What type of fuel did the APT-E run on?

[thenorthern]

Strange question that I have always wondered what type of fuel did the APT-E run on? That is the Gas Turbine Train.

I know it was a "Gas Turbine" train however that is only the type of engine it was and not the type of fuel it used. Jet engines for example are gas turbines but they run on Jet Fuel which is a liquid and very similar Diesel.

 

[Harpers Tate]

I'd guess at Kerosene. Just a guess, though.

 

[Ash Bridge]

Apparently it was normal rail grade diesel fuel according to the Ian Allan publication APT A promise Unfulfilled.

 

[hexagon789]

Strange question that I have always wondered what type of fuel did the APT-E run on? That is the Gas Turbine Train.

I know it was a "Gas Turbine" train however that is only the type of engine it was and not the type of fuel it used. Jet engines for example are gas turbines but they run on Jet Fuel which is a liquid and very similar Diesel.

Just diesel fuel, though tests were also made using special grade diesel fuel for simulated cold weather starts of the turbines down to -40C

Apparently it was normal rail grade diesel fuel according to the Ian Allan publication APT A promise Unfulfilled.

Yes, that's correct.

 

[delt1c]

Fuel consumption brought tears to the eyes of the accountants

 

[hexagon789]

Fuel consumption brought tears to the eyes of the accountants

I think only the French really persevered with Gas Turbine powered trains for longer than about 10-15 years, their RTG trains lasted in traffic until 2004. Amtrak lasted about 12 years with their TurboTrains and RTGs, CN/VIA lasted 15 on and off with their TurboTrains, replacing them with the LRCs in 1982.

 

[Andy R. A.]

A rather faded photo from my old collection. Taken sometime in 1971. The APT-E being refuelled at Cricklewood alongside a 127 DMU. The houses of Brent Terrace in the background.

 

[thenorthern]

I remember a book I have which was published in the early 1980s about the Intercity 125 and it mentioned the differences in costs and it mentioned that a Diesel Engine that is used in the Intercity 125 was the cheapest to run out of all the options.

 

[hexagon789]

A rather faded photo from my old collection. Taken sometime in 1971. The APT-E being refuelled at Cricklewood alongside a 127 DMU. The houses of Brent Terrace in the background.View attachment 83603

Even now it still has a futuristic look to it.

 

[Andy R. A.]

Even now it still has a futuristic look to it.

A photo taken from the other side which I had uploaded to Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/8888017@N08/30752264582/in/album-72157674826143586/

 

[hexagon789]

A photo taken from the other side which I had uploaded to Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/8888017@N08/30752264582/in/album-72157674826143586/

You can see a slight similarity with the prototype HST power car

 

[DelW]

I think only the French really persevered with Gas Turbine powered trains for longer than about 10-15 years, their RTG trains lasted in traffic until 2004. Amtrak lasted about 12 years with their TurboTrains and RTGs, CN/VIA lasted 15 on and off with their TurboTrains, replacing them with the LRCs in 1982.

Don't forget UP's freight turbines, of various types up to 8,500hp, which were in use from the early '50s until the early '70s.
They burned bunker fuel oil, which was cheaper than diesel, mitigating their higher consumption.
Poor reliability and improvements in diesel electric power led to their demise.

 

[Ash Bridge]

A rather faded photo from my old collection. Taken sometime in 1971. The APT-E being refuelled at Cricklewood alongside a 127 DMU. The houses of Brent Terrace in the background.View attachment 83603

Priceless shot there Andy, thanks for posting!

Even now it still has a futuristic look to it.

It really does look like something from another futuristic world surrounded by all the dated surroundings in that shot, and yes I do include the 127!

 

[randyrippley]

Don't forget UP's freight turbines, of various types up to 8,500hp, which were in use from the early '50s until the early '70s.
They burned bunker fuel oil, which was cheaper than diesel, mitigating their higher consumption.
Poor reliability and improvements in diesel electric power led to their demise.

Possibly a bigger factor is that more ships switched to using bunker oil, pushing the price up. Also increased use as a chemical feedstock. Until then bunker oil was very much a waste product and cheap

 

[paul1609]

In the Royal Navy we use F76 which is a distillate diesel in Gas Turbines and you can use MGO which is the Marine equivalent of red Diesel with some additional fouling.
If you want to use aviation fuels you remap the engine to reduce the TET Turbine Entry temperature, this is reasonably easy with computer controlled engines.
If you use aviation fuels without remapping the engine the combustion chambers suffer a very short life.

 

[randyrippley]

Apparently it was normal rail grade diesel fuel according to the Ian Allan publication APT A promise Unfulfilled.

Makes sense as they were Rover turbines, originally intended for road use

 

[thenorthern]

Even now it still has a futuristic look to it.

Looks like what was seen as futuristic in the 1970s in a similar way to the Thunderbirds.

 

[Ash Bridge]

Looks like what was seen as futuristic in the 1970s in a similar way to the Thunderbirds.

Same applies for the Concorde airliner prototypes back then also.

 

[hexagon789]

Looks like what was seen as futuristic in the 1970s in a similar way to the Thunderbirds.

It's difficult to be subjective about it, knowing it dates from that decade, it has a futuristic look but a 1970s futuristic look

It really does look like something from another futuristic world surrounded by all the dated surroundings in that shot, and yes I do include the 127!

Quite, I think many things would look a bit more futuristic against a 127!

Don't forget UP's freight turbines, of various types up to 8,500hp, which were in use from the early '50s until the early '70s.
They burned bunker fuel oil, which was cheaper than diesel, mitigating their higher consumption.
Poor reliability and improvements in diesel electric power led to their demise.

