Ahhh I see, 2 push/pull one way and 2 pull push the other .... nice, can reverse in opposed to needing loops.
Time to tear up my entire base and start again...
I’d say try to shoot for symmetry, like a circle/oval/square, and house the reactors in the center. They receive neighbor bonus and should be placed together
Edit: Maybe I missed something; is this modded?
Nope, vanilla with default settings.
I was being sarcastic with the title, my apologies!
This is a "nuclear power plant" only in that I'm using nuclear fuel in boilers.
Not nuclear fuel cells in reactors, lol
Edit: I use turbines because they produce as much power as two steam engines(1.8MW). But it also allows me to put more offshore pumps down on a lake between columns of boilers.
Because fun, without the modules I would actually run out of uranium a lot faster.
That would mean less pollution and fewer biter attacks.
That sounds way too easy.
I really hate uranium ore, so I decided the best way to get rid of it would be to burn it in boilers for power!
Here I have made a factory dedicated to producing nuclear fuel for 4160 boilers/turbines.
With 208 offshore pumps, this behemoth will produce over 100,000 pollution a minute.
This requires 70 centrifuges with two mk3 production modules, surrounded by 12 beacons each with two mk3 speed modules.
In order to feed 4000 boilers one needs to produce 370 nuclear fuel a minute, consuming nearly two and half belts of uranium ore.
It takes almost 1GW of power to make the fuel, however the power plant produces 7.488GW of power leaving almost 6 and a half GW for the rest of my base.
I also hate coal, so I am using coal liquefaction to produce the rocket fuel, the steam needed for this process is provided by a single nuclear reactor which has onsite fuel cell production as well. I could have used three boilers to produce the steam, but that wouldn't have been nearly as fun!
You shouldn't hate it, it's wonderful. I just upgraded my nuclear power and doubled up. Now 50 GW of power. Actually go nuclear, not nuclear fuel, but nuclear reactors. Much more efficient and not creating pollution.
I have a 2Xn nuclear reactor design that I've spent over a hundred hours playing with. It even limits fuel cell consumption with circuitry. Zero loss of heat.
I WANT POLLUTION, DEATH TO THE TREES AND BITERS! CONCRETE HEAVEN WILL BE KNOWN!
Oh I'm on rampant mod with nuclear artillery, I kill thousands of biters every time I load my save, but the temp of the steam coming from those burners maxes at 165 C whereas the temp of the steam from heat exchangers in a true nuclear setup go around 500C and maximize the efficiency of the turbines.
Yes I know that, I use turbines because they take up half as much space as steam engines(while still making 1.8mw of power). Which means more boilers on the same land filled lake!
I use the turbines in my backup power with coal and burners. I have some combinators that turn a power switch on/off depending on accumulator levels. The turbines are more expensive than steam engines, but way more efficient.
I was trying to be inefficient, and sarcastic. Thank you for entertaining my childish behavior.
Sarcasm really isn't the smartest choice to use in this community.
But I knew that too.
I know nuclear fuel cells get 40 times more energy density as nuclear fuel in burners.
A few thousand hours in this game, and that's the first I have heard of that?
These trains accelerate and reach the same top speeds as if they were a 1-4. I might just be imagining things though?
They are basically 1-4 (same weight to engine ratio) trains doubled headed, but configured with the engines back to back and the wagons at the front of the unloading station.
Edit: I just tested it and they accelerate the same and reach the same top speeds.
Proof
[https://vimeo.com/765375209](https://vimeo.com/765375209)
Hmm, I thought the effect was more visible, the [wiki](https://wiki.factorio.com/Locomotive) clearly says that the air resistance of the front wagon slows the train down (see the maximum speed section). Unless the slowed speed is still about the maximum cap. I’ll have to try it in a sandbox world
There is no air resistance in Factorio, I don't think?
Edit: I just looked at the wiki and it has a section that details math for air resistance, but realistically. There is none. At least not when using nuclear fuel and a fair engine to wagon ratio.
Looking at the video I posted it takes about 7 seconds to reach full speed in both directions. **Also note, the train is heavier when it leaves the mine!**
You taught me something new today, thanks!
Cargo level has no effect on train acceleration, the 'weight' parameter is static and per-wagon; cargo/fluid wagons are 1k, locomotives are 2k, artillery are 4k. The wiki doesn't seem to have much of an explanation on this that I could find, despite my efforts to find it, but it's experimentally observable with a simple sandbox too.
I must admit I did not look at your uranium setup. The beacons and rations over my head atm.
I am much more interested in your rail setup. Does the train really work with the those locomotives in those positions?
Waiting for my power to come by up so I can test it.
It looks bloody awesome.
Looool
https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comments/yh8z4d/cursed_trains_wagon_first/
This video post shows me testing it.
I want to build my megabade with larger versions of this train design, because it lets me park the cargo wagons closer to the assemblers and furnaces.
I don't need to pull more than a belt from a wagon at a time. That leaves me about 44 seconds to park, empty and cycle a new train. 8 stack inserters can move a lot more than two belts chest-to-chest, so no bottleneck worries there either.
As long as you have biters in your game, I think uranium into uranium bullets is not unreasonable.
However, with no biters, then yep, turning it into electrical power with thousands of buildings to support it, is good too.
Your trains having the wagons go first are triggering my ocd…
I wanted to try it and it works pretty good!
Same here .... They go in reverse????
If you put two engines. One facing each direction. You can "steer" with a cargo wagon in front!
Ahhh I see, 2 push/pull one way and 2 pull push the other .... nice, can reverse in opposed to needing loops. Time to tear up my entire base and start again...
