Re: Melbourne trams

David Bennetts (davibenn@pcug.org.au)
2 Apr 98 22:36:09 GMT

Dave McL <davemcl@iprolink.co.nz> wrote in article
<3522E0ED.52D3@iprolink.co.nz>...
> David Bennetts wrote:
>
> > Dynamic braking wasn't very common on Australian tramways, air brakes
being
> > favoured. Brisbane used it on some of their early drop-centre cars.
>
>
> And Sydney used it on the very steet Neutral Bay line: R1 class tram
> 2029 had the extra resistances on its roof. Did K1296 (also used on
> this line) have dynamic braking too?
>
> Dave McLoughlin
> Auckland New Zealand
>
K1296, preserved at the Sydney Tramway Museum was not fitted with dynamic
brakes, it had track brakes (blocks which were screwed down against the
track) which were operated by a separate handwheel on the brake column.
The E cars which worked on this line in earlier years were also fitted with
this arrangement.

It is interesting to note that a form of catch point, or derail was
employed on this line to prevent runaways into the harbour. The descending
tram had to stop for the conductor to operate the derail. If it didn't
stop it would be deflected into the gutter.
On the Athol Wharf line, where no specially fitted trams or derails were
used, no less than three trams ended up taking a dip in Sydney Harbour!

I probably wasn't too accurate about British tram braking systems - later
ones used air brakes (such as the Feltham type operated by London Transport
and later sent to Leeds). The magnetic brake was also common - it was a
form of track brake but operated by the motors generating current to power
electro-magnets to hold the brake against the track. It was controlled the
same way as dynamic braking by the motorman.

David Bennetts
Canberra