A steam comeback?

[oltmannd]

I remember when I first started out at Conrail with a fresh Mech Engr degree being rather shocked at how efficient diesel locomotives were. They were at least as efficient as a typical coal fired steam power plant. That fact alone took quite a bit of "steam" out of electrification, in my eyes.

I also was lucky enought to attend one of Ross Roland's ACE3000 presentations. While the design was impressive and it might have faired well against an F7 in the early days of dieselization, it was competing against Dash 2s. The final judgement was that it wasn't really anything more than a very complicated, 300 ton, coal burning GP40 with untried (on the RR) technology. The fuel cost savings were too slight and capital costs and risk so large such that no RR manager wanted to take a bite.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

rdganthracite,

You could say the same thing about steam. A steam engine can run on coal, crude oil, vegetable oil, lpg, hydrogen, diesel fuel, gasoline or kerosene. Additionally, they beat out the diesels since they can also run on wood , straw or sugar cane stalks.

Alan

That statement is not correct. Some diesel engines and many gasoline engines were run on wood, straw, lignite and the like by the Germans during WWII when we kept destroying their oilfields and synth crude plants. All you need is a simple gasifier, like most cities in the United States had to supply lighting and heating gas before natural gas became widely distributed. Of course the gassifiers that were installed on the trucks were much smaller than the cities used. A small compressor for the gas and changes to the injectors for diesels or carborators for otto cycle engines to provide the larger volume of fuel needed and you are good to go.

Any fuel that can be liquified, gasified or pulverized can be used successfully in a diesel. And the diesel would still retain its thermal advantages and maintenace advantages.

On the idea of using condensers to recycle the water. That is very old technology. The South African Railway used whole classes of condensing steamers to travel through a desert region. They were such a huge maintenance problem that just as soon as diesels became available to the railway the condensing tenders were discarded and the more modern steamers reassigned.

[Paul Milenkovic]

Condensors sound like such a good idea until you figure out what is involved. Steam locomotives are pretty low in thermal efficiency with the boiler pressures they are able to work with, although condensing operation may bring that efficiency up. Anyway, suppose you operate at 10 percent efficiency (good for a steam loco). For every HP at the drawbar, 9 HP of heat have to go out the condensor, and this heat transfer has to take place at low termperatures and low temperature differentials. Also, with condensing operation, you lose the blast-pipe effect to power the firebox draft.

In addition, to get the efficiency advantage of condensing, you have to expand down to near vacuum -- you might want to compound a piston with a turbin back end to do this.

Personally, I think the Champelon/Porta approach of low steam passage restriction is a much better way than condensing to get efficiency. And if you boost efficiency, not only do you burn less coal and use less water, the firebox, boiler, and other accessories become much smaller.

[espeefoamer]

QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

rdganthracite,

You could say the same thing about steam. A steam engine can run on coal, crude oil, vegetable oil, lpg, hydrogen, diesel fuel, gasoline or kerosene. Additionally, they beat out the diesels since they can also run on wood , straw or sugar cane stalks.


Harrier,

Well, the ACE 2000 uses a modern designed boiler closer to what is used in steam ships. It has a rectangular shape rather than the long tubular shape of traditional steam engines. The locomotive and tender or the ACE looked more like a pair of AMTK F40s bact to back than an SD70ACe.

Alan

Steam engines can also run on buffalo chips. In the old west. male passengers had to gather them when fuel ran low.

[Modelcar]

...Enter in ACE3000 into Google and you will find a pretty good drawing of what it was to look like...

[arbfbe]

rdganthracite,

You could say the same thing about steam. A steam engine can run on coal, crude oil, vegetable oil, lpg, hydrogen, diesel fuel, gasoline or kerosene. Additionally, they beat out the diesels since they can also run on wood , straw or sugar cane stalks.


Harrier,

Well, the ACE 2000 uses a modern designed boiler closer to what is used in steam ships. It has a rectangular shape rather than the long tubular shape of traditional steam engines. The locomotive and tender or the ACE looked more like a pair of AMTK F40s bact to back than an SD70ACe.

Alan

[Anonymous]

One of the huge advantages of diesel engines is that with minor modifications they can be fueled on just about anything that burns. Running today we have biodiesel where some are using vegetable oils or previously used animal fats (ie fast food frying oil). Also in a few places there are large diesel engines burning powdered coal. BN had a few SD40-2s running on LPG for a few years. If that isn't enough we can always use processes such as used in South Africa by the SASOL company to turn coal into an oil substitute.

So even if all the petroleum oil disappears, the diesel will be on the rails.

[K. P. Harrier]

If steam did return, would not steamers LOOK like diesels?

[arbfbe]

I don't think the smoke would have been a real problem. As I remember Alliance was sort of on a knoll mostly higher than all the surrounding area. It was so flat the US Army had a glider training operation there during WWII. Besides, there was no chance the smoke would hang around long account the wind blew a little every day since Kansas sucks......or so the locals liked to say........

