C30 AND C30T steam

 
  a6et Minister for Railways

so 5031 5041 5061 and 5091 had z19 tenders as well at some stage
MRHD66
Erh! what makes you think that, & why the specific numbers?

Sponsored advertisement

  Spinner5711 Train Controller

He's mixed up your comment of T type with 50 Class, not thinking that you meant 30T type.
  a6et Minister for Railways

He's mixed up your comment of T type with 50 Class, not thinking that you meant 30T type.
Spinner5711
This is a thread on 30 & 30T classes, not the 50cl.  If you are right, then its possible that they could well have had Z19class tenders at some point in their careers.
  MRHD66 Station Staff

Location: Wingham, New South Wales, Australia
yes  im sorry i was tired and read it the wrong way
  MRHD66 Station Staff

Location: Wingham, New South Wales, Australia
so ive seen all photos of the c30t's besides  3005,3006,3029,3064,3066,3072,3078, 3104,3106,3114,3119 has anyone got pics of these ones
ps  got the "standards in steam c30" and the tender isn't a z19 rather a unmodified z16 tender they also had 2 different type of modified versions of the z16 tenders..

Cheers Oscar
  Spinner5711 Train Controller

Oscar,

You might be thinking of the tenders that were fitted to both 30T and 19 class locos, similar to that currently coupled to 1905.  The tender coupled to 1905 is TAB No 284 (D261 Class later 1624).  This tender also bears TAB no 3029, because it was coupled to 3029T when first rebuilt to its present form.

For pictures of those tenders, see 1904 (before 1970), 1905, 1915, 1931, 1945, 1955 and 1958.
  a6et Minister for Railways

so ive seen all photos of the c30t's besides  3005,3006,3029,3064,3066,3072,3078, 3104,3106,3114,3119 has anyone got pics of these ones
ps  got the "standards in steam c30" and the tender isn't a z19 rather a unmodified z16 tender they also had 2 different type of modified versions of the z16 tenders..

Cheers Oscar
MRHD66
Do you happen to have a photo of 3120?  I would like to see a photo of it especially later in life with its numbers clear.  It was allocated to Casino in last allotment, at least what I have of it.
  Old Northern Station Master

I always thought that the tenders that looked best on them were the 6 wheel ex-C32 tenders.  The Z16 and Baldwin ones just didn't look right and the ex-Standard Goods tenders looked a bit too big.
  a6et Minister for Railways

I always thought that the tenders that looked best on them were the 6 wheel ex-C32 tenders.  The Z16 and Baldwin ones just didn't look right and the ex-Standard Goods tenders looked a bit too big.
Old Northern
It was never an aspect of looking good when decisions were made regarding an item such as a tender, rather having an engine that had a tender that fitted a need for the work required of it.

The smaller tenders meant a fair restriction in coal & especially water capacities for engines, & one thing that was never called into account for enginemen is when they pulled up at a water column to top the tender, even if under normal circumstances it would not have been necessary, to run out of water OTOH was very much frowned upon.

The Baldwyn tender provided for more than 1 ton extra in coal supplies but a bit less in water than the P class tender & except for the overall lengths was the next best for longer hauls than the 3650gal tenders, something appreciated by those who worked on the engines.  The 16cl types were used more in keeping with lightly railed branch lines that had basically no ballast & were more suited to that working, but as many of those lines were upgraded the Pclass tenders were made available of other withdrawn engines.

Most depots that engines allocated to them also usually had spare tenders, & would swap tenders when one of their allocated engines was being sent to workshops, that way they kept a good tender & had the not so good one repaired at the shops.

As for the looks, I did not mind how the Baldwyn tender looked on a 30T as the more open type cab seemed to suit them,
  Old Northern Station Master

It was never an aspect of looking good when decisions were made regarding an item such as a tender, rather having an engine that had a tender that fitted a need for the work required of it.
a6et
Yes, especially where a class of engines was converted from tank to tender.  To keep costs down, they would have to make do with whatever was available and, as a bogie tender would give a greater range, the ex-Baldwin tenders and the ex-Standard Goods tenders would have been the most practical.

My comment was more on aesthetic grounds than anything else.  I looked out a couple of photos I took around 1969 or so of 3026 in Sydney Terminal and one of an unidentified 30T (probably also 3026) at Darling Harbour, and my thought was that the tender looked right, almost as if it was intended for the locomotive from the outset.  Comparing it with the variety of tenders used, the ex-Standard Goods tender suits the locomotive, although some are a bit too high for the lines of the engine, the ex-Baldwin, although not unattractive, looks like it doesn't belong, whereas the ex-Z16 is just plain ugly.

Making an attractive engine was not, however, the point of the conversion exercise.
  a6et Minister for Railways

Yes, especially where a class of engines was converted from tank to tender.  To keep costs down, they would have to make do with whatever was available and, as a bogie tender would give a greater range, the ex-Baldwin tenders and the ex-Standard Goods tenders would have been the most practical.

My comment was more on aesthetic grounds than anything else.  I looked out a couple of photos I took around 1969 or so of 3026 in Sydney Terminal and one of an unidentified 30T (probably also 3026) at Darling Harbour, and my thought was that the tender looked right, almost as if it was intended for the locomotive from the outset.  Comparing it with the variety of tenders used, the ex-Standard Goods tender suits the locomotive, although some are a bit too high for the lines of the engine, the ex-Baldwin, although not unattractive, looks like it doesn't belong, whereas the ex-Z16 is just plain ugly.

Making an attractive engine was not, however, the point of the conversion exercise.
Old Northern
The 3650gal tender was basically a bogie version of the original Pclass type, certainly it was the tender chosen for the 50cl but it also was the same to replace the majority 6 wheel versions on the Pcl, thus extending their range as well.

The Sydney electrication allowed the 30class conversion to tender types & an excellent move indeed, both snotty nosed & superheated types were excellent to work on as well, the typ of tenders used for the 30T's however was most likely one that caused concerns, sure they would have had a heck of a lot of the old Pclass types surplus to needs but, they also needed tenders suitable for the various branch lines, the reason so many of the old 16cl & modified ones were chosen for use on dirt track lines with 50ft TT's at the end, likewise they had the lightest weight of each of the tenders used.

IIRC, 3026 replaced 3127 in the Sydney Metro working of 20trip, prior to dieselisation.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: a6et, jayrail, Raichase, wurx

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.