Re: [VIC] Silver DRC :-)

[Greg Rudd <grudd@mail.usyd.edu.au>]

Mark Bau wrote:

> > From: "Dave Proctor" <daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au>
> > Organization: Another Optus Customer
> > Newsgroups: aus.rail
> > Date: Mon, 08 May 2000 14:15:49 GMT
> > Subject: Re: [VIC] Silver DRC :-)
> >
> > That is right - our Tagaras work, yours doesn't, we sent the one that was
> > packed with the unreliable equipment.
>
> But Victoria got the last laugh. We dieselised with EMD's, NSW fell for the
> ALCO rubbish.
>

The real reason that the NSWGR went for ALCO's (the 40 class) is as follows.

1.  ALCO's were generally cheaper than what Clyde/EMD were offering.

2.  The ALCO had one of the most efficient electrical systems then available.
The only other maker to come close was EMD.

3.  Being a 4-stroke it offered better fuel consumption than a 2-stroke and
lower oil consumption.

While the 244 engine that powered the 40 class had problems with the turbo
charger and reliability in configurations above 1500 hp (the ALCO PA). The
point was that the RSC-3 design was indeed reliable. And paved the way for the
world series engines that were powered by the 251 engine which ironically just
as reliable as any EMD unit with proper care and maintenance, as evidenced both
on the NSWGR and in the Pilbra where the ALCO ruled supreme until the mid to
late 1980's.  It is also ironic that the 567 engine which powered the B class
also had its own problems i.e. water leaks.