Fortsätt till huvudinnehåll

New tri-mode locomotive is exactly wrong

The Stadler class 93 locomotive is a tri mode (diesel/25kV electric/battery) unit intended for both freight and passenger train haulage. Its power is given as 6200 hp on electric traction, 1250 hp on diesel and 540 hp on batteries. Its main purposes is to haul high speed intermodal freight while avoiding diesel running under the wires, with diesel and battery power for the ʻlast mileʼ.

This looks good but is exactly wrong. It is, presumably, a very expensive piece of kit, each one probably costing over £3 million. It that looks like it is brutal on the track - tiny wheels and a 21 ton axle load are a recipe for heavy wear. 

Freight trains should not be traveling at high speeds. It wastes energy and damages the track - the modern container carriers with small wheels are track-bashers, and modern passenger trains are also destructive to the point that it is becoming a real problem; the poor state of the track is evident on, for instance, the Great Western Main Line. 

Electricity does not come out of the sky. Supplies will have to be enhanced to get rid of diesel running under the wires, and overall thermodynamic efficiency goes down. 

The advent of this design points yet again to look at using steam as a benchmark. The 9F freight locomotive delivers over 3000 hp when using coal and about 20% more on diesel fuel. The initial cost of a steam locomotive would probably be a quarter of that of the tri-mode and much the same to run.

As a production locomotive, a new design of three-cylinder 2-8-2 would be a stiff competitor, or another build of the proven 9F class, though the track would have to be modified to allow them back on the national network.

Kommentarer

Populära inlägg i den här bloggen

The dreadfulness of British governance

I wrote to my MP on two entirely separate issues recently. The first was to do with the replacement for the Inter City 125 train, which at £2.6 million per vehicle, is twice as expensive as it ought to be. The second concerned the benefits of a switch from business rate and Council Tax to a tax based on site values. In both cases, the replies were full of spurious, unsubstantiated assertions and completely flawed arguments. This is typical. You will not get an iota of sense from the government on any area of public policy at all - finance, economics, trade and employment, agriculture, housing, health, transport, energy. All junk. If you write to your MP you will invariably receive answers that are an insult to your intelligence, no matter what subject you are writing about. Of course they cannot understand statistics. They are innumerate. Whitehall is staffed with idiots with a high IQ. Look at their IT projects. And mind your purse, they will have that too.

How much more will the British tolerate?

The British are phlegmatic, tolerant and slow to rouse. Thus there was no great reaction after the terrorist attack in July 2005. The murder of Lee Rigby created a sense of outrage, but nothing more, since it appeared to be an isolated incident. Two serious incidents within a fortnight are another matter. Since the first major terrorist incident in 2001, authority has tried to persuade the public that Islam is a religion of peace, that these were isolated events, or the actions of deranged "lone wolves", having nothing to do with Islam, or to reassure that the chances of being killed in a terrorist attack were infinitesimally small. These assurances are are beginning to wear thin. They no longer convince. If government does not act effectively, people will take the law into their own hands. What, however, would effective action look like? What sort of effective action would not amount to rough justice for a lot of innocent people? Given the difficulties of keeping large n...

Importing people to sustain demand

I got involved in a discussion with a Youtuber called “Philosophy all along”. This was in connection with criticism of Trump’s policy of deporting illegal migrants, which he argued would be bad for the economy as it would reduce demand. This implies that there is a need to import people to sustain demand. There is no obvious reason why a population should not be able to consume everything that the same population produces. If it can not, then something else is going on. It is a basic principle that wages are the least that workers will accept to do a job. Wages are a share of the value added by workers through their wages. The remainder is distributed as economic rent, after government has taken its cut in taxes. Monopoly profit is a temporary surplus that after a delay gets absorbed into economic rent. Land values in Silicon Valley are an example of this; it's like a gold rush. The miners get little out of it. Rent and tax syphon purchasing power away from those who produce the g...