[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: BLs vs NRS

Subject: Re: BLs vs NRS
From: "Ben Staples" <98711576@feline.hawkesbury.uws.EDU.AU>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 20:42:21 +1100
Newsgroups: aus.rail
Organization: University of Western Sydney
References: <mauried.276.36EDBEA4@commslab.gov.au> <LxpH2.20$E52.545304@news0.optus.net.au> <Pine.OSF.4.05.9903161406500.30954-100000@ties.itu.ch> <mauried.277.36EEE640@commslab.gov.au>


Maurie Daly wrote in message ...

*SNIP*

>Yes , its worth remembering that the IP and the Ghan were originally worked
by
>CLPs with the only section needing two being Parkes - Lithgow- Sydney.
>I dont know how many NRs are used over this section , but a BL can manage
>1100 tonnes up a 1:40 and 900 tonnes up a 1:33 against an NRs 1250 tonnes
up a
>1:40 and 950 tonnes up 1:33 so the extra 1000 HP doesnt count for much.


It would seem you don't get much for your 1000 horses. Going by this two
NR's can only handle 1900 tonnes up Cowan Bank. I've seen some long trains,
though they must be light.

Ben  Staples

Follow-Ups:
- Re: BLs vs NRS
  - From: mauried@commslab.gov.au (Maurie Daly)

References:
- BLs vs NRS
  - From: mauried@commslab.gov.au (Maurie Daly)
- Re: BLs vs NRS
  - From: dbromage@fang.omni.com.au (David Bromage)
- Re: BLs vs NRS
  - From: arthur marsh <marsh@ties.itu.int>
- Re: BLs vs NRS
  - From: mauried@commslab.gov.au (Maurie Daly)

Prev by Date: Re: DL class
Next by Date: Re: BLs vs NRS
Prev by thread: Re: BLs vs NRS
Next by thread: Re: BLs vs NRS
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread