Next power engine generation

[Anonymous]

First steam, next electrics, then diesel powered engines...what you think would most probably be the next power engine generation to come on freight railroads?

Best,

Rodolfo
"Catenary to the coasts"

[Anonymous]

Hot Air

[Anonymous]

Nuclear or di-lithium crystals maybe?

[Anonymous]

Not realy new, but I expect to hear of advancements in the electrical side of the diesels. For example, the hybrid cars coming out right now are capturing the lost energy in braking by charging batteries when you use the brakes. A system which captures energy instead of losing it in the dynamic brakes may be developed. Or the electronics may continue to be improved because of advances in computers. Who knows? I think it will be improved electrical performance.

I wonder if you could get a benefit from a battery car behind the locos and solar collectors on the tops of box cars?

I wouldn't be surprised if a new engine were built that could go from diesel power to overhead electric on the fly. An engine like this could operate on diesel in the country and overhead electric in the urban areas.

Anything but Nuclear Powered engines. - Ed

[Anonymous]

I agree that the advances will come in electronics. AC traction will become the standard as it does away with the commutator and brushes.
Railroads are a tough enviroment. Catenary may be strung on high traffic lines but something that generates its own power will be needed for secondary lines.
Turbines are good in theory but gulp a lot of air. Current advances in regulating the injectors of Diesels make them hard to beat. Any machine that operates off the high speed main spends most of its life idleling or in low power demands. Thats why switchers last forever.
My money is on a 4-cycle Diesel with advanced electronic engine control driving an alternator with AC traction motors. Such units could be produced today if RRs would part with a few pesos. They are a notoriously frugal bunch.

[Anonymous]

"4-cycle Diesel with advanced engine control driving an alternator with AC traction motors"-you've just described an AC4400CW(also AC6000CW,SD90MAC-H,SD89MAC,although these have been problematic).
Ed is right about energy storage systems,both battery based(Railpower technologies Green Goat) and more advanced systems using superconducting,ceramic flywheels(FRA/Bombardier High Speed Passenger Turbine program). Solar Panels on trains would not generate a significant amount of traction current,but their use on cabooses and railside equipment has been fairly successful. GE proposed a variant of the DM32AC to Amtrack with a pantagraph system for Northeast Corridor running,so the technology for this kind of hybrid exists.
The use of energy storage systems might make a low maintenance,constant speed,multi fuel turbine prime mover more attractive,although Diesel gensets are still more economical to purchase.
I'm dubious about Fuel Cell locomotives,fuel cells are still very expensive and also very bulky compared to even the biggest locomotive diesel primemovers(I'm talking size rather than weight). But someday,who knows?

[Valleyline]

Combination diesel and electric operation (third rail) has been in operation out of Grand Central Station in NYC for many years and is still used by Metro North and Amtrak. While the technology is there for overhead electric it probably won't see use on freight railroads due to its restrictive overhead clearances - no double stacks or multilevel cars, including Superliners. Also the cost of installing and maintaining catenary is extremely high. Refinements and improvements in diesel propulsion are likely to continue.

[Anonymous]

The next generation engines will probably be gas turbine's Allied signal is already testing a few and they look very promising.

[Anonymous]

where's it going throug

[edblysard]

Gas turbine on long hauls, outside city limits. Inside citys, third rail or someother form of electric. Just like with the automobile, the limits of internal combustion have been reached, all thats left is tweaking the last few hp out of them. Battries are too heavy and expensive, hydrogen fule cells cant produce enought volts/amps for their size to be useful.

[croteaudd]

How about water? Every once in awhile there are reports about efforts to tap that energy source. The elements of water are quite explosive by themselves, so, in theory, the fuel water concept is possible. How feasible it would be for railroad applications is unknown to this person. But inexpensive water, if it worked, surely would thrill railroad stockholders.

[edblysard]

Thats the hydrogen fule cell. Use electric current to seperate H2o into its parts, 1 molocule hydrogen, 2 molocules oxygen. Hydrogen is combustible and can be "burnt" as a fule with almost no toxic exhaust. The two molocules of oxygen are just vented to the atmosphere. Oxygen is explosive and corrodes some metals, and is hypergolic, or self ingnites when it contacts most petrolum products, lube oil, ect.
Something that is comustible burns, or releases its energy over a known period of time at a given rate. Something explosive releases it enegry all at once, with a very intense heat and a tremendous & rapid rate of expansion. Shuttle fule is pressuirzed oxygen, allowing it to be stored as a liquid. When release to atmospheric pressure it reverts to a gas, and a fine mist of kerosene is sprayed into the inigntion/ combustion chamber with the escaping gas, they self ingnite and presto. (the little flares you see on the film of the engines ingniting is there to make sure )
Diesel fule is combustible, the heat created when it is compressed in the cylinder by a piston causes it to ingnite and burn, and therefore expand at a given rate, pushing the piston down, turning the crankshaft, ect...
The big problem with hydrogen cells are A: you have to use pure clean water, distilled and expensive. B: the cells would have to be huge to provide enought electricty long enought to run a heavy piece of equipment like a locomotive.
You would have to provide 600 volts from 0 to 1500 amps for an extended period of time.
The automotive industry is releasing hybrid cars, (honda and toyota so far, gm real close) Plus factors : you exhaust oxygen, good thing, almost 0% polution, good thing too.
Neg factors: cost of water, (still cheaper than gas) and storage capcity of hydrogen (small) and matinance is heavy and expensive, railroads hate the words matinance and expensive in the same sentence.
The railroads are going to go with the most inexpensive and dependable equipment they can.
Thats why diesel/ electric replaced steam, less cost and matinance, more bang for the buck.

[Anonymous]

It is all about garbage my friends. I have heard rumor of a joint venture between EMD and GE on a fusion type reactor (called Mr. Fusion) very similar to the one on the Delorean in the movie "Back to the Future." The fusion reaction seems to take place more readily when commen table scraps are fed into the machine (especially the scraps of food that makes humans toot, works even better in locomotives). Have any of you heard the same rumor?

[edblysard]

Yeah, its the prototype with the mag-lev system, no need for wheels, and it has the slr system, (side looking rardar) for grade crossing protection. Optional laser aimed collision advoidance/object removal proton canon. No need for a crew either, it has the new IIEE system(intergrated idiot electronic engineer) from HYPERDYNE, (a subsidiary of Beatrice foods) in the cab and a FART ( fully automated rearend telementry) from microsoft on the rear....

[Anonymous]

I understand that before the Richmond, Fredricksburg & Potomac went under, they were secretly developing a stirling cycle,steam turbine locomotive powered by hot air. Being located in the vicinity of Washington DC, the railroad officials realized that there would be no problem in obtaining the vast quantities of hot air necessary to make this an economical proposition.........................

[edblysard]

Odd that UP dosnt keep iot's Big Blows near there!!!