lepidotos

Okay, so I ended up actially getting a Hornby Single chassis -- found one on eBay for $51 shipped (£40 total). It was just the chassis, wiring, and wheels, no motor, but that's perfectly fine, and desirable in the lack of a shell or tender. Now we'll see about getting the Phoenix shell, it seems like a whole process. I might not do the second engine, at least for now, since the likelihood I'll find a second cheap chassis is pretty low, but if the opportunity presents itself I'll take it. Probably, I'll just do the later-condition (1991 era) of the two planned models (the other being 1916), in VoR-style Rail Blue and with a few modifications, to go with a Rail Blue Stanier 8F and some Mark 1s and 2s.

It's a shame the Hornby singles get pretty expensive even used (lowest I can find is $100), they're both pretty bad models and I'd have no qualms harvesting their chasses. I'll try to see about making my own, I imagine it could involve a couple useful skills. I was already going to be modding it to add the dome and solid splashers, so that's not a problem for me.

I need some Singles, but don't want to go the Rapido route -- they're fine models, but that's the problem, I want to mod them to be the later solid splasher and dome variant of the Single, and paint them in ahistorical livery, and I don't really want to spend $632 before materials and DCC and all that just for two good models to destroy, in a way. So I found these. Assuming they ship them to the US (I read their shipping page, not sure if these qualify), how are they? Has anyone here bought one and built it? They don't have any pictures posted, which I'm not taking as an amazing sign. Would love to see regardless, I'm not needing or expecting them to be museum quality but something better than "just barely not a toy train anymore" quality would be nice. Thanks.

Sure, ignoring the heavy pollution that producing them creates, and the fact you have to switch the batteries out fairly regularly. As for where to put it, first off most of it isn't even waste, just stuff we're too lazy to sort out. For example, the old PWR systems' waste is about 94.4% unburned uranium. Solid fuel designs have that problem, liquid fuel designs allow you to actually use up all the fuel. One notable fission product is technetium-99m, which is used millions of times a year in the medical industry. Another one we've been looking into is bismuth-213, which we've been looking into shoving onto antibodies to try to kill cancer cells. Secondly, we'd have a place already if it weren't for lobbyists and Greenpeace blocking every attempt made at finding a suitable place to put this stuff. We tried putting it all a mile under Yucca Mountain, that didn't get passed because "not in my backyard!". There's possibilities in Texas and Wyoming we can look at, though. If w+s+battery is all we need, why has Germany seen such a resounding failure with Energiewende, which isn't even as restrictive as that? Post EGW Germany burned more lignite coal than pre EGW Germany. That and what do you mean by "all power needed," exactly? Do you propose we stop recycling materials? Because recycling is a major energy expense, if we did it via solar and wind there wouldn't be enough electricity for the rest of the grid, unless you had tons of batteries and hundreds of miles of solar panels, which is frankly ridiculous and would easily make a single drop of Chinese river water lethal, while using up all those rare earth elements that make 21st century life more comfortable and less dangerous the 1910s.

Maybe it's not seeing the numbers 4472 or 60103 on the side of the cab that's making me look more highly upon it than I would otherwise do.

It's gonna start being a problem by around 2040 when oil costs $149 a barrel in 2019 dollars, or if not that, then 2050 when it goes up to anywhere between $185 and $215, again 2019. Sounds too distant in the future but so did 2020 for a while. It's gonna start getting really expensive, and you can bet they're going to want some kind of out for diesel. All it took was a couple months of oil crisis in 1973-74 to get people looking for better options. (Also re: grovenor but I can't get this phone to move your quote up to this edit box) Yeah, but us Americans have this thing where we're afaid of things progressing past the 20th century. My mom just said to me yesterday while we were talking that she thinks that 5G towers cause the virus and high voltage transmission lines cause cancer. Someone's absolutely going to use NIMBY on high voltage transmission lines. Condensation was something I was going to add in there but forgot to. Yeah, it'd use a condenser unit.

