New Mission Impossible Train Problem

@Trainmaster04 posted:

Good evening everyone.

Just got out of the local theater and watched the newly released Mission Impossible movie. If you have not seen the film yet, it contains a very well detailed train scene… or is it.
The Orient Express’ locomotive finds itself out of control and eventually meet its end by crashing into a canyon. Hunt, Tom Cruise, realizes the train cannot be stopped and proceeds to live through a massive cinematic crash scene. This is where my detailed brain started blaring alarms. The villain destroys the train brake and the regulator handle. He did not however disable the reverser.
Correct me if I’m wrong, and place the plot aside, could Hunt just put the value gear into neutral and put on the hand brakes for the tender and coaches? I know the crew of Southern 4501 had to use the reverser to stop her when the dry pipe collapsed. So, could the same be done here? Thoughts and comments are welcomed.

Just saw the movie which is awesome by the way.  Spoiler alert ‼️. Since the train crew was dead, I’m not sure Ethan hunt was trained by the US government to run a steam engine or knows how to stop one. But yes what are the ways to stop a engine if the throttle, brake lever, and reverser were disabled/damaged.

@superwarp1 posted:

Just saw the movie which is awesome by the way.  Spoiler alert ‼️. Since the train crew was dead, I’m not sure Ethan hunt was trained by the US government to run a steam engine or knows how to stop one. But yes what are the ways to stop an engine if the throttle, brake lever, and reverser were disabled/damaged.

Indeed! It was a great movie and I cannot wait for part 2.
Fair point. Maybe the US government needs to hire some of us Train nuts just in case another situation like this happens again.

Since the fireman was manually stoking the fire, and he was killed off right before the engineer, how long would engine continue to run without coal being added?  Given how long the train sequence was, I would have thought they would at least start to slow down.

Still, movie was amazing, and the car chase was incredible.

@cnw4ever posted:

Since the fireman was manually stoking the fire, and he was killed off right before the engineer, how long would engine continue to run without coal being added?  Given how long the train sequence was, I would have thought they would at least start to slow down.

Still, movie was amazing, and the car chase was incredible.

Oh, I had not thought of that! In reality, the train would more than likely would have lost enough pressure to have slowed or stopped. Considering how fast it was going and the terrain it went through, it would needed to have been stoked fairly consistently.
Another thing to consider is the water level. I’m surprised a crown sheet plug did not blow.

It's an escapist movie, and not a documentary.

The first MI movie had them fighting on the roof of the TGV without even showing the electrical lines or pantographs required for engine power. That was more unrealistic than this.

Jim Phelps or Barney Collier or Willy Armitage would have simply uncoupled the tender, let the engine go chugging off into oblivion while the passenger cars went into emergency and stopped.

(headshake) Kids nowadays... 

-MMM-

When "October Sky" was being made, the author of the book was hired as a consultant and tried to correct one of the formulas being used during a scene.  It was a height calculation, not a distance calculation as stated in the movie.   The director said, "We are just selling popcorn here".   No correction was made.

@VHubbard posted:

When "October Sky" was being made, the author of the book was hired as a consultant and tried to correct one of the formulas being used during a scene.  It was a height calculation, not a distance calculation as stated in the movie.   The director said, "We are just selling popcorn here".   No correction was made.

Oh, that explains the early B&W movies where the steam engine (No, not an SP one!) is blowing it's horn, or the diesel (GMC/D's finest!) is blowing its whistle!!  We're just selling popcorn!

The OP's question, though, brings up a question I've often had while watching a runaway steam train: Can you drop fire on the fly to reduce speed or (maybe) minimize post-derail conflagrations and mayhem?

And, given the steps the villain takes on the movie's steamer, would that have disabled the ability to drop fire?

I know that would leave a BIG problem if a collision or derail is successfully avoided...and there's no diesel in reserve behind the tender!

Hollywood...purveyors of 'corn'...and not just the popping type.

@dkdkrd posted:

The OP's question, though, brings up a question I've often had while watching a runaway steam train: Can you drop fire on the fly to reduce speed or (maybe) minimize post-derail conflagrations and mayhem?

Theoretically, yes, but not advised. Typically dropping the fire requires either using the rockers and dropping the fire into the ash pan, which would then be doused by water, or most of the fire would be shoveled out into a pit. Dumping the fire into the ash pan without being drenched could cause damage to the pan.

By dumping the fire, the pressure would begin to drop from the lack of heat and constant consumption. It could cause the train to stop, or slow down quicker than the fact the fire is no longer being maintained and is deteriorating.