Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by AltonFan [quote]QUOTE: But I don't think that the problems with UP's turbine engines have been overcome. First, the engines were extremely noisy, which relegated them to extremely remote areas (they weren't even able to use them alongside cornfields and farms, they were that loud), and there isn't anything new there. Second, the turbines almost used as much fuel when idling as when running, and so they were limited to mainlines, and even then, you couldn't have them sitting waiting for clearance for too long. And the startup/shutdown sequence was so involved that they had a small 350 hp or so diesel engine inside that was used for moving the engine itself around the yard (when light, of course). [/quote] I was told part of the reason the military adopted a turbine engine for the Abrams tank was that its turbine was quieter than a conventional diesel motor. OTOH, fuel efficiency is extemely poor. (I heard something like three gallons to the mile.) So maybe turbines might be worth reconsidering.[/quote] It may be. From time to time, something will come up to change things. ---jps
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

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Model Railroader Newsletter See all

Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!