The HMS Sprängaren (transl. "The Blaster") came to the Swedish navy in 1918 as a mine-sweeper and was in the 1930's assigned as a towing ship, though originally she was classified as a "vedette ship", which makes for an interesting series of classifications. She continued in her duties into the 1990's, but has been restored by a Veteran's association.
She got her name to fame being the ship that towed the salvaged Vasa ship in the 1960's, and she is today the only WW1-era naval vessel in the world running on her own power - which is a coal stoked steam engine.
Images were taken by a Backa Erik Eriksson, August 2023.
20 notes
·
View notes
What Fuel would NWR Steam Engines use Today?
This is a question that I think a lot of people in the fandom are asking, especially with ever-more stringent environmental laws, the war in Ukraine cutting off Russian coal and the end of coal mines in the UK and the western world.
So, what exactly are Sodor's options if Sir Topham Hatt wants to run a steam railway in the 21st century.
I will do a separate post based on what I think the Fat Controllers do to ensure their engines run safely and profitably into the 2020's, but this post is all about fuel. Now, let's talk options:
1: Coal:
This is what Sodor is already using, and is the option that I think Sodor would enter the 2000's with. However, the UK has been rapidly closing coal mines since then, with the last deep coal mine in the United Kingdom, Kellingley colliery in North Yorkshire, closing in December 2015, and many of the mines that produced engine-grade coal already being closed. From this point on, the NWR has two options really: American anthracite coal (which is in decline) or Russian anthracite coal. Most British heritage railways used Russian coal due to its cheap and plentiful nature, leading to their current predicament of skyrocketing prices caused by tariffs and a cut-off from the Russian coal supply. Polish coal is an option some railways are switching too, however this is also quite expensive and not as plentiful as the previous coal.
Another option would be Australian bituminous coal, which is a worse coal for engines but is far cheaper and more plentiful. This would be unlikely, but could potentially be used as a desperate measure by the railway while searching for a better and more permanent option. Remember, bad coal causes a lot of havoc on Sodor even when considering different grades of anthracite coal.
2: Electricity:
If you've ever watched Train of Thought's video on electric steam (find here), then you may just know what I'm about to suggest. During the 1940's, the Swiss Federal Railways (SBB) converted a pair of steam engines with pantographs and used the electricity to boil the water. There was also a patent taken out in Canada as recently as 1992 for a steam engine that uses electricity to boil the water.
The pantograph part of the design would not happen - as much as Sodor has updated and modified their engines, whacking a pantograph on them would be crossing a line. So, what are the other options? Well, they could potentially use a third rail, and hide the converters and other pieces inside the bunker or tender, with what space remains being a perfect spot for extra water storage. Another option is batteries in the place of the bunker or tender, this in essence turning the engines of Sodor into battery engines.
The issue here is that the batteries are not really very efficient above the size of a Tesla, and a third-rail system has the potential to cause issues with any safety equipment on the ground (GWR had problems with their AWS system when travelling near the Southern Railway or the London Underground).
The battery version is something I could see being implemented on branchline and shunting engines however, as they could stay near charging ports and best utilise the extra range and lower emissions such a change would bring, without having as many drawbacks. Another advancement would be using an electric battery to preheat the boiler and to power the electrics in the coaches.
3: Biodiesel:
Before anyone goes insane about the idea of converting the NWR engines to oil-fired, I think I should say that I mean torrefied biodiesel pellets, as tested by the CSR in the USA on steam locomotives since as early as 2016 (article linked here). Torrefied biodiesel pellets have similar qualities to coal, including the fact that they can be shovelled and stored similarly to coal.
They don't really look that different to coal, do they? And in this trial, the engine they were trialling it on (Milwaukee County Zoo Train No. 1924) not only ran on 100% torrefied biodiesel, but also reached just under 200PSI. CSR has also ran tests on standard gauge engines, and the fact is that the Skarloey Railway would probably be an early adopter.
Furthermore, Sodor is a primarily agricultural island, and due to globalisation, the farms would be looking to find new crops with which to make a profit from, as the prices of cheap international products hurts their smaller farms. The NWR looking at biofuels would be a golden opportunity for them, and the NWR would have the crops needed for biodiesel locally, decreasing shipping costs.
The issue with biodiesel as a fuel is that it does not burn as hot as conventional coal, and it burns quicker. It does however start burning sooner, meaning setting a good fire in the mornings would be easier.
Railways using steam power are currently being faced with these major issues, and Sodor would probably be at the forefront of the debate, as its heavy usage of steam and early diesel engines makes for problematic encounters with environmentalists. However, Sodor would also be one of the largest supporters and financers of steam research, and would, in my opinion, use a mix of electric steam and biofuels to preserve their fleet of engines well into the 21st century. And yes, it would be theoretically possible to create an entire scientific essay out of this.
One again, pictures are not mine, and remember to tell me your ideas!
42 notes
·
View notes
I’ve been messing around on Wikipedia this evening, and I stumbled across an article for the Boynton Bicycle Railroad. And…
My jaw hit the floor when I saw this.
This is the article in question, if you want to read it. The sources cited seem to say that the engine didn’t get past the demonstration range, so I guess it’s a bit obscure. Does anyone out there have more info on this railroad and this engine? I have to know more now, lol.
30 notes
·
View notes