Started by jamespetts, December 29, 2010, 08:02:08 PM
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Quoteannual coal consumption in the period 1927 to 1938 for 4-cylinder 4-6-0 (1929: 53lbs/mile; 1933 60 lbs/mile); standard compound (1927: 44 lbs/mile; 1937: 51lbs/mile); Prince of Wales (constant 52lbs/mile), Hughes 4-6-0 (constant 60lbs/mile) and class 2P 4-4-0 (47 lbs/mile).
Quote Bond, R.C. Ten years' experience with the L.M.S. 4-6-2 non-condensing turbine locomotive, No.6202. 182-230. Disc.: 231-65 + 10 folding plates. 4 illus., 20 diagrs. (incl. 4 s.els.), 10 tables. Ljungstrom non-condensing turbine 2-8-0 locomotive on the Grangesberg-Oxelösund Railway: illustration and side elevation. The turbines (one for forward, and another for reverse working) were the major distinguishing feature and these in turn placed considerable demands upon the lubricating system, and to some extent upon the boiler. A feed water heater was fitted. There was a double blast pipe and chimney. It was soon found that the degree of superheating needed to be increased. Roller bearings were fitted. There are data on availability and a detailed record of repairs. Table 2 compared coal and water consumption of the turbine locomotive with Princess Royal Nos. 6212 and 6210 on London to Glasgow workings with a dynamometer car: Engine6212 6210620262026202Miles16081608160812071608Coal lbs/mile42.9044.9842.445.1541.6Coal lbs/dbhph3.222.9772.972.8552.78Water gallons/mile36.137.2634.234.9637.1Water lbs/dbhph26.9024.6724.0022.1124.80[/t][/q] Bond used these data to show that No. 6202 achieved a lower coal consumption of over 6% except in the case of one run by No. 6212. Data compared the hammer blow inflicted by three classes: Coronation at 72 mile/h 3.47 tons per rail (whole engine: .24); 5XP at 72 mile/h 8.31 tons per rail (whole engine: .61) and classs 5 at 64 mile/h 7.59 tons per rail (whole engine: 9.03) Data were presented which showed that coal consumption of the Royal Scot class increased by 8% over 28,000 miles of running due to wear in the valves and pistons. Hammer blow and wear in cylinders was eliminated in No. 6202. Discussion: opened the discussion by noting how he and Dr Guy of Metropolitan Vickers visited Sweden to see a Ljungstrom non-condensing turbine 2-8-0 locomotive on the Grangesberg-Oxelösund Railway. He admitted that it had been a mistake to use a boiler with too small a superheater, basing this on Swindon practice. E.S. Cox (232-3) noted that he had observed the Pennsylvania Railroad turbine locomotive at work when it was scheduled to perform the Chicago to Crestline round-trip of 580 miles within 24 hours. He had observed the locomotive from the footplate between Chicago and Fort Wayne (148 miles). H. Rudgard (233) noted that the locomotive was extremely smooth running, but that the tubes tended to get dirty more quickly. He stated that the tests of the Beyer-Ljungstrom tended to suffer from the locomotive only being allowed on the main line with special permission and at the slightest sign of trouble it was taken off. T. Henry Turner (239) noted that the smoother traction would be appreciated by the passengers; noted that there had been improvements in condensing mechanisms, the possibility of using a geared reciprocating engine for travel in the reverse direction, and possibly acting as a "booster" to assist in starting: he also refered to S.R.M. Porter's B-E bogie. H.I. Andrews (252) could not understand what was going on inside the turbine when the locomotive was exerting tractive force at standstill: Bond replied to this with the assistance of R.A. Struthers of Metropolitan-Vickers (pp. 255-6): basically the energy is briefly converted to heat within the turbine,.
QuoteThe Castles were the most economical locomotives of their time. A castles average coal consumption was 2.83 pounds per drawbar horsepower per hour compared to the average 4 pounds common on other locomotives in the 1920s.
QuoteBradley, D.L. Locomotives of the Southern Railway. Part 2. RCTS, 1975.Quotes locomotive repair costs per mile (excluding boiler) 2.97p and boiler repair costs (0.39p) and coal consumption per train mile (42.3 lb) for 1955. Original source not quoted.
QuoteAtkins, Philip. It had already been done!. Steam Wld, 1999, (143) 54-7.Atkins considers that J.F. Harrison's claim made in 1961 that the A1 class achieved a mileage of 202 miles per day has not withstood close scrutiny and was probably nearer 184.9, as compared with 184.7 achieved by Duchess class. The class 91 electric locomotives achieve 740 miles per day. Britannia class Nos. 70036 achieved 104,549, 70039 104,226 and 70040 102,748 miles in 1953 or 19/4 in the case of the latter pair.
QuoteNAPOLEON Built 1857 by Money Wigram and Sons, Northam, Southampton. Wooden Paddle Tug, carvel built. L120'. B20.4'. D11.3'. 157grt. 100ihp 2cyl 34"x48" side lever steam engine by J. Stewart, London. Acquired 1857. Lost 1881. ON19885 Callsign MTSN 1857 Delivered to William Watkins, London. 7-1870 New boilers and major engine room overhaul at Wigrams, £4000. 1876 Overhaul and new boilers £3000. Coal consumption 19 tons per day. Old boiler overhauled and installed in Renown...
QuoteNubia Built 1890 by Westwood Baillie Ltd., Poplar. Steel Screw Tug. L87.6'. B18.6'. D10.7'. 102grt. 350ihp 3cylTE 12.5"x19"x32" 20" stroke 135psi steam engine by John Stewart & Son Ltd., Blackwall. Coal consumption two pounds per HP per hour. Acquired 1890. Disposed 1935. Scrapped 1935. Official No. 98149. Call sign MQGP.
QuoteOceaniaBuilt 1889 by Gourlay and Co., Dundee. YN136. Twin Screw Tug. L110.5'. B19.5'. D10.9'. 311grt. (1902 337grt). 160nhp 900ehp 2 x 2cyl 19"x36"x27"s compound steam engines by builder. Coal consumption one pound per HP per hour. Acquired 1889. Lost 1918. Official No. 95549.
QuoteThe fitting of a two row superheater was estimated to improve coal consumption by as much as 20%. The original boiler on 46464 was changed when the engine was shopped in 1961. She now carries the boiler from 46465, which spent it's working life in Cambridgeshire.
QuoteTwo years later, the RAG reported on the results of trials: "In passenger service a test on the Kalispell division showed a saving of 13 per cent in water and 14% per cent in coal per car mile, while in freight service on the Wlllmar division the saving was 30% per cent in water and 28% per cent in coal per ton mile, the coal figures being 137% for the simple and 98 pounds for the superheaters per 1,000 ton miles, both very satisfactory figures for prairie type engines in freight service on an undulating road. The company also reports a comparison for nine months between a superheater freight engine and a similar simple engine, showing 137 pounds of coal per 1,000 ton miles for the superheater against 171 for the simple, and a cost for repairs of 4 cents per mile against 3.87 cents, a reduction in the coal consumption of 20 per cent with practically the same cost of repairs.
QuoteSimply put, a T1 steam passenger locomotive's repairs costthe company an average of 54 cents per mile, while a typical passenger diesel cost only 32 cents.A PRR Q2 steam freight locomotive's repairs cost 69 cents per mile, compared to just 40 centsper mile for a comparable 6,000-horsepower diesel.
QuoteIn 1947 the SLNCR took delivery of a railcar from Walker Bros. of Wigan. This railcar, which was designated 'B', was purchased as the result of the company's desire to reduce the operating costs of its scant passenger traffic. This had been handled for the most part, since the introduction of its first railbus, 'A' in 1935, by a number of railbuses. These had been converted from road buses by the GNR, specially for the Sligo and Leitrim. The operating economics of the railbuses had persuaded the directors of the permanently financially straitened SLNCR to invest £10,500 in a larger purpose-built railcar similar to the ones which had been such a success on the CDR and GNR.Railcar 'B' was powered by a 102hp Gardner diesel engine mounted on a four-wheeled power bogie on which was constructed the forward driving cab which enclosed the engine assembly. The power bogie was of the four coupled wheel arrangement with outside rods. It was articulated to the main passenger coach, which was carried on a plain bogie. Transmission consisted of a fluid flywheel, a Wilson epicyclic gearbox, propeller shaft, and an air-operated final drive and reverser unit. The railcar was 54' 11¼" long, 9' 6" wide and weighed 18 tons 12 cwt. Maximum speed was 45 mph. It returned a fuel consumption of 12 mpg and operating costs of 4d. per mile, one eighth those of a steam train
Quotethe Light Pacifics burned 47.9 lb (21.73 kg) of coal per mile compared to 32 lb (14.51 kg) burned by the T9 class that they replaced.
