Plus for switching shunting ops the high torque is nice :3

It's one of the few steam locomotives that still has a practical use.

@@FloppydriveMaestroyeah it’s a real niche piece of kit but when it does what it was meant for it’s the best at it’s job in terms of power, cost and firesafety.

The main reason is, that firelss steam is not an risk of explosion as a diesel would be. Those nitro solvents are highly explosive. Those engines are still in use in chemical and ammonition plants all over the world. Cost effective, easy to to tepair and lasting forever. The oldest in Germany which is still operating on a daily basis is a 0-4-0 from 1887.

@@kishascape Electric engines are far better for that.

oh they still make them at least one or two for example a place in switserland, and it would make more sense then air powered engines, as the steam has expansion the hotter you get it and can be used twice once in the cyclenders and then to a secondary set before condensing or being let off, and the more it expands the more work you can get out of it per volume, its nice to see one actually working, there are several around in museumes but none running to my knowlege, also they can put something that hold heat in them like molten salt that helps keep the heat in them longer, and with this you can totally use steam generated though natural means like the solor collector steam generater, or geothermal perhaps, or cleaner renewable biowaste generated power or secondary heat generating the steam, think about it all the show and sites of steam without all the pollution and when it needs more they pull up to a boiler or steam outlet and fill back up with steam and water, which I believe flash boils as the steam is used or something like that I read I am not as well versed on them as I would like or in concepts of advanced steam engines like the stuff livio dante porta wrote on or shane mcmann one of his followers in concepts he used and proposed to increase effecentcy in steam locomotives like advanced exaust ejectors, the gas producer firebox, or doing stuff like reheating waste steam before it went to the second set of lower pressure cyclinders to power the wheels of the locomotive.

Especially when they're in places where any kind of spark or flame (i.e., an electrical arc from the overhead cables of an electric train, hot exhaust from a diesel train, or an ember from a conventional steam locomotive) could result in disastrous consequences.

Indeed and if you have green generated steam make it be cleaner than batteries with all the mining that has to go on to make them in a certain way of thinking anyway

In many countries certification of a pressure vessel / boiler is a very complex and lengthy affair that needs to be done every few years. Even the low end Henschel D600 (low pressure/wet steam "yarddog") "Schluff" was out of service for six month. And that is a post WW2 and continously well maintained engine These engines also suffer from a rather short endurance forcing them back to the steam source. Diesels do not have that need. So with a KöF, KöF... kzfaq.info/get/bejne/a8-KpsSFvdOpqas.html Let us use a Diesel...(The funniest one I saw was a KöF slowly pulling an ICE out of a station and into the repair shop)

They also get used in sugar cane processing plants in some places for that reason

Loco wanted to go out then went nah

​@@trainfan-ks5hkthe one time you can relate to a train lol

I've seen that one! It's yellow if I recall correctly

@@CSX4772 Yes, it is yellow. I believe is used to have Carolina Power and Light painted under the window

Your locomotive is haunted.

So Tom ur over 120 yo? I'm failing to believe your story. Perhaps ur maf off by a century not too sure.

@@TrapperAaron I didnt see them personally, they used to work here and I've seen photos of them

@@TrapperAaron Well, Thomas Edison introduced electric locomotives to American railroads in 1879 and 1884,

@@allenbooth5193 wait until you see what US railroads still don't use

@@TrapperAaron Bruh

Literally...

@@creamwobbly The firebox is far, far cooler. As is the smokebox.

No matter what you say, diesels are still gay

@@overpoweredsteamproduction513 But they’re better than steam in almost every way. If diesels are gay, steam is trans

@@overpoweredsteamproduction513 Please, do not be toxic. True train enthusiasts love all trains

In many applications, fireless steam locomotives are safer than their battery-electric counterparts. Electric motors often produce sparks, introducing the need to shield them from the atmosphere when working in dangerous grounds (such as a chemical plant) and thereby complicating maintenance and operation. Such steam engines do require a static steam source, but in a such a plant, steam would likely be used anyway as an energy transfer medium (since electricity would be unsafe), so there would be plenty of steam available.

Steam Superior

Yup, cheaper than an electric engine with the huge battery it'd need. And no matter how well built you'd still have to worry about sparks or a fire.

Fireless locomotives are much safer than diesel’s anywhere flammable gases could be. Diesels detonate when they meet a gas cloud.

Also useful in oxygen limited situations like mines.

Excellent news!

True, quite a unique type of locomotive.👍

That was probably a compressed air engine this is filled full of actual steam so it wouldn't be freezing up. Similar but not the same.

@@thedave7760 mmmm... i doubt a high pressure steam/hot water line is going to be live until ones hooked up and then opens the line... meaning its may very well be quite cold, this insulated pipe that has to be somehow accessed in the loco bay, easily connected and disconnected, and deal with water at 200C or so. thermal expansion, seals sealing, blah blah... i think this post highlights one of the challenges that noone considers. the heat source is over there, and the loco bay is over here.... somehow that heat has to get over there. and be disconnected. and not leak, explode, or pose any potential for injury. i doubt its anything like your typical little nitto style airline fitting.

