Re: D57 Class (and Loopline Perway works) [was Re: 6029]

[Ben Armstrong <ba13@uow.edu.au>]

On Fri, 26 May 2000, Robert Lee wrote:

> I agree that a 57 could not be based at Thirlmere.  In fact the whole issue
> of what work a 57 would do if restored is another issue altogether!  And not
> one I want to buy into just now!!!!!
> 
> It always was a mystery to me that 38s were permitted on the loop line,
> albeit at low speeds.

I think they *just* scrape in as far as axleload is concerned... I would
imagine that a 57 would easily have a tonne of two over a 38 for that... 

  I was told that the reason was that steel sleepers
> were laid experimentally just after the new main line was opened in 1919.

They may have been. At a guess about 50-60% of the line is laid with
steel sleepers- but all of these were pressed circa 1953 and were being
laid right up until the 80's. The sleepers mostly have Pandrol
fastening, but some use a 'claw' and 'wedge' system- which is really
neat as you have to go around with a hammer putting all the wedges back
every few months or so. For your info they were all laid without
insulation, so track circuiting becomes a real problem. :-)

> There was a suggestion that these were war resparations and were made in
> Germany. 

The main manf. of the steelies in the line at the moment was Colvilles
(?) Don't know if that helps.

 Are the rails really 1880s vintage?

Around Picton curve and over the ashbank until the line joins the
original alignment they are. This section was laid in (I would imagine)
1918 given the Tahmoor/Bargo deviation's opening date of 13 March 1919.
The rails themselves were rolled in England to what is known as a 80A3
profile and were originally laid in the then Sydney Yard. They were laid
at Picton without properly being 'crowed' so the corner is really a set
of straight rails with turns at the joints. Unfun.

  POssible I suppose, but the
> Price-Williams report of 1890 said that the rails needed replacement, which
> suggests to me that they were still the original chaired 1867 rails then.
> My guess would be that the rails were replaced in Eddy's rebuilding when the
> Hill Top deviation was built, but it's just a guess.

The majority of the rest of the line is laid with 80A, a much nicer
rail. Mostly 1920's vintage. There are several other types of 80lb rail
on the line which can be a headache. (..and when the loop is finished at
Hilltop there will be 90lb rail too) So I guess the line must have had
an overhaul after the new main was opened and definately had work done
when the steelies were laid.

  Those 1890s main line
> steel rails certainly could last till now, given the light traffic since
> 1919.

Their age is starting to show- the steel has become very crystalline and
has begun to fracture in several locations...

> 
> ANyway, back to the 57s, the main problem would be clearances not weight
> today.  I'm also mystified as to how the 57s met the clearances in the circa
> 1886 single-track Scarborough tunnel.  Every other tunnel they ran through
> was double-track and 20th century.  I'd always assumed that Whitton's
> double-track tunnels between Cowan and Kotara were the problem with the 57s
> on the short north.

Weren't the majority of clearance problems with the 57's due to the
cylinder castings? I suppose this would give problems in the earlier
tunnels due to their ovoid/circular shape...

I'm taking no resp. for the grammer in this post- complex no's ungood
for grammer :-)

---
                           ______________________________________
Ben Armstrong                                         /
                               _______________________\___   ______
<ben.armstrong@boral.com.au>  /  ___  |_||_||_||_|  _ _   |_|  ___ 
<ratso_101@hotmail.com>      //|| | |    Ratsara   | | |  | | | | |
<ba13@uow.edu.au>           //_||_|_| |_||_||_||_| |_|_|  |_| |_|_|
                           /______________________________| |______
ICQ #: 1434 3878                 0-0                0-0        0-0