Saturday, on the Sci-Fi channel, “Atomic Train” will start at 6, or 7pm. I’m not sure which one, but I know it comes on. I saw Sci-Fi’s ads for it while watching the 4th of July Twilight Zone marathon.
THIS IS A VERY GOOD MOVIE! (In my opinion)
[8]TrainFreak409[8]
I hate to think what Hollywood did with the concept, but there really was a proposal by either Union Pacific or Southern Pacific, to build a nuclear powered train using submarine components. If I recall correctly, the major obstacle that caused them to abandon the idea was the amount of water that would have to be hauled along.
I think that one of the unmanned thingies going to jupiter is nuc-powered. If nuc can be that small, I don’t know why it can’t fit in a train. Cornfield meets, however, would add a new dimension with mushroom clouds.
Dave Vergun
I remember a movie about a runaway train carrying a nuclear warhead. It derailed, and, well, I won’t give away the end. I wonder if that is this movie. No, the train was not nuclear powered. There was a movie about a nuclear-powered bus once, though. Too bad we don’t have cable, dish, etc…
-Jer
O.K
I won’t give the ending or climax away.
Basically a train carrying a nuclear weapon, unknown to the crew. A mishap occurs on the train and things get hairy from there.
Interesting info: For you BONANZA fans, the engineer of one of the trains is the actor who played “Candy Cartwright”, the guy who replaced Pernell Roberts (Adam Cartwright) on the 1960s show. Aired now on syndication-still a super good program.
Krauss Maffei from Germany had planed a nuclear locomotive in the 60´s. The engine was planed as a articulated engine with three trucks. The middle truck was very strong to carry the reactor above it. No one as built, but imagine:
An engine which runs one billion kilometers without refilling…
then name of the shortline in the movie atomic train was Texas, Colorado & Northern Railroad. the train shots were shot on the BC Rail lines in british columbia
I watched this movie.
Bad plot, bad technicle advisement, bad special effects, bad communiactions between crew and dispatcher, and worst of all. bad railroading.
After about 15 minuts I left and went and saw “The Terminal” starring Tom Hanks at the local movie house. Much better theatric expereince in my opinion.
You want to see a good train movie, see “Emperor of the North” starring Lee Marvin, and Earnest Borgnighn. That move even shows real railroading.
James
I’m not sure how it works, but the reactors on the Voyager probes (and Pioneer as well?) rely on the direct conversion of particles given off by plutonium oxide to electricity. This is not your typical boiler-type reactor. I’m not sure if it would work on a large scheme, but I personally don’t want huge piles of plutonium hurtling down the tracks.
FWIW, I grew up near a nuke plant - one that was on the NRC watch list more often than not. I grew up with this stuff, so it’s not far-out science to me.
COOL!!!
During the 1950’s David P. Morgan, writing in Trains Magazine, often referred to possible development of a nuclear locomotive. Then in one issue Dr. Edward Teller was quoted saying that was the dumbest and most dangerous idea he ever heard. And that was the last mention of the subject by Mr. Morgan.
It seems to me that they actually started to build the prototype for the nuclear powered locomotive, but it was never fueled up. I think Badger Willcox built the power plant and GE did the motive section. As I recall after it was abandoned the prototype was placed in a park on display. I seem to recall that the park was wither north of Milwaukee (maybe Brown Deer) or on the northern end of Racine. But that was a long time ago and I’m a bit fuzzy on the details.