Steel sleepers (Was Indian Pacific Lithgow)

[Michael Milway <Michael_Milway@uow.edu.au>]

I assume that Chris is talking about replacing 1 in 6 of the original
wooden sleepers, not doing this on conrete sleepered track.

The idea of putting steel sleepers in at a rate of about 1 in 6 is to
increase the life time of the wooden ones. Wooden sleepers are still
capable of holding up the track long after they can no longer hold the
track securely in gauge. The steel sleepers hold the track in gauge.
Steel sleepers cost more to install, but last longer than wood, so a
comprimise of intermixing steel and wood can be cost effective. I read a
paper a couple of years ago (which I unfortunately can't find) about the
same thing being done in Western Australia. There they used a ratio of 1
in 4 or 5. Huge savings in the cost of and frequency of maintenance were
cited.

Yes, steel is harder to insert and requires closer attention to packing,
but the long term benefits can be worth it. Concrete sleepers are just
very, very heavy. I can just about lift a standard gauge wooden sleeper,
one end of a steel sleeper, but have no hope at all with a concrete
sleeper.

Regards,
Michael Milway.

Chris Stratton wrote:
> 
> Matthew Geier wrote in message <79ipsq$r8o$1@metro.ucc.usyd.edu.au>...
> >
> > Concrete sleepers, while great for holding CWR in place and lasting
> >a long time are not derailment proof. They crack and then are useless.
> > Country NSW is now being fitted with steel sleepers, which last almost
> >as long, but are not instant writeoffs if a derailed train runs over
> them.
> >
> >
> This is fine if you replace all the sleepers with steel but I was told
> they are only replacing every 6th or so sleeper south of Picton. This
> creates a very rough ride as the steel sleepers are hollow underneath
> and don't sit in the ballast the same as the concrete ones which are
> next to them.
> --
> Regards,
> Chris Stratton
> Wollongong, NSW, Australia