Re: 3526 anyone?

[matthew@mail.usyd.edu.au (Matthew Geier)]

In article <C8Rl4.51$i33.547964@news0.optus.net.au>,
David Bromage <dbromage@fang.omni.com.au> wrote:
>Rod Gayford (rjaygee@smartchat.net.au) won a Nobel Prize for literature by writing:
>> The 57's at one stage were trialled on the Sydney to Albury passenger trains
>> and were easily able to maintain the tabled speed.
>
>They were easily capable of maintaining the overall schedule of a 38, with
>some sectional differences. What they lost on the flat they made up for in
>the hills. The 57 reportedly took the Riverina Express "frighteningly
>fast" up Bethungra.

 What the RTM is worried about isn't its speed, as much is how much wear
of the running gear will occur.
 The 57's only did one or 2 runs on the express trains, they didn't do it
long enough to show up any maintence implications of running at those
speeds. There is no long term data.

 What scares the RTM board, is that after spending millions to get it
running, including getting corperate sponsers, they will find that sustained
high speed running is causing undue wear and tear on the motion and that they
will have to mothball it to prevent further damange, long before they have even
started to get any payback for the money spent. Sponsers could even start
demanding their money back as they didn't get what they paied for!.

 Really the only option would be to restore it with modern lubricated roller
bearings through out, and get computer similations done to balance the motion
accurately. Then you get into a whole new argument over changing the locomotive
from what it was in railway service. (ie the still ongoing argument over
modifications to the VR R class steamers!)

 The 57s were only ever a goods engine except for their brief blaze of glory
on the crack express trains. Since there is only operational maintence data
for their goods hauling roles, its only for those slow speeds there is any
guarentee of operational reliablity.