Re: C Class Rumours

[Bert koksix <oldphart@mpx.com.au>]

Reuben Farrelly wrote:

> Perhaps a dumb question, but what exactly makes a loco "heavy" - are they
> simply heavy because of the steel components they are made from, or are they
> ballasted down to make them as practically heavy as possible to give better
> grip?
>
> I'm leading up to the question:  "Can the C's be made lighter, and if so,
> would it make them useful for mainline duties again?"
>
> Reuben
>
> Steven Hurst <hurste@primus.com.au> wrote in message
> 931253216.938553@diddley.primus.com.au">news:931253216.938553@diddley.primus.com.au...
> > > >'Cos I was thinking......if a C was on BG, they'd have to run it down
> > > >to LI to blow the gunk out every now and then (and you wouldn't need
> > > >ASW or extra radios either).
> > > >
> > > >One can dream.......
> > > >
> > > It would be nice, wouldn't it.
> >
> > Are the C's too HEAVY for the Stony Point line?
> >
> >

They are built heavy! as an example if you ever get close to a H class in
Victoria, you will find the frame has been fabricated from steel about one and a
half times thicker than the
third series T that it looks exactly the same as.
When the H's were allowed out on the main, years ago they were only allowed 65
kph.
[this has changed, now 100]
The C class did not get doppler controlled wheel slipping features [that 81, and
G got] and so relied on a modern sanding system and weight!
Rod