| home |
|
| news |
|
| discussions |
|
| content |
|
| site |
|
|
| technical support | Need Help? Lodge a support ticket!
Note: This is for technical support only. General questions about railways should be posted to the Forums.donation  Please Donate!photo comp Have YOU voted yet on Photo of the Month?
Click Here!
Voting Closes 31/1search |
| |
| Author |
Message |
42101
NSW's Nasty one
Joined: Oct 12, 2005 Last Visited: Jan 7, 2009 Location: I'm here
contact
|
post
|
|
|
 |
biqua
Paper Tiger
Joined: May 10, 2005 Last Visited: Jan 8, 2009 Location: SRA Survey No. 14032
contact
|
post
|
|
| biqua |
|
 |
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 7:48 pm
|
| TE2815 wrote: | Looks like they didn't trust the trackage to take the weight of the 48's or is their another reason why it appears the tullochs were loose shunted (by tractor) and why the V cars were lifted and pushed across rather than shunted in.
They way it looks to have been done must have taken a lot longer than if they had just shunted them with the locos. |
There are no points there ... they would have had to have transferred the 48 the same way.
| 42101 wrote: | Biqua can you put those pics of the process up thanks mate because very few of us on here get to see it all happening. |
Working on it as we speak.
|
|
 |
TheLoadedDog
El Sombrero!
Joined: Jun 19, 2003 Last Visited: Jan 10, 2009 Location: At the pub with 42101
contact
|
post
|
|
| TheLoadedDog |
|
 |
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 7:49 pm
|
| TE2815 wrote: | Looks like they didn't trust the trackage to take the weight of the 48's or is their another reason why it appears the tullochs were loose shunted (by tractor) and why the V cars were lifted and pushed across rather than shunted in.
They way it looks to have been done must have taken a lot longer than if they had just shunted them with the locos. |
I'd argue the opposite - if they were going to lift the V's, why not lift the Tullochs too? Shunting might be easier, but it isn't when you factor in the time and expense of all that stuffing about with the perway.
Humphrey! We're leaving!
|
|
 |
FieldShunt74
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Nov 06, 2004 Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009
contact
|
post
|
|
| FieldShunt74 |
|
 |
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 7:53 pm
|
| TLD™ wrote: | | Still, if you're right FS74, they are indeed a bunch of saddos. |
They deliberately renumbered it after the killer bingle. They ran it on that "The River" two car run so that it would never go west. AFAIK it was working fine when that train was axed and there's no good reason why it shouldn't be completely serviceable. The Railways are superstitious. They'll never have another G7. There's also another G set number missing, the one that ran over the driver who was preparing it in Waterfall yard. The set is still out there but they retired the target plates and gave it a new number.
Bah, humbug.
|
|
 |
TE2815
Minister for Railways
Joined: Mar 19, 2004 Last Visited: Jan 8, 2009 Location: Watching Louise from behind the camera!
contact
|
post
|
|
|
 |
TheLoadedDog
El Sombrero!
Joined: Jun 19, 2003 Last Visited: Jan 10, 2009 Location: At the pub with 42101
contact
|
post
|
|
| TheLoadedDog |
|
 |
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 8:06 pm
|
Yeah, I know the railways are superstitious, but some of it I can wear - renumberings and such (and to me that is also not necessarily superstition but also a mark of respect). A new target plate isn't much drama, but once you start interfering with actual operations, then that's a different matter.
Also, something like 4620 beig scrapped is more understandable, as loco numbers (especially in those days) had some meaning to the commuting public. But not so much the black vinyl lettering on a spark - I doubt most people even know it's there.
Humphrey! We're leaving!
|
|
 |
biqua
Paper Tiger
Joined: May 10, 2005 Last Visited: Jan 8, 2009 Location: SRA Survey No. 14032
contact
|
post
|
|
| biqua |
|
 |
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 9:05 pm
|
Ok, I have uploaded 50 odd photos from the day to http://biqua.fotopic.net/c1507982.html (too many to display here). I added descriptions to help understand it all, but unfortunately they are in reverse order, so start at the end.
As for the whole process, it went something like this - for the Tullochs, they slung the temporary track over the top of the down local, however this alone was not enough - as each bogie reached the join, it seemed to require adjustment. I got there as the first one was being worked on.
Once the first Tulloch was on the local, the front end loader aka shunter reversed to separate the carriages (you can see in my photos how they wedged the front until the buffer), however it also derailed that end ... this is where I got a bunch of pics of the rerailing, but only three seemed worth uploading, as movement was understandably a slow, careful process.
After making a secure base out of old sleepers, a hydraulic jack is used to raise the carriage. A special metal beam is placed underneath, with a sliding stand, and another smaller jack on it - this lifts takes over from the first jack. A hydraulic arm pushes the slide over until the bogie is lined up with the track again, and then it is lowered back on the track. I say hydraulic in all this, but it could be pneumatic - I always get them confused.
After that and chatting to Fred who breifly popped by, I went home for lunch (so didn't see the second one transferred), Sandown to see a Patrick train, and eventually back to Petersham on the way home. I got there as the Vs were being moved into position, and saw them move DIM8020 about halfway across. This time no psuedo points, just jacking up both ends and sliding the whole thing over a bit at a time, alternating between ends.
Remember, the rest of the pics are in my gallery as mentioned above.
Last edited by biqua on Sat May 10, 2008 10:06 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
 |
Raichase
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Oct 24, 2005 Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009 Location: Sydneys Northern Beaches, NSW.
contact
|
post
|
|
| Raichase |
|
 |
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 9:15 pm
|
Very interesting photos and accounts from all. Thanks for calling me today biqua and telling me about it - I thought it was all going on tonight! Feel sorry for the blokes down there when the thing derailed, that'd be the last thing they would want!
