RE: [Ausloco] 422s/NJs

[Scott Martin <semartin@idx.com.au>]

Ben/Peter, 
          It was I who made the comment of a de-cabbed 422 looking 
somewhat like an NJ, but that would be about where the similarity ends. 
Fluck, Marshall and Wilson's seminal 'Locomotives of the Commonwealth 
Railways' point out this superficial similarity was contrasted to the 
differences in the working parts, namely: The EMD 645E powerplant was a 
12-cylinder 1650/1500 h.p. unit, while the 422's prime mover was a 16 cyl 
2200/2000 h.p. unit. The NJ was also a shade under 11 ft shorter and 42 
tons (66t) lighter than a 108t 422 class. 
The authors offer an explanation for a possible standardisation of the 
NJ's in that the       "Standard gauge Alice Springs line will be 
constructed within the economic life of these engines, and that they will 
be converted and be able to work in multiple with other Clyde-GM 
locomotives..." p. 60. The standardisation issue was discussed as an 
aside to why CR chose a Clyde-GM product over the traditional Sulzer 
designs on the narrow gauge. Hope this is of use

Scott   
>
>the NJs as I understand it were constructed with a light frame (and
>possibly even a small body - they look fairly short and stumpy),
>specifically for narrow gauge.  There was a rumour when they were
>superceded on the Alice line that their conversion to standard-gauge was
>considered, but rejected due to their light construction (others may be
>able to confirm this).  I think the NJ / 422 comment just referred to
>their basic appearance, rather than any specific design similarities,
>though there may be several (e.g. the cab design looks identical).
>
>Peter
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ben scaro [mailto:bscaro@hotmail.com]
>Sent: Monday, 15 May 2000 2:06 PM
>To: Ausloco@egroups.com
>Subject: [Ausloco] 422s/NJs
>
>
>There was a comment made on here that potentially single-cabbed 422s
>would 
>be rather like NJs- as the NJ was, or was close to, a single cabbed 422.
>
>I'm not aware how close the two designs are, but my understanding from 
>Oberg's book was that the only real similarity between the two models
>was 
>the cab.  The NJ had a less powerful engine, in addition to different
>trucks 
>and a pressurised carbody.  With such differences, it seems unlikely
>that it 
>would be the same model.
>
>Any clarification on this ?
>
>Cheers
>
>Ben


I hear - I forget, 
I see  - I remember,
I do   - I understand


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failed tests, classes skipped, forgotten locker combinations. 
Remember the good 'ol days
http://click.egroups.com/1/4053/7/_/_/_/958378948/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Ausloco-unsubscribe@egroups.com