This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Room 101 - Steam, Diesel or Electric trains?

If you had to put either steam, diesel or electric trains into ‘room 101’, which would it be and why?  ? 

???

  • Michael Harding: 
     

    Being in my eightieth year my memory sometimes lets me down but I'm pretty sure that when I was a member of the Instution of Locomotive Engineers the consensus was that a national network of steam hauled stock had become a financial and operating liability.  I doubt that much has changed but nostalgia is always with us … I gather vinyl records are proving more popular than CDs.

    Michael I am sure you are right. But again the whole emphasis of the industry post war was to limp along. No real money was put into steam From a central point of view and individual companies were at the forefront of R&D.

    I will give an example. Sentinel https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sentinel-Cammell_Steam_Railcar_No_5208_g.jpg#/media/File:Sentinel-Cammell_Steam_Railcar_No_5208_g.jpg made railcars. If I remember correctly, using a low water volume boiler, fully automatic, oil fired at 300psi. 
     

    From the website “The unit is articulated, the three coaches sharing four bogies instead of six that would be required if normal practice were followed. The boiler is a Woolnough ‘three drum’ marine type and is oil-fired. It supplies steam to a pair of six-cylinder engines which drive the wheels of two bogies via Cardan shafts. The steam boiler is in one end of the coach (3rd class because of the heat), the middle coach was 2nd class, and the end coach was 1st class. Each coach had a toilet appropriate to the class!

    Top speed of the unit is over 60 mph and it seats 186 passengers. It was used on Cairo suburban services, based at El Wasta depot, some 50 miles south of Cairo. It also worked around Tanta, 50 miles north of Cairo. It was withdrawn from service in 1962, when it was put into storage at El Wasta.” 
     

    Technical Details

    Boiler335 psi three drum water tube boiler.
    EngineTwo 6 cylinder single acting compact steam engine, driving the last and first articulated bogies of the power car.
    RegulatorHoused in the boiler room. Controlled by hydraulics from driving compartment at either end of the unit.
    ControlNotching up of engines by hydraulics from driving compartments. 
    Series of lights to indicate regulator position and notched up position.
    Boiler Feed         Automatic with a float valve controlling a feed water pump. Standby injector.
    FuelHeavy Bunker C Oil which is heated, strained, reheated and blown under pressure into the boiler firebox.
    BrakesStandard Westinghouse air system

    No company, as far as I am aware, found reliable materials to produce, say 1000 to 1500psi boilers and therefore the thermal efficiency was never really improved. And more importantly the UK or Europe did not purchase any, thus giving Rolls Royce who took over Sentinel in 1956, no reason to continue.

     

    Russ

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member

    Being in my eightieth year my memory sometimes lets me down but I'm pretty sure that when I was a member of the Instution of Locomotive Engineers the consensus was that a national network of steam hauled stock had become a financial and operating liability.  I doubt that much has changed but nostalgia is always with us … I gather vinyl records are proving more popular than CDs.

  • If only they would run on 100% bio diesel……

  • A 100kW fusion device as a heat source = environmentally friendly steam engine. Low reving. If I remember correctly Stanley steamer had just 15 moving parts….

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member

     

    fb2324bd2921d2afd87239a6916024e1-original-ffd55993-9862-41f7-a6f0-b310c6ddadd0.jpg

    Maybe steam is not dead. In the meantime  Tornado has been out today stretching its legs, remember brand new a few years ago, built entirely by enthusiasts funded by enthusiasts and pulling revenue earning train but burning Russian coal because of the PC brigade shipped right around Europe. About 6 or 8 full size ‘extinct locos are in the process of being created. What we need is bio coal. It is being and can be made, but no R&D and no government interest- sound familiar?
     

     

    Tornado has shed-loads of electronics on board

  • Diesel engines are more reliable than either steam or electric. They are autonomous and unlike electric engines don't rely upon expensive and often vulnerable overhead electrical systems. Diesels are safe, powerful, reliable and efficient.

    Z.

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member

    I notice the East -West rail line have chosen diesel for the new trains on this new line…..

  • Now lets be serious here. R&D stopped in 1937 when Fury blew up. Ok there was an attempt by Bullid to buck the trend, which was largely successful. The Rugby testing plant was really getting somewhere then it was closed.

    There is no doubt in many enthusiast minds that the oil lobby won, and the coal lobby lost. Steam on the road was also killed by the taxation brought in 1932, again as part of the lobbying by oil and rubber companies. As far as I am aware electronics have never been used on a reciprocating steam engine, so for example automatic cut off has never been tried?
     

    I am writing a book about steam buses, which ran in London from 1903 to about 1920. Smooth quite, very rapid acceleration, beaten by a cartel and forced out. 
     

    But the central thing is that engineers worked with what fuel they had.

    A group of Swiss engineers have a scheme to generate steam from a central rubbish plant and to use the storage capacity of steam to run every vehicle within an airport. The CO2 and costings are impressive. Can they get funding? Can they heck.

    so everyone is rushing down the hydrogen route, which is very difficult to compress and store, ignoring all other opportunities, and using precious metals in fuel cells which are only marginally better at conversion than - a steam engine! So why not use the technology that we have already, technicians already building engines and boilers, and burn hydrogen or better still methanol derived from scrap wood with solar and wind energy doing the distilling?

    Picture by coolbowers on Twitter at Chester

    fb2324bd2921d2afd87239a6916024e1-original-ffd55993-9862-41f7-a6f0-b310c6ddadd0.jpg

    Maybe steam is not dead. In the meantime  Tornado has been out today stretching its legs, remember brand new a few years ago, built entirely by enthusiasts funded by enthusiasts and pulling revenue earning train but burning Russian coal because of the PC brigade shipped right around Europe. About 6 or 8 full size ‘extinct locos are in the process of being created. What we need is bio coal. It is being and can be made, but no R&D and no government interest- sound familiar?
     

    end of rant!

     

    Russell Bulley C.Eng B.Eng MIET

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member

    Electric traction is highly capital intensive, steam traction is highly labour intensive and requires [say] three hours to get a head of steam.  Diesel traction is lowish capital cost and available at the throw of a switch.  You choose.

  • ohhh tricky one , heritage locomotives are nice to see and in the larger scheme of things dont do much harm , on the few days they run , probably electric ,so you can get a nice view out of the window as you are carried on your journey .