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 jockellis</i> <br /><br />G'day, Y'all, <br /> While I grant that getting rid of steam was important, let's not forget that railroads were still in deep stinky until the government got rid of the ICC and all the old rules railroads had to live by thanks to excesses by the robber barons of the 19th century. <br />[/quote] <br /> <br />This raises a very important point. What metrics were the regulators using in setting rates during this period? Some utility boards today use a target ROI in setting rates. If inflation was increasing costs during the period, but the regulators felt a 4% ROI was sufficient, not much else matters. <br /> <br />I also disagree with the idea that the entire industry made a hasty decision based on little experience or over-zealous EMD salesmen.. For example, at UP Otto Jabelman made that decision after the war. As chief Mechanical Engineer during the 30's he was closely involved with the Streamliners. He was also responsible for the Northerns, Challangers, Big Boys, and had plans drawn up for a Super 800. At the time the decision was made UP had almost 10 years experience with the Streamliners as well as yard switchers on the west coast. Jabelman was also well aware of the failure of the 2 GE steam turbines. The road didn't dieselize all at once, but rather west to east over the next 10 years. They also bought about equally from EMD and Alco. <br /> <br />UP also had a large group of gas turbines and although they weren't a partner in the project by several east coast roads and the coal industry to develop a coal fired steam turbine, they went ahead and built one using the knowledge gained from that project. That effort which resulted in experimental designs for the N&W and C&O utilized some of the brightest minds in the country, was well funded, and lasted a number of years. It would seem that what those roads felt was no longer viable was the conventional reciprocating steam engine. It would also be very hard to believe that as part of that project they didn't study the comparative operating costs of conventional steam and diesels. In the end, both C&O and N&W bought diesels.
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