I love steam as well but... There were many issues related to steam vs diesel and or electric: Diesels can be MU'd. This allows for a variety of power arrangements. Big steam was limited in application whereas lots of smaller road diesels were not. There is also the need for stopping for water, yes bigger and even secondary tenders can solve this. Perhaps another issue that was part of the demise is the manufacturers stopped making them after a while. Even N&W who held out the longest of all 1st class lines, bless their hearts, finally gave in to market pressures. Of course we do have steam engines of a sort running in our submarine fleet. I assume the reactors are used to generate steam to run turbines. If they can do it in a sub why not have reactor powered steam engines!!! he he he Sorry just had to throw that last option into the mix just for fun.
Comment from steam nut from down under. The rapid transition to diesel in the US was due to several factors. First was the massive traffic loads imposed on railroads in WW2 that saw most steam locomotives needing major shopping/rebuilding. Second was the availability of diesels due to the lifting of wartime construction limitations on diesel builders. In short, the diesel appeard at the right time. The operating cost comparisons did have one interesting test done by the Nickel Plate. They tested four unit EMD F units and decided to stick with their Berkshires as they were cheaper to run and maintain. We had steam in Australia into the early seventies. The big power seemed to be scrapped first and the older locos with lighter axle loads were retained for branch line use. That is until the diesel plague spread. I have fond memories from 1958 coming home from school on a trian hauled by an 1892 bulit 4-6-0 with 60" drivers. This old thing would run for miles at 70MPH without any fuss. The crew liked this locomotive. Gary
