Talk:Electric locomotive

message: What's this talk under "efficiency"? If the locomotive is considered
alone, electric engines would seem to be much more efficient than steam
or diesel-electric engines. But the efficiency of the locomotive alone
does not, in any way, determine the efficiency of the whole electric
traction system. This is because the efficiencies of the power plant
and transmission system are not taken into account. If these are
considered, then electric engines would not seem to be much efficient.
How can it possibly be true? I'll bet that a powerplant is much better
at generating electricity then a diesel-engine mounted in a locomotive
---------------------------------------
The efficiency bit caught my eye too. I believe a large centralized
powerplant (read: hydroelectric or nuclear plant) would be more
efficient at producing electricity than an on-board diesel engine.
However, grid power lines will introduce losses while distributing
electricity from the centralized plants, and I'm guessing there will
also be losses moving power from the third rail to the locomotive
motors, which taken together might decrease the advantages of an
electric-only locomotive.
At least, that's how I read the section. It would be nice to see the
statement quantified in some way.
:I've eliminated most of the efficiency discussion. It was too
hypothetical. Mangoe 21:00, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Efficiency

message: There seems to be a bit of a problem here, which I've not had much luck working out through looking for references. "3 phase" seems to mean three things:
* Supply of external polyphase power to the locomotive which uses it "as is".
* Internal use of polyphase power by the motors, as converted from single phase supply power
* The inaccurate but common US usage to mean the practice of getting 220V from two 110V sources joined over a single "neutral" line
The part about use of Three-phase AC induction motors is particularly problematic. I can't find references to defend this, not to mention the sales-pitchy use of "today's advanced", but in any case the article isn't clear about the use of inverters/etc.; there's too much jargon (particularly the word "commutation") and not enough explanation of what the differences are. I'm a bit wary of doing this myself because, as I said, I'm not finding good references. Mangoe 18:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Three phase AC 

message: I am not sure what this has got to do with electric locomotives. This
relates to the electrification system, which is a completely different
subject. The interface between the locomotive and the contact system
(overhead line or conductor rail) is all that this article should
concern itself with. I strongly suggest that this section of the
article be moved to the Railway electrification system page.
ALECTRIC451 22:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Power Transmission

message: The article should be about electric locomotives, not operating
practices, how country ABC does it on railroad XYZ or the presumed
environmental friendliness of pure electric propulsion (which would
obviously apply to subways, light rail, etc.).
As for advantages or disadvantages, I seem to detect an inherent bias
in what I have read. In the large scale model railroad world we call it
"steam snobbery." All machines have pros and cons, and in the case of
locomotives, one railway's pros are another railroad's cons. In other
words, the advantages of one technology over the other matter only in
the context in which the technology is considered. For example, the
electric locomotive has zero advantages compared to steam or Diesel
power in areas where there is no electricity. For that reason, I
tend to feel that an advantages/disadvantages section may ultimately be
of minimal value.
Electric locomotives appeared before any internal combustion types,
simply because electric motors as practical power sources capable of
moving a vehicle as heavy as a locomotive predated internal combustion
engines. Steam predated electric propulsion because it was the only
means at the time to propel a train. So, does that make steam "better"
than electricity or an electric unit better than its Diesel
counterpart? I think not!
BDD 00:05, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Politicization

message: Where should there be info about the part of the transmission that lies between the pantograph (or shoes) and the motor(s)? How is the current controlled and converted? What semiconductors and other choppers or switches or rheostats have been part of past designs and are part of more recent designs? How does this compare to electric transmissions in hybrid automobiles, boats, ships, submarines, switch engines used to haul ships through canals, etc.? Jack
Waugh 22:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pantograph to Motor 

message: The "current situation" section was intended as a replacement for the general "advantages"/"disadvantages"-section, and not as an in-depth description of the developments in the various countries. I guess the title was a very bad choice. Anyway, I think the details about Australia belong to a specific article about electric traction in Australia, and not in this article. --Kabelleger 18:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I have created a separate article for one of the locomotive classes and trimmed this article back to represent a discussion of the recent departure of the electric locomotive from areas of Australia, as well as its recent success in Queensland. Zzrbiker 03:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have changed the title to one that (hopefully) better represents the idea of that section. --[User:Kabelleger|Kabelleger]] 20:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

