Imaginary Locomotives

[sir douglas]

i wonder if an upsized GMAM garratts would do the job, the GMAMs were the biggest garratts ever at 191 tons on 4-8-2 + 2-8-4 wheels an 60700 lb of tractive effort @ 75%, just stick cabs on the end of that

 

im not that knowledgable on specifics and detailed stats, its all taken from my dad's garratt book, a very good book by the way by A.E.Durrant

[The Johnster]

Sticking cabs on the ends is a pretty big deal, and has never been done in this way.  it is presumably possible to control a modern steam locomotive remotely and electronically with the aid of servos driving the actual physical controls, but some controls have to be situated physically connected to the boiler (regulator, injectors) or cylinders (reverser).  On a conventional loco, this is done by connecting whatever the driver manipulates in the cab to the relevant gubbins by linkage, but the ACE super-garratt seems to not display any evidence of this and I assume remote controlling by servo is intended.

 

Firing must be achieved in a similar way, and coal firing even with a mechanical stoker would be very difficult to arrange; oil firing is pretty much essential for this loco.  It is achieved by a variable nozzle which emits a spray of oil in the 'firebox', which is then lit to heat the water.

 

This is all possible in theory, but to my knowledge has never been done in practice and may not be possible for reasons as yet undiscovered; this will remain the case until someone builds one and runs it, or at least a fully working (including the control systems) model of fairly large scale.  it is likely to prove a dead end with no significant advantages over ordinary diesel electric traction,  so it is very unlikely that anyone will be ever prepared to sink development cash into it, the reason the original 5AT and ACE projects never got beyond the drawing stage.

 

The only possible market I can see for any future steam development would be in a country rich in coal that could not for political reasons legally import oil, and I would have no intention of supporting the transport network of such a country.  North Korea fits the bill the closest at the moment, and I know little of their railways or motive power; some steam is stated to be 'still operational' in the Wikipedia entry.  Do they have coal?

 

In any case, the ACE project steam relies on oil firing, making it unsuitable for this largely theoretical scenario.

 

I do a lot of raining on people's parades in this thread; apologies!

Edited January 9, 2018 by The Johnster

[Coryton]

Sticking cabs on the ends is a pretty big deal, and has never been done in this way.  it is presumably possible to control a modern steam locomotive remotely and electronically with the aid of servos driving the actual physical controls, but some controls have to be situated physically connected to the boiler (regulator, injectors) or cylinders (reverser).  On a conventional loco, this is done by connecting whatever the driver manipulates in the cab to the relevant gubbins by linkage, but the ACE super-garratt seems to not display any evidence of this and I assume remote controlling by servo is intended.

 

Firing must be achieved in a similar way, and coal firing even with a mechanical stoker would be very difficult to arrange; oil firing is pretty much essential for this loco.  It is achieved by a variable nozzle which emits a spray of oil in the 'firebox', which is then lit to heat the water.

 

This is all possible in theory, but to my knowledge has never been done in practice and may not be possible for reasons as yet undiscovered; this will remain the case until someone builds one and runs it, or at least a fully working (including the control systems) model of fairly large scale.  it is likely to prove a dead end with no significant advantages over ordinary diesel electric traction,  so it is very unlikely that anyone will be ever prepared to sink development cash into it, the reason the original 5AT and ACE projects never got beyond the drawing stage.

 

The only possible market I can see for any future steam development would be in a country rich in coal that could not for political reasons legally import oil, and I would have no intention of supporting the transport network of such a country.  North Korea fits the bill the closest at the moment, and I know little of their railways or motive power; some steam is stated to be 'still operational' in the Wikipedia entry.  Do they have coal?

 

In any case, the ACE project steam relies on oil firing, making it unsuitable for this largely theoretical scenario.

 

I do a lot of raining on people's parades in this thread; apologies!

