NEW steam locomotive takes to the rails

[Ameecher]

Then when they realise that's 2 pints they ask if you have a glass that size

[ostlandr]

Over here beer normally comes in twelve ounce containers- either aluminum cans or "longneck*" glass bottles. These come in "six packs", "twelve packs" or cases of 24.
Draft (draught) beer comes in conveniently portable 5 1/2 gallon plastic "beer balls", 7 1/2 gallon "pony kegs" and 15 1/2 gallon kegs (equivalent to the UK half barrel.) It is served in various sized glasses in taverns, perhaps a proper pint glass in a fine establishment, an eight-ounce pilsner glass or iced mug in most, or by the six-ounce plastic cup in others.

Hmm. . . The invention of beer spurred the development of agriculture, which led to measuring the land the grain (for the beer) was grown on. Perhaps this explains acres, furlongs, rods, chains, etc.- the folks who invented them were all drinking the beer!

* American beer, being for the most part foul-tasting stuff, is best served ice cold (the better to numb the taste buds.) Proper etiquitte is to hold a bottle of beer by the neck, thus preventing the warmth of one's hand from heating the beer inside. Holding a longneck by the middle will lead to stares, and possibly the comment "You ain't from around here, are ya?"

[Brianetta]

American beer, being for the most part foul-tasting stuff...

Mitigated somewhat by the fact that US pints are smaller.

[Kevo00]

US beer is not all bad - they have some really quite good microbreweries. For some reason that I have never been able to fathom however, they serve Newcy Broon on draft when it should only ever be drank out of the bottle.

Its also good that you can buy a massive bottle of the cheap mass produced stuff from the Supermarket for about $1.80, which contains a lot of fluid ounces.

[Brianetta]

US beer is not all bad - they have some really quite good microbreweries. For some reason that I have never been able to fathom however, they serve Newcy Broon on draft when it should only ever be drank out of the bottle.

Read the bottle. You don't drink from the bottle, you decant it into a small glass. Heathen.

It's just Broon to drinkers here in Newcastle - "Newcy" sounds so horribly like a south west England seaside resort.

[Kevo00]

Yep, I just meant that it should come in the bottle - of course I slowly pour it into my glass in tiny amounts.

[SquireJames]

As a British Immigrant (or should that be emmigrant? Probably not, since i've talking from the place i've moved to) to the United States I can categorically say that every US Beer it has been my displeasure to taste (Busch, Miller, Budweiser, Milwaukee Best et al) has tasted exactly the same; Too light and yet foul tasting. I thought Stella Artois or Kronenburg was similar until I came here. Atleast they are different enough to be called different Lagers, this Yankee stuff (or, should I say given my geographical location, Confederate Stuff) tastes exactly the same to me.

Should I drink beer, which is unusual (i'm a cider drinker by nature) I prefer either a dark Stout, such as Guiness (although I confess i've never drank proper Guiness, i.e in Ireland) so that my drink actually tastes of something, or a light hoppy beer such as Belgian "Hommelbier" I believe is the word, which is flavourful but not as heavy on the stomach as Guiness. Failing both, Boddingtons or at a push, Carling, so atleast it tastes like something I am supposed to drink. This American stuff has me wondering whether its cleverly marketed industrial waste.

Not to mention, here in Oklahoma your beer is a mere 3.2 percent. I am no alcoholic, but being forced to go to some seedy liquor store just because the bible bashers here think buying alcohol that actually has an effect before you drink your own body weight in it is wrong gets me a little peeved. Then again, you can buy rifles in Wal-Mart right next to the toy department, so I guess my moral compass is set to a different pole than Oklahomans.

The only stuff i've found worth drinking here is either Heineken, although it doesn't taste the same as it did in blighty, probably different percentage as mentioned, imported British bitters (I found a shop that sells Boddingtons and even Spitfire, superb) or this American cider (or hard cider as they call it, as the Americans seem to call spiced apple juice cider also. ) called Hornsbys. Nowhere near as good as Magners or even Bulmers Strongbow, and tastes 'dirtier' if thats the right way to describe it, but better than the torture that is American beer. I favour draught Strongbow over bottled, although admittedly this Hornsbys is somewhere in the middle. As I said though, doesn't taste as sharp.

