> bobg@swifty.tip.CSIRO.AU (Bob Grime) wrote:
>
> >Do oil fired locos have a blast. Do they need to draw the fire.
snip snip
>
>
> Smoke of course, has little to do with the air method, mainly the
> adequacy of the amount supplied. There shouldn't be any at all, of
> course, if the fuel is being burned efficiently. Although the
> potential for burning liquid fuels at 100% efficiency would seem to be
> higher than the potential for coal, oil-fuelled locos were often
> smokier than coal-fired ones- you could nearly always tell from a
> distance whether it was an oil-fired or coal-fired VR J class that was
> chuffing up the track towards you.
>
> Geoff Lambert
It is true that oil fired locomotives have a reputation for being smokier than
coal fired ones but this need not be the case. Having fired both coal and oil
I know that oil firing can be much more precise and the most efficient
combustion is produced when there is a faint grey haze from the chimney
(stack). Many railfans like smoke and I found the trick was to know where they
were waiting for you and overfire slightly so that they could get their
pictures.
It is particularly important to know the road with oil firing. If the driver
starts to attack a steep grade and the fireman is nt anticipating this the
driver can take 25 lbs off the clock leaving the hapless fireman to struggle
for steam all the way up the grade.
One thing that has not been mentioned is that oil firing requires a supply of
steam to atomize the oil flowing into the burner. This has to be adjusted so
that the burner burns brightly - too much steam can put the flame off the
burner.
-- Colin J. Churcher Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. churcher@magi.com Please visit my railway pages at: http://infoweb.magi.com/~churcher/