A steam generator that could do 3,000 lbs. per hour at 200 psi would be sufficient to charge a fireless locomotive. The only variable that is unknown is the time for charging required. As the steam passes into the vessel it percolates up from a perforated pipe along the bottom. The steam condenses and imparts its heat to the surrounding water, thus raising its temperature and pressure. Just keep going until the temperature of the water is sufficient, then disconnect from the generator and away you go.

When you think of it, charging a fireless is no different than heating a passenger train. The generator makes steam as it is required. That steam travels through pipes radiating heat and condensing. The condensation creates a bit of a vacuum that is filled by more steam from the generator. Same principle whetehr you are heating people or 2,000 gallons of water.

Someone needs to restore a fireless so we can go experiment with it and see what works and what doesn't.

Hi,

I agree with Rick. It would be an interesting experiment.

Now many seem to be confused by my saying to put the steam directly into the input ports of the cylinders. They argue about steam tank on top.

However let's remove the tank and add an equal amount of rail in weight. What is left is a steam engine without a boiler. It is the same basic machine that takes steam pressure to horizontal motion to circular motion.

If you remove the boiler from an 0-4-0T, you have the same basic machine. It should be able to take direct steam pressure from a stationary boiler and spin the wheels (like 1218 was when it was at Union Carbide in Charleston WV).

In fact, there is no reason to take a Dockside 0-4-0t, remove its rods, set up the proper lubrication and take the steam from its boiler to a fireless cooker's steam input to the cylinders bypassing the tank on the cooker and running it.

It would be very much a Rube Goldberg contraption and not recommended BUT it could be done. Heck, in diesel terms, the fireless cooker would be a cab car and the dockside a power car. Dumb as could be but possible.

Food for thought.

Doug vV

My thought is this:

We have enough trouble gathering the resources, equipment, and talent to operate REAL steam properly. If we had this stuff, the Gramlings wouldn't be trucking around 0-4-0T's for us to play with for a couple weeks at a time.

Provided you even HAVE a fireless steamer to charge up or steam switcher to kitbash, this all sounds like a convoluted "Gedanken experiment" or "thought experiment"--doing it because you want to show you can, not to actually haul passengers or whatnot. And outside of a demonstration track outside a preserved industrial plant museum, I see no real "return on investment" in this, and think there are better things to expend money and resources upon, at least for most of our money-strapped outfits. Possible, maybe, but woefully impractical.

But, hey, don't let me stop you if you really want to try and prove me wrong. Just use your own monies, please.

Maybe I can get my little Porter pot back at some point. At 7 tons, its an ideal weight to experiment with.

Again, misinformation. There are many mechanical differences between a fireless and a conventional steam locomotive. The Johnson bar on my fireless must have had 60 notches, so I suspect the sign of a good fireless engineer was one who could nurse the heck out of it to keep it running as long as possible on a single charge. Another less obvious detail was the drifting valves which on my fireless were built into the slide valves. Very simple poppet like device, worked on gravity, and made a very cool death rattle when rolling along, while snorting a bit vi the exhaust pipes which ran out of the roof of the cab. With no fire, and the associated noises that go with a fired boiler, there is a real silence to a fireless. As you open the throttle, you can hear clearly the movement of the air (in our case) through the external throttle and to the cylinders which were mounted under the cab.

Again, we had a short track and my interest was to run on steam so had in mind a small towed firetube properly inspected boiler, keeping in mind I do have the appropriate State of NJ license.

Ultimately, if we had not sold off the Porter, the goal was to have the tank restored by an appropriate shop for proper fireless operation. We just never got to that point before we had the unexpected change in plans. In truth trying to figure out the State of NJ regulations dealing with an unfired high pressure riveted steam vessel was not terribly clear. It tends to leave the arena of boilers and you end up in the area of chemical tanks and such. Its not a boiler by definition, at least here in NJ.

Bottom line is that it is a very different experience and it would be nice to have a few in operation. In truth for some small operations, they would be ideal.

J.R. May