• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Nuclear powered trains

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

fgw47

Member
Joined
20 Jul 2015
Messages
19
Or some 20s

Anything DRS, so 20/37/57/66. It won't be 47s, as their last active 47 has been put in the stored pool. It has once or twice been a 68 with another class. However it won't be 20s for a while, they've been on RHTT duties and are out of service at Barrow Hill, with the exception of 20304 (long term absentee at Carlisle Kingmoor) and 20312 (long term absentee at Gresty Bridge).

Usually though it's double headed 37s, however yesterday's 6V74/6M63 Bridgwater runs and today's 6V73/6M56 Berkeley runs were both 66s. Notably 6V74 was top and tailed, with it changing to double headed en route back to Crewe.

6K73 Sellafield - Crewe often sees more than two locos for positioning moves.
 

cin88

Member
Joined
16 Oct 2015
Messages
272
Location
WCML
If it were travelling FTL, you wouldn't see it...

I did mean it as a figure of speech.

Could you imagine the health and safety on that though? "Here's this 100s of tonnes metal object with people in it doing many times the speed of light, and we have no idea whether or not it'll be on top of us within the next millisecond."
 

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
8,321
Not a signalling engineer, certainly not a nuclear physicist, so forgive what could be a silly question, but as nuclear reactors produce a variety of Alpha, Beta and particularly the high energy Gamma radiation, what impact will these have on traditional copper based signalling systems.

We have a big enough problem not causing endless amounts of interference with OLE and well ordered 25kV, 50Hz supplies, won't Gamma radiation risk significant interference effects on our copper based signalling systems, on GSM-R and so on ?

Also, and I don't know much about this, but could they even upset fibre optic signalling, can the high energy radiation particles disrupt photons travelling down the fibre optic cables or the fibre optic detectors at the end of each cable ? I watched a program on BBC4 a few weeks ago where radiation from a nuclear reactor caused interference on a camera, so is that something that is a problem, can it be controlled within our loading gauge if it is, or is it another reason why nuclear powered trains are a folly ?

If such a loco was feasible, the reactor would have to be shielded to prevent any escape of radiation, including high energy particles. So - no effects on electronic systems - just a need for several cm. thickness of shielding material. Various shielding materials are available, including lead - which is rather heavy and currently costs (prior to fabrication) over £1000 per ton. Added to the weight of reactor, steel containment, water, etc., I suspect the axle load might exceed the limit for much of Network Rail.....
 

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
3,305
If it were travelling FTL, you wouldn't see it...

If it were a train that ran from Earth to Neptune and started going past, you'd see it going past for 3 minutes, despite it travelling at Warp 5.

I suspect that the signaling systems would have issues at that speed.
 

HMS Ark Royal

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2015
Messages
2,798
Location
Hull
If it were a train that ran from Earth to Neptune and started going past, you'd see it going past for 3 minutes, despite it travelling at Warp 5.

Somebody watching Star Trek: Enterprise recently? Thats almost a line from the pilot episode
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,281
Somebody watching Star Trek: Enterprise recently? Thats almost a line from the pilot episode

There is only one season of Star Trek: Enterprise - and it doesn't contain the pilot.


[Its Season 4 btw]
 

kevinwaltets

Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
45
One thing has been forgotten here. With s submarine or power station. Vast amounts of sea water or fresh water is used to stop the reactor going into meltdown. How are you going to cool the reactor in the locomotive. What happens when all the water boils away after an accident !
 

bnm

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2009
Messages
4,992
Its not all that stupid when you find out they have already done it in a bus

Big_Bus_Cyclops_1-460x198.jpeg

They've already done it in a train too:

[youtube]gUERtAe73NI[/youtube]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supertrain

An astoundingly bad show. There's a full episode on YouTube with a humorous commentary. Also this promo from NBC:

[youtube]yBMVAzIMl5A[/youtube]
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
33,599
Location
Scotland
One thing has been forgotten here. With s submarine or power station. Vast amounts of sea water or fresh water is used to stop the reactor going into meltdown. How are you going to cool the reactor in the locomotive. What happens when all the water boils away after an accident !
There are many reactor designs that have no cooling water at all. There even more that are incapable of going into meltdown. I'd suggest a PWR or BWR is unlikely to be chosen for a train.
 

Oswyntail

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2009
Messages
4,183
Location
Yorkshire
One thing has been forgotten here. With s submarine or power station. Vast amounts of sea water or fresh water is used to stop the reactor going into meltdown. How are you going to cool the reactor in the locomotive. What happens when all the water boils away after an accident !
You carry a large supply of water behind the loco in, let's think, a "tender", which can be replenished from regular "troughs". In the event of possible meltdown, the reactor is shut down, and the steam is used to power a relatively simple mechanical system that provides "last 350 miles" capability.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top