caldreamer traisessive1. I disagree with you on th point that 4 axle engines are not needed. They are good for locals, transfers and with a slug for yard switching. They still have a place. Not like it used to be when they pulled through freights because they need 6 axle engines due to the higher tonnage pulled today, but thery are still needed and usefull Ira
traisessive1.
I disagree with you on th point that 4 axle engines are not needed. They are good for locals, transfers and with a slug for yard switching. They still have a place. Not like it used to be when they pulled through freights because they need 6 axle engines due to the higher tonnage pulled today, but thery are still needed and usefull
Ira
Which is exactly why I said 4 axle ROAD power.
10000 feet and no dynamics? Today is going to be a good day ...
How about this?
Equip locomotives with strain sensors on their draft gear and logic in place to sense this strain and control power and braking. When placed in a train as a DPU, the logic would be set up to sense the strain on the leading coupler and attempt to keep the strain at zero. This way, I think you could make up a very long train with a single locomotive up front followed by single DPU's spaced throughout the whole train, the number of cars behind each unit depending on the capability of the locomotives and on the terrain. You would still need remote control capability for emergency and for instances I know I haven't thought of, but for routine operation the engineer need not be concerned with controlling the following units. And by spacing the locomotives throughout the train I think broken knuckles would be less likely.
I know there is always, "What if something goes wrong", which is true of anything technical, but otherwise, would this work?
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Paul of Covington How about this? Equip locomotives with strain sensors on their draft gear and logic in place to sense this strain and control power and braking
When we ran with LEADER, it showed buff and draft forces throughout the train.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
Paul of Covington Equip locomotives with strain sensors on their draft gear and logic in place to sense this strain and control power and braking. When placed in a train as a DPU, the logic would be set up to sense the strain on the leading coupler and attempt to keep the strain at zero.
Equip locomotives with strain sensors on their draft gear and logic in place to sense this strain and control power and braking. When placed in a train as a DPU, the logic would be set up to sense the strain on the leading coupler and attempt to keep the strain at zero.
That's been tried before, remember reading about tests in an early 1960's Trains issue. General consnsus is that it doesn't work, think of stop-and-go traffic on a freeway at rush hour.
I also think that the consensus with distributed power is that the embedded locomotives need to do a bit of pushing - a comment along those lines was made in an article on use of helpers in the first few years of the Milwaukee electrification.
zugmann Paul of Covington How about this? Equip locomotives with strain sensors on their draft gear and logic in place to sense this strain and control power and braking When we ran with LEADER, it showed buff and draft forces throughout the train.
Yes, it was quite impressive watching the LEADER screen the time it tore up a 135 car 2x1 coal train. I watched the draft force in the red (excessive force) danger zone develope and run through the train until the air went. Once it started, it was too late to stop it.
The buff/draft indicator was computer generated. I noticed on many that when operating with the fence up and each consist independent, the indicator still showed in-train forces as if the lead and dp consists were being operated in sync mode.
LEADER integrated in PTC doesn't show in-train forces. It also doesn't show the entire train if it's over about 7000 ft long on the PTC screen.
Jeff
If we are going with real possible improvements, I would say a breakthrough in clean engine diesel technology. It would need to be something comparable to converters on gas engines. They are dirtier than we want to think about and it's a global issue so there is a good insentive across many markets to come up with something. I am excepting CO2 as it is native to the beast and all you can do is use it's output efficently. Thay still leaves soot, Nox and sulfer compounds as true posions coming out the stack.
I doubt that a major breakthrough in clean diesel technology is possible. Going from Tier O to Tier 3 may not have been easy but it was accomplished without too much difficulty. Getting to Tier 4 appears to have involved some steps that add a major degree of complication to the process. Getting to a theoretical Tier 5 may be impossible.
Here's a wild card: the closed-cycle gas turbine.
The CCGT is an external combustion heat engine, so needs only a heat source not a specific fuel. The following link summarises the differences between ordinary, open-cycle gas turbines (as used in the UP locomotives, amongst others) and the closed-cycle type:
https://me-mechanicalengineering.com/comparison-between-closed-cycle-gas-turbine-and-open-cycle-gas-turbine/
The CCGT is under development for power generation. It might also be used for marine applications. If a CCGT of suitable dimensions were put into large scale production there is no reason why a locomotive using this prime mover could not be built. Since combustion is separate from the operation of the turbine it would be possible to use carbon-neutral fuels such as biomass pellets or pyrolysis oil.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.