Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Could steam make a comeback?
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
<p>Hello Michael,</p><p>I wrote</p><p> </p><blockquote><table border="0" class="quoteOuterTable"><tbody><tr><td class="txt4"><img src="/TRC/CS/Themes/default/images/icon-quote.gif" border="0" /> <strong>Lars Loco wrote:</strong></td></tr><tr><td class="quoteTable"><table border="0"><tbody><tr><td class="txt4"> <p>Hello everybody,</p><p>would like to supply some facts about maintance + fuel costs:</p><p>In 1954, U.P. found out that:</p><p>"During 1954, steam costs were found to be $145.14 per 1,000 gross ton-miles, and diesel costs were set at $84.03 per 1,000 gross ton-miles. The turbines came in even lower, at $69.19 per 1,000 gross ton-miles."</p><p>(Found at Don Strack's utahrails.net)</p></td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table></blockquote><p>You wrote: </p><p>We are starting to repeat ourselves here.</p><p> </p><p>Sorry, my post was not an intention to repeat things, but have not seen "hard facts" so far at this thread. Only liked to provide some, nothing more.</p><p>Ok, my "facts" may not deliver the "whole" view of this subject, but U.P calculated maintance costs per "unit", despite how powerful or how old they were (in general). In 1954, mainline steam exits only between Green River and Nebraska. The only reason for this was, that U.P got cheap coal from their Wyoming mines. The western district were already dieselized at this time, the difficult water supply in those areas was also a problem. </p><p>The remaining steam engines of the U.P were either freshly shopped mainline steam or small branchline Units. I think at Ogden, they only kept 10 steamengines in '54.</p><p>Can not support any data about the fuel costs, I only know that after WWII gasoline rised high (more than coal). However, in '1954 the situation may have changed, not sure about that.</p><p> </p><p>Well, maybe one day we may face the day coal will be much cheaper than oil, but it needs a whole industry to switch (not only trains!). I have neaver heard in Europe about such a projected, coal-fired (and even use steam-circle) locomotive.</p><p>If we have something new, my propose is it will be a gas, methanol or even hydrogen (aka mini-nuke ;-) ) driven locomotive.</p><p>Best Regards</p><p> </p><p>Lars </p><p> </p>
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy