I didn’t mind at all waiting for this train. The whole thing.
Might have been 100 blades. Each blade 3 cars long. Sharing on each end.
Neato. Where?
Bozeman, MT. Headed West.
Been seeing them, along with generators and nacelles since 2002 on UP’s Spine going to Manly Terminal. I am sure now most of the major projects up here are finished, so they are using it as a staging for smaller projects or as a distribution point. It supported projects in the North Central Iowa and S. Minnesota area, where I would say roughly there are about 1,000 turbines.
We are dwarfed however by Buffalo Ridge, which is rapidly seeing a wind turbine density increasing in Iowa, Minnesota, and S. Dakota. In keeping with the area’s renewable energy assets, the plants in Lakota and Superior in Iowa, and Winnebago in MN use only wind generated power for their ethanol plants. Winnebago, MN located along the IC&E might very well qualify as the most energy efficient project of them all, with it’s use of wind (which they own), corn, and a fluidized bed combustion for bio-mass as process heat. To be sure, they are the most innovative! And for such a small plant, highly price competitive.
…Good Catch…! And good pic.
When I saw the picture I thought I was looking at snow-banks. Wow! I had no idea they were that big! Thanks for the posting!
You need to drive through a Wind Farm sometime. I-65 between Indy & Chicago has a decent one.
The ones near me are over 300 feet in Diameter. The Towers they are on are close to 500 feet high alone. We have over 400 in my area.
Wow: They just keep getting bigger (longer?) and bigger. I suppose that the longer they are the more efficient and the slower the blade tip speed will be. Appies to airplane props. It may be the blade size will be limited by the oversize capability of the various RRs?
Okay, you have me on this one: how the heck does someone own the wind?
Tagging on:
The ones I photographed heading toward Michigan’s Thumb were anchored to special flatcars. The base of the blade was anchored to a fixture on the car, and the overlapping one was pointing the opposite direction. Two blades spanned three flatcars. That would give them a length of over one hundred feet. That’s a WAG. Yes, the towers are between three and four hundred feet tall. The FAA is currently looking at them to be lighted as hazards to navigation, and possibly require painting and lighting.
The turbines and their nacelles were loaded about one to three to flatcar if memory serves.That would make the blades over one hundred feet long. They should have some paint on the towers and blades to identify them.
cannot touch that with a 10 ft pole. Clearance requirements have changed so much over the years that who knows?? FCC used to require all radio broadcasting towers to be lighted and painted but that has changed. Just look at most cell phone towers. If a tower or building breaks a certain slanted plane (maybe 100/1) they still have to be lighted but don’t quote me. That is from any certified landing whether airport, heliport, or some sea ports? Also building above a certain height above ground level and also so close in altitude to a federal airway.
What the rules are now I give up.
Great and unique photo - well worth the wait. [bow] Have never seen anything like that, and wouldn’t much believe it without seeing it like this - but it makes a lot of sense. Thanks for sharing !
Now: Think about how to erect and especially inspect and maintain those wind turbines . . . [:-^] Here’s a link to a photo of one tool for that - a “Bronto Skylift”, which presently can go to 112 meters (367.5 ft. +/-) - just looking at this photo and thinking about the swaying in any kind of breeze or resting on ground other than a real rigid slab kind of gives me the willies:
http://www.bronto.fi/imagebankview.aspx?id=569&s=2
Windpower brochure: http://www.bronto.fi/sivu.aspx?taso=1&id=282#409
Home page - you fellows in the fire service probably already know about these: http://www.bronto.fi/sivu.aspx?taso=0&id=10
- Paul North.
I looked over the obstruction light requirements a few years ago due to a project near an airport. Then the requirement to submit plans to the FAA was if the obstruction is 150 above ground level. The elevation decreases near airports (and helipads). There are two slopes, one for runways longer than a certain length and another for runways shorter than a certain length. The FAA would then determine what was necessary.
Was that train really 300 units long (those look like spine cars)?
I don’t know how long it really was.
I was just surprised that the train cars kept coming; more and more and more…
I thought maybe one of you might be in the business and would come up with the manifest for that load to tell us how many there really were and where they came from and where they were going… [8D]
Each blade is 3 cars long, 100 blades= 300 cars, I would like to see a train with 300 cars, is this possible? ?
I am amending my original statement.
The blades share a car on the narrow end. So it is only 2 1/2 cars per blade, isn’t it? Plus the extra one on the end…
The blades share a car on the narrow end. So it is only 2 1/2 cars per blade, isn’t it? Plus the extra on the end…
Well, not 300 cars long, only 250! are there trains 250 cars long travelling the rails in the U.S. ?
Most of the ones we load out at Greensport have the round end that mounts to the hub riding on a “sled” that can move side to side on the flat car, and the pointed end in a fixed rack.
The blades are quite flexable, I can push on the pointed end and “bend” the blade easily.
The pointed ends are set so that for a pair of blades, they point at each other, and share an idler or spacer car between the two.
This way, you only need 3 cars for two blades.
Clearence is not much of a issue, the blades fit inside a plate C or D clearence even with the ends hanging over an idler.