text:  That's why the article says "most". Feel free to add a section about Japan with more details... --Kabelleger 10:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My personal feeling is that this section is so generalised (eg describing the situation of multiple countries in Asia as being "similar to that in the US", but without any explanation/justification) it should probably be deleted until someone has something more factual to add. There's many countries in Asia that are engaging in widespread electrification projects (eg China, India, Korea to name but a few). Zzrbiker 03:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok I removed it entirely (better don't write anything than something wrong). I was under the impression that Japan was more or less the only country with widely electrified rail networks, which does not seem to be the case. --Kabelleger 20:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Its not my area of expertise at all but i know India has adopted it over a long period of time (there is quiet a good article on India). The problem is "Asia" is a very large (people, area and countries) at varying levels of development meaning catch all phrases are dangerously over simplistic. Pickle 17:09, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current situation 

message: I prefer electric train title, where electric locomotive is a big and important section. --Mac 15:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: IIRC (see train), train refers to the whole formation, be it loco and carriages or multiple units (EMU/DMU, etc) or just a loco on its own. In this sense maybe "electric train" should be a disambig page overing EMUs and this page as choices. Pickle 18:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electric train 

message: If the motors are mounted right by wheels, does that mean that the body of a typical electic locomotive is mostly an empty shell?  Obviously there needs to be a control cab (but that's small, juding from what I've seen on passenger cars with a cab), and if dynamic breaking is used, the resistors need to be mounted somewhere, but what other parts are there?  I imagine there might be transformers to convert the voltage from the overhead lines to what is needed by the motors and any passenger cars, and probably some equipment to supply braking energy to the cars.
I guess the related question is whether there's much equipment in an electic locomotive, or whether it would be easy to mount those parts on a passenger car with a cab to build an EMU. JNW2 16:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mostly Empty Locomotive Body?

message: The article mentions regenerative braking.  I'm curious how common this is.  The system that varies the power going into the traction motor might become more complicated if it needs to be able to function correctly in reverse; perhaps the article could explore that in more detail.  JNW2 16:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Regenerative Braking

message: In the second para, it is said "Also the power for electric locomotives can come from clean and renewable sources, including hydroelectric power, solar power, and wind turbines.". Solar power and power from wind turbines is intermittent. For example, solar power is only available when the sun is shining, and is therefore unsuitable for powering a train. Ccfn (talk) 02:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Noone says that wind or solar power *alone* are suitable to power trains. If there is not enough wind or sunshine, power can come e.g. from Pumped-storage hydroelectricity plants, which can store wind or solar energy, or from hydroelectric plants that provide electricity on demand. Moreover, if wind or solar power is distributed over a wider area, power generation becomes more and more constant overall. Thus, wind and solar power are very suitable for powering trains (or anything else). --Kabelleger (talk) 08:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

text: At least in Europe, railway power grids are interconnected with public power grids (even if frequencies are different, in which case mechanical converters are used) and electricity is bought from and sometimes (especially here in Switzerland) even sold to the public power grid. So railway companies do not need to have their own pumped storage plants. Many railways don't even have any power plants themselves, so the problem of leveling out electricity production is shifted to public grids anyway. --Kabelleger (talk) 12:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Characteristics

message: The first sentence in this newly labelled paragraph is: "The first known electric locomotive was built by"... etc. Seems contradictory, given that RT systems aren't usually loco-hauled. Proposing a revert. --Old Moonraker (talk) 17:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There's definitely a shift from DC to AC but the implicit assertion that DC was basically for transit systems isn't true, as the text indicates. Mangoe (talk) 18:09, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the fix. --Old Moonraker (talk) 20:45, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  New level-3 header "Electric traction in suburban and metropolitan transit systems" 

message: DC traction means only suburban and metropolitan trains. The real so-called locomotives which are not local but long-distance trains are always AC tractions. Some modern locomotives ( like TGV) have very serious AC/DC converters and phase conventers, therefore the most modern trains can use DC, but  O N L Y when they entered the suburban area
:First of all, Stubes99, sign your messages. Second, I can see for myself that (for example) all Italian passenger service from the 1930s on, at least, is DC-powered. Your absolute statements simply aren't correct. Mangoe (talk) 19:57, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: There are not DC Locomotives

message: A Discovery channel program "Massive machines" with a Chris. Claims the first electric train In Switzerland was built and run in 1829. Being able to run at 6 km/h with passengers facing the side of the train (b/w photo was shown). The reason for electric power was coal demand, and a surplus of high mountains and water = hydropower. Electron9 (talk) 01:46, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: History of rail transport in Switzerland claims that the first railways in the country were built in the 1844-45 era, so I think a prior claim is dubious. Mangoe (talk) 15:41, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discovery channel claims 1829 as a first 

