Transport Tycoon Forums

Ovenbaked wrote:I love steam and feel it's a great piece of our History and Heritage. I feel diesel is a bit of a not-so-great part, being no cleaner or more efficient than steam could be.
Steam should of stayed till the last of the lines had been electrified. I'm not saying it should of survived longer, I'm saying that ALL mainlines should of been finished half a century ago!

that's how I think about it as well, in Europe diesel is just not being used anymore (never really was actually). I think the future is indeed EMU' in cities and for longer (international) trips E-locs+carriages.

but in north-America they can't stop using diesel trains. there are a couple reasons why:

1. railways are commercial there (electrifying costs money, with diesels it didn't have to be changed)
2. use of diesel is more in the culture of NA (i think)

but what I really HATE is people (mostly steam+diesel fanatics), claiming that E-locs do not create their own "power" so they are not "real" engines.

SniperDJ wrote:but what I really HATE is people (mostly steam+diesel fanatics), claiming that E-locs do not create their own "power" so they are not "real" engines.

Couldn't agree more. In fact, steam and diesel trains don't create their own power either. Earth did by compressing stuff under great pressure, thus creating the coal and oil that powers these types of engines use.

Also, in North America diesel is much cheaper than over here, which reduces the need to electrify lines.

This is semi-related.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lutNECO ... el&list=UL

JamieLei wrote:

PikkaBird wrote:But of course the biggest problem with horse transport, one that olde worlde enthusiasts and period dramas invariably ignore, is the poo. Poo everywhere. By the turn of the 20th century, an army of roadsweepers working 24/7 could not prevent the streets of London and New York being perpetually clogged with horse poo. The motor car was a welcome solution to an increasingly insurmountable problem.

That's actually a very valid point. The stench in late 19th century New York City was unbearable and lead to disease.

How true. Many people who complain about the environmental risks of abandoned automobiles have never had the unpleasant experience of trying to dispose of a bloated, decaying carcass of a large animal on a hot summer's day. Abandoned dead and dying horses on city streets was not an unknown phenomena in major cities 100-200 years ago...

FooBar wrote:

SniperDJ wrote:but what I really HATE is people (mostly steam+diesel fanatics), claiming that E-locs do not create their own "power" so they are not "real" engines.

Couldn't agree more. In fact, steam and diesel trains don't create their own power either. Earth did by compressing stuff under great pressure, thus creating the coal and oil that powers these types of engines use.

Also, in North America diesel is much cheaper than over here, which reduces the need to electrify lines.

Another factor, especially in the western US states, was the lack of suitable water supplies. Not only was water scarce in the desert, but was often very alkaline and needed to be treated before use. Descaling and washdown of boilers was also a major maintenance headache. The Santa Fe dieseled quickly with the early General Motors (EMD) FT models not just for fuel savings, but to eliminate helper districts, save brakeshoe wear (due to dynamic braking) and close down many expensive water treatment facilities. Numerous advantages of dieselization cut the cost per horsepower-hour so substantially in North America that it made more sense to retire even recently purchased steam locomotives, as the ROI (Return On Investment) of diesel-electric propulsion allowed their investment to be recovered rapidly. In some cases the cost savings over steam in a given time period were greater than the payment schedule on the locomotives. Dieselization was a no-brainer for American railroads...

Britain, specifically the LMS, probably would have switched to diesel power by the early 1950s had the war not intervened. The LMS was very interested in American Dieselisation efforts, and in fact their prototypes directly lead to the EE Type 4s (Peaks and 40's) that served until the 1980s. The war didn't impact American infrastructure to anything like the same degree, hence there was money there to invest in diesel traction. Meanwhile the "Big Four" were still trying to repair the years of neglect suffered during the exhaustive war effort. By the time they could focus on diesels and electric, they were nationalised, which set back modernisation for at least 15 years i'd say. Then BR compounded their error by then rushing to replace all their steam locomotives, introducing diesels that were unreliable replacing steam engines that were more powerful and only had a few years on the clock.

