New locomotives

 
  jmt Deputy Commissioner

You really have to crunch numbers.

Assuming a buyer in either in Latin America or Southern Africa.

There are no heavy lift liner services from Tasmania to either of these destinations, so it will require the charter of a vessel (hopefully one that has had a paying cargo to the mainland).

A small heavy lift vessel with adjustable tween decks will be needed, anything under about 8000 tonnes will probably have insufficient height to double stack locomotives, so work on something similar to BBC Chartering's Bergen Class
http://www.bbc-chartering.com/uploads/tx_bbcfleetlist/BBC_Bergen_type%20-%20dwt%208000.pdf?ts=1357438870
In cross section this type will give 3 locos wide x 2 high, with a theoretical max of 18 units.

Cost of charter with wharfage, stevedoring, and insurance, probably in the range of A$1 to A$1.5 million.

So a minimum locomotive buy would have to be at least 10, to justify, and amortise the charter cost, better 12 or 14, to land them at under A$100k per locomotive.

Previous Tasrail locomotive disposal tenders have had a relatively short notice. For a Latino (or African), to obtain an Australian visa (our overseas embassies and consulates can be tardy and not present in all countries), and book flights, you must allow at least 6 weeks, so a gap of between 10 to 12 weeks between the tender been published, and closing is desirable, with flexible inspection times allowed for overseas bidders. Inspection windows for previous disposal tenders have been arbitrary. Tasrail is theoretically a Limited Company, why let the civil service mindset govern disposal tenders?

Previous loco disposal tenders have facilitated local scrap merchants. If Tasrail wanted to maximise returns, they should have a list of potential overseas bidders, and give these people advanced notice, this will increase their return, as the overseas buyer purchasing rebuild core, will pay a premiun over local scrappers. Also arrange the tender process to favor the bulk purchaser, all of the QR class for instance with the option as a job lot, will probably attract a better price than if sold piecemeal as single units.






Sponsored advertisement

  Graham4405 The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dalby Qld
Perhaps someone looking at establishing a (or expanding an existing) small operation in Queensland might look at some of the "clapped out" locos...
  jmt Deputy Commissioner

Perhaps someone looking at establishing a (or expanding an existing) small operation in Queensland might look at some of the "clapped out" locos...
"Graham4405"


This assumes that there is not some form of confidential "knock for knock" agreement in place between Aurizon and Tasrail

After all Aurizon did sell 4 x 2150's to Tasrail, contrary to their usual practice. What sort of caviet or understanding was negotiated to allow this sale to proceed? also the earlier sale in 2010 of 2 x 1502's for parts.
  CodyW Junior Train Controller

Location: Launceston, Tasmania
What port do you think these new locos will be unloaded at?

Also, Tasmania does technically have a ship operating out of Tasmania that is capable of heavy lift operations. The 12K SSE build GC, HR Endeavour (IMO: 9261073). I think that does the odd general cargo job aside from the AUBWT>AURDN ZC run.
  dw54 Assistant Commissioner

Location: Devonport, Tas
Raze the DQ's to the deck, fit them with a 1500hp Cat 3512D and Kato alternator, and the same control system and cab as the new units. Maybe do the same with the D's, but with the 3516 engine. Could be done at East Tamar as resources allowed, with technical assistance from Progress and Downer. A nice homogeneous fleet. Flying pigs and all that Laughing
"i_know_nothing"

Upthread you will find a subthread on the DQs - regarding their frames and suitability for rebuilding. It was somewhat inconclusive, but the balance of probabilities is that the locos were the G22CL model - ie the lightweight version of the frames - which of course does mean that they are not as strong as the standard G22C. After a rather long service life (since the 1960s), I can understand Tasrail taking a cautious line on the matter of rebuilding vs new.

DW in Don
  dw54 Assistant Commissioner

Location: Devonport, Tas
What port do you think these new locos will be unloaded at?

Also, Tasmania does technically have a ship operating out of Tasmania that is capable of heavy lift operations. The 12K SSE build GC, HR Endeavour (IMO: 9261073). I think that does the odd general cargo job aside from the AUBWT>AURDN ZC run.
"CodyW"

Cody - please translate for landlubbers like me.