message: I find it odd that Battery locomotive is a section of Electric locomotive, but then again, I notice that Electric Vehicle includes both rail and non-railed vehicles (ie buses and cars).  I may be wrong, but I have always associated electric locomotives with an electrified railway, whereas non-railed electric vehicles are powered by batteries (or capacitors); I have never thought of a trolleybus as an electric bus, because the latter traditionally ran soley off batteries (unlike more modern hybrids).  I also note that whilst the electric bus article includes trolleybus as a non-autonomous electric bus, it then just occasionally refers to the trolleybus article.
Just to complicate matters further the Electric Vehicle article says it is also referred to as an electric drive vehicle, and specifically includes onboard generation, as in a diesel-electric locomotive or most electro-diesel locomotives.  I think that approach is wrong, and just leads to a messy article with much information that should be hived off into separate more specific articles, as with electric bus vs trolleybus and electric locomotive vs diesel-electric locomotive.
So, should there be a separate battery locomotive (akabattery-electric locomotive) article as with buses, or should the information be kept here, with the current redirects onto this section, on the basis that it's still an electric locomotive? Tim PF (talk) 17:09, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battery locomotive 

message: The caption and  title of this image suggests that these are the controls of an electric locomotive, but there is also a link to an external view here—it's an EMU. I suppose we should take it out, for accuracy. Views? --Old Moonraker (talk) 05:23, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I would have no problem in leaving it. I would certainly leave it unless we have a better image that's from a "canonical electric locomotive". This is not only an EMU, it's a narrow-gauge EMU, it's a Swiss EMU and (like any image) it illustrates the technology of a particular decade. Either of those make just as much difference to the cab image as being a MU/locomotive does. It's a fair illustrative image of electric traction in general - any other image would be equally subjective, just in a different way. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, but let's remove "locomotive" from the caption. What about the rather fuzzy "unit" instead? Any other suggestions for wording? --Old Moonraker (talk) 21:21, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Removing locomotive is fine by me, as it's inaccurate. I'd call it a motorcoach, because that's what it is and how it's described at Luzern–Stans–Engelberg-Bahn. It's not a "unit" because it's a rack railway and so I doubt very much if this train can have its components easily uncoupled and re-arranged. Usually the bottom vehicle on a rack is the specialised power & brake car and the top vehicle is a driving trailer. They might not (although I don't think this applies here) even be built on the level, so even the trailer coaches can only be used one way round. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:39, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Switched to a picture found on the Russian Wikipedia article. It looks pretty "canonical" to me! --Old Moonraker (talk) 09:21, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image of [[Electric multiple unit|EMU]] 

message: One can read the passages cited from Duffy online, and the quite clearly do not support any priority claims for Kando other than the use of single-phase transmission to three-phase motors. On p. 116: "The first railway to use three-phase supply and three-phase induction motors was the Lugarno tramway, on which Brown installed a 40 Hz system in 1896." Kando's system is shown as not being put into action until three years later. At the very least, Duffy does not say that Kando was first at AC traction. Mangoe (talk) 17:56, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Tagged . --Old Moonraker (talk) 12:21, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What Duffy actually says 

message: SQM operates probably some of the world's oldest (built around 1927) electric locomotives still in regular service, and much of the infrastructure is about the same age, in particular the overhead line. Might be an interesting addition to the article, but I'm not sure if it fits and where to put it, since the article seems a bit over-illustrated already. If desired I can also provide other pictures. --Kabelleger (talk) 21:27, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  SQM Boxcabs 289A 

message: since it and the rest of the article are large.  But what to call it ? History of electric railways seems better than History of electric locomotives since the locomotives depend on the electric generators (stationary or on-board)? - Rod57 (talk) 10:27, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could split out History section into its own article 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Electric locomotive. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080530050949/http://www.victorianrailways.net/vr%20history/history.html to http://www.victorianrailways.net/vr%20history/history.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070507120820/http://locopage.railpage.org.au:80/qr/33003400.html to http://locopage.railpage.org.au/qr/33003400.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:35, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Electric locomotive. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110717113122/http://www.turnagaintimes.com/current%20issue/4-17-08/solarwind.html to http://www.turnagaintimes.com/current%20issue/4-17-08/solarwind.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:50, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The lead section mentions that a supercapacitor could be the power source for an electric locomotive?  Can someone cite an example of such a locomotive?
216.152.18.131 (talk) 21:38, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.--217.155.32.221 (talk) 23:28, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Supercapacitor power? 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
* 
* 
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:13, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion