I've been known to chuck a chocolate cake into my firebox

Feb 22, 2026 1:58 AM

Sounds like a Friday night babyyy!

1 month ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 0

Make fun for the oven to have a sugar cust.

1 month ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

They almost got fired for this, until someone informed their bosses it would be a PR nightmare because of all the good reactions to it

1 month ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The kid went to the birthday for the cake:

1 month ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 1

Im so Valve coded that I thought they were talking about Steam the program and threw a cake in to the machine that powers the servers for everyone to download their game

1 month ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I bet that smelled really good for three seconds.

1 month ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm a fan of the fire box myself... More interested in pies then... Poor cake 😞

1 month ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Does, does anyone have this legendary video?

1 month ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I've never seen a version of this that wasn't this screenshot referencing a video that may or may not exist

1 month ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Men only want one thing and it's disgusting.

1 month ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

My new favourite phrase 'chucking a chocolate cake into her firebox'

1 month ago | Likes 259 Dislikes 1

"And other old-timey names for kinky sex acts."

1 month ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Alaskan pipeline

1 month ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Is it anything like tongue punching the fartbox?

1 month ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Shes not a steam engine but she has a fire box

1 month ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

*giggity*

1 month ago | Likes 35 Dislikes 0

Title of your Interracial Irish sex tape

1 month ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Jerome chucked a chocolate cake into Lois's firebox before she met Peter.

1 month ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That doesn't seem smart

1 month ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 10

It seems like pointless food waste to me. Why not serve the cake to the train crew instead

1 month ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Assuming there's enough fuel (likely coal) and heat in there, it should be able to evaporate the water content of the cake before the firebox becomes too cold to burn things anymore. At that point, the cake will burn like any other organic material.

1 month ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

I imagine it probably just burns to ash like everything else they toss in there

1 month ago | Likes 44 Dislikes 0

I wonder how many murders steam train drivers get away with?

1 month ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

I'm going to guess you probably know the same number of serial killers as you do steam train engineers.

That's not a coincidence.

1 month ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

I was wondering where my potential went...

1 month ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Aw man, that is going to make a mess.....

1 month ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

for a few minutes, at least

1 month ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

I guess it would carbonize, but still something is going to be baked into the fire bricks. Or maybe I am thinking small.

1 month ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

There's fire bricks, it's a steel steam engine

1 month ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I mean, I'm no rocket surgeon, but I'd think that the cake would be reduced to carbon just like the coal would, and wouldn't behave any differently

1 month ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Yeah... Birthday cheer and well wishes. That's the point...

1 month ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

A locomotive firebox can get up to 2500 degrees F. I expect the cake would be vaporized in seconds.

1 month ago | Likes 81 Dislikes 0

We ran a rat (that was already dead from natural causes) through a heat treatment furnace att 890 degrees. That's when we learned that it was not a good way to dispose of bodies. No oxygen means no flame. Came out chared but whole.

1 month ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

yeah but that's only about 80 celcius

1 month ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Surprisingly not. The heat scorches the surface pretty quickly, but there's enough moisture in a decent cake to delay it igniting for some minutes before it dries out enough to burn.

1 month ago | Likes 31 Dislikes 0

It would take a minute. I've thrown doughnuts and stuff in our kiln, at 2300 the sugars still melt then burn.

1 month ago | Likes 59 Dislikes 0

Ngl, "someone with personal experience chucking pastry foods into a steam loco's firebox" is not the level of extreme specificity I expected in the Imgur comments section today

1 month ago | Likes 40 Dislikes 0

Reddit in 2010, absolutely. Imgur today, unexpected.
Almost irrelevant, I interviewed to drive trains once, but I lived too far to meet their emergency protocols.

1 month ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Okay, and its made of steel... right? and what else do we know of that apparently melted at lower temperatures? eh? eh?

1 month ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 31

A horse

1 month ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Very small stones?

1 month ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

A duck!

1 month ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

exactly.

1 month ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

7/11 was a part time job

1 month ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

...chocolate frosting? /s

1 month ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Wood!

1 month ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

The metal body is being cooled by all the water around it, so it basically never reaches higher temperatures than the water around it. Since it is a pressurised system, the steam is in the 200-300 °C range: and so, the steel wall won't get hotter than this.

Expect if you ran out of water, but then that causes a LOT of issues...

1 month ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Jet fuel burns at like 650C. Steel loses like 2/3rds of its strength by then. Do you think the designers of the WTC were accounting for their steel losing 2/3rds of its strength and also having had an entire jumbo jet slammed into it?

1 month ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 0

yep.. Like slap a steal beam into the ground. slam a car on fire (no gas) into it and see how it collapses.

1 month ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 20

Okay, now add like 1/2-2/3 of the ambient temperature load capacity of the beam on top of it, and raise the temperature of the beam to 650 where it loses 2/3 of its load-bearing capacity. Do the math. :o)

Bonus points for a load supported by a grid of these beams, raising their temperature, and then also violently removing 20% of the beams to simulate damage, see how that goes.

1 month ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

It didn't have to melt, it only had to get glowing hot. The very long horizontal floor beams would get longer as they heated up, gradually losing strength. At a certain temp they'd abruptly sag, going from pushing to pulling and shearing the rivets holding them. Once enough did it the debris pile got so heavy no single floor could hold it and down it went. That's also why the scale model didn't collapse, the effect would only work at full size.

1 month ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

Genuinely did not expect to find a 911 denier in here today. Wild that this was ever a thing and especially this long after. That takes some serious effort to not understand basic information.

1 month ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

consider how i got a -16 i presume its me thats the denier.. im not. just noticing that had the aircraft just slammed into it no fire it would collapse anyway... the fire just made it worse. Also how on earth can someone be a 911 Denier... Like its not like the two tower where out in some random bushwack whit no camera pointed at it.. it was in the middle of NY whit prime time news coverage from the moment if not before the plane hit untill long after it fell.

1 month ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1