I was wondering if anyone out there knows if they make an engine(dcc) that has sound and smokes....I called a few companies and I'm told that they are no longer available....
Do our really want a smoker?
I was raised in a home in which my parents stir fried our dinner 95% of the time. The oil from the stir frying got on EVERYTHING in the kitchen and in the dinning room. Just think of what the oil smoke from a steam locomotive can do to your layout.
Now Rapido has a steam generator car that is said does not use oil to make smoke.
I am curious as to why there is this fascination with smoke generation . I realize that the original steam engines generated enormous amounts of pollutants , steam & smoke ,due to burning coal and oil , but is this really either necessary or wise in an indoor environment ? Proto-type railroads would have loved not to deal with all the problems smoke caused . With current environmental laws steam engines would be illegal to operate in any large amount .
Don't forget, a lot of us started out with Lionel or American flyer. My AF steamer had smoke and sound. Sound was produced by a small bellows.
Good Afternoon all,
Not knowing who you contacted, MTH(Mike's Train House) offered a Pennsy K4 in HO scale with a smoke unit. Also, I think, BLI offered an SP cab forward with a smoke unit.
Why you would want one is beyond me. Smoke units are nothing like the smoke from a real engine. At best, they resemble a smoldering cigarette. Besides, the amount of additional maintenence you will have to keep track clean is not worth it.
I agree that smoke units, especially in HO or smaller are bad news. However, I have tdo agree with Jhanecker. The smoke and steam from a steam locomotive, especially a wood or coal burner did not produce a lot of pollution. Unlike today's high chimneys, the low smokestack of a steamer didn't allow the smoke to go very far from the track. It settled on the track and acted as a major fertilizer, making it necessary to tame the wilderness with some regularity.
It did get on the family wash if the wash was out to dry at the wrong time, but I'm not sure that is pollution, per se.
I would suggest that diesels probably pollute more than steamers.
Gene.
Hi:
I think most large scale smoke is created by heating propylene glycol, not oil.
This stuff is used every where, food, cosmetics and medicinal products.
Look it up, it is interesting trivia.
Factory Direct Trains has a deal on some smoke units, if anybody cares... :-\
http://factorydirecttrains.com/smokeunits.aspx?utm_source=delivra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=laborday2008 I'm sure some one is bound to care! :)
I would consider the particulates , the sulfur and the mercury found in coal as pollution . Add to that the water mixing with sulfur dioxides from the combustion to form sulfuric acid . Smoke was biological as well as visual hazard .
A couple of western steam excursion lines are under heavy criticism today regarding the smoke and pollution, law suits are imminent.
The Georgetown Loop is now using a diesel switcher to pull the excursion cars. As we watched it pull away from the Silver Plume Station, we could detect the heat vapors, but hardly a trace of smoke.
Baldwin #12 (originally running in Hawaii) is being rebuilt, and scrubbers will be added to reduce pollutants. I have pictures of it in the engine house with the boiler stripped down. They let me get a close up view of the innards, the cab is sitting on a flatbed.
We visit Denver often, I plan to take a lot of pictures as the renovation progresses.
"The smoke and steam from a steam locomotive, especially a wood or coal burner did not produce a lot of pollution."
Gene are you speculating/dreaming or do you have actual fact to support this?
I am presuming you're speaking of as delivered?
AFAIK There is no currently operating re-built/re-furbished from the "Glory Days of Steam" locomotives that do not require a special EPA permit to operate. If I'm wrong, which I am known to have been, please enlighten me as to which and when.
None that I am aware of will even pass 1980 Federal EPA standards. Did I miss something?
All, AFAIK, have been granted exceptions strictly specific to place/date/ and time.
"Unlike today's high chimneys, the low smokestack of a steamer didn't allow the smoke to go very far from the track. It settled on the track and acted as a major fertilizer, making it necessary to tame the wilderness with some regularity."
This statement is just simply mis-information, or possibly ignorance.
You younger folks may regard this as misspeaking.
We older folks refer to this as a blatant BS.