In fact both wars got in the war of modernisation. Had the First World War and the subsequent grouping of the railways not occured, Sir Vincent Lichfield Raven could have had electric express trains running on the ECML in the 1920s! British GG1's

I was in Stafford and Crewe yesterday, and the amount of bulls*** the Veg (Idiot Enthusiasts) were talking was unbelieveable. Crap like "The *Insert Class here* should of been through *insert place here* at *insert time here*" gets really annoying. Especially when you know that it isn't due at this time, or even better, when you know everything Due, and where it was at certain time (Thanks TRUST (Not my Access!) )

A321Pilot wrote:I was in Stafford and Crewe yesterday, and the amount of bulls*** the Veg (Idiot Enthusiasts) were talking was unbelieveable. Crap like "The *Insert Class here* should of been through *insert place here* at *insert time here*" gets really annoying. Especially when you know that it isn't due at this time, or even better, when you know everything Due, and where it was at certain time (Thanks TRUST (Not my Access!) )

Once again, I link you to 'Trainspotters denied orgasm'. Calling the driver of a 159 'arseface' simply for keeping to schedule.

You'd think if they were such experts on timetables, they would have know that those two services were due to pass at that station at that time, and would have moved up or down the line accordingly...

I've noticed that as with enthusiasts of most things, rail enthusiasts seem to go potty for anything that is 50 years old or there abouts i.e usually beyond their memory. It's the same way as certain people insist it was better "in the good old days" and look back with nostalgia on the 1950s and 60s, the same way as those of their age in the 1950s looked back with nostalgia on the 1920s I suppose. It's all just a distorted perception of reality kept alive by nostalgia.

Remember that from the so-called "Golden age of Steam" (which in reality was prior to and during the First World War, traffic steadily dropped from then) we have quite a few pictures of the sleek, fast and popular express locomotives. We even have a fair few preserved (too many IMHO, why do we need so many Merchant Navys for example? Couldn't we have preserved a wider variety of stock. What was lost so that yet-another MN could be saved?)

Notice what we don't have is the regular joes. The "boring" services and locos no-one took notice of because they weren't glamourous. Todays enthusiasts are DYING for more photos of regular, every day life on the railways. I hear them bemoan that such-and-such a class was scrapped or why couldn't they save x and y, yet these same people are those that shout arsehead at the driver of a DMU (twas a DMU wasn't it? not an EMU) and moan that Class 59s and 66s are not "proper British" locos, and spit and the mention of a Pendelino.

Some day, not soon, but some day, they'll be queuing up on a platform somewhere to see the same engines they once shunned because they weren't popular at the time they were in service.

Yes James, t'was a DMU, well 3 159s coupled together to be exact I think. I haven't seen anywhere near that many frothers around that area though, the info says it was at Brookwood which isn't far from me at uni and I haven't even seen one before in Guildford or Woking, including once when a steam train passed whilst I was waiting to go to London...

Living at what seems to be a frother mecca, catching trains around where I grew up and live out of term (e.g. summertime) is hell. Try catching a normal train when the torbay express is supposed to come in on a sunday and they basically start hissing at you for blocking their shots of something that isn't just not there, is not even in sight. The worst ones are those who look like they've cleared out a branch of Jessops who seem to think they are entitled to go drive to the train station, set up a branch of snappy snaps on the platform and yell at the people who are trying to travel by train. Eejits.

Haha I love blocking shots when not photographing myself - that's because I photograph in convenient areas out of the way.

Then they're shouting at you asking you to move and... I pretend I'm deaf haha.

Dave W wrote:Haha I love blocking shots when not photographing myself

Not difficult!

p*** off haha - I'm a model of human existence now.

You are the very model of a modern major-general?

If you think having train spotters heckle you for "ruining their shot" when you are just a regular train goer is rough, try BEING the subject of the photo, then getting heckled. Happens all the time as a re-enactor. You get self-declared "experts" trying to find fault in your uniform and equipment, or even your character and such.

Of course the up side is when you actually know more than they do and can destroy their argument. Satisfying when you can be totally professional and nice, but point out that "actually sir, this is a very early 1915 production Type A Brodie Helmet made from magnetic hardened steel, as opposed to the later Mk.I Helmet which was shallower, had a slightly different rim and liner and was made out of thinner, cheaper, non-magnetic manganese steel. Ergo, it's completely plausible that my helmet looks different to the rest of my platoon; I got what I was issued with"

I think every 'minority interest' has a handful of followers who turn it into a p***ing contest. They're obviously overcompensating for something...

Curious footnote to this discussion. http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/9953123 ... y/?ref=twt

Alan Fry in disguise, maybe?