Re: 42220

["Russell Norton" <russelln@primus.com.au>]

David Johnson wrote in message <37E10893.5EBE8A27@ozemail.com.au>...
>Russell Norton wrote:
>
>> I haven't got stats regarding rail wear. However, rail wear is obviously
>> better from these locos (than a loco without computer controlled wheel
>> slip), as there is far less chance of going into a violent wheel spin
whilst
>> stationary, due to the computer control.
>
>So the 90 class I was sitting in doing 120 km/h whilst stationary on
Whittingham
>Bank never happened?
>
If it did, I wouldn't go telling everyone else about it <g>. Most drivers'
would have taken corrective action long before the speedo got to this stage.
The crew was probably (surprise surprise) waiting for the computerised
traction control to take over (and it didn't work).

Obviously this loco (and possibly the crew) had some sort of problem (no
sand, defective module, incompetent driver etc.).

You will notice, of course, that my previous posting said less chance, not
no chance.

Regards,
Russ...