Who's revolutionary now, Diesel?- Duck, 2024

We are so back

LONG LIVE THE ERA OF STEAM ENGINES

“BOOM! I’m back, dummy!” -Steam

this is such a nice break from all this "hyperloop" and "pods" garbage. it's nice to see some *real* innovation in the places where it matters the most.

If this succeeds then the class should be called the Phoenix class

I love that he used the song "fury the high pressure engine's theme" by S.A Music while talking about the leader's problems, lol

<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="236">3:56</a> that locomotive deserves a video all to itself, looks futuristic, strong, awesome too. 😊

Looks like we're coming back full circle to the age of the steam Era, I'm so excited for where rail travel will go.

"Different designs are very fussy on what fuel they use." I think this was proven very well by the camelback locomotives of the US. *Giant* fireboxes to burn coals with extremely low BTUs. The Strasburg railroad had an 0-4-0 camelback that they tried to use high-BTU coal in and it went... poorly to say the least.

Wait, what? Wow! I am happy that steam is returning from a while now! Steam Engines is always my passion and one of the reasons I created my channel! Thanks for the video! Keep up the good work Terrier55Stepney!

BOYS WAKE UP BRITISH RAIL IS BRINGING BACK STEAM

I remembered when people said we'd have hydrogen-powered cars by the 2020s. I guess this is close enough?

Steam engines: "haha, did you miss us bit-"

I like steam locomotives and all but does no one else find it weird that the assumption is that after 220 years of development we've barely developed the steam locomotive but in half the time we've achieved all we can from diesel-electrics

Say Terrier, I was wondering if you heard of Sam Mackwell and his efforts to bring back steam in New Zealand. He doesn't have much on his KZfaq channel but he does have a working boiler that utilitizes Advanced Steam principles as developed by L.D. Porta. He's planning on using the technology for farming, especially since he designed his boiler for biofuels, wood, and bagasse.

euh electric locomotives/ multiple units are indirect steam powered trains ! The majority of Power plants use steam turbines to produce electricity.

We are indeed back on track

someone from wyvern rail must of saw victor tanzig non-fictional steam-diesel conversion and thought "let's give this ago"

why does everyone forget about the ACE-3000?

This smacks of distraction-tech. Hydrogen, in all its many guises (colors) still has to be made from something else, and therein lies the problem. It takes energy to make hydrogen, a lot of energy, and that must be factored into the overall equation. Just because the loco itself is efficient and "green" isn't helpful if its fuel-making process is inefficient and energy-intensive. When you look at the big picture, hydrogen is simply not a sensible alternative to existing technologies. Britain should be electrifying all its lines, and doing so without any further delays. If India (with one of the world's largest rail networks that moves more than 9 billion people each year) has already electrified 95% of its broad-gauge lines and will electrify the remaining 5% very soon, then there's no excuse for Britain to not electrify its entire network. Even if the electricity is generated from fossil fuels, it's easier to control pollution at a few large power stations than at a vast plethora of individual locomotives and trains. This is the only efficient way to power trains: anything else is just a distraction.

It’s amazing to think that steam could be making a comeback. I’ll take a steam loco over a diesel/electric any day of the week. It’d blow me away if a concept akin to the Bulleid Leader ends up being a success.

Would be funny to see a thomas the tank engine trainz thing where Diesel is still bragging about diesel being the future, and then finds out about steam being tried again.

All though it's an intriguing idea, it wouldn't surprise me. It probably would end up not doing so good. It reminds me much of the cancelled ACE (American Coal Enterprise) 3000 Series Project where they attempted to bring steam locomotives back due to the fuel economy and the cold war. Coal ended up being reduced to cheap prices again and steam was considered to be phased out much too quickly at that time in America. The idea this group's attempt is so much different from that of the ACE project, as they wanted to create a steam locomotive that is featured with modern technology such as a boiler that is controlled by using a computer, and using diesel locomotive body designs to be the main body casing for both ends to lessen the need of a turntable for it. But it ended up being cancelled as no-one was interested in it, and that the oil pricing eventually dropped back down as the biggest nail in the coffin. Thus the prototype was never built, as a result. All ready nitpicky issues with the cancelled project and its design started to unfold in today's age for how it wouldn't work out back then compared to now. Railfans are sure to complain about this conventional project as well. Even if it looks exciting to see being pulled off. We can't know for certain what the outcome would be if they eventually get by with solving the problems from the past or if this would be a success at all. We'll just have to wait and see what the outcome will be before we jump to any conclusions.

THE AGE OF STEAM IS BACK

<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="918">15:18</a> You fell into the old schoolboy trap :“Which is heavier ? A pound of feathers or a pound of lead?”

Wow and I thought American railroads were bending over backwards and doing everything they could to not do the obvious next step in rail traction which is just putting up wires for electric trains. Honestly I do see a future in steam power but honestly that's just in the context of what the 5AT was doing, expanding on the traditional stephensonian locomotive mainly to keep heritage steam going. Maybe also what the Mackwell company in New Zealand with energy sovereignty are doing but that's non-railway stuff. There are also a handful of modern steam locomotives around, mostly rebuilds like the red devil or DLMs Kreigslok but there are a few newbuilds, those all of course are still traditional steam engines though. Honestly I don't really see the point in New steam for revenue service, even if diesels have their flaws the answer isn't steam engines and honestly diesels were never the answer either. The future is electric and has been since the New York Central ran the first electric hauled train in 1899 the rail companies just don't wanna commit due to the large upfront cost of installing overhead wires or third rail.

You missed out one of the major reasons why dieselisation was rushed, one that is always overlooked, the Clean Air Act of 1956 which imposed fines on anyone burning coal and releasing excessive smoke into the atmosphere in a clean air zone. This applied equally to British Rail steam locom9tives as it did the owner of a factory. This meant any plans for phased withdrawal of steam were scrapped and untested diesel locomotives were ordered.

I'd recommend the concept of the 5AT Advanced Technology Steam Locomotive for a futuristic Steam Locomotive idea. 😊

i guess you could say steam never ended it just took a long vacation

we are back steam team

If it succeeds, it would be a proof of the old adage "what's old is new again".

Instead of turning Hydrogen into Steam, why not use the Electricity we’d use to make the Hydrogen directly with electric locomotives? It’s much more efficient, you’d just need to build more overhead wires

“The BOYS are back in town, boys back in town.” -The Boys-

This man never heard of the ACE 3000 or the Big John, the PRR S2, or the yellow bellies...

If you are burning hydrogen to make the steam, the temperature will be so high that this is effectively a gas turbine. This will have the same problem as other gas turbines of not operating efficiently when not at its optimal design speed and load, mitigated by the use of 4 of them so that you can start with 1 turbine, and then switch on others as requirements increase. It will also not be emission-free, because combustion of hydrogen makes a hot enough flame to produce nitrogen oxides unless you go to the trouble of separating the oxygen in the air away from the nitrogen, which would require much additional equipment, which would be heavy and consume some of the power, and would also make the combustion temperature even higher so that exotic materials would be needed to stay solid. If you are going to use hydrogen, it would be better to use it in fuel cells, which can operate with reasonable efficiency under varying load. However, the use of hydrogen is itself problematic: Although fuel cells themselves have efficiency that somewhat exceeds the best internal combustion engines, when you multiply this by the efficiency of generation of hydrogen by electrolysis of water, the overall efficiency becomes fairly low, meaning that even if you did convert hydrogen production to use renewable energy, you would need a lot more renewable energy than if you used the renewable energy as electricity. Also, hydrogen is hard to store and transport, because it has a very low boiling point and critical point, so that if you liquify it, you use about 1/3 of its energy content to run the refrigeration (and that is before considering the need for ongoing refrigeration to prevent boiloff. If you don't liquify it, you need extremely strong and heavy tanks to store it at high pressure, or to combine it with other substances which add a comparable amount of weight, and then consume some energy when you need to pry the hydrogen back out of them. Hydrogen is composed of molecules so small that they are even able to leak through some solid materials. So you would be better off building more railway electrification infrastructure and using the electricity directly, which is much more efficient and requires less renewable energy investment than what you would need with a hydrogen intermediate. So never mind steam locomotives -- the entire hydrogen economy concept is a pre-ordained fail, except for the subset of industrial processes that specifically need hydrogen.

Another dead end. Not because of steam, but because of hydrogen. Creating, compressing (or even liquefying) hydrogen, then expanding and "burning" it is extremely wasteful. 80% of the energy is lost as heat to the environment. Storage of hydrogen is also a big issue. I bet on synthetic fuels, made from green hydrogen, without any storage or transportation of hydrogen itself. Synthetic fuels that can be distributed with the existing infrastructure and stored as easily and safely as fossil fuels will be the future. Costly, sure, but from a practical point of view much better. And certainly not worse than using hydrogen directly in terms of efficiency. Of course, the most efficient way will remain to install overhead wires and run directly on electricity. At least on main lines with frequent service.

We're back baby!

now this I did not expect

loving the fact that new steam is becomming a thing also loving the fact that i'm not the only one to think about turning electric kettle technology into usable steam traction, not quite how i envisioned it but then battery technology of the time wasn't quite as advanced as it is now, considering electric car batteries are getting better and better, whats stopping in the future having large kettle elements inside existing steam engines, swapping the coal for batteries of a usable voltage, yet keeping steam engines looking as they should be

Well this is an epic history for steam engines. Can't wait to see where this turn out.

General way to understand engines and locomotives: -Source of energy. Could be chemicals that react, could be nuclear (in theory, trains obviously don't use this outside some experimental things), could be electricity from wires, flywheels, springs, or other mechanical energy sources, etc. -Convert that energy into something that can drive wheels. Could be a heat source + steam system, could be an internal combustion engine for some fuels, a battery or fuel cell for some chemicals. Outside electricity skips this step. -The thing that actually pushes the train. Electric motors, gears or drive bars, that sort of thing. A good locomotiove system will convert energy efficiently, not be too expensive to build, be able to work well at different speeds, be easily maintained, not pollute too much, produce a lot of power, and others I'm forgetting. Obviously there are tradeoffs between these, an actual choice depends on what the trains will be used for, but all else equal more of these are better. Hydrogen to steam system has to compete with different types of internal combustion engines (if theburned frdrogen powers a turbine directly instead of being condensed and reheated, it is just a gas turbine with steam heavy exhaust. Nitrogen and other air gases are presumably still there) and fuel cells as other options, and these are almost certainly more fuel efficient, piston engines can handle lots of different speeds, if the system is engine-electric (like current diesel electric locomotives) different speeds needed is somewhat of a moot point (depending on how the electric system is designed.), and these things either already exist with a little development needed, or are well on their way to being developed. Possibly, the burned hydrogen directly powers pistons like your traditional steam engine (The video didn't seem to explain this well), but burning other types of fuel could already have been used this way and was not, suggesting it isn't a great way to run an engine. Will want to look this up to see how it is actually powered.

Thank you for mentioning the cutting off of fuel for heritage railways for the sake of greenwashing.

The problem with hydrogen is that we can't just mine it. It has to be artificially produced. That process is not particularly efficient to begin with (about 10%), and basically has to be done next to its own dedicated nuclear power plant if it's to power anything bigger than a few heritage railways. Storage and transport issues exist, but those are solved with an adequate investment in the requisite infrastructure. Trouble is, it would cost about as much to build the power plant, pipelines and storage tanks as it would to just electrify the whole network and be done with it. This one might be consigned to heritage railways. Though saying that, if the rest of the infrastructure got properly cleaned up (highly unlikely, but one can dream), there would be a BUNCH of coal left for the heritage railways to burn, and they will do so at such a slow pace that it really doesn't matter on a global scale.

Big diesels are now over 50% fuel efficient. The laws of physics mean that steam can’t even get close to that.

All very interesting, but the best way forward is always going to be electrification. Nothing, short of rocket propulsion, will accelerate a vehicle like electric motors will. Instant, flat torque curve that no piston or turbine-based system can match, and with no need for gearing. Keep up the research though.

<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="381">6:21</a> Great Scotland Yard. It's LNER Gresley A4 Streamlined Pacific Sir Nigel Gresley A Bit Like Mallard From The National Railway Museum In York In Yorkshire. Thanks Mate. X❤

I'm sure that with modern tech it probably be made to work reliably and be functionally useable, maybe even work im multiple with other types, but I honestly don't see the point. Off-the-shelf hydrogen fuel cells are typcially 40-60% efficient. They're immediately and easily scalable simply by havimg more of them - which also means that in locomotive terms they're near constant efficiency devices because you only use as many as you need at any given time. The output is electricity, water, and waste heat. This is basically the power-station-on-wheels again. Burn the hydrogen in air to get heat (which will almost certainky not be as clean as a fuel cell and produce at least some nitrogen oxides), use that to boil water, and then run the resultimg high pressure steam through a turbine connected to a generator to get your electricty. To get any reasonable thermal efficiency out of the turbine you'll likely also be wanting a cooling system/condensor after it. Thats 4 stages vs 1. I don't see how it can hope to compete in efficiency terms, it'll just burn more hydrogen - quite possibly two or three times as much - to do the same work. Not to mention both the boiler and and turbine are also going to be limited by both their size and the operating environment, most modern power stations run at over 1000psi, I doubt that is suitable for rail use.

Kind of reminds me of the experimental “Steambus” that from the 1970s and was created to test steam engines in buses that could possibly reduce some of the pollution and smog in the Los Angeles valley. (See we knew about this stuff back in the 1970s) Nothing came of that, but we did get cleaner burning diesel buses and stricter emissions standards throughout California.

I think it's also interesting to note that something somewhat similar is being done in Spain. A minery railway closed in 2012 in Ponferrada is due to reopen in the coming years using hydrogen powered steam trains from the late 1910s.

I still seeing the article when it first came out I was in awe

I am pleased you included Bulleid's CIE Turf Burner. I did muse, back in the early 1970s using paraffin to fuel a small steam engine which would power a generator to fit inside a motor car.

The loco shown at the 3.59 mark wasn't an attempt at improving steam at all. It was an Austrian prototype electric freight loco, the long boiler like barrel contained a rotary converter used to provide a controlable DC supply from a fixed frequency AC supply. The Swiss locos shown later came about due to wartime coal shortages and reverted to as built condition after the war.

Unless these are steam electric trains with boilers that are heated from the overhead wires, it would be expensive. Since we can’t use coal anymore we would need to plant more trees as a source of charcoal and wait at least 20 years for them to grow

I live in The US but I would love to see more steam locomotives build

I’ve actually read the article when it first came out. I’m very keen in how this project turns out. Let’s hope the companies get this right compared to the steam turbine locos of the past. And could one imagine if this could be refined for possible use on actual steam locomotives as they mostly rely on fossil fuels.

"You've become the verry thing you swore to destroy"

I have wondered for a while now if we could make use of steam along with heat pump technology. Current heat pumps can move three times or more energy than they use to operate from the ambient air, and that's for heating a whole house. If you set one up to heat a boiler to generate steam, use the steam to run a turbine or other generator to create electricity, could that create enough power to run itself off of the heat energy from the air around it? It wouldn't be perpetual energy, which is a physical impossibility of course, as it's not a closed system and relies on constant heat input from the air outside. And if this could work, could it then generate more power than it needs to operate? If that answer is yes, then it's just a question of scale to create enough power to operate a train. Even if the answer is no, could this potentially be used to pull further energy from the waste heat created by another power method and increase its efficiency?

Technically it's a sort of gas turbine engine. It uses the combustion gas produced by burning hydrogen and oxygen which is water, it's in gas form (steam) containing a lot of energy to drive turbines. A conventional gas turbine also uses exhaust gas to drive a turbine, just do their exhaust gasses contain more than just water unless you would let them burn hydrogen. But as it doesn't use the oxygen from the surrounding air but oxygen stored in pressurised form in tanks the combustion proces is more like what happens in a rocket engine, in an enclosed combustion chamber what I can see from the schematic of the locomotive. The reason could be that more energy can be obtained from the combustion this way and the forming of nitrous oxides is ruled out as there is no nitrogen involved like in the conventional gas turbine which sucks in ambient air containing a lot of nitrogen and only 21% oxygen. The turbines then drive the generator which creates electricity to power the traction motors. What the SVR is doing is using fuel cell technology to create electricity from hydrogen, in fact just the way to turn the energy in hydrogen into electricity is different in this experiment. And the exhaust gas from a fuel cell is....water vapour!

One thing that always annoys me to no end is that the end of steam was incredibly artificial, being abrupt and by decree, rather than an organic phase-out as they became obsolete. In all likelihood, we'd probably still be seeing some steam engines running on goods service today (if in very small numbers) were it not for that. The 9Fs had plenty of life in them by the time they were withdrawn and could've easily lasted 50 years. This would also have been far better for our industries as well. Now we've got railways covered in lethal electric beams (a hazard to people and animals both) that fail far more often than the more robust steam alternative.

