SussexSpotter
Member
In your opinion which is better and why? 
-
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!
Steam v.s Diesel v.s Electric?
- Thread starter SussexSpotter
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
90019
Established Member
Electric.
Granted you need the infrastructure, but once it's there, you no longer have to rely on a single fuel source and they are generally more efficient because you don't have the added weight of carrying your fuel source around with you.
Granted you need the infrastructure, but once it's there, you no longer have to rely on a single fuel source and they are generally more efficient because you don't have the added weight of carrying your fuel source around with you.
SussexSpotter
Member
MCR247
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 10,292
Is it the fastest in normal weather? No.
electric for me
electric for me
SussexSpotter
Member
It's not pointless I was just saying!
90019
Established Member
He asked for opinions.
Daimler
Member
Agreed. Just a shame we can't seem to make overhead wires more attractive. :roll:
Now, if you asked me which one I preferred as an enthusiast rather than 'which one is best', steam always wins!
It will always be steam for me, the most reliable in all weathers
Now there's a shock.
It's got to be electric. We'd be much better off if all lines were electric.
As an enthusiast, steam without a doubt. However, as anyone with a modicum of sense, electric with a few diesels as backup in case the power goes off and for shunting. The vast majority of traffic works best with electric traction, where electrics are capable of higher speeds and quicker acceleration for passenger, and moving massive loads for freight. They also don't need to idle, and so don't waste energy when sitting still.
33056
Established Member
From a personal point of view, diesel.
Taking my crank's hat off it has to be OHL electric, clean, fast, reliable (as long as you make sure the infrastructure is sufficiently robust
). You only have to look and compare with Switzerland.
Taking my crank's hat off it has to be OHL electric, clean, fast, reliable (as long as you make sure the infrastructure is sufficiently robust
). You only have to look and compare with Switzerland.
37401
Established Member
Are we sure that the 37 isn't just you know, ON FIRE! 
hock:
hock:
SouthEastern-465
Established Member
Totally agree.
Although I like steam and diesal as an 'enthusiast', I prefer the electrics and 90019 has already described the benefits. It also helps that I love EMUs over anything else anyway!
At_traction
Member
- Joined
- 5 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 291
In your opinion which is better and why?
Out of these? Petrol and gas-turbine, thank you.
The first for compactness and no-frills adaptability (like in frontline services) and the latter for the sheer wasteful wonderfulness and high-revolution engineering requirements.
(Any more semi-needless, opinion-based queries around?
)
starrymarkb
Established Member
[youtube]cdy3G_an65s[/youtube]
Could a steam loco outdrag a Taurus to 70mph?
Could a steam loco outdrag a Taurus to 70mph?
SouthEastern-465
Established Member
Sounds bit like a Cl465?
MCR247
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 10,292
Taurus
90019
Established Member
MCR247
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 10,292
Same thing, still sounds amazing
And looks much better than a 'Vectron'...
And looks much better than a 'Vectron'...
moonrakerz
Member
- Joined
- 10 Feb 2009
- Messages
- 870
The transmission losses for electricity are probably more than the penalties incurred by hauling round a few hundred gallons of diesel
NEVER as simple as it first appears ....................
90019
Established Member
The transmission losses for electricity are probably more than the penalties incurred by hauling round a few hundred gallons of diesel
NEVER as simple as it first appears ....................
Indeed it's not.
But you also have to take into account fuel used whilst a diesel is idling as well, and I would say electrics are likely to be more efficient than a diesel overall.
aspierail
Member
Im a diesel person as i love the sound of them but don't mind electric either.
Sun Chariot
Established Member
Darn, you beat me to the gas turbine quip... But here's a thought:
Union Pacific's gas turbine locos were ideal for sustained high rev running but ceased to be cost effective when their gloopy low grade oil became a source for manufacturing plastics and, as a result, rocketed in price. Oh and the oil used to clog up the filters and blades.
I've just spent two weeks driving an Ethanol 85 (reconstituted sunflower oil..) powered car in the USA. It's cheap and still runs fine. And I wondered if it could be viscous and cheap enough to use in a contemporary gas turbine unit. Scientists and brainiacs out there - what say you?
Vulcan
Member
(Any more semi-needless, opinion-based queries around?
Yes, the one asking if we should revert to steam, the one about new pacers and the one about ditching the 3rd rail system. To name but a few. This forum used to be a place for some intelligent railway-based discussion, not any more it seems.
Voyager 2093
Member
Diesel - I like the versatility of diesel units and trains, the fact that they can work on any track type, be it third rail, fourth rail ect. Yes the fuel cost, but with Traction such as 165s that can go 1000 miles between refuelling, it really is the way for me.
- Status