🚀 go-pugleaf

The know all Terry Flynn wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> "Greg Rudd" <grudd@usyd.edu.au> wrote in message
> news:co6srn$i4k$1@spacebar.ucc.usyd.edu.au...
>> Terry Flynn wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "Greg Rudd" <grudd@usyd.edu.au> wrote in message
>> > news:cmsbo1$lkt$1@spacebar.ucc.usyd.edu.au...
>> >> Terry Flynn wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > "Greg Rudd" <grudd@usyd.edu.au> wrote in message
>> >> > news:cma1sv$29u$1@spacebar.ucc.usyd.edu.au...
>> >> >> Mark Newton wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Terry Flynn wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Whats the next thing he will be telling us.  That the classic
> american
>> >> >> balwin 4-4-0 never ran in NSW.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > What a Baldwin 4-4-0 has to do with this thread I don't know.
>> >> What I was making the comment you
>> >> > I do know
>> >> > that the Baldwin 4-4-0 locomotives were a poor second compared to
>> > English
>> >> > 4-4-0
>> >> > designs which the NSWGR had.
>> >>
>> >> I wouldn't necessarily say that. In certain areas the quality of the
>> >> workmanship and the materials used in construction of the British
> engines
>> >> in particular the 12 class were far superior to the Baldwins. As
>> > performers
>> >> they did do well in their early days with quite a few speed and load
>> >> records to their credit and had some good design features that suited
> New
>> >> South Wales conditions down to the ground, such as long smoke boxes
>> >> and large grate areas. Another thing was that the Balwins were far
>> >> lighter
> on
>> >> the track than what the British engines were.  I think that given the
>> >> choice of working one of the Balwins or the 12 class in their original
>> > form
>> >> I think you would want to work in the far more comfortable cab of the
>> >> Baldwin.  What would have been the most spectaular of all the Baldwins
> to
>> >> see in operation would have been the big J's which would have pushed
> the
>> >> NSWGR loading gauge to its sheer limits. But as to the quality of the
>> >> finished product Beyer-Peocock built a far better loco than what
> Baldwin
>> >> did at the time.  But then you have to understand that the Balwin's
> that
>> >> were built to last for a certain period of time and no longer.  While
> the
>> >> Brits built their export locos to give the longest possible life.
>> >>
>> >
>> > In the above chapter, are you saying the Baldwin 4-4-0's had the load
> and
>> > speed records or are you talking about the later J class.
>>
>> Against other passenger engines in use at the time the U with a set of
>> Jackson and Sharp cars beat the existing record for Sydney-Eskbank and
>> return by aprox 10-15 min.  With the equalised design of both the leading
>> bogie and driving wheels caused far less wear and tear on the track than
>> the ridgid British designs that were in use on the NSWGR at the time. As
> to
>> the both the little and big J's they for their time totaly changed the
>> way
>> freight  trains  were operated in this state.
>>
> 
> Goods trains back then.
> 
> So did the earlier 0-6-0's, the later 57 class and 40 class. .
> 
>> > If the Baldwin
>> > 4-4-0 is lighter, then it can not pull more than a heavier 12 class
>> > locomotive.
>> >
>> Are you talking in theory or in practice??  As a loco with a certain
>> tractive effort with a small grate and evaporate surface area is not
>> going to produce that tractive effort over a long period of time compared
>> to a steam engine with a large grate and evaporative surface area rated
>> at the same tractive effort.
>>
> 
> Theory and practice are consistent. If the wheels are slipping, the rest
> is academic. If the US 4-4-0's were so good they would have either ordered
> more or copied the design and made them in the UK or Australia. They did
> neither.
> 

They were brought as an experiment.  What did impress as far as Per way were
concered was their equalised suspension. What do you thing would be harder
on the track a 12 class or a Balwin 4-4-0.  Probably the main reason was a
thing called loyalty to the mother country.

 
> 
>> > The long smoke boxes were not much better on these earlier
>> > engines, because on later designs our engineers continued with UK
>> > practice.
>>
>> That is such a stupid statement.
> 
> It's a historically accurate statement.
>>
>> If you care to note that a number of 12 class and 17 class engines for
> that
>> matter had their smoke boxes extended so as to prevent tubes blocking
> under
>> hard steaming. Dont be stupid or are you just saying this to shit stir
>> hoping to get a response from Mark Newton.
> 
> Not all 12 and 17 got the modification. No doubt it is better to have a
> longer smoke box, but clearly the economic benefit was not great,
> considering the extra cost  to build the longer smoke box, and the
> distances the locomotives needed to work between depots at the time of
> manufacture.

In the case of the 17's they were known for being hard on the track and
difficult loco's to handle.  The reasion that the program probably wasn't
continued was because of a thing called the P class.
>
> 
>>
>> > The same goes for frames and cabs, sticking with UK practice,
>> > which produced a lower maintenance cab and stronger mainframes. 

Very interesting comment why was it that the P class had a number of frame
rebuilds during its life???

>> > As for 
> the
>> > J class, when a new 2-8-0 was designed by the NSWGR, the engineers said
>> > the T was a
>> > combination of  the best  UK and US ideas. Again it had a steel cab,
>> > not
> a
>> > high maintenance to hot for NSW wooden cab.
>>
>> Yes but would *you* want to work in an exposed cab like what the 12 class
>> was when introduced??? I think not.
>>
>> By stating the above opinion on loco cabs you really show your lack of
>> knowledge on the conditions that railwaymen of the time had to operate.
>>
> 
> Clearly the crews in the big J thought being in fresh air was preferable
> to a
> hot wooden cab. I refer to the classic picture of a big J, with the driver
> sitting on the window ledge, most of his body outside the cab, or the
> other photographs, with the front door of the cab open when in operation.
> Clearly in NSW it's hot on the footplate allot of the time. At the end of
> the day, the design engineer decided on what cab design would be built,
> not the locomotive driver.
> 

And that was part of the English mindset.  We cant give the workers any
comforts.

> 
>> > The difference in grate area
>> > of both 2-8-0 locomotives was minimal and UK practice of plate frames,
>> > inside valve chests and short smoke box was continued.
>> In other words you are saying that the J's influenced the design of 50
>> class.
> 
> Of course it did.
> 

So they mustn't have been that bad, so you contradict yourself once again. 
God you are as bad as Costa.

>>
>> Remember we are interested in what you know, not what you don't know
>> which appear to enjoy showing us.
>>

See above.