Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by nanaimo73 Futuremodal- Old Timer is far more knowledgeable on this topic than you or I, and has had over 30 articles published in Trains magazine. [/quote] Well, you and I and most everyone else on this forum are less knowledgeable than those who are part and parcel of long term involvement in railroad operations. My opinion on this steam vs diesel topic has been formed by all the contributions presented. With that being said, Mr. Sol has done a far better job of presenting a clear consise hypothesis than has Old Timer. Hands down. There is also more to this topic that I have an inside track on that I would venture no one else has, and that is my current access to an analogous situation in the electric utility business. The steam vs diesel argument of old is mirrored by the analog vs AMR meter debate in the electric utility sector. Those electric (and gas) utilities that are rushing pell mell to automate all their meters are having the same kind of financial snags that the railroads had when they rushed pell mell to dieselize, and it can be summarized thusly - when you trash perfectly good older widgets (with years of depreciation left to go) to replace them with higher cost new widgets (and go into debt to purchase the new widgets en masse), you're going to have unintended consequences: (1) your credit standing takes a plumment, and (2) you still have no long term record to see how the new widgets will perform over the long term. Now, as most folks will aver, AMR's are of course "better" than analog meters because we're all going to get rid of a lot of meter reading labor, and all the little mistakes that human meter readers make, and that should in theory result in massive savings for our utility. It's the same with diesels - diesels are of course "better" than steam engines, because the railroads were able to get rid of alot of steam locomotive labor, and that in theory resulted in massive savings for the Railroad. But, it didn't work out that way in the railroad business, and it ain't working out that way in the utility sector. The reason? Such things need to be "massaged" into the operating framework by normal attrition, not shoved down the industry's throat. New technologies NEED a good long breaking in period to see how such newbies perform over the long run BEFORE they are allowed full control of their designated area of operation, and correct any snafu's and shortcomings that crop up. Once all is tried and true, by that time you should be able to fully implement the new technology WITHOUT massive layoffs, WITHOUT junking older technologies before their service life is ended, AND WITHOUT carrying a brand new mountain of debt into the mix. But, as we all know, management sometimes can get giddy with dreamy eyes over new technologies, exsascerbated by the inherent need to "keep up with the Jones'". Fatalism is it's own flaw.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag