|
sigher posted:I don't give a single loving poo poo about how dangerous this is it's loving amazing and I want to see it in a Mad Max film. gently caress that, I want one.
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 13:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 00:11 |
|
|
Scratch Monkey posted:THE EYES DON’T WORK! Her first mistake was wearing a helmet instead of an ice cream container.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 13:54
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg1NCNh1Sdc
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 15:09
|
|
|
That couldn't have been cheap.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 15:15
|
|
|
I like how you can hear the high-speed cameras start up as it goes over the cliff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 15:25
|
|
|
Given the history of the films, I'm 50/50 if Tom Cruise was riding the train all the way down.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 15:32
|
|
|
Iron Crowned posted:gently caress that, I want one. Pfft, call me once he upgraded to one without the lame training wheels  
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 16:04
|
|
|
CRUSTY MINGE posted:That couldn't have been cheap. well a 1/87 scale model of that steam engine is $265.09 so it should cost about $22k for the full size, right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 16:07
|
|
|
Back to the Future just used a model and it looked real enough.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 16:10
|
|
|
punishedkissinger posted:well a 1/87 scale model of that steam engine is $265.09 so it should cost about $22k for the full size, right? If we assume price is proportial to volume, rather than length, it would be $265*87^3, or $175M
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 16:20
|
|
|
poo poo if that's actually being propelled by steam I was hoping for a boiler explosion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 16:21
|
|
|
If any movie had steam engine crash money it'd be an MI. But since it just went smash instead of kaboom I could be convinced that's a simpler engine clad to look like a cool steam train.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 16:24
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm not a train guy, but it would be a shame to smash up an actual steam train if it was still working. I assume they just build up a realistic looking steam train around something cheap and then rigged it to billow smoke. Edit: Oh wow, talk about movie goof ups. The full size train used for the non-crashing scenes in Back to the Future was Sierra Railway No. 3, which was built in 1891, six years after when the movie takes place. I hope someone got fired over that blunder. Cojawfee fucked around with this message at 16:31 on Aug 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 16:27
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:it would be a shame to smash up an actual steam train if it was still working. lol why?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 16:34
|
|
|
LifeSunDeath posted:lol why? Steam trains are cool, they’re not being made any more, and they belong in museums.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 16:36
|
|
|
sigher posted:Saw this in Vegas over the weekend: Tesla not even trying to hide the disdain for their occupants anymore
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 16:39
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Steam trains are cool, they’re not being made any more, and they belong in museums. Still, I think we should sacrifice one or two for the new Mission: Impossible movie
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 16:46
|
|
|
It's not like the technology died with their common use. We can still build steam engines. I was thinking more total costs, between whatever the steamer cost, and clean up for chucking it into a river. Where'd they film that scene? Cojawfee posted:Yeah, I'm not a train guy, but it would be a shame to smash up an actual steam train if it was still working. I assume they just build up a realistic looking steam train around something cheap and then rigged it to billow smoke. Now I'm curious if they rigged up a launch system like an aircraft carrier catapult or something. CRUSTY MINGE fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Aug 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 16:56
|
|
|
sigher posted:I don't give a single loving poo poo about how dangerous this is it's loving amazing and I want to see it in a Mad Max film. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eW_XXIn6CU
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 17:08
|
|
|
Antigravitas posted:
Warning sign: AUFZUG GESPERRT! Me: haha aufzug goes brrt *dies falling down empty elevator shaft*
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 17:09
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Still, I think we should sacrifice one or two for the new Mission: Impossible movie It’s like trophy hunting: you charge rich bastards for the privilege of destroying a few precious things to fund conservation of the rest.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 17:13
|
|
|
https://i.imgur.com/hiSnrnf.gifv
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 17:20
|
|
|
CRUSTY MINGE posted:It's not like the technology died with their common use. We can still build steam engines. If money is no object, sure. But it is, and no factory has the tooling or molds to produce the thousands of parts needed to build a steam engine. So for all practical purposes, we can't really build a steam engine anymore.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 17:23
|
|
|
ESDK posted:Pfft, call me once he upgraded to one without the lame training wheels  e: Buster Keaton's General already did that in 1926 with a record budget of $750,000 (equivalent to $11,567,923 in 2021 bucks) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCH-tUmMl7Q&t=72s Of course it wouldn't be a Buster Keaton movie without everything in the production being hugely OSHA related! quote:According to a United Artists press release at the time, the film had 3,000 people on its payroll and cost $400 an hour to make.[7] Entertainment trade papers reported rumors that the film's budget had grown to between $500,000 and $1 million, and that Keaton was out of control, building real bridges and having dams constructed in order to change the depth of rivers. Producer Schenck was angry at Keaton over the growing costs. There were also numerous on-set accidents that contributed to the growing budget. This included Keaton being knocked unconscious; an assistant director being shot in the face with a blank cartridge; a train wheel running over a brakeman's foot, resulting in a $2,900 lawsuit; and the train's wood-burning engine causing numerous fires. The fires often spread to forests and farmers' haystacks, which cost the production $25 per burnt stack. There's also a bit of, uh, damper in the background of the movie. It's still a masterpiece but one sympathetic to the South, maybe partly because Keaton loved Birth of A Nation as a kid, but also because audiences of the time expected that sort of treatment. https://daily.jstor.org/what-drove-buster-keaton-to-try-a-civil-war-comedy/ Nenonen fucked around with this message at 17:47 on Aug 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 17:29
|
|
|
Bloody Hedgehog posted:If money is no object, sure. But it is, and no factory has the tooling or molds to produce the thousands of parts needed to build a steam engine. The wikipedia for steam locomotives would love to disagree with you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_locomotives_of_the_21st_century There's a list of recently completed, and currently under construction steam engines.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 17:32
|
|
|
During the war, Switzerland retrofitted some steam locomotives to use electric boilers. The country faced coal shortages, but their hydroelectric dams kept working so they were good on that front. Unfortunately, all were converted back to coal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 17:41
|
|
|
Bloody Hedgehog posted:If money is no object, sure. But it is, and no factory has the tooling or molds to produce the thousands of parts needed to build a steam engine. Steam power is deceptively simple and we're much better at making wild poo poo than the we were in the 1860s. 3d printing obviates the need for casting for small runs and high end manufacturing is going closed-loop finally so CNC accuracy is wild. We absolutely can make them, and I see another train weird showed that too. It's mostly a question of how you produce the steam engine most economically for your market. A steam train may be more attractive for a sugar plantation since they'll have ample plant matter to feed boilers with as part of processing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 17:44
|
|
|
Samuel L. Hacksaw posted:A steam train may be more attractive for a sugar plantation since they'll have ample plant matter to feed boilers with as part of processing. Some industrial facilities used steam engines with no fireboxes at all. If you’re already producing superheated steam for your sawmill or whatever, you can just squirt the superhot water into a locomotive’s tank and drive the pistons off that for a short while. Fake edit: They’re called fireless locomotives and as of 2017, at least two sugar mills in Indonesia used them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 17:53
|
|
|
I bet we can build boilers a thousand times stronger than 100 years ago. It should be possible to build a modern "steam engine" that burns bio fuel to spin a turbine to power traction motors and it could probably look just like a diesel locomotive
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 18:16
|
|
|
FuturePastNow posted:I bet we can build boilers a thousand times stronger than 100 years ago. It should be possible to build a modern "steam engine" that burns bio fuel to spin a turbine to power traction motors and it could probably look just like a diesel locomotive https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkGMY63FF3Q
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 18:17
|
|
|
FuturePastNow posted:I bet we can build boilers a thousand times stronger than 100 years ago. It should be possible to build a modern "steam engine" that burns bio fuel to spin a turbine to power traction motors and it could probably look just like a diesel locomotive Turbines are not well suited to moving vehicles, as it is difficult to change their speed. They're best suited to constant speed uses, like power generation. Piston engines are less efficient, but handle changing load situations much better.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 18:25
|
|
|
https://i.imgur.com/wl2Pivf.mp4
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 18:28
|
|
|
CVT transmissions don't seem to mind picking an RPM range and sticking to it while fluctuating output speed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 18:28
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:During the war, Switzerland retrofitted some steam locomotives to use electric boilers. The country faced coal shortages, but their hydroelectric dams kept working so they were good on that front. Did they use batteries as an electric source, or did they run overhead lines?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 18:34
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Did they use batteries as an electric source, or did they run overhead lines? Overhead lines, and it looked so wrong. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 18:37
|
|
|
In world wars electric locomotives also had the benefit of not causing big visible plumes that would draw attention.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 18:54
|
|
|
Pretty cool though
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 18:56
|
|
|
FuturePastNow posted:I bet we can build boilers a thousand times stronger than 100 years ago. It should be possible to build a modern "steam engine" that burns bio fuel to spin a turbine to power traction motors and it could probably look just like a diesel locomotive
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 18:56
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:In world wars electric locomotives also had the benefit of not causing big visible plumes that would draw attention. It’s Switzerland. If anything, they wanted to be seen. The German town of Konstanz, on the Swiss border, kept their lights on all war, reasoning that Allied planes would assume they were looking at a neutral Swiss town. The ruse worked.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 19:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 00:11 |
|
|
Right, I was speaking more generally.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2021 19:03
|
|