The early railroads burnt untold tens of thousands of acres of forests and homes due to embers from steam locomotives.
Do a bit of research Gene
Please post the chemical composition of both wood and coal burning waste byproducts as they directly relate to "fertilizer".
Shame on you, especially posing as a former educator on this site.
"It did get on the family wash if the wash was out to dry at the wrong time, but I'm not sure that is pollution, per se. "
What was the right time to hang the laundry?
Is soot, whatever the source, not pollution?
Again, please post reference regarding chemical composition of said "soot".
If you have nothing to counter-challenge me on, I would suggest a challenge on my sentence structure or maybe spelling.
Maybe you can save a bit of face.
I'm disappointed with you on this Gene.
I'm certainly no expert on steam locomotives, or the pollution factors. They made a lot of smoke, that's about all I know.
If the EPA had its way, I couldn't use my outdoor barbeque. They even tried to shut down our cattle feedlots which would have put us out of business.
I think the matter of any steamer pollution is a moot issue. I think they are only used in excursion applications, preserving a bit of our heritage can't be too bad a thing.
Heck, I'm an old timer too, but I wasn't upset by anything Gene said. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Anyway, I'm an engineer not a chemist, so I can't really comment.
Can't we all just agree to disagree and get back to having fun? :D
what fun, I'd rather pick on you! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Yes, Bob you are right everyone in entitled to their own opinion.
Its part of what makes each of us individual, and "That's a good thing".
Sorry, but it's hard for me to cut anybody any slack when they consistently attempt to force their will on, and belittle, others.
The poster, I directed my reply to, appears to feel it's his/her duty/obligation to correct others publicly on this site.
I was just giving him/her a dose of their own medicine.
I know I know, I shouldn't have, and that by doing so it lowered me to that same level.
My apologies.
Yes, let's have some fun and go lay some more tracks.
Cease fire in effect ; )
In life, I cut everyone a lot of slack (except for PD) in the hope they will do the same for me. Everyone "blows smoke" occasionally. Hey I made a funny. HAHA
Pardon me while I reply to PD. >:( STOMP! Ah, I feel much better. :D
I am sure that they pullute but I really don't care. Even if they were running them as much as they did back when it was used on the mainline I doubt (but am not sure) that they would do it as much as cars do. Even if they did it's worth it.
Stomp? STOMP? I thought we were friends? :'( :'( :'( :'(
Cutting slack, I don't need no stinkin' slack. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Well, excuuuuuuuuse me. >:( Hey are we havin' fun yet?
I am confused. Why criticize someone who wants who wants smoke. It make about as much sense as arguing about EPA standards on an item built before the EPA.
Steam engines smoked, pollutant or not, that's what they did, and it only seems natural to model an engine with a smoke stack with smoke.
In regards to the original guestion, what scale are you asking about? If you were in O scale, most company's engines would come with a smoke unit, although it would seem that Bachmann does not. Looking through the Bachmann catalog it looks like they only offer smoke units in their 1:20.3 engines.
As a matter of fact, if Bachmann were to try to compete in the O scale market, they need to offer smoke or the other companies will eat them up. O scalers do want engines that smoke. Whether they use it on not is up to them, but they won't buy one with out it. Same with me in large scale, I would never buy a steam engine without a smoke unit in it.
HO is a different matter, because of their size. Smoke units tend to heat up the plactic their incased in and warp it. Some companies do offer it, but it is not as popular as in large scales.
Bruce
Show me one ALCO that didn't blow smoke! ;D And even diesels smoke a lot in O, come on, O scale and Large scale are, to me, known as the smoke scales. ;) az2rail is right, if Bachmann wants to step it up to the market, smoke needs to come on out. :)
I am wondering if some information is missing in this thread. Underground mining under the right circumstances use scrubbers on the exhaust of the rock trucks .
With the technology available they should be able to scrub the exhausts of both diesel and steam engines.
Don
az2rai Wrote "I am confused. Why criticize someone who wants who wants smoke. It make about as much sense as arguing about EPA standards on an item built before the EPA.
