Steam vs. Diesel Who would Win
- Thread starter gtasa
- Start date
Wessex_Electric_Nutter
New member
Err, not just the 5AT, 60163 is sort of a new loco, but also a mix of old technologies. The team could not rebuild an A1 to the same exact specifications, as some specifications were a) vauge and B) some of the equipment no longer exists.
For example, to make the boiler, they got it done in Germany, who were used to building large steam vessles, we (the Brits) no longer have the technology, or the skills for the right price. The firebox was steel as well, the loco have to have 25mm shaved off the top of it. Etc, etc, read here for more info: http://www.a1steam.com/
As for the debate, if you got locos of simliar ages together with simliar power classification, then neither Diesel or Steam will win. Diesels do have a lot of advances in control to stop the wheels from spinning for example and the wheels are smaller, to stop or reduce wheelslip (greater surface area and weight causes wheelspin?), you also got other considerations, Diesel would have field divert coils, which are active at a certain speed, to increase the speed of the motor, plus at slower speeds, you got starting resistances, to asorb the current the motor is taking. Then there is the speed up/slow down cycle of the diesel engine and one can't just throttle it to the summit on either traction, you would just slip allover the place. Additives in the fuel can inpact on performance as well and even some slight mechanical faults. Is the engine burning oil? As soon as a cylinder looses compression, through worn rings, or other ways, you loose some power. Although I am simplyfying matters to Diesel Electrics, we have Diesel Hydraulics to worry about (leaks loose power in the torque converter you know!
) and diesel mechanical (Wrong gear changes loose power too - An engine has a range where the most power is produced, the faster the engine runs outside of that band, the little gain you get.)Steam does have more manual control, but you need to be effective teamwork members, good coal and a good fireman. A fireman who is going to plonk coal on coal will ensure power would actually be reduced quite significantly. Not only that, but they risk killing the fire. (The best way to fire a steam engine, is to have enough to cover the grate and burn for a reasonable amount of time, without burning to excessively or burning inefficently. You also should keep the fire even, like running a spirit level over the top to make it level.) The coal has to be of a type that is suitable on the loco. A GWR loco loves dusty coal (plonk it in the firebox, it burns and turns to dust, leaving little energy), while LNER locos like the hard stuff.
While on the subject of coal, it also must be of a type that gives out the maximun amount of energy, compared to amount of waste it produces. (Don't ask the calculations). A good driver would also be extremely useful, as they know how far the regulator should be open and what cut off setting to use.
Electrics would probably win, as long as someone hasn't fiddled with the wiring (That makes a lot of difference, wiring induces resistance, thus heat), the motor brushes and contactors are in good order (any contactor that doesn't contact properly, is inducing heat through resistance, lowering the power rating). Ac locos would probably need more involvement, as early AC locos used tap changers, rather than fixed notches controlled by pneumatic cams which I believe there are a lot of and each one contacts a contactor.
A good thing about electrics, is the power that goes in, is 90% or more efficent, meaning the more power that goes in, 90% of it is movement, the same argument could be leveled at Diesel Electrics, but generators only are 45% or so efficent. (45% of the movement energy goes into electrical energy)
Steam is something like 10-15% efficent, I can't remember how efficent.
To technical?
Last edited:
Wessex_Electric_Nutter
New member
I am not saying electrics are perfect, yes, they share the same problems with diesel electrics, you have to have an offshore supply (I was oversimplifyling the argument
) I did forget losses of transmission of power, which doesn't affect diesels to a large degree, substation to loco, you might get a 3% loss or so (Don't quote me on the figure, I honestly don't know), losses through the shoe or pantograph and above about 100mph, losses of contact, although, 3rd rail hasn't been tried over 110mph as BR couldn't find a strech fast enough.Even more interesting, what about the fuel economy and how much power would each loco consumme? Red Diesel which is about 48p a litre (I don't know the exact price, so it might be grossy underestimated) and more suspectible to price change. Red diesel is the VAT free version, banned from the road, it is instead, used for off road use. (Multiply that by ammount in litres, etc). And engine oil, don't ask me the price of (IIRC P30 oil - correct me on that) that.