The fuel, spotting, moving, fueling in the terminal would have become a major operation. Add to that all the stations down the line that would need similar facilities and the investment would become staggering. Think of the capital cost in all the new trainsets and locomotives to haul the coal from the PRB throughout the delivery area and all the extra trains online an already crowded system and it was just not feasible without massive investment and operational costs. It is no wonder there was not enough backing within the industry to get even a prototype built for testing. That would have been nice to see, though.

Alan

[Anonymous]

Yeah, but the thought of spotting two unit trains every day to fuel the fleet at Alliance is pretty darn funny! To say nothing of the pall of smoke over the valley ...

OS

[arbfbe]

I was pulling throttles back in Alliance, NE when the ACE unit was the rage for fuel conversion during the oil crisis. One night we were sitting around the switch shanty reading the Railfan article and put a pencil to paper. The state of the art steam engine was to be rated the same as an EMD GP40-2. To give the steamer the benefit of the doubt we uped the rating to equal an SD40-2 to match what we were running out of the Powder River Basin. The first thing that reared it's ugly head was the fuel consumption of the steam engine. We were spotting a handful of tank cars loaded with diesel fuel to feed the fleet of SD40-2 and U30C locomotives each day. Seems like a dozen or so loads to spot. The ACE units would require almost 2 full 100 car trains of coal to be spotted daily if they were to replace diesels on a one to one basis. That pretty much showed me the steamer would lose the battle before it was even built for most applications and that would limit it to production levels too low to be price competitive.

[Anonymous]

Assume that several hundred chief mechanical officers in the 1930s were inquisitive and progressive. What were they to use for a heat sink for the condensers they should have applied? What supports the assertion that those CMOs would have provided the same locomotive miles for less money by using condensers than by performing frequent boiler washes?

How could a small steam turbine plant today have less total lifetime cost than any currently marketed locomotive not financially propped up with R&D credits or environmental credits? Exactly what operational role will that locomotive fill?

How is straight electric the most efficient, anyway? I mean, what the hell, if we're going to dismiss initial cost and maintenance cost, we ought to go for broke and dismiss something really annoying, like having to turn a profit.

OS

[Anonymous]

I suppose it wouldn't be too difficult to have a condenser set-up on a steam locomotive and I'm surprised that back in the "good old days" one was never developed since the steam tugs and steam ships have been using condensers to recycle steam for ages now. I suppose in the beginning the Railroads just wanted to save money by not putting condensers on their locomotives and just let the crud build up in the boiler tubes and have it blasted out every now and then. Of course by the time condenser technology got really good, I think it was too late as diesel-electrics were coming on line and despite the high initial cost, were/are cheaper to maintain without all those rods and running gear. I think if there is any future for steam locomotives, it will probably be along the lines of the "green goat" hybrid locomotive using batteries as the primary power source with a small steam power plant generator complete with a condenser. I know that straight electric from overhead wires would be most efficient, but the initial cost and matinence cost of such a system is very high.

[Anonymous]

Good question, rdg. I was wondering how high-tech metals and polimers (sic) make maintenance as easy as diesel or electric. I was also wondering how expelled steam would be returned to a reservoir after doing useful work. Second law of thermodynamics is voided, perhaps?

OS

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SteamerFan

Whoops, yes the article was refering to the swiss steam, but the germans are also performing this as well. Seems steam is being thought of as viable in europe, probably due to the high costs of oil there, and the fact that electrification is unfeasible in some areas (notably all the mountains).

I sure don't know where you ever got the idea that electrification is unfeasible in "all the mountains". It sure wasn't from the Swiss, Austrians, Germans, Italians, or French. They all have lots of electrification in the Alps. And that idea sure didn't come from the Milwaukee Road, the Great Northern, the Norfolk and Western, the Virginian, or the Boston and Maine. Their electrifications were in the mountains.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Hugh Jampton

QUOTE: Originally posted by SteamerFan

Steam never went away, it just got less attention. China, India and several otehr contries still use good old Steam as a motive fleet.

The New and Improved Steam the germans are using allows for one man crews, less maintenence than before and increased operational abilities. In other words, they are almost on par with diesels, in all senses.

Give the germans 10 years and they'll refine it to the point that steam will again outclass diesels.

Don't you mean the Swiss.. They get a bit upset about this type of confusion.. Almost as bad as a Canuck being mistaken for a Yank.

Whoops, yes the article was refering to the swiss steam, but the germans are also performing this as well. Seems steam is being thought of as viable in europe, probably due to the high costs of oil there, and the fact that electrification is unfeasible in some areas (notably all the mountains).

I'm sure we will see self contained systems, where expelled steam is not vented but returned to the resevoir, perhaps an electric boiler run by a small fuel cell generator. New high tech metals and polimers mean that steam can be as easy to maintaine as diesels or electrics.You have to remember, Europe is far more into the enviromental movement than the US is.

