OOPS… RERUN!

You posted this back in 2008 from a different mag with more info.
http://blog.modernmecha…

Brilliant! Batteries to power pumps to compress air to drive the train! I wish I lived in these times, if this guy could get funding for this stuff, the stars would be the limit for me.

At a local model railroad show, the large-scale modelers demonstrate their steam engines with compressed air.

Along the lines of what Christoph said, what charges the batteries, a diesel engine? The article says “Should the pressure in the tanks drop”, as if that is not too likely to happen, and the batteries are just for emergency.

Quote from previous article about this train – Inventor Boyette claims his invention is quite simple, even though it is contrary to all principles of engineering.

Yup, its a perpetual motion machine which he admits leaks a tiny little bit.

Perpetual motion seems to be the “thing” for all compressed air systems no matter when then are made.

http://www.youtube.com/…

Compressed air is an attempt at addressing the biggest problem we have with energy systems and that is storage. There is a big waste in electricity production in that systems have to built to meet peak demand yet that production is wasted off peak. Currently there are several systems that store off peak production by pumping water into a reservoir, but this is only suitable for very large systems. Small systems could take advantage of compressed air as a clean storage medium.

Take your pick, pneumatic, hydraulic, steam or electric– all have been used for railroad purposes.

The basic idea using a compressor or generator as a brake, regenerative braking, is used in today’s hybrid automobiles.

Intesting, the previous link which Gazzie pointed to portrays this as a perpetual motion machine, with both the air compressor and the battery charging generator being powered by the wheels, which in turn get their power from the compressed air. Thermodynamics makes that kind of operation impossible. But this particular article here is shy on details, and makes no obvious blatantly impossible claims, just saying that “Boyette claims the advantage of exceptional economy”.

Wonder if the Popular Science editors somehow refused to run claims that were obviously contrary to thermodynamics? But if they recognized the impossibility of the claims, why did they give the kook any publicity at all?

To be fair, the Modern Mechanix editors did note that the device was “contrary to all principles of engineering”.

Both articles ran in Feb of 1934.

It is hard to tell with these old grainy photos, but are we looking at a model (mockup) or a prototype? If a protoype I am impressed with how much money it must have cost.

Even if the guy wasn’t claiming the magic self-charging perpetual motion (or if Popular Science cut those parts), it’d be hard to make a decent argument for hauling heavy batteries to run a compressor rather than just skipping the compressed-air stage altogether.

I suppose it might make sense if it could get hundreds of miles on the compression tanks, and the batteries really were just an emergency measure, but I find that unlikely.

Why does that look like a radiator on the front? Probably to cool the gasoline engine that runs a generator that powers an electric fan that brings air to the coal fire that is used to make steam that runs the pump to fuel the diesel engine that compresses air in emergencies.

By George ^^ you are right!!

Well, here is the patent he received for his idea.

Assigned to the Boyette Air Electric Car Company of Florida. Gee, do you think that they are still in business?