Marcos Buenijo wrote:
There has never been a steam locomotive built that incorporates all the advances made to date.
David Livingston wrote:My understanding of this issue was nevert that desil in itself was any cheaper nor was it more efficient than the stream engine . The problem was and still is the cost of maintainance. Every few years a stream engine has to be taken apart and rebuilt otherwise it becomes a dangerous object - think bomb . High pressure combined with steam rust metal fatigue etc is not a good combination .
Peter Mckinlay wrote:The high cost of water and its delivery to Steam trains is still relevant.
David Livingston wrote:I see the problem with compétition is that neither of your options Will beat electric either third rail or overhead
allen lumley wrote:Marcos Buenijo : When I was growing up all railroad men wanted to be thought of as having learned their craft in the 'Days of Steam', any problem would require a R/R man to speak about how the problem was solved in the old days ! Ballast was spoken of in the reverent tones a Car sales man off the 50s
and 60s would talk about 'Road hugging Weight'.
I guess my question is how does the modern steam engine deal with what was formally cinders,ashes, and clinkers, is this all now fly ash,and is it collected?
I do think steam engines have a future, but i still throw up a little in the back of my mouth when i hear about 'Clean Coal', if they can't make a stationary
plant that can compete with other Fossil Fuel Fired (new) plants a moving unit must have to pay a premium to do so or be allowed a sliding Particulate Matter
per mile scale !
David Livingston wrote:Well this is the last "proper" steam engine I know of that was built in the UK it was the Peppercorn Class A1 Tornado in 2008
It cost best part of 5million $