October 4th 05, 04:21 PM
|
|
|
On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 09:51:46 GMT, wrote:
Tracks across Lake Ponchartrain fell in.
Granted they were put back in service faster than anything the
government had connection to.
Why a loco anyway? It would appear to be the mistaken assumption that
anything that big must have power to burn on anything plugged in by a user.
Not the case - the power from a loco is, not surprisingly, applied to the
tracks.
Actually, it's not.
What made you bring up tracks anyway -- my reference to the
tracks on the lake falling in? My point was that the locomotive is
going nowhere there aren't usable tracks.
On a diesel-electric locomotive, the generator's output is
applied, not to the tracks as you seem to think, but rather through
control circuitry to the stator around the axle. It's rather amusing
to see a repair yard worker with a set of wheels-and-axle (they're all
one single piece, in case you didn't know) clamp a stator around the
axle, connect a battery with a pair of short jumper cables and walk
the whole arrangement across a concrete floor as though he were
walking the family dog.
BTW, at 4,000+ horsepower, you could plug in nearly anything a
user might want, given proper appliances and the right plug. :-)
This is what we have been led to believe and the schematics are on their
way in. Jeez, if we can't find wattage on these beasts.........
--
Drop the alphabet for email
|