Posted by Marc Gerges on August 10, 2007, 7:40 am
>>
>> Although many diesel locomotive are diesel electric, there's no buffer
>> battery between the diesel engine and the train. The generator-traction
>> motor setup is nothing more than the system that transmit power from the
>> engine to the wheels.
>>
> True, but having diesel engines and electric motors meets the dictionary
> definition of hybrid.
>
> "something (as a power plant, vehicle, or electronic circuit) that has
> two different types of components performing essentially the same function"
>
> Both the diesel engine and the electric motors produce mechanical energy
> sufficient to operate the locomotive... and yes I realize I'm being a
> bit picky here <G>
No, you're not being picky, you're just wrong <eg>
The diesel is what moves the train. The generator/motor is just the
transmission.
Without the diesel the whole electric setup is worth just as much as a
gearbox without the engine.
cu
.\arc
Posted by Roger Blake on July 24, 2007, 3:11 am
Rosenberg wrote:
> In September, 2004, I bought a Prius for about the same price as a
> comparably equipped Camry would have cost, and I've averaged 46 MPG
> since then.
About the same as a 30-year-old VW Rabbit diesel. Very impressive.
--
Roger Blake
(Subtract 10s for email.)
Posted by Richard Warren on July 24, 2007, 5:16 am
> Rosenberg wrote:
>> In September, 2004, I bought a Prius for about the same price as a
>> comparably equipped Camry would have cost, and I've averaged 46 MPG
>> since then.
> About the same as a 30-year-old VW Rabbit diesel. Very impressive.
> --
> Roger Blake
> (Subtract 10s for email.)
Yeah. That was a real non-polluter, wasn't it? Quiet too, eh?
Posted by Roger Blake on July 24, 2007, 12:00 pm
> Yeah. That was a real non-polluter, wasn't it? Quiet too, eh?
We were discussing fuel economy, not "pollution" or "quietness," little one.
However having said that, you will find that today's diesels are much
more refined that those of 30 years ago, while still offering outstanding
fuel economy. (Of course you knew that, you were simply being disingenuous.)
All without hundreds of pounds of expensive batteries or a complex Rube
Goldberg drivetrain, and of course a properly-designed diesel engine will
run nearly forever by automotive standards.
To today's hybrids I say "Thanks, but no thanks." But I would certainly
consider a diesel.
--
Roger Blake
(Subtract 10s for email.)
Posted by richard schumacher on July 24, 2007, 7:56 pm
> > Yeah. That was a real non-polluter, wasn't it? Quiet too, eh?
>
> We were discussing fuel economy, not "pollution" or "quietness," little one.
Yeah, who cares about pollution and quietness, anyway. Buncha
God-damned treehuggers.
> However having said that, you will find that today's diesels are much
> more refined that those of 30 years ago, while still offering outstanding
> fuel economy. (Of course you knew that, you were simply being disingenuous.)
> All without hundreds of pounds of expensive batteries or a complex Rube
> Goldberg drivetrain, and of course a properly-designed diesel engine will
> run nearly forever by automotive standards.
>
> To today's hybrids I say "Thanks, but no thanks." But I would certainly
> consider a diesel.
Meanwhile you'll stand on the sidelines and snipe? Thanks for sharing.
XML site map
>> Although many diesel locomotive are diesel electric, there's no buffer
>> battery between the diesel engine and the train. The generator-traction
>> motor setup is nothing more than the system that transmit power from the
>> engine to the wheels.
>>
> True, but having diesel engines and electric motors meets the dictionary
> definition of hybrid.
>
> "something (as a power plant, vehicle, or electronic circuit) that has
> two different types of components performing essentially the same function"
>
> Both the diesel engine and the electric motors produce mechanical energy
> sufficient to operate the locomotive... and yes I realize I'm being a
> bit picky here <G>