have hauled the steam excursions alone... Problem was, the engines dont have HEP power -- so unless they have a power car (which may or may not be the case), they need a diesel to provide the HEP power.. 

Mike


----------



## Kurt Sykes (Feb 28, 2008)

In the late 90s when I rode that train. 
It was steam only,and Pullman cars only. 
It was a terrific ride........Staged train robberys and all.


----------



## vsmith (Jan 2, 2008)

GCRR trains do have a special HEP car, that allows the trains to run regardless of what locomotive is pulling it. 

http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/7/9/0/7790.1168610400.jpg 
HEP car, between the 1st passenger car and the second Alco unit. 

I am still wondering what the long term plan for the GCRR is thru Xanterra, I mean if there so Green that they are killing the steam engines and maybe even the Alco's, whats left to pull the trains? They would need twice the number of F40ph's they currently have, and I would really hate to see some generic GP unit at point. Maybe a fleet of Green Goats? 

I still think the suits are looking at this from a bottom line cost savings measure more so than any "green" considerations, my concern is that at the time Xanterra took over operations in '07 there was a stated plan to try and severly limit auto traffic into the canyon and to make the GCRR the primary point of entry for people into the park, which to my interpretation could signal essentially turning it into more of a transit system than a tourist line, and as such the costs associated with the steam loco's would not figure into the bottom line, not to mention the labor costs asociated, the proof will be in what they chose as motive power from here on out.


----------



## Russell Miller (Jan 3, 2008)

All I can say is that if they make it a nontourist line then they better lower their prices. $65 per person minimum is too high for a family to pay. 
Russ


----------



## railgeek (Jan 15, 2008)

Anschuz is a jerk. He ran the D&RGW into the ground and almost eliminated the ski train.


----------



## roadranger (Jan 6, 2008)

As a former shop employee of the GCR, still in contact with current employees, here's my take on the situation; 
It was the former owner, Max Bigert, who desired a steam operation for his railroad. He even sunk $1.2 million into rebuilding the 4960 into their large road locomotive. 
However, the writing was on the wall when the Marketing Dept. realized in the late 1990's that the major draw for a majority of ridership was NOT the steam locomotives. 
That is when the steam program was downsized from year round to summers only, and diesels were used for economy of service 3/4's of the year. 
The railroad concentrated on ALCO FPA-4 diesels for service, as they were cheap to acquire from VIA, they were a classic 'covered wagon' profile, and fairly economical to run. 

Now Xanterra owns the railroad. It claims to be a "Green" Corporation and does NOT want to deal with the environmental problems of fuel oil, lube oil, and boiler water treatments. 
Did you know the Nat'l. Park Service does not provide boiler water to the RR up at the Canyon itself, and that the RR has to bring it's own boiler water up in tank cars ? 
WAY too many operational/environmental problems with steam for the new owners to handle. 

Xanterra has also found that the ALCO engine parts are getting harder to source out, the engines are rated only 1800 horsepower, and have no HEP- requiring the use of a "power car" with it's own maintenance/fueling problems. Hence they are moving to the EMD F40PH's rated at 3000 hp (fewer engines needed per train) with built in HEP. EMD parts are easily obtained, and I understand Xanterra will contract out to outside shops for heavy repairs. No need for mechanics in their shop, now. 
Interestingly enough, it's only the "1st class" cars that require HEP power. The older "2nd Class" Harriman coaches are still steam heated and require a steam generator boiler (in the power car) for winter heating. 

I understand that Xanterra wants to "stuff and mount" on the property their 2 perfectly sound operational steam locomotives, the 4960 and the 29. 
It is unfortunate these engines are not sold off as the #18 was (to San Luis and Rio Grande) to continue operating for the "appreciative" general public. 
Business is business, I guess....


----------



## vsmith (Jan 2, 2008)

"Enviromental concerns" my left foot! I knew it was bottom line issues.

"Stuff n mount" to me is a sour grapes attitude. We wont run them, but we wont let anyone else run them either so you can't pollute the air by running them on your RR. 

Shame, but lets see if they start running short of cash for new engines, I'm sure they could very well end up on the auction block anyways.


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

Glad we made the run with the steam engines because we do not plan to do it again with diesel. In fact if we revisit the Canyon it would be by car thus the new owners will be losing customer base.


----------



## coolhand (Jan 7, 2008)

Tried to post htis earlier but was not able to log on. Made the trip Oct. 11 with the diesel and !st class cars. The ride was enjoyable. It was to cool to open the windows and smell the smoke anyhow.The last steam run was labor day. 
Talked with ticket agent and gift shop employee. The 1st said that the steamers are gone forever and that Anschuts was a big enviromentilist. 
The 2nd said that she believed EPA had something to due with it. We better pray that xanterra dosn't buy any more tourist steam rail roads. 
The Grand Canyon Rail Road news had an article about a big rail raod museum planned for Williams.


----------



## coolhand (Jan 7, 2008)

I forgot 4960 is already sitting next to thr station on a siding.


----------



## lvst4evr (Feb 28, 2008)

Charles; when we were there last march we were told that the park was probably going to close down the vehicle admission to the park. Maybe the tour buses, only, would be let in? Very bad mistake going before Memorial Day, but how was I to know that steam operations would stop at Labor Day! These so called "GREEN PEOPLE" are really getting carried away with their environmental policies!!! I'll never go back there! Jim


----------



## Charles (Jan 2, 2008)

So, is this going to be policy for all National Parks? Not mentioned as such on website. Cannot image limited access to our National Parks. Maybe, someone is in the pocketbook of a politician or two. Running live steam on the limited basis to and from the Canyon would have very little environmental impact. i can understand cost factors and profit but the outstanding engine shops, reduced steam schedule and better off season promotion the program could have continued if one wanted it to.


----------



## Tenn Steam (Jan 3, 2008)

My understanding is limited access is not only at Grand Canyon, but also some other parks. The problem is more traffic-with increased pollution true- but more concerned with overcrowed roadways, parking lots and other problems of a large vehicle population. 
I spent a summer in another western park and saw traffic jams due to any construction. At Great Smokey Mountain park, a bear cub can cause miles of backed up traffic. 
A train to visit the park would be great, but the cost of building a rail bed to all overlooks and trail heads would quickly end this dream. 
Bob


----------



## Dave -- Use Coal (Feb 19, 2008)

I have an excellant Pentrex Video titled Grand Canyon Railway. This video has great shots of the Mikado underway. (I am an old sailor -- is underway okay to use related to the railroad?) 

One of the major points the narrator makes is that the railroad can have a major affect for GREEN. The railroad will allow access to the caynon rim after car traffic is restricted 

Also, in the video there is a discussion of the need to hall water. It states the reason for halling water is the quality of water available at the rim. What is available is not suitable in the boiler. 

Of course, I have no insight into the thinking of the new owner, but would like to see the steam engines continue to run. I guess somewhere along the way business is business. Eventually we may be glad there are passanger trains at all, even if they are not pulled by steam.


----------

