Re: Strategic Reserve.

[dave pierson <pierson@mail.dec.com>]

Martin Silsby wrote:

> Doesn't the NSW or Victorian railways have a few steam locos set aside for this
> type of situation? It would make sense to me.

	And the trained steam crews to operate them?
	And maintain them
 
> Roy Wilke wrote:

> > No coal or oil - but can't steam locomotives also burn wood?

	_if_ designed for it.  It took nigh 50 years of effort to figger
	out how to burn anthtracite. (effectively).

	Oil burners need a an oil injector, and a crew trained to
	use it.

	Yes, loks (and other stuff) around sugar plantations burnt
	'leaves' (actually, stalks and all, technical term:
	bagasse).  This was because it was (as pointed out)
	_free_, and because it had to be burnt _anyway_.

>> Or anything that can be burnt in the loco's firebox, for that matter?

	Thats trickier than it sounds, at least with any decent
	performance.

>> Diesels and electrics, I take it, are a bit more fussy on what fuel they use.

	Diesles, yes.  Electrics will 'burn' anything the power house is
	designed for (eg: France, et al, have substantial nuclear powered
	railways...) etc. etc.

	HOWever if the power house, transmission, susbstation, distribution
	OR switch gear is out, from natural, or manmade causes....

> > But getting away from the war-type thing, the idea of a railway retaining a
> > 'strategic reserve' of locomotives and rolling stock for unforeseen
> > emergencies sounds like a wise thing to do.


	Costs money.  LOTS of money.  To train, retain & keep skilled crews.

>> Floods, for example. If the track isn't washed away, the idea of retaining a
>>handful of steam locos or diesel-hydraulic locos for use in flood-affected
>>areas wouldn't be a bad idea.

	...or compare the costs (as above) with the costs of flood-proofing the
	RoW & yards...

	best
	dave p