[Anonymous]

Just to end this discussion: Although DLM is a Swiss firm they will never ever build a mainline steam engine for comercial service. The Swiss network is electrified by 100 per cent and there is no public accection of any kind of steam or diesel (!) locomotives (remember the Kyoto protocol!).

But DLM has the possibility to build small numbers of modern steam locomotives for special service like museum railways (Brienz-Rothorn-Bahn) or special excursions (locomotive 52 8055). Just this weekend a special excursion with locomotive 52 8055 will take place in Switzerland. But do you really like the design of this modern steam engine? I would prefer the good old historical locomotives which are still in service from time to time (A 3/5, C 5/6). You can't bring back the elegance of this design!

It's really important to keep the few remaining steam engines in a good shape! It's our heritage!

[Train Guy 3]

I want to see a comeback in steam excursions but libability insurance is such a backstabber.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper

If oil gives out, the coal and nuclear power will be used for electric cars and trains. I don't see steam making a comeback except in specific situations, but then that may be enough to suite steam fans.

No doubt about it, a thinker is in the forum.

[Modelcar]

...If oil does become too expensive or supply becomes limited...I believe it wil not be any form of a steam engine that will be used for a replacement...Electric engines under catenary would be my guess to replace the diesel. Or a process of manufacturing some sort of fuel from coal..{liquid}, would be developed.

[Hugh Jampton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SteamerFan

Steam never went away, it just got less attention. China, India and several otehr contries still use good old Steam as a motive fleet.

The New and Improved Steam the germans are using allows for one man crews, less maintenence than before and increased operational abilities. In other words, they are almost on par with diesels, in all senses.

Give the germans 10 years and they'll refine it to the point that steam will again outclass diesels.

Don't you mean the Swiss.. They get a bit upset about this type of confusion.. Almost as bad as a Canuck being mistaken for a Yank.

[CSXrules4eva]

QUOTE: Originally posted by SteamerFan

Steam never went away, it just got less attention. China, India and several otehr contries still use good old Steam as a motive fleet.

The New and Improved Steam the germans are using allows for one man crews, less maintenence than before and increased operational abilities. In other words, they are almost on par with diesels, in all senses.

Give the germans 10 years and they'll refine it to the point that steam will again outclass diesels.

UT OH WATCH OUT!!!!!!!!! Steam is comming back with an attack!! Hay I wouldn't mind seeing steam come back to into the everyday operations of Class One. Even though I grew up on diesel, love diesel, and am a diesel machinest.. I need to see the Allegheny H8 2-6-6-6 run.

[Anonymous]

With diesel fuel climbing to all time highs, it's likely that alternative modes of energy will be looked at and tried out, this is already taking place with the Green Goat hybrid switchers that are running off of batteries that are charged by a small diesel generator.

I was hearing that for the first time ever, diesel is taking the place of labour as the highest coast for railways, so you can bet that railways are going to be looking at alternatives.

Steam I find hard to imagine, however hybrid locomotives seem like a very likely candidate at the moment.

[coborn35]

When you think about steaam coming back in America, consider how many [u]diesel locomotives it takes to sufficently power a modern freight train. Also take into consideration how much it would cost to build water towers, coaling towers and also the regular maitnence cost. It would be cool, but not a reality.

[daveklepper]

If oil gives out, the coal and nuclear power will be used for electric cars and trains. I don't see steam making a comeback except in specific situations, but then that may be enough to suite steam fans.

[steveblackledge]

how about a brand new 4-6-2 Pacific capable of 100mph, it's a dream thats almost complete here in the UK, just waiting for the boiler to be made by a german firm, Dampflokwerk Meiningen (Steam Locomotive Works Meiningen), a workshop of the Deutsche Bahn.
the loco is an A1 class pacific thats being made from sctatch, every part is brand new so it will be classed as "new rolling stock" so will be free from other preserved loco restrictions such as limiting it to 75mph, the line speed will be the limit, yes yes, for more info and a video of the wheel turning for the first time go to,
http://www.a1steam.com/

[:D]

[Anonymous]

I suppose that even with better thermal efficiency the matinence on the rods and running gear could be pretty bad. On the other hand I think SteamerFan in right that just given a matter of time steam will be ruling the rails again. Personally I'm a freshman Engineering Technology student and my own intuition tells me that electronics need to be integrated into the system to further boost fuel efficiency to the magic point where the savings on fuel are so great, that matinence costs won't matter because the overall cost compared to diesel will be so low.

[espeefoamer]

Forget China,I'm moving to Switzerland[:D]!

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Steam in India is pretty much gone in general service, diesels and electrics are just about everywhere. There may be some left in odd locations here and there.

Steam in China has for the most part pulled back to Manchuria since that's where the coal mines are and diesels are beginning to make inroads even there.

My 2000 issue of Jane's World Railways shows minimal steam in the rest of the world, not unlike steam in the United States in 1958-1959.

Baldwin completed an order of export steam locomotives for India in 1954. Keep in mind that India's loading gauge is fairly generous.