[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/n/ - Transportation


Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 27 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]


The 4chan Vtuber Competition is over. Click here to see the winning entry!




Steam engines are way cooler and if given a chance could be cleaner and better that diesel, it's just water boiling and rising up, that stuff happens naturally to water after rain.
>>
>>1245235
You forgot about the part where you have to heat said water...
>>
>>1245235
Steam engines had their day. They're not coming back. Whatever replaces the diesel won't be boiling water.
>>
>inefficient
>very high maintenance
>takes more manpower than diesels
>extremely polluting
>terrible performance even compared to much smaller diesels
>>
>>1245240
Steam engines are very widely used still, just not on vehicles. Modern steam engines are extremely efficient, more efficient than even the best internal combustion engines. However, they are huge and require an enormous amount of water to operate, making them too heavy for practical use in any vehicle. They were ok to use on trains when there was no alternative, because trains themselves are huge and extremely heavy, so rail systems are built to minimize how often a train has to speed up or slow down, and they are never expected to accelerate quickly. However, for something like cars, frequent stops and starts are required, and they are expected to be able to accelerate up to cruising speed in seconds.

For large scale stationary engines, external combustion outperforms internal combustion by far, which is why almost all modern power plants use their fuel to make high pressure steam, and steam to power a steam turbine.
>>
File: swisselec6.jpg (39 KB, 468x318)
39 KB
39 KB JPG
>>
>>1245244
No shit. That's why we're talking about steam locomotives and not power plants in this thread.
>>
File: xxjcddw0xhez.jpg (951 KB, 4753x3169)
951 KB
951 KB JPG
>if only we could make stationary steam engines that power the moving part of the train from afar...
hmmmm, really makes you think.
>>
>>1245250
Ah, carry on then
>>
There's still a niche for steam locomotives, just fireless ones which need to have steam loaded into them from some water superheater and then have the steam stored in the locomotive at low atmospheric pressure inside the loco.
These fireless locos are useful for shunting operations since they have very high tractive effort, but since they're shunting, electrification would be out of the question, and the reason they're fireless is because they're operating around highly flamable or reactive materials. Fireless steam locomotives are still in limited use in chemical plants, where they shunt in taker wagons from a mainline to the plant.
>>
>>1245259
Based, although hydro-electricity is even more efficient as a power source for electrified rail.
>>
>>1245380
A lot of them were used in pharmaceutical plants, where a lot of steam would be generated already through chemical processes, and the risk of chemical fires was too great.
The UK highstreet chemist, Boots, used to own pharmaceutical plants before they outsourced it to other companies. For shunting operations inside plants, they used fireless locos.
Smaller shunters such as those used for hauling 2-3 wagons of delicate materials have since been replaced with battery operated shunters, such as in places like Sellafield in the UK.
>>
File: fireless shunter.jpg (170 KB, 1280x720)
170 KB
170 KB JPG
>>1245383
As said, only a few fireless locos are still in use in chemical plants. Here, the loco is hauling sodium carbonate, but other chemicals which are far more reactive required specialist rolling stock.
>>
File: brian genus.jpg (52 KB, 638x1000)
52 KB
52 KB JPG
>>1245381
>he cares about where a train's electricity comes from
>>
File: T14444Englewood.jpg (331 KB, 1024x645)
331 KB
331 KB JPG
>>1245235
They're really fucking cool in a way that diesels can never be, Anon, but there's a reason every railroad dropped them like a hot potato when the diesels came around. They're nowhere near as practical.

Still, wish we had saved more of them, late-model steam especially. Late-model steam was the fucking coolest. You got all the crazy or elegant designs as a last-ditch effort to compete with the diesels. The Big Boys, NW 611, PRR T1, were all incredibly unique locomotive designs. We're amazingly lucky to 2/3 of them today.
>>
>>1245398
It's really a shame that of the steam locomotives that didn't get scrapped, very few of them are operational and only a few of those could be feasibly made operational.
>>
>>1245398
Isn't there a group building a new T1 from the original plans?
>>
>>1245426
Yes and the chances of it happening are close to 0
>>
>>1245390
>he doesn't
>>
File: carr.jpg (12 KB, 341x223)
12 KB
12 KB JPG
God i live this strange thing.
>>
Why are there no diesel engines that just emulate steam engines using a small waterbox for show?
I understand why there aren't industrial/commercial ones, but what about the luxury consumer train lines? An art deco styled diesel would be badass. Or the rare steam-diesel hybrid.

I swear, the wrong assholes win the lottery. If I had several hundred million dollars, I'd immediately cement my position as the most autistic lottery winner by blowing half of it on making a single train.
>>
File: blacolvelsey.jpg (126 KB, 800x533)
126 KB
126 KB JPG
>>1245622
There are tons of them on miniature railways, minus the waterbox. In fact the oldest working diesel locomotive is steam-outline.
>>
>>1245413
There a quite a few floating around the United States. There are the standard gauge eight coupled locos that get a lot of press, but there are also quite a few smaller steam locomotives still running out there, especially industrial tank locomotives made by H K Porter and Vulcan Ironworks. One of my favorites is a one off 4-6-2 Pacific built for the Little River Railroad by Baldwin. The LRRR #110 is the smallest standard gauge Pacific built in the US weighing in at 99.5 tons empty. It was built in 1911 and has been in near continuous service except for a 20 year period of storage starting in the late 1950's. It's early life was spent hauling passenger trains on logging logging railroads in Tennessee and was built with rough track and tight curves in mind. The center drivers are blind and the #110 is particularly sure-footed over rough track.
>>
>>1245459

Cramptons are basically steam dragsters.
>>
File: SP_1402.Speed.GLD.small.jpg (205 KB, 1000x571)
205 KB
205 KB JPG
4-4-0 best steam
>>
>>1245442
Mate, have you looked out a window lately? Trump's the president, private companies are running passenger trains, and nothing makes sense anymore. It has a chance.
>>
File: 05.003~DRG-bkh1[1].jpg (88 KB, 1339x764)
88 KB
88 KB JPG
>>1246365
4-6-4>4-4-0
>>
File: IMG_20170312_0087-L.jpg (130 KB, 800x503)
130 KB
130 KB JPG
>>1246365
Yes... YES!
>>
>>1246404
Edwardian 4-4-0s > all
>>
File: serveimage-5.jpg (110 KB, 1042x320)
110 KB
110 KB JPG
>>1246377
2-8-2 > 4-6-4
>>
>>1245442
Tell that to the Brits
They've got several new-build projects going on at the same time
>>
100 years after one of the worst railroad disasters in Sweden, the locomotive of the train that derailed in a landslide returned to where it all happened.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get%C3%A5_railroad_disaster
>>
File: fo4_locomotive.jpg (451 KB, 1920x1080)
451 KB
451 KB JPG
>>1245235

a nuke steam engine would be pretty neat
>>
>>1246418
Shame hardly any survived. It would make a nice change seeing some of them on heritage lines as opposed to standard 4 tanks & black 5's.
>>
File: PRR_S2.jpg (120 KB, 863x426)
120 KB
120 KB JPG
>>1246437
>>
File: x32.jpg (116 KB, 900x461)
116 KB
116 KB JPG
Victorian Railways X Class
>>
>>1246437

wtf
>>
>>1245442
They have the tender, the cab, some bits of the front, a driving wheel, and parts of the boiler. It might just happen.
>>
File: br96e.jpg (166 KB, 833x313)
166 KB
166 KB JPG
Bumping with GT 2 x 4/4. None of these absolute units survive, just need a mad Kraut rich enough to want to build one.





Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.