Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Steam Locomotives versus Diesels
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: <i>Originally posted by Old Timer</i> <br /><br />Sayeth futuremodal: <br /> <br />"With that being said, Mr. Sol has done a far better job of presenting a clear consise hypothesis than has Old Timer. Hands down." <br /> <br />Sorry, guys. I didn't realize I had to present a hypothesis. My position is that what should have happened did happen (dieselization, that is, if you've forgotten), and it happened for the best, and without it having happened, several railroads wouldn't have made it. <br /> <br />I'm not the one trying to revise history here, and history speaks for itself in spite of what Mr. Brown and his disciples have to say about it. If a good case needs to be made, they're the ones who need to make it, and they've all fallen short. <br /> <br />If what I said represents an "attack" on Mr. Brown, so be it. <br /> <br />Old Timer <br />[/quote] <br /> <br />This is just amazing. <br /> <br />Old Timer still is suggesting that Brown, Sol, et al are claiming that dieselization was bad. Hmmm, senility or obfuscation on Old Timer's part? <br /> <br />I'll give it one last shot. Here it goes.... <br /> <br />1. Dieselization was a good thing. No one is arguing anything to the contrary. <br /> <br />2. Going into massive debt for new technology that has no established long term track record is a bad thing. Do you wi***o argue that point to the contrary? If not, then state so for the record. <br /> <br />3. Junking older techology that has not used most of it's useful service life <i>can</i> often result in not meeting those original investment goals. You paid good money for those things, so if you don't use them to their full depreciation, your investment on <i>that</i> technology was wasted. Ergo, your new investment not only has to pay for itself, it also has to <b>make up </b> for the wasted investment as well in order to be a justified expenditure. If it doesn't, you've just compounded the wasted investment. Do you wi***o argue this point to the contrary? If not, state so for the record. <br /> <br />Do you get it now, Old Timer? <br /> <br />Dieselization wasn't bad. However, selling out to EMD en masse did result in a corresponding drop in ROI, as one should expect when corporations go into debt for unestablished technology. Getting rid of equipment that still had years of useful service life only compounded the debt accumulation.
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
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy