5 ms·
Interestingly, trains today are technically diesel-electric, where a diesel engine is feeding a generator, which feeds traction motors on the axles. So putting
by CaliforniaKarl 8y ago
Interestingly, trains today are technically diesel-electric, where a diesel engine is feeding a generator, which feeds traction motors on the axles.
So putting in a battery would "just" mean swapping out the fuel tank, engine, and generator. Probably the biggest issue I could see is, the battery would have to be able to handle extremely high currents to get the consist moving. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMD_SD90MAC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMD_SD90MAC shows a power output of up to 4.47 Megawatts at full engine speed (for the EMD 265).
- narag 8y agoThat seems US specific. Of course it wouldn't make sense to use the batteries for that case, but maybe it would be cheaper for you than electrifying the network.
- anonymou2 8y agoI know it sounds dangerous, but, haven't anyone thought of electrifying by just using the two rails as conductors, one rail per pole? So no need of third rail or catenary. I suppose the expense would be isolating all the axels! This is the method used by model railroads by the way.