 

I'm pretty sure that it would be possible now to produce a single-manned double-cabbed steam engine, given sufficient development. I think we could replace manual controls with motorised ones, and probably something a bit more subtle than an enormous servo motor pulling a reversing lever. I would imagine that in any case rather than having conventional valve gear you'd just have electronically controlled valves on the cylinders - much easier to operate, less to maintain and essentially unlimited control over the valve timing. And while keeping the appropriate steam pressure in even an oil-fired locomotive isn't trivial, I think modern technology is probably up to the task (probably with the route profile loaded into a computer so it knows when gradients and speed restrictions are coming up).

 

Having read a book recently about Bulleid's Leader, I've been wondering what the next step could have been using the sort of technology available in the next couple of decades, e.g. maybe moving away from mechanical valve gear. Of course there was no point because that technology also included diesel engines that did everything that was needed. 

 

These days I'm sure we could do even better.

 

But as you say - who would want to put the money into something like that and why?

[Suzie]

Surely we must have the technology to pulverise coal and feed it into a fluid bed without requiring a man with a shovel. The whole idea of using a steam engine in modern times is to directly use coal - oil firing a steam engine is rather pointless when suitable oil burning internal combustion engines are readily available already. 

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

 

In any case, the ACE project steam relies on oil firing, making it unsuitable for this largely theoretical scenario.

 

 

Erm, oil firing?  American Coal Enterprises?  You can see where I'm going with this can't you

[runs as required]

i wonder if an upsized GMAM garratts would do the job, the GMAMs were the biggest garratts ever at 191 tons on 4-8-2 + 2-8-4 wheels an 60700 lb of tractive effort @ 75%, just stick cabs on the end of that

im not that knowledgable on specifics and detailed stats, its all taken from my dad's garratt book, a very good book by the way by A.E.Durrant

Weren't the metre gauge EAR 59 class 4-8-2+2-8-4 Gorton built Garratts at 252 tons, more powerful at 83,000 lbs, adhesive weight  160 tons ?

They were certainly the shiniest red locos I ever saw.

 

dh

[The Johnster]

Erm, oil firing?  American Coal Enterprises?  You can see where I'm going with this can't you

 

Ah.  You may have a point there, Fritters old bean!  These senior moments are becoming more joined up...

[Regularity]

Surely we must have the technology to pulverise coal and feed it into a fluid bed without requiring a man with a shovel. The whole idea of using a steam engine in modern times is to directly use coal - oil firing a steam engine is rather pointless when suitable oil burning internal combustion engines are readily available already.

 

There would still be an issue (!) with the various emissions: coal is a very dirty fuel.

[FPH 603]

There would still be an issue (!) with the various emissions: coal is a very dirty fuel.

As is diesel and petrol!

[Regularity]

Yes, but coal is the worst, I believe.

[The Johnster]

This one is hard to accurately quantify, as proponents of each method of traction and each fuel try to influence you efforts.  A steam locomotive has the potential to have much lower, effectively zero, emissions, when it is not being actively fired, such as when it is standing idle but in steam or coasting down Shap, whereas a diesel continually chucks out muck.  Steam, condensed into clouds of white water vapour drifting from cooling towers and falling as clean water droplets close to the source, is frequently used in images which purport to show heavy pollution in articles about global warming; you can rely on the British media to be inaccurate and sensationalist!

 

So, it is arguable that for some work, a modern steam loco, however fuelled, may have a better emissions performance than a diesel or even an electric when power station emissions are factored in.  This feature may be further skewed by the desire to reduce carbon monoxide emissions in urban areas and city centres.  

 

But any such advantage will be small, and the loco will emit all sorts of carbon and sulphur when it is doing any work.  Lets be honest, guys, it's a shame, and perhaps there was a future for developed, more efficient, steam traction over poorly performing diesels up to perhaps 20 years ago, but steam's a dead duck in any commercial sense except 'heritage' now!

