Re: Rail Adventures Around Australia

["Trevor Edmonds" <tedmonds@tmx.com.au>]

Eddie Oliver wrote in message <3772283D.B371ADEF@efs.mq.edu.au>...

<<Wouldn't it be more constructive for you, Trevor, to provide an assessment
of just what condition the various Dorrigo locos ARE actually in?>>

I totally agree, and would be happy to do so if asked (as you have). Is
there any particular ones you would like details on? Given there are 60
locomotives in the collection, it would take some time to list them all with
any degree of detail.

As a general guide, the locomotives purchased directly from the railways in
the 70's were selected on condition within the available locomotives of eash
class. The first criteria was the boiler, then wheels and general
mechanicals. Many of these locos were the last of their class to receive a
heavy overhaul, and had not been back in traffic for long before withdrawal.

Some locomotives came to us in poor condition. I have already given 2535 as
a prime example. It was placed in a park, and as usual with park engines
deteriorated badly. Compare 2535 to the rest of the steam locos and the
effectes of our conservation efforts can be appreciated.

Obviously keeping locomotives in long term open storage is undesirable. Over
the years we have been frustrated in our efforts to establish undercover
storage, but we are making progress. The basic strategy used to conserve the
locos is to cover all openings (chimneys, safety valves etc) and to
regularly black oil them. Oil is much more effective than paint because it
gets into every crevice. The lagging is soaked through with oil and seems to
be keeping water away from the boilers.

A couple of years ago, someone came up with a story that J & A Brown No 3
had swapped identities with No 4. I went under the loco to look for builders
numbers, and found every surface totally covered with oil. Using a scraper
revealed sound smooth steel. BTW the locos definitely did not swap
identities.

As the black oil washes off the boiler cladding, the cladding can get a
light surface rust, but we have not foud any significant deterioration.
Tenders can be a problem. In service they often developed rust holes which
were patched (some better than others). It is not uncommon for preserved
locos to have similar problems, and we expect that tender repairs will be
needed. Thats just part of the job when maintaining a steam locomotive.

The diesels (and electric) have been selected in a similar way to the steam
locos, although some consideration was given to what modifications a loco
had received and how we want to eventually present it. As an example 4602
was picked as being a suitable loco to return to its 1960s/1970s appearance.
4608 was another possible choice. It was in better condition, but 4602 was
more complete. We have since managed to get hold of the parts needed to make
4602 complete. 4420 never went back into traffic after her last heavy
overhaul.

<<The name-calling and unconstructive debate [along the lines of "tell me
which ones are bad" followed by "they're all bad" followed by "you haven't
said which ones are bad"] is (a) a vicious circle (b) doomed to create
antagonism.>>

True, but I was only responding to uninformed comment from others. I
certainly found the initial comments antagonistic.

<<One thing which is amply apparent is that there IS a lot of antagonism
about the Dorrigo set-up,>>

Thats true, but I don't understand why. We are spending our own money as we
see fit. Sure, we have had a lot of legal problems, but this has not
directly affected most of our critics. It is a little tiresome continually
refuting the same old tired stories.

<<and the constructive way to deal with that is with facts, not by
encouraging an exchange of ignorance.>>

I have always tried to indicate that I would be more than happy to answer
questions. If you don't attack me, I won't attack you.


Trevor