Revolutionary New Steam Loco Design

Jim Martin

What do members think of something like this running on Irish rails?

http://www.5at.co.uk/

corktina

it'll never happen in the UK never mind Ireland!
WHat use do you imagine it would be put to here?(or there)
Its of no interest as a Heritage loco as its new,
its of no use for modern passenger ops as its a loco (locos are a dying speices )
Its a Class Five, it wont be anywhere near powerful enough fro modern freight haulage

to sum up, its a mildly interesting pipe dream ( of people who could be using their resources of time money and talent to propose something much more useful such as a replica Suthern Rly N class 2-6-0 so they could make an extra one for us. :-)

)

CIE

Jim Martin wrote: »

What do members think of something like this running on Irish rails?

http://www.5at.co.uk/

What makes them think they can get that high of thermal efficiency from such a narrow firebox (the reason the ten-wheeler was extended into the Pacific type was to accommodate a wider, and hence more efficient, firebox)? The website is very, very short on details as to how they intend to improve efficiency to 14 percent (the best petrol engines are about 18 percent heat efficient, whereas the best diesels are close to 40 percent; the best steam engines managed a scant 6-8 percent although they were very powerful). Don't see anything about condensing tenders on there (although they cite a "high-capacity" tender, which means they must be expecting lower efficiencies than they claim), what kind of superheating and/or feedwater heating, specific kind of improved insulation around the boiler, none of it. The Wikipedia page on the 5AT merely lists the claims, but gives no actual detail (beyond it being a two-cylinder design, that is, and that will certainly reduce possible torque as well as throw away the possibility of the best driving wheel balance).

Also have to laugh at "drawbar" horsepower; you don't generate horsepower there (it's developed where the wheels meet the rails). Bragging about horsepower amount is an empty argument; lots of steamers had horsepower that was far in excess of their diesel counterparts, but they didn't have anywhere near the thermal efficiency and their horsepower curves were completely different (diesels develop max horses at low revs/speeds whereas steamers develop maximum at about the 35-40 mph range). There is also the adhesion factor of driving wheels (diesels always have more, with all wheels driven usually). The steam engine might be a simple machine, but maintenance is never simple even compared to the more complex diesel, and thanks to all that thermal expansion/contraction, the road availability is always going to be much lower.

There were already several attempts at improving the efficiency of reciprocating steam engine power; one of the biggest flops that never reached the build stage was probably the ACE 3000; highly unconventional, with two cabs on either end (one on the tender) and an equally-unconventional four-cylinder compound 4-8-2 design (one variant was eight-cylinder 4-8-2+2-8-4, with drivers under the tender).

There were several other attempts at improving the efficiency of piston steam engines, almost none of which came to reality. And of course, steam-turbine engines, whether direct-drive or used to power traction motors, had very low efficiency at low speeds.

locos are a dying speices (sic)

False. What do you think pulls freight trains, besides the many intercity (and even commuter) trains that still run on the continent? Siemens, Alstom, and the rest (except for one US builder, EMD) still build electric and diesel engines for both passenger and freight purposes. That business is not going away.

corktina

Please dont selectively quote me.

"its of no use for modern PASSENGER ops as its a loco (locos are a dying speices )"

we arent talking about the USA or the Continent ...in Ireland the loco is defunct on passenger trains (except as in pull pull mode whichis effectively a part of a unit) and pretty near defunct on freight too.

Jim Martin

corktina wrote: »

Its a Class Five, it wont be anywhere near powerful enough fro modern freight haulage


)

I must admit, I'm puzzled by the '5' classification, which doesn't seem to relate to the quoted horsepower figures!

corktina

Steam locos in the UK used a classification derived from the Midland Railway sytem Class 0 was the smallest and (ultimately) Class 9 was the largest. Class five was generally a mixed traffic medium power loco.Most express engines would have been Class 7 or 8 with large freight engines being classed as Class 9. (In terms of power even these would be puny ranked against a modern Class 66 or 70 diesel loco)

Basically, its an intersting technical study with no practical appication likely. The choice of Class 5 would probably relate more to their desire to build a modern version of the ever-popular "Black5" locos than to any application it might have to modern operations.

Cookie_Monster

corktina wrote: »

Steam locos in the UK used a classification derived from the Midland Railway sytem Class 0 was the smallest and (ultimately) Class 9 was the largest. Class five was generally a mixed traffic medium power loco.Most express engines would have been Class 7 or 8 with large freight engines being classed as Class 9. (In terms of power even these would be puny ranked against a modern Class 66 or 70 diesel loco)

is that where the terms "4mt", "5mt" & "Black 5" etc come from then?

Jim Martin

corktina wrote: »

Steam locos in the UK used a classification derived from the Midland Railway sytem Class 0 was the smallest and (ultimately) Class 9 was the largest. Class five was generally a mixed traffic medium power loco.Most express engines would have been Class 7 or 8 with large freight engines being classed as Class 9. (In terms of power even these would be puny ranked against a modern Class 66 or 70 diesel loco)

Basically, its an intersting technical study with no practical appication likely. The choice of Class 5 would probably relate more to their desire to build a modern version of the ever-popular "Black5" locos than to any application it might have to modern operations.

Wouldn't exactly call this puny (Class 9F 2-10-0 92203 Black Prince pulling 1,000t)!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu9NcNmaNjQ

Jim Martin

corktina wrote: »

Steam locos in the UK used a classification derived from the Midland Railway sytem Class 0 was the smallest and (ultimately) Class 9 was the largest. Class five was generally a mixed traffic medium power loco.Most express engines would have been Class 7 or 8 with large freight engines being classed as Class 9. (In terms of power even these would be puny ranked against a modern Class 66 or 70 diesel loco)

Basically, its an intersting technical study with no practical appication likely. The choice of Class 5 would probably relate more to their desire to build a modern version of the ever-popular "Black5" locos than to any application it might have to modern operations.

Would have thought that with the power output being talked of with the proposed Class 5AT - it should be more like Class 9MT!

murphaph

Jim Martin wrote: »

Wouldn't exactly call this puny (Class 9F 2-10-0 92203 Black Prince pulling 1,000t)!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu9NcNmaNjQ

It's no Langer Heinrich though

Langer Heinrich was the heaviest steam freight train ever to be hauled on the German railways. It was a 4000t ore train hauled by 2 oil fired steam locos.

Steam is just wonderful, but not practical anymore. These guys could presumably be doing something more worthwhile but it's their time to waste I suppose.

corktina

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

is that where the terms "4mt", "5mt" & "Black 5" etc come from then?

spot on!

corktina

Jim Martin wrote: »

Wouldn't exactly call this puny (Class 9F 2-10-0 92203 Black Prince pulling 1,000t)!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu9NcNmaNjQ

the thing is , that is a transient effort, it cant keep that up for more than a handfiul of miles and would have to retire for servicing after one shift, whereas a modern diesel can do that 23 hours+ per day, so yes, puny...also inefficent, expensive to maintain and dirty , But I still thril to the sight of one.!

corktina

murphaph wrote: »

It's no Langer Heinrich though

Langer Heinrich was the heaviest steam freight train ever to be hauled on the German railways. It was a 4000t ore train hauled by 2 oil fired steam locos.

Steam is just wonderful, but not practical anymore. These guys could presumably be doing something more worthwhile but it's their time to waste I suppose.

was Heinrich from Cork then Bhoi!:D