>
> Although there were some functional advantages and emotional
> attachments in the old technology, the efficiency and
> operational costs of the new technology are so superior, that
> the new displaced the old practically overnight.
>
I absolutely agree with your assessment. However, a number of railroads had
converted to burning oil instead of coal and that really improved things for
the steam engines. Certain major cities (NYC included) banned coal-fired
locomotives decades earlier.
The main reason, it is believed, that the transition to D-E engines was so
fast was that the rolling stock was worn out after WW2 and in need of
replacement anyway. Had engines been built and/or refurbished during WW2
(which rarely, if ever happened), it would have taken much longer to
amortize them off the books and justify the swift replacement.
OM-4-3-2 Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|