Talk:Atmospheric railway
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| See also: WikiProject Trains to do list | |
 |
This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments) |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance within the Trains WikiProject. |
" Brunel chose to test the system on a relatively flat section. Brunel simply assumed that the system would work,"
doesn't really look right, apart from being unfair to Brunel I think. I think there were tests on gradients actually. I have a book, somewhere. Midgley 16:03, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Description of application on SDR is incorrect. Air is sucked out of the pipe containing a piston, not out of the tunnel (this latter method was considered by earlier advocates of an atmospheric system, but never applied successfully) --Ewanduffy 20:08, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Engineer Robert Malet wrote a report of the system between Dun Laoghaire and Dalkey for the French Government. He was generally supportive.--Ewanduffy 20:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] AWB-assisted edit.
Hi there. I've just used Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser to do a minor clean up of this article. If you have any concerns about the result, please don't hesitate to drop me a note on my talk page. Thanks! Very kind regards —Encephalon 05:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] As an example of an approach
Today with electic trains (though not along that line!) we leave the boiler and the problems of supplying fuel to it in one place, and transfer the power from it to the moving vehicle. Brunel didn't really have electricity available, but the concept seems to me similar. The other concept of directly pulling the train rather than driving the wheels and hoping for traction waited until Braithwaite and the linear induction motor, except for rather short stretches of cable and cog rails etc. Midgley 20:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] How did they deal with the pressure in the train?
Did they keep an atmosphere in the train? Seems quite dangerous to me. De mortuis... 05:50, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
- Pipe underneath, not pipe containing train. The cleverness - and failure of available materials - was the seal that allowed drive from the piston to get to the train.Midgley 09:02, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
- There's a nice picture of the setup here (first para and image). Interesting subject: later there actually were experimental transit systems where the car went inside a rather small pipe. Not recommended for claustrophobes. Just the picture of the Thomas Webster Rammell system makes my palms sweat. Tearlach 11:30, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] LCR
Did the London and Croydon railway not implement such a system out of London bridge ??? I seam to recall reading about it once but i don't remember many of the detail (it might have caused finical problems and led to its takeover by the London and Brighton). Pickle 18:37, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Brunel's "atmospheric caper"
This section, which is nearly half the article, is directly copied from Isambard_Kingdom_Brunel#Brunel's "atmospheric caper". I'm not sure whether this is standard practice, but it is a little off-putting to the reader to be presented with the exact same copy in several places. Would it not be better to have a link from one to the other (probably Brunel to here) that says 'for more information see X'. --HappyDog 14:27, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
