Subject:
|
Re: Gray VS. Black Metroliner Nose
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 28 Oct 2001 04:56:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
139 times
|
| |
|
|
> Grow up, people. Steam lost. It costs too much.
Hardly. So what...it costs more than diesel for maintance, and since US
railways are profit orented, that's what they use (well, for the most part...I
could name a few US railways that use steam, although I cannot think of any
which are exclusively steam). Used correctly, modern steam would be cheaper
than diesel to run (you don't believe me? Check out what was written about the
ACE engines in ~1982- 614T was cheaper to fuel than a diesel, and it was NOT
working right by the end of the testing...). Steam would also be cheaper to
buy (historically, steam ran to about 1/5th of the price of diesel...)- the big
bugaboo is maintance. Fuel wasted when idling is not a big concern, when was
the last time you saw a diesel shut down?
The problems of steam are a lack of MU ability, and the use of 100-150 year old
ideas of maintance. I believe that it is certanly possible to make economic
use of coal via a railway engine, rather than oil-either directly, or
indrectly.
James P
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
