Re: R711 (and other WCR stuff)

[dbromage@metz.une.edu.au (David Bromage)]

David A. (mercury@netspace.nospam.net.au) wrote:
>Also, is there any truth to the rumour that the R will have a new,
>larger tender ?  Somebody told me (who shall remain nameless as it is
>probably a hoax) that a new 12 wheel tender was on the cards, similar
>to those used by the S class streamliners, possibly using second hand
>diesel bogies from SA with the motors taken out.

It would be too long for the turntable. 

>The justification
>was that extra capacity would be needed to get to Warrnambool without
>a service stop.  Begs the question are we talking about water here or
>just coal ?

An R can make Warrnambool without servicing. It's only in preservation
with 80km/h schedules (the speed limit imposed on the carriages) that
means you need to take water at Colac. A fan trip to Warrnambool with an R
is a slow slog rather than a fast sprint.

BTW, will R711 be burning coal or oil? Will there be any South African
style modifications to the firebox?

>What's the effective range of an R anyway?

One of the major design criteria was that an R could make the famous 100
mile dash to Bendigo on a passenger train without taking water. The limit
of an A2 was about 60 miles. The other was that it could run Melbourne to
Ararat without taking coal. As built, an R carried 6t of coal. In
preservation, the extended bunkers can hold 10t.

>Makes you
>wonder why the VR designed them with a smaller capacity tender; axle
>load and therefore route availability or just to keep the tare weight
>of the thing down

The axle load is pretty high already, considering they ran on some
secondary main lines.

The axle load wasn't the major factor in keeping the tender capacity as
low as it was. Had it been much higher, the total locomotive and tender
weight would have exceeded the capacity of many of the a single span 70'
turntables.

Cheers
David