The spreadsheet that has been under construction is now finished. I think it exists now as it will exist in its final state. The spreadsheet was designed to support the thesis:
Despite other contributing factors, American railroads adopted Diesel locomotives primarily because Diesel technology promised mechanical advantages to alleviate real economic problems.
The spreadsheet as it is now is avaliable at:
http://www.4shared.com/file/40524635/2f1502f5/Senior_Exit_Project_-_B.html
Over the course of the project, the spreadsheet has evolved from a model, to both a model, as well as an index. I will now provide an overview of the spreadsheet, highlighting the functionality of each section of the spreadsheet as well as its importance.
The Model
Starting at the top of the spreadsheet, the first thing visible is the model. The first component of the model is a tool to calculate the cost of operating three very widely used Diesels for a given number of hours. The Also HH1000, NW2, and E3AB were all widely used around the mid 20th century, and were important first-generation Diesel engines to the railroads. The data provided was collected in 1939.
The model itself is inflation adjusted for 2007 dollars, to provide more tangible results for a modern user. From the results, it can be seen that from the costs seem rather low. This can be attributed to several factors. Firstly, the cost of labor, which is one of the largest components of locomotive operation, is not listed. This cost was unable to be found through research. Also, the price of many supplies for the operation of these locomotives has inflated much more quickly than the US dollar. An inflation calculator was found to determine costs in 2007 dollars, but a better means to measure the costs in 2007 dollars might be to trace the value of each individual component from 1939 to 2007. This would be impossible however, because the categories found, are relatively vague, and do not consist of one commodity that can be traced.
The second portion of the model consists of two parts. The first part is a tool to calculate the maintenance cost of a Santa-Fe Railroad 4-8-4 class steam locomotive per mile in 1944. The cost of maintenance was found to be $5.28 per mile in 2007 dollars from the data that was found. This is considerably higher than the cost of Diesel locomotives that was found. The Diesel locomotives had maintenance costs per hour around three or four dollars. The average speed at which locomotives operated was around thirty miles per hour. This means that the Diesels cost three or four dollars for up to thirty miles from the information provided. This is significantly higher than the steam data found on the Santa Fe 4-8-4 engines found.
It is important to note however, that this comparison is seriously flawed. The cost of operating a giant locomotive is most certainly more than 3 or 4 dollars per hour, or 5 per mile, for maintenance. In my personal opinion, I believe costs were omitted in both of these sets of data. An interesting comparison is provided however, showing, with the limited data available, that Diesel technology may be cheaper than steam at least in maintenance costs.
The third section within the model deals with the average cost of a steam locomotive in 1891. The data was found in a study investigating the costs of a new type of steam locomotive then introduced, the condensing locomotive. The data includes material and labor costs, costs previously unseen in the other data. What can be compared to the Diesel locomotives is the cost of maintenance. The average cost of maintenance for a steam locomotive in 1891 is even higher than the cost of maintenance per mile of a 1944 Santa Fe 4-8-4. Diesel offers an even greater advantage here. Also, the cost of fuel can be compared. Considering the number of miles a locomotive runs in an hour, the average cost of coal at $2.51 an hour, creates an hourly cost of coal much higher than the cost of fuel for the Diesel engines.
From this model, although comparisons are very difficult because of different types of data (cost per mile vs. cost per hour), it has been shown that Diesels provided mechanical advantage over steam locomotives in the cost of maintenance as well as in fuel.
Index
The index provided here shows long-term trends in the railroad industry.
The first list of data shows the number of locomotives in operation. From the data, it can easily be seen that by the mid-20th century, the number of steam locomotives was declining, and the number of Diesel locomotives was increasing. After 1952, there were more Diesel locomotives in operation than steam locomotives.
The next list of data is perhaps the clearest indicator that Diesels helped alleviate real economic problems. The next set of data illustrates the operating ratio of engines in three major categories. An operating ratio is defined as:
Cost of a particular element of a locomotive
Total revenue generated by the locomotive
The operating ratios for engineers (labor), fuel, and repairs are shown. A high correlation is seen between the widespread advent of Diesel technology and a drastic drop in operating ratios. This demonstrates the economic benefits of Diesels.
The next list of data describes the number of locomotives per train. Fewer locomotives mean less cost. The correlation between the advent of Diesels and fewer engines per train also demonstrates the benefits of Diesels.
The next list of data describes the average tonnage and average number of cars per train. Correlation can be seen again. Tonnage for both passenger and freight trains, as well as train length all increased with the advent of Diesels. This allowed for better financial performance by the railroads.
Finally, revenue ton-miles are listed. Revenue ton-miles are defined as:
(Number of tons carried by railroads for revenue) x (number of miles the tons are carried)
More ton-miles indicate that railroads are busier and are generating more cash flow. This is generally good for the railroads. Again, there is high correlation between the advent of Diesels, and high ton-mileage per year for railroads. It should also be noted that ton-mileage increased with the advent of WWII in the early 1940’s. Higher rail traffic due to WWII may have been represented in higher ton-mileage, but ton-mileage remained high after the war. The advent of Diesels is the most major change in railroads before and after the war, so if any change in the railroads led to sustained high ton-mileage; it was therefore the advent of Diesels.