Anyways, the locomotive. My only negative thing about it is that I hope they don't intend to leave it in that unlined grey. I would love to see it in lined BR Brunswick Green (although, LNER Apple might be nice, still I prefer the darker Brunswick myself)

[ostlandr]

There are a few good brews in the US- just not from the big breweries. Sam Adams (all varieties) are good. Yuengling isn't bad either. For mass produced beer, Killain's Irish Red is a good drink. Saranac Black & Tan is another favorite, but probably not available outside of upstate NY.
The problem is, the blighters use corn and rice to brew the big beers, and not proper barley malt.

If you get out to Colorado, try Coors. Used to only be produced in Colorado, but now they make "beer concentrate" which is shipped out in tank cars and reconstituted with local water instead of Rocky Mountain water.

And back to the Locomotive, they are going to do the paint. They wanted to have everything working before they did the final paint, in case they had to tear something apart.

As a British Immigrant (or should that be emmigrant? Probably not, since i've talking from the place i've moved to) to the United States I can categorically say that every US Beer it has been my displeasure to taste (Busch, Miller, Budweiser, Milwaukee Best et al) has tasted exactly the same; Too light and yet foul tasting. I thought Stella Artois or Kronenburg was similar until I came here. Atleast they are different enough to be called different Lagers, this Yankee stuff (or, should I say given my geographical location, Confederate Stuff) tastes exactly the same to me.

Should I drink beer, which is unusual (i'm a cider drinker by nature) I prefer either a dark Stout, such as Guiness (although I confess i've never drank proper Guiness, i.e in Ireland) so that my drink actually tastes of something, or a light hoppy beer such as Belgian "Hommelbier" I believe is the word, which is flavourful but not as heavy on the stomach as Guiness. Failing both, Boddingtons or at a push, Carling, so atleast it tastes like something I am supposed to drink. This American stuff has me wondering whether its cleverly marketed industrial waste.

Not to mention, here in Oklahoma your beer is a mere 3.2 percent. I am no alcoholic, but being forced to go to some seedy liquor store just because the bible bashers here think buying alcohol that actually has an effect before you drink your own body weight in it is wrong gets me a little peeved. Then again, you can buy rifles in Wal-Mart right next to the toy department, so I guess my moral compass is set to a different pole than Oklahomans.

The only stuff i've found worth drinking here is either Heineken, although it doesn't taste the same as it did in blighty, probably different percentage as mentioned, imported British bitters (I found a shop that sells Boddingtons and even Spitfire, superb) or this American cider (or hard cider as they call it, as the Americans seem to call spiced apple juice cider also. ) called Hornsbys. Nowhere near as good as Magners or even Bulmers Strongbow, and tastes 'dirtier' if thats the right way to describe it, but better than the torture that is American beer. I favour draught Strongbow over bottled, although admittedly this Hornsbys is somewhere in the middle. As I said though, doesn't taste as sharp.

Anyways, the locomotive. My only negative thing about it is that I hope they don't intend to leave it in that unlined grey. I would love to see it in lined BR Brunswick Green (although, LNER Apple might be nice, still I prefer the darker Brunswick myself)

[Dave]

I think it might be the start of something of a steam revival - if it can haul at 90mph+ then it'll be good for passenger runs on secondary routes as well as freight, and with the price of diesel, it might even be cheaper to run(!)

[Kevo00]

I think it might be the start of something of a steam revival - if it can haul at 90mph+ then it'll be good for passenger runs on secondary routes as well as freight, and with the price of diesel, it might even be cheaper to run(!)

Only if they can solve the problem of them tying up a lot of labour while being steamed up. This is a big problem for preserved railways, as volunteers often have to go in at 4am for an 11am start! Or sometimes they even have to start putting them in steam the day before. Not to mention all the checks and oilings that have to be done, and shoveling the coal back out afterwards (perhaps the worst job in the world). And the double manning nessescary too. Nope I don't think we'll be seeing steam locos back on scheduled services unless these problems can be solved, at least not on NR.