DW in Don
  jmt Deputy Commissioner


Upthread you will find a subthread on the DQs - regarding their frames and suitability for rebuilding. It was somewhat inconclusive, but the balance of probabilities is that the locos were the G22CL model - ie the lightweight version of the frames - which of course does mean that they are not as strong as the standard G22C. After a rather long service life (since the 1960s), I can understand Tasrail taking a cautious line on the matter of rebuilding vs new.

DW in Don
"dw54"


"but the balance of probabilities is that the locos were the G22CL model". Unlikely, every reference that I have sighted gives a loco weight of around 91.6 tonnes (or are you also disputing the weight?). On what references and evidence are you basing your claim? Utter hearsay sufficient times and the uninformed will accept it as gospel.  If you are going to peddle your lightweight theory as fact, you are going to have to do some due diligence and produce credible evidence to back up your claim.

Start here, list of the lightweight 645s built, compare these loco weights with the 1502 Class (references from Wikipedia)


EMD GL22C Orders

Builder
Country
Railroad
Quantity
Road Numbers
Notes


Henschel & Son
Mali
Chemin de Fer du Mali
2
CC1681 – CC1682
 


EMD
Nigeria
Nigerian Railway Corporation
30
1126 – 1155
 


EMD
Guinea
Office National du Chemin de Fer de Guinée
2
CC1601 – CC1602
 


Henschel & Son
Senegal
Régie des Chemins de Fer du Senegal
2
CC1701 – CC1703
 


EMD
Morocco
Société Ferrite de Rif
2
1 – 2
 




EMD GL22C-2 Orders

Builder
Country
Railroad
Quantity
Road Numbers
Notes


EMD
Taiwan
Taiwan Railway Administration
2
R193 – R194
 



Plus the NZ GL22MC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_DF_class_locomotive_%281979%29

I will give you a clue, the Nigerian 1126 Class weighed 80 tonnes
http://www.topforge.co.uk/Photographs/JPG%20Files/NRC%201143.JPG

If the 1460/1502 were built on a lightweight frame, the weight should be under 82 tonnes. They were not built with dynamic brakes, add DBs like Antofagasta's 1452-1458 rebuilds (of 1502s), and the weight comes up to 96 tonnes (the same as the US built GR12). Compare with the NZ DF class which were factory fitted with DB. The DF were built as GL22MC, after the turbo rebuild to GT22LC  DFT Class, the weight was 87.6 tonnes (some references claim 86 tonnes which I think was the original build weight). Use the actual weight to judge if a loco has a lightweight frame.

As a very rough rule of thumb, EMD's lightweight export offerings are generally around 2 tonnes per axle lighter than the standard model (for similar mechanical/electrical spec).

Kristopan's Clyde list is based on GM/EMD order numbers, La Grange gives G12C for the 1460s and G22C for the 1502s
http://community-2.webtv.net/ajkristopans/CLYDEENGINEERINGCO/



  dw54 Assistant Commissioner

Location: Devonport, Tas

Upthread you will find a subthread on the DQs - regarding their frames and suitability for rebuilding. It was somewhat inconclusive, but the balance of probabilities is that the locos were the G22CL model - ie the lightweight version of the frames - which of course does mean that they are not as strong as the standard G22C. After a rather long service life (since the 1960s), I can understand Tasrail taking a cautious line on the matter of rebuilding vs new.

DW in Don
"dw54"


On what references and evidence are you basing your claim? Utter hearsay sufficient times and the uninformed will accept it as gospel.
"jmt"


As you can see, I was referring to a subthread on the subject, and the postings therein. Shame you didn't chime in back then.

But thanks for the info - it casts that thread in a different light. Nonetheless, the conclusion I drew (above) still stands. I can understand TR's caution.

DW in Don
  M636C Minister for Railways


Upthread you will find a subthread on the DQs - regarding their frames and suitability for rebuilding. It was somewhat inconclusive, but the balance of probabilities is that the locos were the G22CL model - ie the lightweight version of the frames - which of course does mean that they are not as strong as the standard G22C. After a rather long service life (since the 1960s), I can understand Tasrail taking a cautious line on the matter of rebuilding vs new.

DW in Don
"dw54"


On what references and evidence are you basing your claim? Utter hearsay sufficient times and the uninformed will accept it as gospel.
"jmt"


As you can see, I was referring to a subthread on the subject, and the postings therein. Shame you didn't chime in back then.

