Started by jamespetts, December 29, 2010, 08:02:08 PM
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Quote from: E. L. AhronsThe Stockton and Darlington was a slow-speed coal-carrying railway. Pambour stated that the fuel consumed by the mineral engines was about 54lb per mile, or .86lb per tone gross per mile. He also gave a table showing that during five months, at the end of 1833, 23 mineral engines of all types performed work equivalent to 5,802,562 gross ton-miles on a level at a cost of 0.58 penny per tone-mile for repairs
Quote from: jamespetts on January 08, 2011, 05:03:54 PMSomewhat more vaguely, but also of interest, apparently the horses themselves were the most expensive part of a horse-drawn transportation system
QuoteBritish Rail figures showed the cost of crewing and fuelling a steam locomotive was some two and a half times that of diesel power, and the daily mileage achievable was far lower. As labour costs rose, particularly after the second world war, non-steam technologies became much more cost-efficient.
QuoteAn indication of the great improvement in engine design can be gained from the fact that between 1900 and 1939 the steam locomotive had doubled its maximum horsepower with only a 30 per cent increase in weight. It had also reduced its coal consumption per unit of work measured at the drawbar by about 40 per cent.
QuoteBritish Railways placed the order with British United Traction in summer 1956 for the equipment required for the 98 power cars and 47 trailers of the first batch. The order, along with equipment ordered by Cravens for 66 power cars and the 3 parcels cars, was valued at £830,000. The first batch was ordered for the WR's West Country dieselisation scheme, which it hoped to complete by the end of 1959. The sets were expected to work between Bristol & South Devon. Their general reliability and good braking characteristics made them popular with drivers.
Quote from: muserI generally play pak128.Britain, but I think this information would apply to any pak set, and may be useful to someone pursuing game balance.Here is a table summarizing the running costs between steam and electric here in the US in the early part of the last century. I expect it would generally apply to any region at that time. It is taken from the General Electric Review volume 25 of February, 1922:http://hoist.hrtc.net/~arabento/pubfiles/steam_vs_electric_costs.jpgThe entire original article can be seen here:http://books.google.com/books?id=lPHNAAAAMAAJ&dq=general%20electric%20review201922&pg=PA88#v=onepage&q=general%20electric%20review%201922&f=falseBasically, it describes a reduction in running costs from about 0.50 per mile for steam to about 0.10 per mile for electric. Of course that doesn't include the huge investment in constructing the electric infrastructure, but if I'm reading the article correctly the railroads could expect to see an annual reduction in overall operating costs equivalent to 14% of the cost of the upgrade to electric.Although the article doesn't speak to it, I believe I read somewhere, years ago, that the initial purchase cost of the electric loco was about 30% to 50% more expensive than its equivalent steam counterpart. I'll see if I can find a reference to that and post it here.
Quote from: WLindleyI found a reference of page 53 of the Google scan of the 1832 American Rail-Road Journal for construction costs on the Fifth Division Baltimore & Ohio Railway.This division had 11 miles of grade, and "three bridges of one arch each, and of the following chords, to wit, 30, 20, and 10 feet respectively; and one viaduct of the Rail-road for the Georgetown and Frederick turnpike road, of stone abutments and superstructure of wood of 24 foot span. This viaduct is elevated [16 feet 1.2 inches] above the gradated surface of the Rail-road."The 11 miles of gradation cost $66,614 (about $6,000 per mile) while the masonry for division altogether cost $12,068 (for 84 feet (!) in four bridges plus an unspecified number of smaller culverts). Altogether my feeling is that this example suggests a Simutrans tile of masonry bridge should cost about 20 times a standard tile. This document for Washington State's Sound Transit lists a cost of $10,140 per foot for a long post-and-beam bridge, while this document from the State of Michigan lists an installed cost for railroad sidings (spurs) to be about $170 per foot (for 115-pound rail with 9-foot concrete roadbed)... the bridge costing sixty times a simple siding. However a siding costs less than a main-line track... again, 20 times seems about the right answer.p.s., That 1832 article has a variety of figures quoted for European railways as well, unfortunately the scan process has obscured too many of them.
Quote...the Liverpool and Manchester Railway was an immediate success. In 1831 the railway carried 445,047 passengers. Receipts were £155,702, with profits of £71,098. By 1844, receipts had increased to £258,892, with profits of £136,688. During this period, shareholders were regularly paid out an annual dividend of £10 for every £100 invested.