RE: Melbourne 82 class

["Chris Parnell" <chris@infinisource.com>]

Aus loco discussion mailing list

Alan

I always thought that tractive effort was a function of horsepower or kw 'at
the rail', allowing for adhesion losses and  and power transfer losses. My
formula allows for 86% of said rating to be available at the rail for
pulling power. So your comment about dead weight and capacity of fuel tanks
confuses me.

CP

> -----Original Message-----
> From: alan holding [mailto:charters@river.net.au]
> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2000 10:01 AM
> To: Aus loco discussion mailing list
> Subject: Re: Melbourne 82 class
>
>
> Aus loco discussion mailing list
>
> G'day all,
>
> I'm not an engineer, however, it seems to me that an 81 class has a higher
> `dead weight' than either an 82 or a G class owing to its considerably
> smaller fuel capacity.
> In other words, for all three to weigh approx.. 132 tonnes `in steam', the
> 82 and G classes must carry approx..10,000 to 10,250 litres of
> diesel fuel.
> The 81 class is only carrying 6000 litres!
> On any gradient where an 81 and 82 (or G class) were doubleheading a train
> and both carrying half a tank of fuel, the 81 class would have a higher
> tractive weight than either the 82 or G class.
> No doubt the subscribing engineers on this list can raise many more
> technical reasons for performance differences in the loco types.
>
> See Ya    AH
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Molloy <c501@diesel.net.au>
> To: Aus loco discussion mailing list <Ausloco@listbot.com>
> Date: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 6:07 PM
> Subject: Re: Melbourne 82 class
>
>
> >Aus loco discussion mailing list
> >
> >"an 81 class is rated at 3300hp where as an 82 is only rated at 3000hp"
> >
> >Is this correct ??  An 81 class has 2461kw (3300hp), of which 2237kw
> >(2999hp) is available for traction ( the other 300hp being used to run
> >auxiliary equip).  An 81 is fitted with  a 16-645E3B.  A DL
> (which is older
> >than an 82) is fitted with a 12-710G3 , which i think is the same engine
> >fitted to 82's.  A DL is reated at 2424kw (3250hp), or 2259kw (3029 hp)
> >available for traction.   Unless the 82 has been down rated
> (which i doubt)
> >then this puts the 82 at 30 hp more for traction above the 81.  I have
> >always been lead to believe that 81's were better pullers than 82's (and
> >better than V/Line G's for that matter).
> >
> >I think the above statement refers to the 81's gross power
> output, where as
> >the 82 figure reflectd the tractive figure.
> >Maybe somebody else can help with exact figures for the 82..l
> can't seem to
> >find them
> >
> >Stephen Molloy
> >
> >
> >______________________________________________________________________
> >To unsubscribe, write to Ausloco-unsubscribe@listbot.com
> >----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >Advertisement:
> >redtag.com offers UNBELIEVABLE prices on a wide variety of brand
> >names. Get a boys or girls MURRAY 20" bike for only $29.99! Compare
> >as high as $99. To receive 10% off any purchase TODAY go to
> >http://www.listbot.com/links/redtag2
> >
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe, write to Ausloco-unsubscribe@listbot.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Advertisement:
> redtag.com offers UNBELIEVABLE prices on a wide variety of brand
> names. Get a boys or girls MURRAY 20" bike for only $29.99! Compare
> as high as $99. To receive 10% off any purchase TODAY go to
> http://www.listbot.com/links/redtag2
>


______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, write to Ausloco-unsubscribe@listbot.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Advertisement:
redtag.com offers UNBELIEVABLE prices on a wide variety of brand
names. Get a boys or girls MURRAY 20" bike for only $29.99! Compare
as high as $99. To receive 10% off any purchase TODAY go to
http://www.listbot.com/links/redtag2