[sir douglas]

thats interesting, as ive always been told that the GM and GMAM were the biggest but looking through the book, for east africa, the class 60 251 tons on 4-8-2 +2-8-4 but 38400 lb of tractive effort @ 85%, there is the class 59 with 73500 lb but at 186 tons

[Coryton]

This one is hard to accurately quantify, as proponents of each method of traction and each fuel try to influence you efforts.  A steam locomotive has the potential to have much lower, effectively zero, emissions, when it is not being actively fired, such as when it is standing idle but in steam or coasting down Shap, whereas a diesel continually chucks out muck.  Steam, condensed into clouds of white water vapour drifting from cooling towers and falling as clean water droplets close to the source, is frequently used in images which purport to show heavy pollution in articles about global warming; you can rely on the British media to be inaccurate and sensationalist!

 

So, it is arguable that for some work, a modern steam loco, however fuelled, may have a better emissions performance than a diesel or even an electric when power station emissions are factored in.  This feature may be further skewed by the desire to reduce carbon monoxide emissions in urban areas and city centres.  

 

But any such advantage will be small, and the loco will emit all sorts of carbon and sulphur when it is doing any work.  Lets be honest, guys, it's a shame, and perhaps there was a future for developed, more efficient, steam traction over poorly performing diesels up to perhaps 20 years ago, but steam's a dead duck in any commercial sense except 'heritage' now!

 

Agreed, but - given the thread is on imaginary locomotives - it's still interesting to speculate on what might have been developed in the 70's as an alternative to diesel. Or perhaps earlier, if British Railways had been a bit more adventurous with the standard designs.

[runs as required]

thats interesting, as ive always been told that the GM and GMAM were the biggest but looking through the book, for east africa, the class 60 251 tons on 4-8-2 +2-8-4 but 38400 lb of tractive effort @ 85%, there is the class 59 with 73500 lb but at 186 tons

I read your post about the RSA Garratts here and wondered about them in relation to the EAR 59s here  I've linked each to the relevant Wiki page (which may not be as accurate as a print source).

Another point in considering a modern Garratt is that the 3' 6" (42") gauge Garratts were coal fired (RSA ones with mechanical stokers), EAR steam was oil fired. I'm not sure you could dispense with a real person by the firebox of a pulverized coal fired loco.

... steam's a dead duck in any commercial sense except 'heritage' now!

Many areas away from the overheated south east have successfully used heritage and the culture based industries as igniters of economic regeneration: housing that is both attractive and affordable and more fulfilling economic activities than shelf stacking..

In the coming era of Artificial Intelligence it may have to be heritage and culture based industries that provide the alternatives for ‘real people’.

 

I did my city planning post grad masters in Liverpool where the old "Civic Design" Prof urged us not to forget the human delights of city living. His example was commuting in from Hoylake and preferring to use the steam ferry from Woodside for a bit of exhilarating exercise than the direct Merseyelectric to Liverpool Central.

 

dh

[Coryton]

Many areas away from the overheated south east have successfully used heritage and the culture based industries as igniters of economic regeneration: housing that is both attractive and affordable and more fulfilling economic activities than shelf stacking..

In the coming era of Artificial Intelligence it may have to be heritage and culture based industries that provide the alternatives for ‘real people’.

 

I did my city planning post grad masters in Liverpool where the old "Civic Design" Prof urged us not to forget the human delights of city living. His example was commuting in from Hoylake and preferring to use the steam ferry from Woodside for a bit of exhilarating exercise than the direct Merseyelectric to Liverpool Central.

 

Nothing wrong with steam for steam's sake, but at the moment while re-builds of traditional designs can be funded, there doesn't seem to be sufficient need for anything more modern to justify putting in the money for R&D.

[Ramblin Rich]

Given Mr Trump's liking for the coal industry and contempt for environmental issues, it might have a future over in the USA...

