richs09 posted:
Hot Water -- wasn't the conversion to oil largely out of necessity? Short of hauling around your own coal and a front end loader, I'd guess coal isn't readily available in the first place and second, the emissions from coal firing are going to be more problematic than burning oil (are they not?).
Actually the two main issues were/are: 1) trackside fires set from the hot cinders, and 2) all handling and mess of the coal and ashes. When 3985 was still a coal burner, and went to the grand opening of the California State Railroad museum in 1981, she set so many fires that when the 10th anniversary of the museum was planned, the UP was informed that 3985 could not return. Thus, in 1989/1990, 3985 was converted to oil burning.
It seems like the conversion to oil came off without any real issues(?).
Maybe not. Reports have been that full working boiler pressure is difficult to maintain, under heavier throttle. so,,,,the book may still be out on the burner design.
So what does a "modern" oil-burning locomotive burn?
Reprocessed waste oil, or #5 power plant oil, if available.
I assume that the old bunker C (and its ilk) are no longer available (not to mention the problem of emissions) - so is it diesel #2 or ??
See answer above.
The run up Cajon pass (from Barstow to Colton) has some nifty scenery, but man-o-man, traffic on I-15 in that area is bad on a good day, let alone chock full of foamers jockeying for position...