Steam would need water, which would be pennies per litre, BUT you need decent water and not tap water, as there would be too much calcium in it for the boiler to run reliably. (Scale in your kettle anyone?) At the Watercress Line, we used deionised water, basically, very pure water, which is suppose to be a lot better for the boilers, but it costs a lot more to produce. (Add that to the price per litre, don't ask how much, I honestly don't know! I'll interrogate my top boss next time.) And not forgetting coal for most steam locos. I found a place that does a price per tonne, its £272/Tonne (notice the spelling - METRIC TONNE): http://www.coaldelivery.co.uk/acata..._stoves.html?gclid=CMaA5bLHmJsCFZgU4wodiBgQnQ
Electric usually works in consumption per kW and in the UK, Network Rail set the price of power consumption, its here: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse... Charges Reviews\CP4 Charges&pageid=2893&root=
Oh and access charges are applicable for all 3, the problem you'd have there, would be the heavier the loco, the more the track charges would be.
Have I forgotten anything?However, I wonder how efficent solar power/wind power is?
EDIT: And for gods sakes don't mention the infrastructure costs!!! Electric would loose big time, because how much it would cost to install the OHLE, etc. Lets keep it simple and say the infrastructure is there already.
Last edited:
WEN: electrification may be way expensive, but it still seems to be economically feasible or else everyone would change over to diesels right away anyway. Though you do need to have a good amount of traffic over a line for it to pay itself back, so no one-train-a-day branch lines will get electrified unless it's intended to use it as a diversion route.
Oops, did I just talk about infrastructure costs!? :hehe:
Oops, did I just talk about infrastructure costs!? :hehe:
Wessex_Electric_Nutter
New member
Leave that to Network Rail to decide what lines to electrify.
Interestingly, 2 of the sleepy ones in East Sussex are under consideration for electrification, Hurst Green to Uckfield for compatiblity reasons. Ashford to Ore (Hastings) and Reigate to Guildford may well be included, because these are diesel lines surrounded by 3rd rail electric lines. The cost effectiveness of having an electric train operating from the electrified territory, going to a line where electrification does (not yet) exist, would be cheaper than buying bespoke diesel units. Since the relationship between wheel and rail is pratically non existant, I can't see that happening before the next general election.
Besides the ramblings of Nuclear powered locomotives, And the "dreamt" come back of steam, GTASA, your not thinking in the farthest extend. Just because one locomotive has more horsepower than the other, doesn't give it the advantage.
Firstly, How is each unit Geared? Inside those traction motors, are those set gears. You could put a Diesel that looks like a normal unit, but intended for passenger, and the steamer would most likely win.
Secondly, On this 2% grade, whats the track layout like? Twisty, Curvy with Tunnels? Or is it a gradual climb with easy curves and few tunnels?
What type of load is each one pulling? Can't load the steamer up with boxcars of hay and give a coal train to the diesel.
The point i'm putting across is there are too many variables to account for. Unless you define your question more, there will be no deffinate answer.
Like So: What unit is better in this certain case, A EMD F7 A-B-A set diesel, geared for freight service, pulling a general freight, up against a single ALCo 4-8-4, With 65" drivers, pulling the same train, equal in weight, over a 2% gradual climb, then drop, spaced out in 25 miles.
That question can simply be answered as: The diesel would win. The steamer, would most likely need to stop for coal and water, where as the diesel can go, as long as it has fuel.
Now do you understand the enormanocity of the equation your dealing with?
Firstly, How is each unit Geared? Inside those traction motors, are those set gears. You could put a Diesel that looks like a normal unit, but intended for passenger, and the steamer would most likely win.
Secondly, On this 2% grade, whats the track layout like? Twisty, Curvy with Tunnels? Or is it a gradual climb with easy curves and few tunnels?
What type of load is each one pulling? Can't load the steamer up with boxcars of hay and give a coal train to the diesel.
The point i'm putting across is there are too many variables to account for. Unless you define your question more, there will be no deffinate answer.
Like So: What unit is better in this certain case, A EMD F7 A-B-A set diesel, geared for freight service, pulling a general freight, up against a single ALCo 4-8-4, With 65" drivers, pulling the same train, equal in weight, over a 2% gradual climb, then drop, spaced out in 25 miles.
That question can simply be answered as: The diesel would win. The steamer, would most likely need to stop for coal and water, where as the diesel can go, as long as it has fuel.
Now do you understand the enormanocity of the equation your dealing with?