GWR Locos

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek4PLn1 ... freload=10" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I travelled behind some of those steam locomotives when I was going from Slough to a college in East London - change at Paddington to the Metropolitan Line. I am glad they are long gone, first to diesel and soon for the line to be electrified. The age of those steam trains was medically horrible. Good riddance.

I love GWR locos. That copper bonnet is pretty unique, and generally the locos are very aesthetically pleasing. I believe the Castles acquitted themselves very well in the post-nationalisation locomotive exchanges.

johnthefireman wrote:I love GWR locos. That copper bonnet is pretty unique, and generally the locos are very aesthetically pleasing. I believe the Castles acquitted themselves very well in the post-nationalisation locomotive exchanges.

Love them as much as you like. Admire them like dinosaurs as a marvel of the past. But don't allow them to fill the air with carbon dioxide and coal smoke. When there are only a few of them they don't seem to do much harm but when they were the main power on the railway they did a great deal of damage. My clothes got dirty fast when I travelled behind them nearly every day. When I was a technician in the London Chest Hospital I saw lots of people whose lungs were damaged by the smoke. The climate is severely damaged by the carbon in the atmosphere.

One of the main tasks of the near future is to stop burning coal and oil, worldwide. NO carbon dioxide. No harmful emissions.g

Thanks, George. Yes, they really are a marvel of the past. I've worked on the footplate of GWR tank engines, and had a footplate ride on a Manor. A few years ago I was standing on the platform of Exeter St David's when a steam special came through hauled by a Castle - a magnificent sight. Mind you, I'd love to be standing on a platform when an A4 comes through at 90 mph - that would be truly spectacular!

Great experiences you guys have had.

philipmartin wrote:Great experiences you guys have had.

Cough, cough.

george matthews wrote: Cough, cough.

Better watch that cough, George. You may have had an overdose of clag.
Here's a link to the "Yes, Prime Minister" "Smoke Screen" episode. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OB-WCX6ndow" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

philipmartin wrote:

george matthews wrote: Cough, cough.

Better watch that cough, George. You may have had an overdose of clag.
Here's a link to the "Yes, Prime Minister" "Smoke Screen" episode. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OB-WCX6ndow" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If your beloved (why?) steam engines were here in force there would be huge amounts of lung disease. The smoke hung around large cities like London and gave people diseases like Bronchitis (constant coughing), Asthma (constriction of the airways in the lungs), cancers, tuberculosis. These disease processes were part of the reason why steam engines were phased out as soon as possible after the war. No coal emissions are permitted within Greater London.

As it is, burning oil products, diesel and petrol, are also affecting lung disease. I think the demand to eliminate most of the oil products burning is increasing.

I assure you I remember Paddington when it was full of steam locomotives. It wouldn't be allowed today, as a considerable health hazard.

The work I have done with biogas in Africa showed me there are huge possibilities for energy from farms, and that would be energy that doesn't need huge corporations. We will be able to live without coal and oil by growing our energy.

george matthews wrote:.
If your beloved (why?) steam engines were here in force there would be huge amounts of lung disease. The smoke hung around large cities like London and gave people diseases like Bronchitis (constant coughing), Asthma (constriction of the airways in the lungs), cancers, tuberculosis. These disease processes were part of the reason why steam engines were phased out as soon as possible after the war. No coal emissions are permitted within Greater London.
.

You say that every day, George. How come?

philipmartin wrote:

george matthews wrote:.
If your beloved (why?) steam engines were here in force there would be huge amounts of lung disease. The smoke hung around large cities like London and gave people diseases like Bronchitis (constant coughing), Asthma (constriction of the airways in the lungs), cancers, tuberculosis. These disease processes were part of the reason why steam engines were phased out as soon as possible after the war. No coal emissions are permitted within Greater London.
.

You say that every day, George. How come?

Because you don't seem to get the point. Coal burning cannot be permitted in cities because of the disease processes, and nowhere else because of the CO2. The Chinese now have the same problem.

george matthews wrote:Because you don't seem to get the point.

George, with all due respect I think we've had this exact same conversation again and again. I think we do get the point. I've pointed out that I grew up in London during those days and like you I would not want to see it as dirty and polluted as it was then (although in terms of air quality as opposed to visible grime, I think it's pretty bad again now due to motor vehicles). Nobody is suggesting that coal-powered steam locomotives should be, or in practice will ever be, used as the main form of rail haulage again. Just look around you - electrification, high speed trains, etc. Even in China where for a period it appeared to be economic to use a handful of steam locomotives in a mining area, that is now being phased out. Even in South Africa where a paper mill found it economic to use three steam locos, that has already been phased out (although in both cases it is dirty diesels, not clean electric, which has replaced them). Clearly there is no place for regular steam and nobody is suggesting otherwise.

But that doesn't stop people appreciating the technical achievements of steam locomotives when they were in their prime and when there were no alternatives. Neither does it stop us preserving some working examples for the sake of history, heritage, education, tourism, leisure and yes, pure enjoyment. The amount of CO2 which preserved steam locos are putting into the atmosphere today is negligible, and there are much bigger battles to be fought in terms of environmental concerns.

george matthews wrote:
Because you don't seem to get the point.

This isn't the place for proselytizing, George.

johnthefireman wrote:Nobody is suggesting that coal-powered steam locomotives should be, or in practice will ever be, used as the main form of rail haulage again.

Actually, after seeing that Bern steam tram video, I'm advocating that all trams worldwide be converted to steam. What a delightful world this would be.

What--with no railfan seats up front?