For all the excuses we're fed about why all of a sudden diesels must accompany steam for "insurance" reasons, and in light of the whole UP 844/UP 1982 fiasco, has there ever been a single instance where a Mainline steam engine had a failure that required a diesel to assist or rescue the steam powered train? I witnessed UP 1983 get its computers sprayed by steam from the 3985 inside a tunnel on the former WP in 2005, and now this, it seems that the people who think its a bright idea to have diesel assistance are, for lack of better words,completely full of @#$%&. Can anybody give a legitimate Reason why diesels continue to ruin steam excursions either aesthetically or mechanically. If it is purely insurance, it would seem more harm comes from having diesel assistance. Hasn't the time come to finally tell the lawyers and insurance agents to get lost? Why are pussy ass number crunchers and pale faced legal dweebs allowed to tell the company and the experienced people on the ground how to run trains? If this @#$%& continues, UP's world class steam program could be terminated for incidents like this that wouldn't have happened if they ran the 844 without a diesel, the way it's been done for 180 years.