Conclusion
From both the index and model portions of the data, the superiority of Diesel technology over steam can be seen economically. The many different sections of the PowerPoint and the series of data all show that Diesels improved the economic conditions of the railroads, alleviating real economic problems faced by the Railroads. The data found in this spreadsheet fully supports the thesis:
Despite other contributing factors, American railroads adopted Diesel locomotives primarily because Diesel technology promised mechanical advantages to alleviate real economic problems.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Saturday, March 8, 2008
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!
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!
Monday, March 3, 2008
Chugging Along....
The spreadsheet model has been updated! check back to the link http://www.4shared.com/dir/5878411/bcf7dabd/sharing.html, and view the file "(2) Senior Exit Project.xls." This is the newest version of the spreadsheet.
Data has been added at the bottom of the spreadsheet, to describe the cost of operating Alco HH1000, EMC NW2, and EMC E3AB units per hour in 1939. Data was collected in 1939 dollars, but as adjusted for inflation, so that the equivalent costs are displayed in 2007 dollars.
It seems that the calculated costs per service hour are slightly low. These low numbers might be attributed to the cost of fuel. In 1939, fuel was much less expensive relative to other products than it is now. When I converted the costs, Inflation was adjusted using a calculator based upon an average consumer price index, however the cost of fossil fuel has risen many times this amount.
The relatively low cost of fuel during the period of transition from steam to Diesel,provides further incentive for railroads to switch to diesel
I tried to fix all issues that were addressed with the original version of the powerpoint. Please leave further comments and suggestions. This thing is still only in initial phases.
Data has been added at the bottom of the spreadsheet, to describe the cost of operating Alco HH1000, EMC NW2, and EMC E3AB units per hour in 1939. Data was collected in 1939 dollars, but as adjusted for inflation, so that the equivalent costs are displayed in 2007 dollars.
It seems that the calculated costs per service hour are slightly low. These low numbers might be attributed to the cost of fuel. In 1939, fuel was much less expensive relative to other products than it is now. When I converted the costs, Inflation was adjusted using a calculator based upon an average consumer price index, however the cost of fossil fuel has risen many times this amount.
The relatively low cost of fuel during the period of transition from steam to Diesel,provides further incentive for railroads to switch to diesel
I tried to fix all issues that were addressed with the original version of the powerpoint. Please leave further comments and suggestions. This thing is still only in initial phases.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Off on the Right Track...
Over the course of the next few weeks, this blog will attempt to evaluate steam and Diesel locomotive power on American railroads, with the aim to determine that Diesel power has distinct economic advantages. This blog will be the site of the development of an excel computer model to calculate operating costs of Diesel and steam locomotives. If all goes at planned, the model will be used to empirically demonstrate the superiority of Diesel locomotion.
The first construction work on the model can be seen at the link:
http://www.4shared.com/dir/5878411/bcf7dabd/sharing.html
A version in both word 2003 and word 2007 formats has been uploaded.
The "model"....although it is just lists of data right now.... contains two sets of data. The first set of data shows the numbers of steam and diesel locomotives held in total by American railroads every year during the transition from steam to diesel power. All data was drawn from a paper by HF Brown written in 1961.
The second set displays the average operating ratio of locomotives during the same transition period. Operating ratio for a certain expense of a locomotive is defined as [cost of a certain expense generated by the engine]/[total revenue generated by engine].
Between the two sets of data, the correlation is striking, between the appearance of diesels, and the decrease in operating ratio for the average locomotive. These two data sets alone may prove Diesel locomotives to be more efficient than steam. This efficiency was a major reason why the Diesel locomotive was chosen to replace steam on American railroads.
One last thing about the model, above each set of data, there exists an input. A year may be entered into the box that appears appropriate, and the corresponding values for that year will appear in the same row.
If you view the spreadsheet model as it is now, please comment and give some feedback! Let me know if I'm on the right track! ...pun totally intended.
Thanks!
PF
The first construction work on the model can be seen at the link:
http://www.4shared.com/dir/5878411/bcf7dabd/sharing.html
A version in both word 2003 and word 2007 formats has been uploaded.
The "model"....although it is just lists of data right now.... contains two sets of data. The first set of data shows the numbers of steam and diesel locomotives held in total by American railroads every year during the transition from steam to diesel power. All data was drawn from a paper by HF Brown written in 1961.
The second set displays the average operating ratio of locomotives during the same transition period. Operating ratio for a certain expense of a locomotive is defined as [cost of a certain expense generated by the engine]/[total revenue generated by engine].
Between the two sets of data, the correlation is striking, between the appearance of diesels, and the decrease in operating ratio for the average locomotive. These two data sets alone may prove Diesel locomotives to be more efficient than steam. This efficiency was a major reason why the Diesel locomotive was chosen to replace steam on American railroads.
One last thing about the model, above each set of data, there exists an input. A year may be entered into the box that appears appropriate, and the corresponding values for that year will appear in the same row.
If you view the spreadsheet model as it is now, please comment and give some feedback! Let me know if I'm on the right track! ...pun totally intended.
Thanks!
PF
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)