[62613]

This one is hard to accurately quantify, as proponents of each method of traction and each fuel try to influence you efforts.  A steam locomotive has the potential to have much lower, effectively zero, emissions, when it is not being actively fired, such as when it is standing idle but in steam or coasting down Shap, whereas a diesel continually chucks out muck.  Steam, condensed into clouds of white water vapour drifting from cooling towers and falling as clean water droplets close to the source, is frequently used in images which purport to show heavy pollution in articles about global warming; you can rely on the British media to be inaccurate and sensationalist!

 

So, it is arguable that for some work, a modern steam loco, however fuelled, may have a better emissions performance than a diesel or even an electric when power station emissions are factored in.  This feature may be further skewed by the desire to reduce carbon monoxide emissions in urban areas and city centres.  

 

But any such advantage will be small, and the loco will emit all sorts of carbon and sulphur when it is doing any work.  Lets be honest, guys, it's a shame, and perhaps there was a future for developed, more efficient, steam traction over poorly performing diesels up to perhaps 20 years ago, but steam's a dead duck in any commercial sense except 'heritage' now!

If the fire's burning, it's chucking out CO2; The reason smoke goes dark, whether coal or oil (including diesels) is insufficient combustion air, when you might be producing a lot of CO.

[Compound2632]

If the fire's burning, it's chucking out CO2; The reason smoke goes dark, whether coal or oil (including diesels) is insufficient combustion air, when you might be producing a lot of CO.

 

Incomplete combustion, equating to inefficient use of the fuel, quite apart from the production of particulates and toxic gas.

[Hroth]

I read your post about the RSA Garratts here and wondered about them in relation to the EAR 59s here  I've linked each to the relevant Wiki page (which may not be as accurate as a print source).

Another point in considering a modern Garratt is that the 3' 6" (42") gauge Garratts were coal fired (RSA ones with mechanical stokers), EAR steam was oil fired. I'm not sure you could dispense with a real person by the firebox of a pulverized coal fired loco.

Many areas away from the overheated south east have successfully used heritage and the culture based industries as igniters of economic regeneration: housing that is both attractive and affordable and more fulfilling economic activities than shelf stacking..

In the coming era of Artificial Intelligence it may have to be heritage and culture based industries that provide the alternatives for ‘real people’.

 

I did my city planning post grad masters in Liverpool where the old "Civic Design" Prof urged us not to forget the human delights of city living. His example was commuting in from Hoylake and preferring to use the steam ferry from Woodside for a bit of exhilarating exercise than the direct Merseyelectric to Liverpool Central.

 

dh

One assumes that your old Prof also ambulated clockwise on the upper deck of the ferry come rain or shine?

 

[Edwardian]

 the EAR 59s here

 

dh

 

Used to run past the bottom of the garden of one of the houses Mrs Edwardian grew up in. A lot dirtier than that, though!

[Compound2632]

Used to run past the bottom of the garden of one of the houses Mrs Edwardian grew up in. A lot dirtier than that, though!

 

Beats the Class 166 DMUs at the bottom of the garden when I was growing up. None too clean, either.

[LNWR18901910]

Suppose Drummond did a 2-6-0 inside-cylinder Mogul based on his 700 Class 0-6-0? What do you think?

[jjb1970]

I'm struggling to think of a single good reason why coal fired (or oil fired) steam locomotives would make sense on any level in the modern world.

Edited January 10, 2018 by jjb1970

[FPH 603]

I'm struggling to think of a single good reason why coal fired (or oil fired) steam locomotives would make sense on any level in the modern world.

Other than in preservation!

[DavidB-AU]

I'm struggling to think of a single good reason why coal fired (or oil fired) steam locomotives would make sense on any level in the modern world.

There are a handful of places in the world with cheap domestic coal, no domestic oil and little hard currency to import it. That's one of the reasons Zimbabwe was retrieving steam locomotives out of the Bulawayo Railway Museum as recently as 2010.

 

Cheers

David