www.railadvent.co.uk
www.railadvent.co.uk
Sounds like electric traction with 'special effects' to replicate the steam, rather than electrically heating the water as has previously been suggested on here.Does this mean the boiler tubes will be replaced with electric elements?
Agreed. If they wanted to retain genuine steam traction they would be better simply to provide a boiler at the station with a connection to transfer the compressed steam into the locomotives. As it mentions they have a fireless loco they can probably do that already.
You could probably use one of the sound chips sold for models, hook up an amp and some bigger speakers.
Might as well do the first three at the power station…
I've read elsewhere that all the battery traction kit including the motors will be housed in the tenders. The locos will be lightly modified to be pushed around by the power tenders. They may have boilers and pistons removed to reduce weight and resistance , although I'd have thought the cylinders might be useful to 'puff' a steam exhaust simulator. The cab will presumably receive some sort of new control desk for the new power source or maybe existing control handles and levers might be adapted for this. The approach seems to leave the main fabric of the locos fairly intact so in theory they could be converted back one day if desired.
Or 3rd rail shoes...
Sorry, but unless this is a late April Fool's joke, I just don't see the point.
No it isn't. But we're talking about steam locomotives and all of the mainstream preserved steam locomotives that people go to see in the UK use coal as fuel. That's nothing to do with pedantry; it's just a fact.
I don't particularly like it but it's a better solution than replacing them with those fake steam outline diesels once popular in theme parks. The locos are being retained largely intact, just being pushed around rather than powering the train, so people can still see them moving and they'll have to be maintained mechanically and cosmetically. The reduction in emissions will not only benefit the air quality but will avoid the cleaning of soot from the engine, rolling stock, and surroundings as well as eliminate the dirtiest and most time-consuming routine tasks in the depot. I think the particular solution is probably only suitable for small trains moving slowly along a short gently graded track. In a theme park setting, the railway represents just one attraction among a broad offering. They might have shut it down instead without these measures which will undoubtedly be cost-saving in operations and maintenance. The technique will preserve the locomotives largely intact albeit as 'dead' moving exhibits. I'll be interested to see what the special effects department comes up with for simulating the sight, sounds and smells of a loco in steam, particularly as they actively market it as an explicitly steam railway attraction currently. They'll have to be good. The modifications would likely be fully reversible if ever desired in the future or if the railway closes and the locos are sold. I like the NYMR WD 2-10-0 oil burner project. While that doesn't eliminate carbon output at point of use, it does offer much of the cleanliness benefit while being compatible with fuel that could be bio-sourced. I saw a recent Hyce YT video about a private 'Grand Gauge' 15 inch railway run by a Swiss billionaire on his California wine estate. That has a replica Swiss RhB metre gauge steam loco in ~40% scale. The amazing 2-8-0 is propane-fired with completely automated burner controls. Everything is so clean with no coal dust, soot, ash or clinker, but there's absolutely no doubt it's a real steam engine.
I reckon this will probably be the choice that most heritage railways and some mainline locos will go for if coal can no longer be sourced. Electric might take off one some smaller lines such as zoos or mansion estate railways, but even some of the most environmentally friendly heritage railways are happy with using biocoal going forward such as the Talyllyn railway.
There's a Swiss oil-fired conversion of a German BR.52 owned and operated by modern steam company DLM on the European mainland. As suggested for the NYMR, they use light domestic heating oil, which is very close in characteristics to diesel apparently and can be obtained cheaply at warmer times of the year (when heritage rail ops are at their peak and fire risk is greatest). Fossil diesel or bio equivalents can also be substituted. None of that heavy bunker fuel planned in the late 1940s before British interests in cheap Iranian crude were nationalised (by them). Bunker oil is so thick it needed steam heating to move around. After his apprenticeship at Doncaster, Dad's first job assigned to him in the loco drawing office was to design the fixed plant for depot fuelling, which required a steam boiler for oil heating and for powering a small stationary engine used for pumping. That scheme never got off the ground and was abandoned quickly as the railway started getting top quality coal again for expresses, which they had difficulty sourcing throughout the war years. Dad recalled it remained a problem with the new NCB for a period after that.
I would go along with that. When I read your earlier post I thought you were thinking of full size locos. That said, I cannot see it going down too well somewhere like Romney Hythe & Dymchurch or Ravenglass & Eskdale. For one thing those lines are too long but more important than that, the locos on those lines are as much revered by their fans as Mallard and Flying Scotsman!
They're big powerful engines for their gauge and haul some lengthy trains, albeit on the flat in the case of the RH&DR. Maybe oil or gas firing conversions would be better for these, like many of their bigger cousins. An automated burner system would make these single-person operated little engines much easier to handle and the cleanliness would cut prep and disposal time significantly.
15inch gauge locos will be able to convert to biocoal rather easily. The trials that took place two years ago at the Bure valley railway proved successful with the biocoal trial so they should be okay.
www.railadvent.co.uk
It looks like there will be a range of solutions that owners and operators can choose for locos of all sizes. Some simply want a direct replacement for coal. Others may also want to clean up and streamline the operation more radically and eliminate fire risk with oil-firing or similar. The old push the exhibits round with a battery tug approach is probably rather niche, but might catch on for small commercial park and zoo railways.
The Brown Boveri design reminds me of a cartoon which appeared in the Ffestiniog Railway Magazine in the early 1970s with a pantograph of the top of the cab of a Fairlie - it appeared again in the Spring 2024 Ffestiniog Railway Magazine.Suspect most or all of the participants in this thread already know this, but for the benefit of lurkers electric powered steam locomotives have actually been tried and worked in Switzerland back in the war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric-steam_locomotive
Image shows one in use
Worth noting these could reach full pressure from a cold start under wire in about an hour and once 'charged up' could venture off along unelectrified trackage like a fireless loco. I don't know for how long or how far they could go before they needed to put the kettle on again. They still had a conventional firebox and grate and could be lit up if staff could find any suitable solid fuel.Suspect most or all of the participants in this thread already know this, but for the benefit of lurkers electric powered steam locomotives have actually been tried and worked in Switzerland back in the war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric-steam_locomotive
Image shows one in use
I rather fancy the idea of an EV amplifying the sound from an English Electric 16SVT (in class 40) or 16CSVT (in class 50). That'll get the attention of pedestrians and other road users.
Is it me, or does this basically sound like a full size version of a Hornby tender-drive model of the 1990s....