@@thedave7760 Good observation. Almost certainly a compressed-air loco. Not much of an engineer, that chap, if he can't tell the difference.

In Germany there are four or five still actively working....

Pretty much, with some caveats. Fireless locomotives can only go as far as the steam will last before the pressure drops too low, so they need to be recharged with high-pressure steam frequently, and are thus only able to travel a very short distance from a source of steam. It basically just moves the firebox outside the engine.

@@michaelramsey82 i mean, i guess you could station pressurised steam depots along lines but thats a ridiculous fantasy. you could theoretically use this type of thing in a light transportation role, supplying the steam with either an external or internal electric boiler

⁠@@rrai1999or just string up an overhead line for electric traction. These fireless steam engines only make sense in factories when around hazardous materials

all steam trains are sustainable if you get out of the rut of thinking that they have to BURN stuff. all you need is HEAT. that is all they do. take heat, and make it do something.

They get quite far! It's not just steam but superheated water in the boiler

Ooh so they were exported? Didn't know that. And surprised it is not used anymore. 😊

@@l3p3, Yes, apparently they were.

According to the german-language Wikipedia article on fireless locos still existing, yes, this one is still in use.

Yes. And there are several other in Germany that are still in active use today, too.

One also at the sittingbourne and kemsley

@@guypenryn7008 Two at the SKLR actually. One narrow guage ‘UNIQUE’ BAGNALL FIRELESS 2-4-0F 2'6" gauge and ‘No 1’ Andrew Barclay & Sons, No 1876 of 1925 0-4-0F standard gauge. Both static exhibits due to no steam being available.

There is a lot of sentimental attachment to these things.

If there's steam available from the process anyway, the running cost and impact of a fireless locomotive is negligible. An air horn would require a separate air system, and a whistle doesn't consume that much steam anyway.

I believe that traditionally, they used to use bells.

its all about applying the right tech at the right time, in the right place. if i have a solar array, a resistive heating element is vastly superior to a battery. i can dump excess power into water, into thermal mass. same for wind. same for hydro. if i were in a geo-active country, i would be thinking of that nice geothermal energy just going to waste... cant understand why countries like hawaii, iceland, NZ even use "fuel" in cars. they have sources of intense heat just lurking a few metres underground. oh yeah... "global demands and economics...""steam engines are old fashioned and inefficient". i believe you can ignore that "inefficient" part when the heat source is free. you just gotta store, and harness heat. we got pretty good at that last century. then forgot it all. heat storage for transport seems ideal. water isnt the only way to store it. burning stuff isnt the only way to create it. i can make something hot just by rubbing it. wheres the fuel? if i have a factory process that i require to run on "coal or oil" simply so YOU can sit in your little comfort zone, then it is far more beneficial that i use some of the otherwise wasted energy of that process in performing some function. i havent increased consumption, i have reduced it. contemplate that bit.

Fireless locomotives like this one were built specifically to be used as factory yard switcher engines, so range considerations weren't a problem. They would be "charged" on-site and shunt cars around the factory yard all day. I doubt anyone ever attempted to use a locomotive like this for mainline or even sideline operations.

Correct. The "boiler" is just a big pressure vessel precharged with steam.

Yes and no :D The vessel contains hot water under pressure. Due to the pressure, the boiling point is higher. If they let steam out of the vessel, the pressure reduces and the boiling point sinks, which produces new steam again. Until at certain point of course.

I am not sure. Unless there have been major changes at the factory then I guess they are. This page will have the most up-to-date guidance: www.internationalsteam.co.uk/europe.htm#Fireless

@@gosportgricer8806 maybe you should do a update then.

Much more energy can be stored in hot water than in compressed air. Also the available pressure does not drop as much, as there is an equilibrium between steam and hot water. So often it can run the whole day without recharging.

I've never seen a hook style coupler in my life.

Outside the US and some asian countries those are actually pretty rare.

The other question is though, how long till the steam cools down and becomes steam again, though i guess it'll be long enough.

@@soldnerdose9257 Actually the reservoir (the "boiler") is mainly filled with water (2/3) which gets heated and pressurized (by an external steam source) beyond the boiling point. When the valves are opened, the pressure drops and steam develops. Which is then used to drive the locomotive. When the reservoir is filled up and fully heated, a steamless locomotive can usually work several hours non-stop before they need to refuel again.

Range?

True

Very niche application. They only make sense somewhere where you need something that really definitely can't set stuff on fire and where you have an existing source of high-pressure steam.

They're specialist equipment for niche conditions where ignition sources are needed to be eliminated, coal mines are another good example of a flammable vapour/gas environment. Compressed air was sometimes used in a similar arrangement but since the plant has high-pressure steam generation plant already in place serving the industrial processes, the operator would've selected a steam charged fireless loco instead of compressed air.

It's a common usage that locomotives are 'she', like ships. Unless it's the Bismark, the Kriegsmarine dreadnought. The Bismark is definitely a "he". And Big Boys for locomotives. Big Boys have no pronouns, there are no pronouns strong and tough enough for Big Boys.

