|
Search
You searched for the word(s): userid:205996
I have read in multiple sources about the danger posed by a rod failure to the engineer in the central cab location. Had there been accidents of this type? Was the metalurgy such that rod failures happened with such frequency that there was an "honor roll" of locomotive engineers perishing in those accidents? Or was there a single notorious accident giving the design a bad reputation? Kind of like the matter of boiler explosions. It might be that boiler explosions are actually rare accidents
[quote] Paul Milenkovic: 2) Even if transportation is properly a government function, transportation is still not removed from market forces and the need to get value for the money spent. That Amtrak requires multiples of the subsidy rate for other modes is a subject the advocacy community tries very hard to drop rather than address head on. Agreed. I am advocating rail transport that is rational, not a return to pre-1960. If there were competitive, fast, frequent relatively short routes, the increase
As a matter of fact, I believe I have "standing" to comment on what people outside the train advocacy community think, pro and con, about trains. I have had this deal going where for one weekend on the coldest day in February in the Upper Midwest, I have 200 square feet of prime exhibition space that I don't have to pay for as a result of the generosity and committment to public service of the South Central Wisconsin Divison of the Midwest Region of the National Model Railroad Association
[quote user="schlimm"]I realize air traffic has increased greatly in the 23 years, but it is hard to imagine the subsidy dropping by 90%? In any case, I believe all transportation is a proper government function. My question is: should we continue maintaining a system of roads and airways that are near capacity? The cost to relieve congestion by building new roads would be exorbitant as would building 10's of new airports. Even then, the air in many areas is reaching capacity. Doesn't
Um, do they get a block of seats together, do they have to go marching down the aisles asking someone with headphones on with their bag on the seat of they can sit there like the rest of us, or does Acela have a first-class/business class option that allows reserving seats? At least with a charter bus they can sit together and get door-to-door transportation, and there are customized charter buses with more leg room and other amenities, and they have to get from the train station to the stadium somehow
OK, I had a chance to search for Baldwin 60000 and came across the Altoona dynamometer test results. [quote]The locomotives of Chapelon, the French railway engineer, were marvels of efficiency and power by anyone's standards. A 4-8-0 type achieved 40 indicated horsepower per ton in the 1930s, a number perhaps never exceeded. His 4-8-4 constructed in 1946 (a rebuild of an unsuccessful 4-8-2 simple type) achieved efficiencies of 12% (early diesels probably operated at a lower efficiency than this
[quote]Instead of putting "fancy" gadgets on steamlocomotives, running lighter trains with them could habe been a better alternative. Cheers lars [/quote] One thing that comes out of such experience along with the thermodynamic analysis is that for "simple expansion" locomotives, there is probably a "best match" between locomotive and operating conditions. Work a locomotive too hard, and you operate at large cutoffs that are wasteful of steam. Work a locomotive too lightly
[quote user="Lars Loco"] Dear Railway Man, at UPRR's homepage, a table of current operated Wyoming coal mines (here: http://www.uprr.com/customers/energy/coal/coalspec.shtml ) show a value of 9700- 9800 btu/lbs. They are not necessarily the mines that supplied fuel for steam-engines (Hanna / Rock Springs is not listed anymore), but give a course of how low the grade of coal in this area is. Anybody wonder now, why some steam engines smoked so badly? Cheers, lars Paul, if you read somewhere
OK. 10,000 gal water/hr evaporated times 8 lb/gal times (1314 - 150) BTU/lb = 105 million BTU/hr. The number 1314-150 is the enthalpy of steam at 315 PSI absolute (300 PSI gauge), 600 deg-F superheat temperature, minus the enthalpy of water at about 180 degrees, which I am assuming is the temperature of the feedwater with whatever feedwater device they had. Enthalpy is this fancy name for the energy in a system at constant pressure but you allow the volume to change -- when you boil water, you want
I did some more research. Especially when you are using any type of steam injector for water feed, be it live steam (boiler pressure) or exhaust steam (blast pipe pressure), you want cold water as the feed. I don't yet understand how the injector works (but the story is the patent examiner who handled the original patent application couldn't figure out either and demanded a working model), but the feed water is supposed to condense the feed steam to get the necessary suction in the device
|
By signing up I may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers from Trains.com. We don't sell,
rent, or trade our e-mail lists.
|