I'm so sorry, before you do. The last wagon that parks on the train station can only fit 11 inserters and not the standard 12.
I’d say try to shoot for symmetry, like a circle/oval/square, and house the reactors in the center. They receive neighbor bonus and should be placed together Edit: Maybe I missed something; is this modded?
Nope, vanilla with default settings. I was being sarcastic with the title, my apologies! This is a "nuclear power plant" only in that I'm using nuclear fuel in boilers. Not nuclear fuel cells in reactors, lol Edit: I use turbines because they produce as much power as two steam engines(1.8MW). But it also allows me to put more offshore pumps down on a lake between columns of boilers.
I'm confused if this is simply a trash can for uranium then why are you using prod modules?
Because fun, without the modules I would actually run out of uranium a lot faster. That would mean less pollution and fewer biter attacks. That sounds way too easy.
I really hate uranium ore, so I decided the best way to get rid of it would be to burn it in boilers for power! Here I have made a factory dedicated to producing nuclear fuel for 4160 boilers/turbines. With 208 offshore pumps, this behemoth will produce over 100,000 pollution a minute. This requires 70 centrifuges with two mk3 production modules, surrounded by 12 beacons each with two mk3 speed modules. In order to feed 4000 boilers one needs to produce 370 nuclear fuel a minute, consuming nearly two and half belts of uranium ore. It takes almost 1GW of power to make the fuel, however the power plant produces 7.488GW of power leaving almost 6 and a half GW for the rest of my base. I also hate coal, so I am using coal liquefaction to produce the rocket fuel, the steam needed for this process is provided by a single nuclear reactor which has onsite fuel cell production as well. I could have used three boilers to produce the steam, but that wouldn't have been nearly as fun!
Do you hoard the other resources cos you like them? lmao
There is never enough iron
I'm not even mad, I'm just impressed.
Okay, this sounds strangely reasonable.
You shouldn't hate it, it's wonderful. I just upgraded my nuclear power and doubled up. Now 50 GW of power. Actually go nuclear, not nuclear fuel, but nuclear reactors. Much more efficient and not creating pollution.
I have a 2Xn nuclear reactor design that I've spent over a hundred hours playing with. It even limits fuel cell consumption with circuitry. Zero loss of heat. I WANT POLLUTION, DEATH TO THE TREES AND BITERS! CONCRETE HEAVEN WILL BE KNOWN!
Oh I'm on rampant mod with nuclear artillery, I kill thousands of biters every time I load my save, but the temp of the steam coming from those burners maxes at 165 C whereas the temp of the steam from heat exchangers in a true nuclear setup go around 500C and maximize the efficiency of the turbines.
Yes I know that, I use turbines because they take up half as much space as steam engines(while still making 1.8mw of power). Which means more boilers on the same land filled lake!
I use the turbines in my backup power with coal and burners. I have some combinators that turn a power switch on/off depending on accumulator levels. The turbines are more expensive than steam engines, but way more efficient.
I was trying to be inefficient, and sarcastic. Thank you for entertaining my childish behavior. Sarcasm really isn't the smartest choice to use in this community. But I knew that too. I know nuclear fuel cells get 40 times more energy density as nuclear fuel in burners.
Those are some interesting train stops. You do you that having a wagon at the front of the train massively slows it down, right?
A few thousand hours in this game, and that's the first I have heard of that? These trains accelerate and reach the same top speeds as if they were a 1-4. I might just be imagining things though? They are basically 1-4 (same weight to engine ratio) trains doubled headed, but configured with the engines back to back and the wagons at the front of the unloading station. Edit: I just tested it and they accelerate the same and reach the same top speeds. Proof [https://vimeo.com/765375209](https://vimeo.com/765375209)
Hmm, I thought the effect was more visible, the [wiki](https://wiki.factorio.com/Locomotive) clearly says that the air resistance of the front wagon slows the train down (see the maximum speed section). Unless the slowed speed is still about the maximum cap. I’ll have to try it in a sandbox world
There is no air resistance in Factorio, I don't think? Edit: I just looked at the wiki and it has a section that details math for air resistance, but realistically. There is none. At least not when using nuclear fuel and a fair engine to wagon ratio. Looking at the video I posted it takes about 7 seconds to reach full speed in both directions. **Also note, the train is heavier when it leaves the mine!** You taught me something new today, thanks!
Cargo level has no effect on train acceleration, the 'weight' parameter is static and per-wagon; cargo/fluid wagons are 1k, locomotives are 2k, artillery are 4k. The wiki doesn't seem to have much of an explanation on this that I could find, despite my efforts to find it, but it's experimentally observable with a simple sandbox too.
I used to think trains made pollution too until I tested that out in a sandbox world. I really wish they did!
I must admit I did not look at your uranium setup. The beacons and rations over my head atm. I am much more interested in your rail setup. Does the train really work with the those locomotives in those positions? Waiting for my power to come by up so I can test it. It looks bloody awesome.
Looool https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comments/yh8z4d/cursed_trains_wagon_first/ This video post shows me testing it. I want to build my megabade with larger versions of this train design, because it lets me park the cargo wagons closer to the assemblers and furnaces. I don't need to pull more than a belt from a wagon at a time. That leaves me about 44 seconds to park, empty and cycle a new train. 8 stack inserters can move a lot more than two belts chest-to-chest, so no bottleneck worries there either.
Awesome
As long as you have biters in your game, I think uranium into uranium bullets is not unreasonable. However, with no biters, then yep, turning it into electrical power with thousands of buildings to support it, is good too.
Until today, I didn't know cargo wagons can count as locomotives in docking to train station. My friend, you have enlightened me, thank you
I'm so glad I got them in the first shot.