🚀 go-pugleaf

apparently the freight version lasted longer (1940's) than the passenger
version.
I think the real problem with the 4-4-2 was its high speed. Apparently there was
a fatal accident (probably due to track conditions) at high speed. This scared
off the public and TGR management with regards to this class of loco.

chris


John Dennis wrote:

> Bad form to follow-up your own posting, I know, but a little
> research has discovered that the M class were 4-4-2+2-4-4
> 8-cylinder compounds.  I would suggest that the complexity of
> articulation combined with the complexity of compounding might
> have had some bearing on the successs or otherwise of these
> locos.
>
> >>> I have read most of what has been published about the TGR L
> >>> and M class Garratts, and they all say that they were not
> >>> regarded as a success.
> >>>
> >>> But none of the references I have read have said why they
> >>> were not regarded as a success.
> >>>
> >>> Any thoughts on their perceived lack of success ?
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> DPC James McInerney
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> >>Before you buy.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >--
> >John Dennis
> >Home of the Dutton Bay Tramway
> >http://members.optusnet.com.au/~jdennis/dbt.html
> >* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's
> Discussion Network *
> >The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet
> - Free!
> >
> >
>
> --
> John Dennis
> Home of the Dutton Bay Tramway
> http://members.optusnet.com.au/~jdennis/dbt.html
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!