Re: Thought exercise - steam VFT

[dbromage@fang.omni.com.au (David Bromage)]

John Garaty (jkgaraty@1earth.net) wrote:
> 1 - To reduce coal stops and time lost - make the unit oil-fired (also gets
> around bush-fire and total fire bans). Axles under oil tanker can also be
> powered to achieve a better power weight ratio for the train.

You can carry enough coal to get all the way. Works out to about 55t by my
calculation.

> 2 - Reciprocating engines have a "practical" maximum speed of about 300rpm,
> some of the marine generating plant units got up to 500rpm. Try a marine
> high speed type at about 500rpm and step up the gearing to drive AC
> generators.

You can do it with reciprocating cylinders. You just need big wheels and
drive them via a lay shaft to remove all hammer blow.

> 4 - Design the boiler and as a "flash" steam unit as used on the Bessler
> rail cars in the 1930's (3 minutes from light up to go).

I thought about that, but decided on nothing really radical.

> 5 - Incorporate a gas producer fire box arrangement to get maximum thermal
> economy from fuel. This includes admission of secondary air into the
> combustion zone. The fuel also would burn cleaner.

Had all these been developed by the 1940s?

> 6 - Make steam engines as condensing units to assist water economy and
> reduce the need for water stops.

No water stops needed. You can use troughs.

> 7- If you really want to be controversial and thought provoking - go
> nuclear - we have about 1/3 of  the world's uranium. A small "submarine
> type" reactor

That hadn't been done at the time. The world's first nuclear poweres
submarine, USS Nautilus, wasn't launched until 1954.

Cheers
David