You're viewing a single thread.
Wouldn't technically nuclear power also be considered Steampunk?
Meaning there is no difference between Steampunk and Atompunk?
Nah, key difference is that in atompunk, the energy is typically converted into electricity.
A big part of steampunk is the pipes moving steam to the contraptions, compared to wires moving electricity.
Hmm. Suppose you were building a nuclear locomotive. (Setting aside, for the moment, whether this is a good idea.) Would nuke→turbine→electricity→motor be more efficient than just using the rotation of the turbine to move the train?
It can't be, right?
Diesel engine > generator > motor is frequently used for trains nowadays. Transmissions can be super inefficient, especially with discrete gear ratios
This is only true for locomotives really. Diesel Multiple Units (DMUs) often use hydraulic transmissions. Here's an example railcar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V/Line_VLocity
It's possible that controlling the rotation would be significantly more difficult without the extra conversion.
That raises the question: are the Voyager probes (or anything with an RTG) considered Atompunk, or do they need random bits of sheet metal welded on to meet the aesthetic first?
Atompunk confirmed
I remember playing flash game years ago that was about WW1 dog fights in nuclear powered steam biplanes.
I loved that game! The sequel was pretty good too, if I'm thinking of the same one
Are we talking about Steambirds?
That's the one I was thinking about! 😃
I couldn't remember the name XD
I am so checking that out!