Fireless locomotive

[Dron__]

I'd like to suggest new type locomotive -- Fireless locomotive

A Fireless locomotive — a steam locomotive of conventional type except that it has no firebox (and, accordingly, a chimney), its steam being obtained from an outside source, stored, and admitted to the cylinders at reduced pressure as required called also steam storage locomotive. The steam necessary for its operation is not produced on the locomotive itself, but on a stationary installation, from where it periodically pumped into the locomotive steam boiler-accumulator. The steam boiler of such a locomotive is structurally a closed cylindrical vessel with reinforced thermal insulation. When preparing a non-stop locomotive for operation, the boiler is filled with water by 60-70%, after which one or several nozzles are pumped into it superheated high-pressure steam, which heats the water to a boil. In operation, the steam pressure in the boiler gradually decreases, which leads to a decrease in its evaporation temperature, and the water in the boiler again boils, thereby adding another pair.

Plus: This allows you to use steam for the movement of the train, and accordingly to save fuel, only for the train.
Minus: It will take a lot of stations / filling stations to produce steam, this will lead to air pollution.

p.s. In parallel (if we do not take into account the production of steam), you can connect a generator, which will produce energy, otherwise at some point in time the station will be idle and consume resources.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fireless_locomotive
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0wvPDgDloA
http://www.douglas-self.com/MUSEUM/LOCO ... a/soda.htm

image

Fireless locomotive.jpg (74.68 KiB) Viewed 3236 times

[dood]

save fuel

How?

[steinio]

Sounds interesting and remembers of this monument from the steam era.

For this locomotive liquid (and gases) as fuel for the burner in general would be enough.
If i remember right, there is a suggestion for this somewhere here.

Btw: steam can be produced through nuclear energy.

[darkfrei]

Nuclear steam locomotives?

[bobucles]

Trains have a fuel storage that lasts for hours of operation, and a single fuel load can probably last you all game to build a rocket. While the idea of a "fuel car" to extend a train's range might have been neat, it's a moot point because trains simply don't need any more fuel.

Of course a fuel car could have been anything. It could be a simple coal car, or a steam storage tank, or a battery, or anything else that stores energy.

[Hannu]

What is the point? If you think current game mechanics you would burn coal in boilers near the stations and make pipe lines to stations instead of coal belts. That would not be very practical or interesting in my opinion.

Real fireless locomotives were small switching engines intended to work very locally in factories. That kind of energy storage is not enough to pull trains between stations or even make regular switching with heavy trains on large railyards. Fireless locomotives were not economic or good but were used on fire or explosion hazardous places where regular steam engines or sparking electric locomotives of that era were not allowed. Fire hazards are not modeled in Factorio, so there should be another reasoning for more complex mechanics.

[Dron__]

How?

obtaining steam by chemical means

Btw: steam can be produced through nuclear energy.

Nuclear steam locomotives?

this is one of the possible options

What is the point? If you think current game mechanics you would burn coal in boilers near the stations and make pipe lines to stations instead of coal belts. That would not be very practical or interesting in my opinion.

Minus of fireless locomotive in comparison with conventional ones is a limited range of work.
I think a fireless locomotive will be useful at the beginning of the game, the radius of the base and the distance will be minimal, and steam technology in priority, But to increase the working radius, can be used other methods to produce steam:

there are substances that, when mixed with water, give off even more heat: sulfuric acid, soda (obtaining steam by chemical means).
please pay attention to the article, it describes the method of using soda, alkali / acid for the locomotive (without coal)
http://www.douglas-self.com/MUSEUM/LOCO ... a/soda.htm

p.s. I think need, develop technologies that do not use coal and oil, i proposed a method for producing sulfuric acid / alkali viewtopic.php?f=6&t=39635

[dood]

How?

obtaining steam by chemical means

Both means burn things.
Never mind that fuel conservation is completely irrelevant at every stage of the game, how is that saving anything?

[Dron__]

How?

obtaining steam by chemical means

Both means burn things.
Never mind that fuel conservation is completely irrelevant at every stage of the game, how is that saving anything?

IMHO...If we use a lot of only one resource (often used coal), then it becomes less and production slows down.
if the production is slow, then it is necessary to expand the base area, for this we need ammunition, if all the coal was spent, then we can not build ammunition, so we need to save., and if oil (Solid fuel) is used, the production of plastics and other useful parts will slow down or stop. Playing in the Factorio, we always balance and choose the side we need: production ammunitions, energy, expansion of the base territory, technology development

[dood]

Oh, you think getting into fuel conservation being relevant anyway would be helpful for your argument?

Well okay then, I've literally never had a coal bottleneck, including at the stage at which you burn the stuff in boilers which consumes several magnitudes more fuel than vehicles.
If you get away from boilers, the stuff only goes into plastics and military science. The bottleneck here is petroleum, not coal.

And you don't even need to burn coal for early trains. This is where wood, wooden poles and boxes go to burn so train fuel consumption is in its own ecosystem and doesn't even touch coal or oil until you want it to anyway.

And besides, picture this: one of those trains is on the rails, mid-junction with no fuel. Full cargo. Now what?

[Dron__]

Oh, you think getting into fuel conservation being relevant anyway would be helpful for your argument?

Well okay then, I've literally never had a coal bottleneck, including at the stage at which you burn the stuff in boilers which consumes several magnitudes more fuel than vehicles.
If you get away from boilers, the stuff only goes into plastics and military science. The bottleneck here is petroleum, not coal.

I play an old map for a long time, I have not enough resources, I'm short on production due to lack of oil and coal, I propose the idea based on personal experience and on older versions of the game, that is i have energy, but no fuel