- Raichase.
My Flickr! and Website - Trackside
Comments made are not my own and may be complete rubbish.
|
|
 |
doridori
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Sep 21, 2005 Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009
contact
|
post
|
|
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 10:21 pm
|
| Raichase wrote: | | Very interesting photos and accounts from all. Thanks for calling me today biqua and telling me about it - I thought it was all going on tonight! Feel sorry for the blokes down there when the thing derailed, that'd be the last thing they would want! |
Think by appearence along that they're phneumatics mate...
And by the sounds of it, it sounds like derailing was part of the overall plan...
May be young'n'dumb, yet unlike some, I've heart!
|
|
 |
42101
NSW's Nasty one
Joined: Oct 12, 2005 Last Visited: Jan 7, 2009 Location: I'm here
contact
|
post
|
|
| 42101 |
|
 |
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 10:29 pm
|
|
They ARE Hydraulic jacks indeed, definitely not pneumatic at all.
Thanks heaps to ALL my friends on here.
|
|
 |
Electra
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Jun 06, 2004 Last Visited: Aug 18, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 12:47 am
|
| TheLoadedDog™™ wrote: | | FieldShunt74 wrote: | As useful a learning aid as it might be, I'm still a bit miffed that this pandering to the superstitious means one less serviceable car in an all too small fleet.
|
Do you reckon that's it?
The vast majority of the people who travel in 8020 are (were) the general public. Probably only about 0.0001% of them would know or care. That leaves gunzels, drivers and guards. Gunzels probably wouldn't really care, or if they did it would be in an almost positive way out of curiosity or just to say "I've riden DIM 8020" (I would count myself in this group). So that brings us to drivers and guards - again, you probably have a lot who don't care (some who maybe don't even know, maybe), and the rest who don't work on interurbans). This brings us down to what - a handful of individuals? Isn't it just their tough noogies and they can be directed to operate the train?
Ockham's Razor suggests to me it might just be a coincidence, or 8020 was old and clapped out.
Still, if you're right FS74, they are indeed a bunch of saddos.
ETA: I am a little unsure why they decided on V cars at all though. I'd say a T would be more representative of the average car an emergency worker or rail trainee is likely to have to deal with in a crisis. Maybe an S set as these are older and more expendable. The only thing I can see about the V is the narrow doors, so if you can rescue punters out of a smoke-filled one of those, you can do it on anything.
Related question about Petersham: what on earth is the big f*ck-off Gaza-style fence for? |
Very few people would know that 8020 never carried that road number until after Glenbrook. For carriage enthusiasts, the DIM code gives away its former identity, just as DMT.9204 wouldn't, for most people, give away that vehicle's original identity. In fact, I'm surprised that no-one has suggested that DMT.9204 be restored to its original motor car status.
Back to Petersham: In the '60s, the NSWGR parked its archival support vans there: two SHO vans, L.1323X (SHO.562) and L.1064 (SHO.636), both having been built in 1937 on the underframes of BKE bogie hearse vans. There was also an MLV louvred van, coded L2X, with those vehicles.
|
|
 |
nazarail
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Feb 08, 2003 Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009 Location: meeks road deport
contact
|
post
|
|
| nazarail |
|
 |
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 1:45 am
|
|
as of this evening, 8020 is in the compound and the trailer still fowling the local.
|
|
 |
doridori
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Sep 21, 2005 Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009
contact
|
post
|
|
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 3:42 am
|
| 42101 wrote: | | They ARE Hydraulic jacks indeed, definitely not pneumatic at all. |
Thanks for correcting me...
I've been trained in and used hyrdulic jacks before with cribbing, yet they're just effin HUGE !
May be young'n'dumb, yet unlike some, I've heart!
|
|
 |
Bwana
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Jul 21, 2003 Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009
contact
|
post
|
|
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 7:58 am
|
Like TE, I expected a temporary set of points and some simple shunting (which made me wonder why they had something like 16 hours to do it). As a result I figured I had buckley's of the actual shunting being done while I was there, so waited till late to see the final result.
Imagine my surprise when I turned up to see this:
Some close ups of the bogies:
48130 could not have been in a darker spot if they tried. This is an 8 second exposure...
TLD™, Is this "the apparatus"?
4819 moves the second V-carraige into position
While, hiding in the dark, the Tullochs wait for the trip to their new home
And seeing as I was out in the dark I tried my hand at long (ish, only 2 seconds) exposure on a moving train:
I left at 7pm, and they'd only just started moving the second v carraige over, so it would seem they must have gone way over time and the return trip would have been quite late - I hope nobody was waiting down the line for a shot of it going past!
PS Biqua, that pic of the guys pushing the bogie is priceless!
|
|
 |
biqua
Paper Tiger
Joined: May 10, 2005 Last Visited: Jan 8, 2009 Location: SRA Survey No. 14032
contact
|
post
|
|
| biqua |
|
 |
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 8:56 am
|
| Bwana wrote: | Imagine my surprise when I turned up to see this:
 |
You must have arrived just after I left ... it's only slightly further over than my last shot (the back has had one big movement).
|
|
 |
|
|
All times are GMT + 10 Hours
|
You can post new threads in this forum You can reply to threads in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.6 © 2001 phpBB Group
Theme images and concept © 2004 by Michael Greenhill and Railpage, All Rights Reserved.
Version 2.0.6 of PHP-Nuke Port by Tom Nitzschner © 2002 www.toms-home.com
|
|