What we could even do, is put the steam turbine in a central location, and connect its electrical output with wires directly to the trains...

STEAM IS BACK AND I KNEW IT WOULD BE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In Portugal, there are a historic coal steam locomotive, that was restored and converted to diesel; it is been used nowadays.

I have thought about deasil to steam conversions before but the choice of hydrogen as the fuel and source of the working fluid seems overly complicated in comparison to a fuel cell. I'm also leery of the fact that it (sounds like it) is using turbines in direct drive. While technology has improved, I can still see that choice being the source of extra engineering hours and systems.

Steamed Hams?

In the 1970s iirc there was a proposal for a steam locomotive to be built specifically to haul coal from the Powder River mines to power plants. The ACE 3000. Never built of course. It was designed with features to overcome a lot of the maintenance heavy features of earlier steam engines. A 4-4-4-4 layout l think.

Load of hot air. Just stick the wires up and say that as a steam fan. These won’t be steam locomotives in any sense that steam fans want. If going to call these steam locomotives then nuclear powered submarines and carriers should also be called steam as the nuclear power plants generate heat to boil water, which generates steam. Pre WW2 then the big 4 were all looking at moving away from steam as they realised wasn’t the future. UK stuck with new steam after WW2 as infrastructure intact and had a ready supply of coal, whereas diesel or electric would have cost a fortune to move too and would need to import oil etc. Just go electric wires and be done with it and central electric generation.

gentle reminder that nuclear IS steam, just with an extra step, the nuclear fuel superheats pressurized water, the superheated water runs through a coil of tubes to heat more water that turns into steam, and the steam powers a turbine that generates electric power if we want to be really clean, compressed air engine, pull a vacuum in one air tank, pressurize another air tank, let the pressurized air run through the engine to generate electric to power the train, we don't even necessarily need to stop pressurizing the high pressure tank after we've used everything from the vacuum tank, if we want to be really fancy, we can fill the high pressure tank with something like liquid nitrogen, and as it warms up the high pressure escaping nitrogen can run the train pros: simple, clean, can theoretically run ANY engine that doesn't apply direct mechanical power, highlights the fact that anything that doesn't burn fossil fuels is technically a battery locomotive, as it is charged with electric, given a low voltage onboard compressor it can extend its own range and draw on the grid to "refuel" itself, saves weight versus batteries cons: range and power, has probably been tried before but those were before modern materials, modern tolerances, and computers, ultimately has never been given a fair test but the fact there's been any testing is going to discourage investors from giving it an updated honest trial

The Godfather of railway power is back. Whilst there is no coal involved this time around. A steam gas turbine Class 60 is doable. That said, how come other safe alternatives have not been considered? Thorium reactors and salt reactors are just as powerful as nuclear reactors but there is no dangerous radiation poisoning with those like there is with uranium and plutonium in the event of a leak. If Hydrogen is to to be used then would it be better to use fuel cells like that used on buses and cars? Just my thoughts on the matter. Anyway. I wish them well with this unique and intriguing project. EDIT: You might want to look up CPKC 1200 on here. That one has something similar to what will be done on a Class 60.

Great video, very interesting. Thank you 🙏😊

It'll certainly be interesting to see how this project develops. Personally I think that the conversion work will be in the loco's hull only and that the bogies and drive motors will be used as is. One big question is probably whether they will retain the original alternator and link the turbines to it through a gearbox or if they will remove the alternator and give each turbine its own alternator. Going by what I could find on the class 60 each turbine will have to generate about 750 kW to replicate the class 60's original diesel. The use of multiple steam units is also interesting. I'm wondering if the developers might want to use some kind of flash boiler like the Doble brothers seem to have used for their 1920s steam cars. Hydrogen is an 'interesting' choice as fuel. We'll see how it goes but currently almost all commercially produced hydrogen is made from methane. One other possibility might actually be to run the locomotive on natural gas, methane or propane instead of (or in addition to) hydrogen. One potential if ugly solution to the fuel and water supply problem would be to use a tender, with tanks of water and fuel, to feed the locomotive through hoses.

The problem with steam turbine locos working best at consistent speeds could easily by solved by use of slip coaches

Great video, Max!

over here in the states we have a railroad building a old type of steam but news is slow

It boggles the mind that someone alive today can be old enough to watch steam be phased out, diesel introduced, electric introduced, diesel phased out, steam re-introduced.