Steam engines smoked, pollutant or not, that's what they did, and it only seems natural to model an engine with a smoke stack with smoke."
Generally speaking, modelled "smoke" is not liked by experienced modellers for the following reasons: -
1) The "smoke" emitted by smoke units is a chemical that will spread over your room and track and scenery and everything else leaving a sticky residue behind that is difficult to clean up.
2) It's completely unrealistic and looks toylike and is not worth the money.
Not criticism, just cautions. I have seen smoke in O and Large scale, it does look fairly realistic. However, modelers of these scales usually have a separate isolated room or building for the layout. If they enjoy the realism of having smoke settle on everything, that's their business.
There is a sign at our door that says: "Wipe your shoes, take off your hat, and NO SMOKING." Since our layout is in the house, the CEO mandates no smoking locos.
who's that? Your wife? He he he he he ;D
This is one of those threads that will never end. Some folks smoke in their houses, some don't. I grew up and ran O guage Lionel's that my Uncles gave me from the 50's. We ran smoke all the time and loved it. When my Nephew now comes over, he doesn't care about realism, the first thing out of his mouth is "Uncle Paul, make it smoke!", and neither my wife or I smoke in the house (cigarettes), so we have a smoke free house, but that short amount of time while running smoke, nothing happens. Ok, I wipe down the engine after they leave, but the joy of seeing a kids face is worth it. We tend to lose site of what got us into this great hobby in the first place. Yes some of us are detail oriented, but if someone likes to run smoke, GREAT, do it and enjoy it! As for a greasy residue on all of our buildings when I grew up, I don't ever remember having to clean anything (other than track).
Now for my take on actual steam locomotives. I take trips and vacations to ride steamers. I wouldn't drive 10minutes to get pulled by a diesel. Do they pollute, and how much, don't know, don't care. I am eco friendly, I am a consultant for storm water and wetland preservation, and in my house we try and recycle/ reuse most items. But for the small amount of steamers still running, they were here before the federal laws. Modern days cars and trucks pollute far more than the few steamers running. Look how developement is adding to our carbon footprint, the runoff from hardscape areas into rivers and bays, polluting our drinking water. Look at the Cities with smog problems, is this from RR's, I think not.
That's like the people that purchase a house where a tourist line is already existing, if you don't like steam trains, don't get the house. In my area, there is a dragstrip that has been round for years, as people sold their houses and moved, new owners bought and had a petition to try and shut down the races. Needless to say, it didn't work, the drags were there first.
People forget, all of our history and freedoms that made us what we are today. Steam engines forged the United States, and these are majestic symbols of our history. So hopefully the day never comes, but what if a child never had the chance to experience the sounds, smells, and excitement of riding behind a true iron horse. Snorting soot, and smoke, listening to the sounds of the whistle, and wheels on the track, I think that would be a true loss to all of us.
Reminds me of the time when a neighbor rancher retired, and sold his place to someone just wanting to live in the country. Within a month, I received a call from the new neighbor complaining about our feedlot. He didn't like the odor when the winds shifted. He also complained that "my runoff water" from melting snow flooded his house.
My reply: "Look, I didn't ask you to be my neighbor, if you don't like it, move back to town." As for the spring runoff, I advised him to complain to a "higher authority" He tried to get support from other neighbors, also ranchers. Obviously his "petition" failed, and he sold the ranch to a real cowboy, who now has lots of horses and cattle.
This area is beautiful, but it has always been ranches, and always will be. Steam, cattle, feedlots and cowboys, all here first. If people want to enjoy T-Bone steaks, they have to endure the prevailing winds.
Our ranch is a literal "game preserve", lots of deer, elk and antelope, nesting American Eagles, cranes and geese. Yesterday I watched for an hour while 4 Red Tailed Hawks soared motionless against the thermals rising from the hills behind our house.
Ok, I'm rambling, but I get tired of people in their ivory towers, having their "cheese and whine", wanting to destroy our heritage in the name of "progress".