Re: [NSW] 44 vs 48 class

["Tezza" <tezza2000@dingoblue.net.au>]

"Ben O'Regan" <benandveronica@net21.com.au> wrote in message
39c887ed$1@news.hunterlink.net.au">news:39c887ed$1@news.hunterlink.net.au...
> I read somewhere that one 44 class loco was equal (in haulage terms) to
two
> 48 class.

In general terms a main line engine was equal to 2 branch line engines. I
just had a look for my old books to get the exact figures, but it looks like
I've thrown everthing out.

> Given the large number of 48s still being used, from what I've seen, in
> multiples of 2, 3, 4 or even 5 and that the 48s were introduced before thr
> 44s, I have found myself wondering why the 44s were scrapped and the 48s
(in
> multiples) remain.

I think the later Mark 48's were introduced after the 44's. FC had all the
locos they needed when they scrapped the 44, 49, 73, 422 (most). Then we
forced them to scrap the 46. Even most of the 48's were scheduled to go.

Someone's been using a 44 at Leightonfield.

>From a Driver's point of view, they had a lousy one :-)  They had a nice
ride and a nice sound, but that was about it, they were unreliable. The
larger Drivers didn't like walking through the engineroom, they'd need a new
shirt by the time they changed ends.