Re: C class's and Belarine Peninsula Railways (two qns)

[mauried@commslab.gov.au (Maurie Daly)]

In article <35A5BA09.14B5@harnessnet.com.au> Craig Haber <albatross@harnessnet.com.au> writes:
>From: Craig Haber <albatross@harnessnet.com.au>
>Subject: Re: C class's and Belarine Peninsula Railways (two qns)
>Date: Thu, 09 Jul 1998 23:51:53 -0700

>David & Julie Donald wrote:
>> It all seems rather strange.  My understanding, though, and this seems to be
>the
>> publicly stated scenario, is that the EL's are due for heavy maintenance and
>> overhaul (possibly their ten-year component changeover), and this is the
>reason
>> that no-one wants them - don't want the expense involved.  Word indicates that
>> whenever ASR hired the units, they were very particular about which ones they
>> wanted, for this particular reason.

>This is a major issue.  How nominally 'old' a locomotive is, is a poor
>way of judging its economic value.  Yeah OK a nominally old loco (say a
>B class) uses old technology compared to a nominally young loco (the
>EL's), BUT the key issue is "how much life is in that loco?".  How much
>life is in the loco depends on it's last major overhaul.  If the EL's
>are at major overhaul, then they're life expired.  If the B is at half
>life, its the one you want hauling your train, because it'll do so for
>many kms to come.  Yeah it might have old technology, you gotta upgrade
>the cabs etc etc, but it's got a lengthy service life before major
>overhaul.  Upgrading cabs on old loco's costs pocket money compared to
>major overhauls on younger locos (or alternatively, buying new locos).

>When any loco comes up for major overhaul, you can spend megabucks on
>making it like new (it'll still have old technology, but it'll be in
>similar condition to the day it rolled out of the builders factory), but
>you've gotta weigh that up against the cost of a new loco, with new
>technology.  The EL's are basically a purpose built passenger train
>loco. And unfortunatly, on the SG there's really only one loco hauled
>passenger train operator (who are of course GSR), and they're
>out-sourcing locomotives from NRC.

>So if it's correct that the EL's are at major overhaul, then I'd reckon
>there's little prospect of them returning to traffic.

>Cheers,
>CH.
>-- 
>Craig Haber
>albatross@harnessnet.com.au
>Manufacturing Systems Engineer (B. Eng, RMIT 1998)
>Web Page Designer, Harness Racing, Railways, and Essendon Football Club
>fanatic
>http://www.harnessnet.com.au/


Something very wrong about all of this.
Why on earth would any railway buy locomotives that are life expired after 
only 10 years, would have to be the worst economic decision ever.
Granted the ELs have non optimal gearing for freights , but this simply means 
that they arnt an optimum loco for hauling heavy trains where there are steep 
grades like the Adelaide Hills.
Across the TAR and the CAR which is where AN intended them to be used they 
would be quite OK.
If its a big deal replacing the traction motors with suitably lower gear 
ratios isnt all that hard either.
Exactly , where does the responsibility of the loco manufacturer fall.
Surely there must be some sort of design life span for a loco.
Are the NRs all going to be life expired after 10 years,after all there a very 
similar loco , engine wise to the EL.

MD