Re: Why Wooden Sleepers are better. Was [NSW] CityRail Delays Friday

["chris@enet21.com.au" <chris@enet21.com.au>]

Concrete sleepers have other advantages over timber ones.
1. You don't need to chop down trees - this may suprise some people who think they magically appear out
of nowhere. (the railways in Australia, are partly responsible for deforesting much of Australia - think
of all those wooden sleepers used since 1854 )
2. Cost less to produce.
3. Termite resistant.- termites don't eat concrete (not yet)
4. Don't burn.
5. last longer.
6. Don't rot.
7. Look better, we are in the 21 century, not the 19th.

The other alternative is steel sleepers, which seems to be not used in Australia, except on iron ore
lines and on BHP lines.

Chris


Maurie Daly wrote:

> In article <38DF0CC7.9B365AD2@fastlink.com.au> The Railway Rasputin II <bob@fastlink.com.au> writes:
> >From: The Railway Rasputin II <bob@fastlink.com.au>
> >Subject: Why Wooden Sleepers are better. Was [NSW] CityRail Delays Friday
> >Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 17:24:55 +1000
>
> >Wooden sleepers don't weigh as much and therefore are less lightly to
> >sink and deform the rail. (smooth ride)
> >They don't crack.
> >They don't echo flat wheels as much as concrete.
> >Most importantly, if the train derails the wooden sleepers break/give
> >way so that the wheels don't bounce up and down which can tip the
> >carriage.
>
> >The only real advantage concrete has over wood, is that wood has to be
> >replaced more than concrete.
>
> >rgds
>
> >Hubert Lam wrote:
> >>
> >> Why would wooden sleepers give the best ride? the rails are not continously welded so it's
> >> annoyingly noisy and bumpy (i can't write like that)
>
> I suggest then that you take a ride on the Overland or the Ghan or the IP and
> compare the ride in NSW or VIC which are wooden sleepers to the ride you get
> on the SA side which are all concrete.
> There simply is no comparison, concrete wins hands down.
>
> MD