Re: Super Series 42220

[keithm@commslab.gov.au (Dave Malcolm)]

In article <mauried.233.374BCB9A@commslab.gov.au> mauried@commslab.gov.au (Maurie Daly) writes:
>From: mauried@commslab.gov.au (Maurie Daly)
>Subject: Re: Super Series 42220
>Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 10:23:22 GMT


>>3400 tonnes for a full load.

>>>Maybe this issue never arises?
>>>
>>It does.

>>>Another interesting aside is the loads for 82s seem to be the same as for 81s 
>>>even though the 82s are fitted with the much larger D87EBTR series motors , 
>>>same as the 90s and the Westrail Qs
>>>Continuous tractive effort is quoted at 413 kn which is higher than an NR (388
>>>kn).
>>>When NR were using the 82s was this in any way obvious?

>>As a general rule 82s pull more but NRs go faster with any given load.
>>For example a full load up Stawell bank with a BL/G/C would have us
>>down to around 20 km/h. An NR happily goes over the top at around 35
>>km/h. 


>>Cheers

>>Krel

>>Waxy Wary Zany Zebu


>Thanks for this Kev , all makes sense.
>Its understandable that a NR will go faster than 81/BL/G etc for the same load 
>You would want to get something for the extra 1000 HP.
>Curious though why Freightcorp opted to use 81s for the Leigh Creek line when 
>82s would have allowed heavier trains for the same no of locos,maybe something 
>to do with the power by the hour contract.

>cheers
>MD

Isn't the full load for an NR less than that of an 81/BL/G?

Dave Malcolm