Of the three major disasters (3MI, F. Daiichi, Chernobyl) one of them was a safety test taken too far on a design nobody even builds anymore (Chernobyl), one was the builders cheaping out on building materials in a country known for flooding (Daiichi) and one was only a partial meltdown that didn't give you enough of a dose to get a sunburn (3MI). It's no coincidence all three were built in the 1970s either. Tell me where the technology is at fault here, when it's only had one real incident not the fault of someone else's lack of foresight in... 74 years? Especially when considering that "nuclear power plant" is as broad a concept as "automobile".

Per kilowatt maybe (though with MSBR it's dubious)--but it doesn't really matter because solar and wind have awful capacity factor that depend on the local climate and can't ever improve (solar, for instance, has a 30% or so CF); nuclear has about a 98% capacity factor with far smaller environmental impact. Batteries are certainly one option, but they're nowhere near environmentally friendly. Plus, the low density means for just 500mWe, you're gonna be plopping down a lot of solar panels.

This has more to do with this individual seller I'm assuming, but a thousand bucks for an O-gauge A3. Personally it doesn't seem like it's thousand-dollar realistic, it kinda looks better than RtR stock but it's not enough to not instantly go "oh, that's a model". https://www.ebay.com/itm/BASSETT-LOWKE-O-GAUGE-REFINISHED-LNER-4-6-2-CLASS-A3-LOCO-2576-The-WHITE-KNIGHT/333652544843?hash=item4daf3dcd4b:g:zhkAAOSw14dbbulR

I was thinking about this topic recently, because oil is incredibly unstable (more in a bit) and electrification is kinda nonexistent here in the United States; it's basically just a bit of Texas, the NEC, the PRR, and various bits and pieces along the eastern half. And that's to be expected; the United States, I don't know if you know this, is a pretty big place. You can't really electrify lines out west outside metro areas of California or Colorado because of how spread out everything is, you'd have to start plopping nuclear power plants down in the middle of nowhere, specifically molten-salt reactors due to the fact there's no water out here, and we haven't really been doing MSR since the 60s. Meanwhile, steam doesn't depend on external factors besides the existence of two rails (or grooves), can burn just about anything, doesn't care if it's being run in the wrong type of snow, and is far from developed to its max. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for electrification where possible, but it's not possible everywhere. So, oil. A 2000 prediction by Dr. Sadad al-Husseini, a pretty well respected oil geologist, predicted that by 2004 oil production would reach a 15-year plateau, and conventional oil could be used up as early as 2057. He was correct on the first half, though it was actually 2005, with year to year fluctuations that don't derivate too far from the trend to break it. The U.S. military backed him up on it, predicting shortages starting between 2015 and now, but we pushed it back a few decades due to hydraulic fracturing. The clock is ticking on that, though, and we aren't really doing electrification (as explained previously), so... anyone up for a brand new class of steam locomotive? I've been cooking one up in my head because I'm certain it'll be a thing within my lifetime, at least. Not mentioning exact statistics, because I'm not personally an engineer (though I will end up majoring in it when the virus time ends and I can go to college), here's a ""brief"" collection of my thoughts. Half of it is going to be stuff you already know, but I'm still putting in A. to explain my reasoning and B. for those who don't. Feel free to mock it, I finished it up at 1:10 am and it's probably gone off the deep end somewhere. As for locomotives that existed already but don't anymore, I really want to see an LNER H2, maybe two of them since I can see it being a good design for preservation railways. If I was gonna do it (and I might, at least in live-steam form), I'd make it a Porta-ble testbed (geez that's a terrible pun). In terms of active new build projects, the one I'm most excited for is Beachy Head. The LNER C1/LBSCR H2 is one of my favorites with Gresley/LBSCR cab installed, so I'll be happy to see one up and running. Duplex summary.docx

I mostly agree, the one thing I'm not so sure of is how long the smokebox is, it just looks weird. It doesn't have to be Gresley length, but a midpoint would probably be ideal. I'm 100% sure I have no idea what I'm talking about and there's a good reason for it, though.

Admittedly, I'm not the biggest fan of how Tornado looks, but it looks a fair bit better when given an LNER livery.

I think I will, that's pretty good advice.

Copy of the image so that once the listing goes down (whether by someone buying it or it expiring) the KB can still be... appreciated? Is that the right word? Same here

I've seen something truly awful Imagine having a whole runway for a nose