Talk:Dynamic braking

Technopedia Center

Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science
S1 Informatics S1 Information Systems S1 Information Technology S1 Computer Engineering S1 Electrical Engineering S1 Civil Engineering

faculty of Economics and Business
S1 Management S1 Accountancy

Faculty of Letters and Educational Sciences
S1 English literature S1 English language education S1 Mathematics education S1 Sports Education

Talk:Dynamic braking - Wikipedia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Trains: Locomotives Mid‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by the Locomotives task force.

This article lacks references.

UK/US terminology

In the UK, Dynamic braking is an umbrella term covering both Rheostatic braking and Regenerative braking. In the US, Dynamic braking seems to be a synonym for Rheostatic braking. Is this correct? If so, I will add an explanation in the article. Biscuittin (talk) 09:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Non-locomotive use

It appears this term is used in industrial and electric vehicle contexts too. This article appears to cover railroad use only!? --Treekids (talk) 19:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamic braking on steam locomotives

This article implies that dynamic braking only applies to electric locomotives, but my understanding is that steam locomotives also use forms of dynamic braking known as counterpressure and countersteam braking which use air and steam respectively to achieve retardation through the cylinders and drive. Can we please include these other forms in the article with appropriate links? Bermicourt (talk) 16:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved for now. Jafeluv (talk) 09:24, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamic braking → Dynamic braking (locomotive) – The term "dynamic braking" is used in industrial electric motors and electric vehicles as well as railroads. This article is about the railroad use of the term and that's fine since there is a lot of good content on it but the name should be more precise. There is sufficient content here and on other pages to create a stub for a general purpose Dynamic braking article. Joja lozzo 15:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:PRECISION, at least until the general purpose article is created (either in userspace or under a temporarily qualified title). -- JHunterJ (talk) 17:05, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per JHunterJ. Would be willing to consider this once a draft article has been created, but not before. Jenks24 (talk) 20:33, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Request move 2 - with draft general purpose replacement

The result of the move request was: pages moved. Andrewa (talk) 14:16, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamic braking → Dynamic braking (locomotive) – Per previous RfC above, I drafted a new, general purpose Dynamic braking article here. Joja lozzo 17:53, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Discussion

Any additional comments:

Hydrodynamic braking

Hydrodynamic brake or Dynamic braking#Hydrodynamic braking requires its own article! Peter Horn User talk 21:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC) Peter Horn User talk 21:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And Hydraulic drive system. Peter Horn User talk 21:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Principle of operation (Field power source)

Different sources of electric power for field are listed. The list lacks accumulator/battery (used in e.g. trams). Would it be simpler to rephrase the list by just mentioning that external source of current is needed to create magnetic field? Dm5 (talk) 05:22, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 January 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: MOVED. I urge those interested to generalize the article content. В²C ☎ 00:36, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The history of the generic fork was moved to Dynamic brake. – wbm1058 (talk) 03:27, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamic braking (locomotive) → Dynamic braking – This article used to be at dynamic braking until it was moved to its present title to make way for a general article on the topic. (See also the two move requests above.) However, "dynamic braking" now only exists as a redirect to this article since G-13114 (talk · contribs) redirected it here, commenting that this article "is nearly identical and has more detail." Compare the revision before redirect with this article. The initial revision of "dynamic braking", started by Jojalozzo (talk · contribs), appears to have been based on a version of this article, but with most locomotive-specific text removed, which explains the similarity.

Options are to restore dynamic braking as an article, or delete it and move this page back to that title. 15.211.201.85 (talk) 23:48, 13 January 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:18, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – so what happened with the more general article that would cover road vehicles (and maybe other things) along with rail locomotives? Dicklyon (talk) 07:04, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sounds like the better solution by far would be to add some content on non-locomotive dynamic braking to the article currently titled Dynamic braking (locomotive) and move it to Dynamic braking. Having two articles on the topic seems unnecessary.--Cúchullain ^t/c 03:51, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Don't move it without expanding its scope: Dynamic braking is not just about locomotives. Undoing the redirection may be desirable, so the locomotive article can retain its detail about locomotives without burdening a more general article with all of that. —BarrelProof (talk) 15:06, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cuchullain. — Amakuru (talk) 11:52, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Regardless of the ambiguity of "dynamic braking", unless other topics of the same name are proven notable, the present title is an example of extra disambiguation. George Ho (talk) 07:03, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Re-Write for Clarity … Please!

When an entry becomes overwrought, bloated and self-aware, so that even readers very familiar with the topic (and desirous of reading) must claw their way through tortured sentences, it’s time to step back, take a breath and re-write.

This was an article I was looking forward to … until I got into it. Take, for example, the piece beginning, “Since the role of …”

You can chop that down, cut the length in half and clearly explain the phenomena without attempting to produce a stilted 1950s engineering textbook. What are you really trying to say?

Please think of the reader. You are here for them, for us all. You are not here to obfuscate in the glare of shining light upon yourself, otherwise turning interested readers away. Your role here is to be of benefit, to educate, to explain and illuminate.

Today especially, Dynamic Braking is a very relevant topic. Show people this with a clear, concise, and compelling explanation.

Thanks 2600:1016:B103:88E8:8193:62F5:BE90:48AE (talk) 13:56, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Most of this article was written between 2009 and 2012. Our standards have gone up a great deal since then. This does indeed need a rewrite. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:14, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Categories:

Hidden category:

Unreferenced rail transport articles