@@Damien.D nah, it's not that Im a thomas the Tank Engine fan.

It’s an engine not a woman moron

@@tonywright8294 What an astonishingly unintelligent reply.

A lot of chemical processes require a lot of steam, so they probably have an existing boiler system that they just hook the loco up to.

"Engine" is a hugely flexible term. There are rocket engines and jet engines and "engine" used to be a term for machines in a machine shop in the 19th century.

@@donjones4719 well an electric motor is not an engine, whereas steam, jet and internal combustion engines are. i'm not sure about rockets, they're referred to as engines and motors, solid rocket motors and liquid fuel engines, though i have also heard liquid fuel motors...

It is about the degree of complexity. A solid fuel rocket is a rocket motor but a liquid fuelled rocket uses a rocket engine. Electric motors are simple - diesel electric engines are complex.

So a car has an engine, but it’s called a motor car !

@@tonywright8294 Which is short for an automotive carriage… (which is where we get auto, motor and car from).

It's the cylinders under the cab.

@Gargory64 If it was a cab-forward locomotive, I think they would have added better windows to that end of the cab.

Thanks for the question! As I understand it a fireless locomotive works by pumping both boiling water and steam into the 'pressure vessel'. As the steam is used, the reduction in pressure allows more water to turn to steam. Thus, at a mico-level steam pressure continually fluctuates as the engine uses steam & more is generated from the hot water but with a general decline in overall pressure & water temperature over time. In 2007 I was lucky to have a cab ride in the fireless loco at Roblingen (near Halle) and I am sure that I saw the steam pressure gauge fluctuating quite widely as we moved along the track.

A steam engine that uses its own steam?

The boiler is actually a tank to store pressurized steam

@@enderplant Basically, it gets its steam from another source that pumps it into the pressurized tank for the day. So yes, it is a regular steam locomotive, but you don't need to worry about keeping the fire going.

Amazing!!

Yes.

It's Germany. Buffers and Chains are Standard in pretty much all Europe (except the Russian Broad Gauge Network). The only Exception here in Germany 6000 t heavy Ore Trains, which are hauled by two Class 151 Electric Locomotives (8500 HP each). Such Power and Weight would rip Chains apart, hence these Trains are equipped with a sort-of Janney Coupler. The Coupler is a special Design that can also link to Buffers and Chains, to make handling these Trains easier.

@@Genius_at_Work Why though? The buffer and chain method was already antiquated over 100 years ago.

​@@Genius_at_WorkWhy would an inferior, outdated, more difficult, and less safe coupling method be standard? Why not just use what we use in the US since it's objectively better in every way?

The costs of changing to a new system would be prohibitive is my guess. Perhaps with modern communications, those old link couplers are not as dangerous as years ago.

@@dickJohnsonpeterBecause you need all of europe to change at the same time. There is actually a push for (semi) automatic couplers that are interoperable with buffer and chain. But it will take a very long time to change all rolling stock

The same way a diesel locomotive gets its diesel.

It's charged with pressurised steam from the factory which is then stored in the large pressure tank on the loco (The thing that looks like a boiler).

@@musketthedog thats crazy how does it stay hot ?

@@mentalunicorn9567 I think lots and lots of insulation and pressure. The bit you can see is most likely an outer casing with a smaller, more rounded high pressure tank underneath.

Thank you so much for reply I'd love to see this get charged i wonder how it hooke up and stuff and what charges it bet its got to be huge whatever it is !!

@@mentalunicorn9567 When it's not needed it sits in the berth where lines constantly circulate very hot waste water and steam from the facilities own steam plants which are used in the solvent production process. It's unhooked and shunts (switches) cars around and takes them down to exchange siding where standard rail picks them up. It can store quite a lot of thermal energy for a while so between heatings and recharges it sits next to the crew hut waiting for something to do.

The "boiler" is almost filled (2/3) with water. The water get's superheated and pressurized by an external steam source. If you then open the valves to the cylinders, the water starts to boil and produces steam. The amount of energy that can be stored that way is so high that the locomotive can work several hours or a whole day before having to "refuel".

@@tobiaswichert4843 ok but how does the external steam source get to the loco?

Or is it already super heated when it’s put in the boiler?

@@thelivingcat0210 The steam is produced elsewhere on the facility and then carried via pipes and hoses to locomotive. There it heats up the water and is used to build up the initial pressure.

@@thelivingcat0210 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/l9-dZblomLCRnXk.html

but it is standard gauge

The steam is is supplied by an external source, in this case a chemical plant. There will be a stationary boiler somewhere in the plant, it is a common way to add heat to chemical reactions involving flamable or explosive chemicals (solvents in this case) as there's less risk of fire or sparks causing explosions.

The big cylinder isn't a boiler on this one, it's just a big tank to hold steam. It's periodically filled during the day from a stationary boiler. Apparently this chemical factory generates steam for the chemical processing so it's available anyway.

Extracting the latent energy held in the uranium is a highly involved process, and requires bulky apparatus which would be difficult to mount on a locomotive. It would be possible to use process steam from a uranium powered plant to operate a fireless loco, of course.