QuoteThe construction of the works of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway required immense and unremitting labour. Besides the embankment over Chat Moss, to which we shall have again to refer, there was the building of viaducts, the formation of cuttings and embankments, the erection of sixty three bridges, and the construction of a tunnel near Liverpool; besides the laying down of the permanent way, the erection of stations and warehouses, and the preparation of the engines, carriages, and wagons. The cost was as follows:Cuttings and Embankments £199,763Chat Moss 27,719Tunnel 47,788Land 95,305Fencing 10,202Bridges 99,065Formation of Road 20,568Laying of Blocks and Sleepers 20,520Laying of Rails (£ 12 10s. per ton) 60,912Surveying, Law, Parliamentary, and Incidental 157,341Total £739,183
Quote from: Milko on August 13, 2012, 07:49:36 AMHelloUntil today I put in prices and running costs of aircraft in a very coarse. I, for certain airplanes, I could not find the associated costs. James, you found some page where they listed all costs or you have found the prices in the descriptions of individual aircraft?ThanksGiuseppe
QuoteThe use of two power cars in the 125 dieseFhauled trains made energy costs an importantfactor. Again, the electrical rating (two sets of 1,680 kW motors, for a total of 3,360 kW per train)proportionate to the length and weight, but the cost of generating this power was compared withenergy c.osts for locomotive-hauled electric passenger trains on the WCMLIn. 1978, the fuel costson BR were given as 44p (70¢) per mile for diesel traction, while electric traction cost 19p (30¢)per mite:. In the mid=1980s the 125 energy/fuel costs had risen to £1.37 ($2.19) per mile (whichwas equal to 30p [48¢] per seat/mile), whereas the electric traction costs had risen to £1.04 ($1.66)per mile, and 18p (29¢) per seat mile (Potter, 1988: 111). In energy costs, electric traction maintainedits comparative efficiency, but the global fuel crisis of the late 1970s shows in the 1978figures --in the mid-1980s the differential had been clearly reduced. There is no reason to doubtthat a similar relationship between the cost of diesel and electric energy prevails still today.
QuoteThis is an elegant way of saying that the additional speed caused the cars to lurch noticeablyon encountering minor misalignments of the track. Thus, a major leap in the maintenance of trackand the parameters of acceptable track geometry were required. Since track maintenance washistoric:ally labor-intensive, the higher standards have led BR to introduce continuous welded rail(CWR), found extensively (ultimately ubiquitously) on high-speed lines, and to introduce newvery sophisticated equipment to detect track wear and to replace manual labor in maintenanceactivity. The network relays roughly 600 miles of track per year, and on the high-speed lines thenew track is laid on concrete ties, now more closely spaced than hithertofore, and on a greaterdepth of ballast (Nock, 1980: 33-39).]By 1979, BRh ad largely completed the installation of CWRw ith heavy rail comparable tothat used elsewhere in Europe (60 kg rail per meter/ll5 lbs a yard) and had made a lot of progresswith ballasting and tamping machines to adjust misaligned track 0R J, December 1979: 42-44). BRalso developed its own track recording car in 1977 (IRJ, March 1977: 29).
Quote"We propose to use modern economic theory to measure more accurately the effects of major technological changes. We will do this in a comparative setting, comparing the current new technology - computing - with those of the 19th and early 20th centuries, railways and electricity. In order to understand the effects fully, our work will approach these incidents from consumers', as well as producers' points of view, looking at social as well as private returns[.] [...]"
QuoteAnnual maintenance costs for steam engines accounted for 25% of the initial purchase price. Spare parts were machined from wooden masters for specific locomotives. The sheer number of unique steam engines meant that there was no feasible way for spare-part inventories to be maintained.