Most coal fired power stations use steam powered generators so the only new bit is how to generate the H2 and separate it from the O2 then burn it in a controlled fashion!

Kind of like the new "wind assisted" ships being developed lol

You should have mentioned the advanced steam trust with their efforts

Levitating steam bullet trains become standard in 2077

So this means the Furness Railway 21 Class K2, the L&YR Class 28, the LBSC E2 Class, and the GER C53 Class locomotives will be built again, right?

I’m very interested to see what a modern day steam engine could be, using hydrogen is a interesting fuel source but it’s still to early to know if it’ll work but I feel pretty confident it can work I also find it funny that they’re converting a Diesel Engine into the thing they were supposed to replace, ironic isn’t it

I'd love to see someone be brave enough to build a new-build Leader with all the faults ironed out: boiler fired by vegetable oil, weight distribution sorted by siting the boiler centrally (since there'd be no need for a passageway along the loco with remote operation and oil firing), and with modern tolerances and manufacturing techniques there'd surely be no problem getting the sleeve valves to work reliably. The next project for Sheffield Park after the Brighton Atlantic? 🙃

@Terrier55Stepney, could you please make a video about the prospect of running diesel locomotives on biodiesel? I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.

“Hey Diesel!” “I’m a steam engine.” “What?!”

You would think that any new rail engine design would be tested to death with computer simulations before wheel meets rail. So it takes some of the guess work out of the equation. Something past designers did not have at their disposal. But in the end the 'build it and try it' method still applies. Computer simulations alone do not reveal all.

Your worthy Sir Topham Hatt thinks I need to learn he is mistaken we steam engines don’t need to learn we know everything we come to a yard and improve it we are revolutionary

Here's what I think. I do not know if this technology would be better then overhead wires, I doubt it will, so were possible overhead wires should be used and the network be extended. That being said, there are also many places, where overhead wires cannot be used, especially regarding sidings, where wagons are loaded and unloaded from the top (or other places where clearance from the top is needed). That's where this technology can truly shine. Putting that aside, I do wonder if steam to hydrogen-steam conversions are possible. Imagine preserved locomotives have that, instead of coal burning boilers. Less emissions, potentially cheaper fuel, easier to work with - both in maintenance and in use and the drive train preserved

It would be more efficient to power the locomotives with hydrogen fuel cells that to boil water with it.

And with how certain heritage railways have been looking into suitable alternatives to coal to burn (both for environmental reasons, as well as to tackle the unfortunate reality of the resource inevitably drying up), I'd say it's safe to say that steam is still a time-tested method of powering locomotives.

They could just use wooden pellets instead (or any other form of solid biomass) for heating the boilers. That's makes more sense than burning them for heating houses. Because in a locomotive you then get mechanical energy out of it.

so long as the experiment is economical and does not have any fossil fuels and is operator friendly (both the company and drivers) and works on existing infrastructure I don't see why there wouldn't be investment and interest from the current industry

If I look at the needed added infrastruckture, and facilities, I cant imagine this going to be a sucses, the fact that diesel traction is even still a thing is actually mindbogling.. And no im not a hater here, I'm actually A steam engine Driver and enigineer.

Many US steam engines are being restored to active service. From passenger to freight.

Hopefully my class 357 wont be replaced by this

One concern is that hydrogen burning in oxygen has very high adiabatic flame temperature. The turbine combustors and the turbines would need to be made of superalloys as in a jet engine and even then, excess oxygen would be needed to reduce the temperature to something the materials could handle. Both the provision of pure oxygen and the superalloys are going to add to the operating and capital cost of the locomotive.

Has someone finally figured out the complimentary nature of battery power and regen in tandem with high pressure steam? Hell electric preheating seemed like an obvious solution that BR ignored. I'm annoyed why it's happening now and not 15 years ago but I should be glad, right?

So if this experiment is successful, could this make maintenance costs of conventional boiler and pistons cheaper?

Love your comment, electricity appearing eco friendly!

I wonder if this is being considered viable because fuel cell technology can't be scaled up to the power requirements of a freight locomotive, because if it was then i would assume fuel cells would be the way forwards, because they're a lot more efficient at the whole hydrogen to electricity thing

Really cool