[ostlandr]

A lot of that has been solved, although I'm not sure how much of that made it onto this locomotive. Modern bearings take most of the "oiling" out of the picture, and I believe this locomotive makes use of that. Capacity of lubricators was raised also to reduce maintenance.
If a locomotive is in regular service, it can be "banked" and the boiler kept warm for an early start. The tourist lines are dealing with 100 year old locomotives that aren't being run daily, and so the boiler has to be warmed very slowly and gently to extend its life.
With modern water treatment making the daily "blow-down" a thing of the past, new revenue-service locomotives can now be kept hot between runs.

In the US, steam fire engines were kept hot at all times by circulating hot water from the fire station's heating boiler through the engine. A fire was laid in the firebox, and when the alarm sounded, the engineer would take a scoop, remove the fire from the heating boiler, and toss it into the engine's firebox. Already being at perhaps 220 degrees and 15-30 psi, the boiler could be producing steam by the time they got to the fire and in full operation in minutes.

If this were used on modern steam locomotives (in conjunction with Chapelon-style "excessive" insulation) then a loco could be ready within minutes of being needed, without damage to the boiler. It's the start-up that causes lots of wear as pieces expand at different rates.

As far as burning coal and the required fireman, it would come down to the reduced fuel, maintenance and capital costs of modern steam outweighing the cost of the fireman. That's not as far-fetched as you might think, with the cost spread per BTU of diesel vs coal these days.

We have wood pellet stoves over here that run very nicely without intervention, just fill up the hopper. If we can improve solid-fuel stoking equipment enough (should be doable for a society capable of space flight) there's no reason one person couldn't operate a coal fueled locomotive equipped with automated boiler controls. On freights over here, the conductor pretty much sits around the cab while the train is moving. Montana Rail Link, for example, puts two engineers in the cab so they can switch off to reduce fatigue. So for freights, no extra crew would be needed. And for passengers, over here we require a second person in the cab for passenger ferries, aircraft, etc.- why not trains also? Again, the cost savings (and they are substantial) would have to outweigh any increase in labor cost.

I really believe that a modern steam locomotive like the 5AT could be produced in quantity to give a lower total ownership cost per horsepower/hour than diesel-electrics.

I think it might be the start of something of a steam revival - if it can haul at 90mph+ then it'll be good for passenger runs on secondary routes as well as freight, and with the price of diesel, it might even be cheaper to run(!)

Only if they can solve the problem of them tying up a lot of labour while being steamed up. This is a big problem for preserved railways, as volunteers often have to go in at 4am for an 11am start! Or sometimes they even have to start putting them in steam the day before. Not to mention all the checks and oilings that have to be done, and shoveling the coal back out afterwards (perhaps the worst job in the world). And the double manning nessescary too. Nope I don't think we'll be seeing steam locos back on scheduled services unless these problems can be solved, at least not on NR.

[Kevo00]

Well fair enough, perhaps these problems can be solved. I would love to see steam back on the mainline, but its still firmly in the 'I'll believe it when I see it category.' Another problem that springs to mind would include the problem of having to give the engine a 'drink' quite frequently compared to diesels, and also the problem of including two cabs or allowing for decent two way visibility in a steam loco, as our network doesn't have turntables any longer (but I believe the US still does?). Also I'm not sure if steam could be incorporated into a multiple unit design too well (although some steam railcars did exist in the UK, but with limited success), but an SMU would probably be more attractive to the UK system for passenger traffic as it doesn't need to run round.

In UK (and possibly other European countries) freight trains are all one man only - we don't even have a conductor any longer, because there is simply no need for one when you have track circuit technology, so those savings would have to be pretty incredible to make steam attractive if it required two men. But I guess nowadays a computer could monitor the boiler temperature and control how much water was let in etc., and maybe the coal shoveling could be automated somehow. Hmm...

