John,
Economics always has impact on everything. Economics is not mutually exclusive to historic preservation.
Colorado can not pay its way this year. If the C&TS only survives on grants, does it shut down in economic downturns because the states or feds or anyone else can not come up with the money? Then the cost of restarting needs to be added in. Look what it took to reopen the line in 1970 after 2-years of inactivity.
If the C&TS can pay its own operational costs, the shutdown senario is much less likely.
It does not matter about the motive power at all. Take SG, NG, steam, Diesel, etc.
IF the railroad takes care of its own expenses then it will survive. Then any grant money can go to restoring additional motive power or other rolling stock.
Survival of the C&TS is the most important item I see. Survival requires an economic model.
If the model is surviving off grants and being at the whims of the national economy and state economic problems, I'll disagree with you.
If the economic model is maintanance of operation from ticket receipts and any funds over and above operation expenses (profits) are turned back into the property, I'm behind you 100%.
As far as effeciency, if the C&TS was only interested in moving people from point A to point B, get an SD60MAC, straighten out the curves, level the hills and fill in the valleys. I'd fight you all the way.
I'm only interested in effeciency as far as using 100 year old steam technology with the outdated narrow gauge doctorine that has proven over time that NG is not viable. It is to show people what 1930 era railroading is all about.
To show the 1930 era off best, the riders need to see a freight on the line and meets between passenger and freights. However freights are increasing the expenses and not increasing the bottom line since the freights are for show and not hauling cargo.
You need to get a grip on your belief that extoling efficiency automatically excludes historical accuracy. It does not.
Doug vV