Dieselisation
Weighing against the cost of, and inertia against, replacing the large investment that railroads had in existing steam power were the dramatic increases in flexibility and efficiency with diesel. The fastest and most powerful steam locomotives were faster and more powerful than diesels; however, their range of efficient operation was severely limited. Diesels pro-rate their fuel usage to the length of trains, which a steam engine cannot do. Multiple-unit diesel power is scalable to power requirements with one locomotive crew; steam power is not. A high speed Hudson steam locomotive is good for only one situation, high speeds on level grades. The diesel locomotive can be operated by a single person, with no need of a fireman to run the boiler (two person cab crews may be required for other reasons). Also, diesels use much less fuel and no manpower when idling, something locomotives often do. Diesels can be parked running for days unattended, whereas steam engines must be constantly tended to if not completely shut down. Bringing a steam engine boiler up to operating temperature is often regarded as both an art and science, requiring much training and experience. A diesel is much simpler to start and shut down.
Union Pacific GTELs
Union Pacific had long sought the biggest and best locomotives. In the 1930s, a pair of steam turbine locomotives were tried but rejected. Before World War II, Union Pacific had been adding diesels to its roster, but none pulled road freight trains. The idea of using four diesels to equal the power of a steam locomotive was unappealing, so the search began for something bigger. General Electric had been building gas turbines for aircraft and proposed using something similar on a locomotive. Union Pacific thought maintenance costs for a locomotive were largely independent of its power, so a smaller number of more powerful locomotives would save money.