[Brianetta]

I really believe that a modern steam locomotive like the 5AT could be produced in quantity to give a lower total ownership cost per horsepower/hour than diesel-electrics.

Possibly. The 5AT is not designed to burn coal; it's deigned to burn the same fuel oil that mainline diesel locos and MUs use. Coal shovelling is a thing of the past, and probably should remain so. Wardale have said that using coal might be considered for a future modification to locomotives hauling coal trucks, but not in the standard 5AT model.

Another problem that springs to mind would include the problem of having to give the engine a 'drink' quite frequently compared to diesels, and also the problem of including two cabs or allowing for decent two way visibility in a steam loco, as our network doesn't have turntables any longer (but I believe the US still does?).

A decent condenser could probably make a tender full last all the way between existing water facilities in the UK. For turning, the UK tended to use more wyes than turntables anyway. Two-way visibility in a tender engine is optimistic. Even one-way visibility is pushing it, since the cab's almost in the middle. Solution? CCTV.

[SquireJames]

I wonder if a redesigned Bulleid Leader might be a good candidate for 'future steam'. While technical issues bogged down the original, I reckon we've advanced enough in engineering to fix the issues with the steam bogies and such.

http://www.bulleidlocos.org.uk/_ldr/ldrClass.aspx

and i'm still holding out for Brunswick Green on 'Tornado'

[Beardie]

http://www.bulleidlocos.org.uk/_ldr/ldrClass.aspx

Wow that is some crazy design for a train, i assume its a diesel? Very ugly in my opinion, but unique.

[gks]

I think it might be the start of something of a steam revival - if it can haul at 90mph+ then it'll be good for passenger runs on secondary routes as well as freight, and with the price of diesel, it might even be cheaper to run(!)

the ecologists would hate that
unfortunately these days we're running on a delicate situation:global warming and the desperate search for new eco-fuels...id say first we solve these problems then maybe it would be ok to run a couple of steam locomotives

[Kevo00]

http://www.bulleidlocos.org.uk/_ldr/ldrClass.aspx

Wow that is some crazy design for a train, i assume its a diesel? Very ugly in my opinion, but unique.

It was an attempt to design a steam loco with two cabs and other revolutionary features.

[Purno]

I think it might be the start of something of a steam revival - if it can haul at 90mph+ then it'll be good for passenger runs on secondary routes as well as freight, and with the price of diesel, it might even be cheaper to run(!)

the ecologists would hate that
unfortunately these days we're running on a delicate situation:global warming and the desperate search for new eco-fuels...id say first we solve these problems then maybe it would be ok to run a couple of steam locomotives

Global warming is BS IMO. Last summers have been cooler, and world temperatures have always fluctuated (ice ages and such). But that's off-topic.

[brickie]

One consideration no-one's mentioned in putting steam back on the mainline is that I don't think the general public would like it.

Sure, there's the nostalgia element, but steam trains are "dirty" and "smelly", they hoosh steam at your legs as you walk past and make lots of noise doing it. They start lineside fires, get smuts on your laundry and contribute to smog and probably the greenhouse effect.

And - here's the kicker, IMHO - they're old technology. Remember the fuss when someone pointed out that a journey from Fishguard to London takes longer in 200x than it did in 1938? No matter how many people pointed out that in 1938 there was a direct boat train and that now there's no boat, there's no need for boat train and therefore no direct connection and so you have to change, all the media were interested in was "the railways are worse now than they were in 1938".

So, you try re-introducing steam and it won't matter how many experts stand up and say "the new generation of steam locomotives are cleaner, quieter and more fuel-efficient than the current crop of diesels", all people will hear is "British railways have now got so bad that technology is going backwards. It'll be tickets written out longhand in copperplate next, you mark my words".

Steam is the past, diesels and electrics are the future, and you won't change that perception...

[gks]

a steam train starts really slow,catches up speed in a long time,and who would like to put coal in the train for a miserable pay?tough job!and they're not very reliable..