True, I'd forgotten about them. I think the Germans trialled turbine booster units in some of the "rabbit ears"

 

[Richard Scott]

True, I'd forgotten about them. I think the Germans trialled turbine booster units in some of the "rabbit ears"

There were 9 locos, prototype 219001 (think it started life with a V16x number, possibly V169001) which had a 16 cylinder Maybach with a gas turbine for additional power and ETS, I believe. The other 8 were basically a 218 with MTU TB10 engine and think a Lycoming gas turbine of helicopter origin (numbered 210001-210008). They weren't massively successful (a little prone to self combustion, I believe) and were converted to almost standard 218s numbered 218901-218908. Think they were all withdrawn mid 2000s and scrapped. Remember having 218902 out of Hannover in 2004. 219001 still survives I believe. Sorry it's off topic but hope provides some interest.

 

[hexagon789]

There were 9 locos, prototype 219001 (think it started life with a V16x number, possibly V169001) which had a 16 cylinder Maybach with a gas turbine for additional power and ETS, I believe. The other 8 were basically a 218 with MTU TB10 engine and think a Lycoming gas turbine of helicopter origin (numbered 210001-210008). They weren't massively successful (a little prone to self combustion, I believe) and were converted to almost standard 218s numbered 218901-218908. Think they were all withdrawn mid 2000s and scrapped. Remember having 218902 out of Hannover in 2004. 219001 still survives I believe. Sorry it's off topic but hope provides some interest.

Yes, those are the ones on was thinking of. I think the turbine took them from about 2,600 to around 4,000hp and they were passed for 160 instead of the usual 140km/h as well iirc

 

[Richard Scott]

Yes, those are the ones on was thinking of. I think the turbine took them from about 2,600 to around 4,000hp and they were passed for 160 instead of the usual 140km/h as well iirc

From a book I have the 210 had a 2500PS rating on the engine and 845kW (roughly 1150hp) from the gas turbine and were designed for 160km/h as you said.

 

[hexagon789]

From a book I have the 210 had a 2500PS rating on the engine and 845kW (roughly 1150hp) from the gas turbine and were designed for 160km/h as you said.

That's probably right, I was going purely off memory so I think I did well that my figures weren't too far out!

 

[Richard Scott]

That's probably right, I was going purely off memory so I think I did well that my figures weren't too far out!

Bet they were great performers when working properly. Roughly similar sort of power to a 68! Standard 218 is no slouch!

 

[hexagon789]

Bet they were great performers when working properly. Roughly similar sort of power to a 68! Standard 218 is no slouch!

Imagine if the Westerns were so equipped...!

 

[randyrippley]

If you want a diesel piston / turbine hybrid, take a look at the Deltic C18
from https://oldmachinepress.com/2019/09/05/napier-deltic-opposed-piston-diesel-engine/

In 1956, Napier built a compound diesel engine known as the Deltic C18 (E185). Serious development of the C18 occurred after the Napier Nomad II compound diesel aircraft engine was cancelled in 1955. The Deltic C18 had an eight-stage (some sources say 12-stage, which was the same number of stages as used in the Nomad II) axial compressor positioned inside the engine triangle. The compressor was driven by a three-stage turbine, which was powered by the engine’s exhaust gases. The turbine was positioned in the normal blower position on the free end of the engine. A new phasing gear housing was constructed with an opening that allowed air into the center of the engine triangle and served as the inlet for the compressor. The Deltic C18 produced 5,500 hp (4,101 kW) at 2,000 rpm. The engine was 124 in (3.15 m) long, 65 in (1.65 m) wide, and 77 in (1.96 m) tall. The C18 weighed approximately 10,700 lb (4,853 kg). The engine was tested in 1957, but only one experimental C18 was built. While undergoing power tests, the engine was intentionally pushed beyond its limits until a connecting rod failed at 5,600 hp (4,176 kW). The rod came through the crankcase, but the damage was never repaired due to the Navy’s increased focus on gas turbine engines.

The 5,500 hp (4,101 kW) compound Deltic C18 (E185) engine was the most powerful piston engine Napier ever built. Although it is covered, the intake can be seen in the upper part of the phasing gear housing. Exhaust was routed through the three-stage turbine, which powered the eight-stage compressor inside the engine’s triangle. (Napier/NPHT/IMechE image)

 

[Journeyman]

If you want a diesel piston / turbine hybrid, take a look at the Deltic C18
from https://oldmachinepress.com/2019/09/05/napier-deltic-opposed-piston-diesel-engine/



View attachment 83754

The 5,500 hp (4,101 kW) compound Deltic C18 (E185) engine was the most powerful piston engine Napier ever built. Although it is covered, the intake can be seen in the upper part of the phasing gear housing. Exhaust was routed through the three-stage turbine, which powered the eight-stage compressor inside the engine’s triangle. (Napier/NPHT/IMechE image)

Right! Who is going to start the project to (a) recreate this engine and (b) build a suitably impressive retro-futuristic-looking loco to put it in?

 

[Richard Scott]

Right! Who is going to start the project to (a) recreate this engine and (b) build a suitably impressive retro-futuristic-looking loco to put it in?

And get it through current emissions regulations?!!!!!!

 

[BayPaul]

The 5,500 hp (4,101 kW) compound Deltic C18 (E185) engine was the most powerful piston engine Napier ever built. (Napier/NPHT/IMechE image)

Did I read correctly that it failed at 5600 hp, so less than 2% overload? That could be part of the reason why they didn't build anymore!

 

[pieguyrob]

Right! Who is going to start the project to (a) recreate this engine and (b) build a suitably impressive retro-futuristic-looking loco to put it in?

If only we had the money. Crowd funding possibly?