Climbing the Grade...

I have once again updated the spreadsheet. It can be seen at: http://www.4shared.com/dir/5878411/bcf7dabd/sharing.html. I have added several series of statistics, including average tonnage of train per year over the period of steam to diesel transition. Also, I have added the average length of both passenger and freight trains over this period and the average number of locomotives per train. The data points to increasing average tonnage of trains, fewer engines, as well as more cars per train. the most drastic changes occur in the late 1940's and early 1950's, coinciding exactly with the general adoption of Diesel technology. Coincidence? I think not.

Unfortunately however, these lists of data only have potential to really be an index of costs over the years, and not really a model of the operating expenses of locomotives.

Fortunately however, a something of a model is underway:

A few days ago, I found a little blurb about the cost of maintenance for the Santa Fe's 4-8-4 steam locomotives when delivered in 1944. Cost of maintenance was $1.79 per mile, in 2007 dollars. I have therefore added that information to the "model" section of the spreadsheet.

A bit of analysis:
Looking at the data, it can be seen that for the Diesels that have been modeled, maintenance costs ran at about 10 dollars or less per operating hour. The Santa Fe's massive 4-8-4 steam locomotives cost 1.79 per operating mile. Therefore, it can be seen that if these engines ran above about 5 miles for every hour of operation, Diesels offered drastic cost savings.

Granted however, the average diesel locomotive was not as powerful as the average steam locomotive when first introduced. Several Diesel locomotives were required to match the pulling power of one steam locomotive. Therefore, the number of miles required for operation every hour for Diesels to be advantageous must be multiplied by 4 or 5. More miles of operation are now required for every hour of operation, but the savings can still be seen.



One piece of data should now be noted that is displayed in the spreadsheet. The spreadsheet shows that the number of locomotives per train decreased over the period of transition from steam to diesel. This might seem outrageous, considering that several Diesels were required to replace the pulling power of one steam locomotive. The explaination lies in that several Diesels linked together, with A and B units, were actually several locomotives, but were counted as one locomotive unit in the railroad records. This causes the official count of locomotives per train to decrease in the books.


Also, I know that in the model, labor costs have not been addressed at all. Labor costs is where diesel nailed the coffin for steam. The costs of labor for diesel are phenomenally lower. I am still looking for data on this to show how much Diesel was drastically better than Diesel.


As work continues however, several problems arise. Data available for the actual model will be from many different sources, and will not always be compatible. As has already been shown, two types of data exist: cost per mile and cost per hour. Different types, sources, and formats of data from different years will all make it harder to compare the data found in the model of operating costs.


Work continues however on the spreadsheet. It can be viewed at:
http://www.4shared.com/dir/5878411/bcf7dabd/sharing.html.

Again, comments are welcome, and I would really like comments here of any kind!