But thanks for the info - it casts that thread in a different light. Nonetheless, the conclusion I drew (above) still stands. I can understand TR's caution.

DW in Don
"dw54"


All of the Clyde G12C (and the QR 1502 and WAGR AA) units used a frame based on the original Clyde G12.

The Clyde G12 (and G8 ) were 450 mm longer than the standard units built in La Grange and London and were said to use a frame designed for a model J12 (although whether the Henschel built units for the OBB used this frame isn't known.)

The first Clyde G12Cs were the 1450 class in Queensland and this was recognisably a G12 with longer trucks at the same pivot centres with the body lengthened at each end to cover the longer frame. These were called GR12s initially but were different to the EMD version which had all the extra length in front of the cab.

The 1460 and WAGR A were the same frame with the body altered to provide walkways at each end.

So none of the locomotives under discussion used a standard EMD frame, rather a Clyde adaptation of an older frame.

M636C
  Draffa Chief Commissioner

What would be the rough cost savings over a new locomotive? Half? Or a third less?
"i_know_nothing"
Based on very limited research, the cost of a 'kit' to repower a loco stretches into seven figures.  A new 'lightweight' DC loco, with a maintainence contract included, might cost $3-$4m.
If you're only saving a million dollars (say), then the risk assessment would probably suggest going new.
  bengoody1 Station Staff

the new locos are gonig to be wide cabe unites?, and gonig to be great locomotives of tasmania. zp class, zr class, d class and mka are all wide cab locos and now 17 more!!!!. S H I T . i can not wait. tasrail is a small rail net work but big and getting bigger. just great =D
  DQ2004 Chief Commissioner

Location: Hobart -where the rain has lumps in it
For those that haven't seen it, the latest issue of Railway Digest has an article from Peter Clark about the new TR class locomotives.
Much of the information in the article has already been seen on this thread, however there is an additional diagram.
There is a larger image of the proposed colour scheme with the vertical red chevrons (or whatever you want to call them).

Not convinced about the colours personally, but its better (IMHO) than the plain grey and yellow.

Regards all,

Toby
  Draffa Chief Commissioner

Much of the information in the article has already been seen on this thread, however there is an additional diagram.
"DQ2004"
Function before form is obviously at the forefront of design.  Not sure what the purpose of the lower rear hood is.  The front end looks like something out of Germany before they started streamlining everything.
  DRR_Fireman Deputy Commissioner

Location: -
The diagram in the magazine also shows a lot of empty space above the front traction motor blower, looks to me like an end walkway would've fitted after all.
  12CSVT Chief Commissioner

Location: Drowning in accreditation red tape!
That wouldn't be space for future developments like an electronic braking module would it?
  neil steel Station Master


While I do look forward to seeing TasRail's new PR22L's in service - I personally think for the cash outlay of $60 million plus, there are/were better options!

In a perfect world the Tasmanian government should of used 41kg rail in it's rail rehabilitation package of the last few years but as we all know - that's not reality. Unfortunately due to this oversight/lack of funding whatever - TasRail have no other option than to purchase DC 2000hp locomotives of around 110 tons (PR22Ls 111tons).

The best narrow gauge locomotive for your dollar is the EDI GT42Ace, 3000hp AC traction - 180 units are now in service for Aurizon (QR National), Pacific National and GWA. They are now the most successful narrow gauge locomotives in Australian railway history - yet we can't get them due to the inferior track in Tasmania!

While the PR22L's are stated at pulling 750tons up a 1 in 40 grade - the fact remains that the GT42ACe are rated at 1500 tons up the same gradient! Yes there length is a problem, but their height at 3900 above rail, could fit through the tunnels on the west coast!

A far better option would of been purchasing all 14 members of the 2150 class from QRN (another would of been buying 2250/2300 12 cylinder EMD's) from QRN and save $40 million which could of been spent on removing the worst of the 200 year old, hideous small chain curves from the system.

It is a HUGE gamble to purchase a locomotive with a caterpillar prime mover, while it may power countless locomotives overseas - no other Australian rail operator has touched Caterpillar since the disastrous NSWGR 47 class debacle of the 70's - most were scrapped before 20 years of service!  

If they perform without too many problems, then that's great but I think it's a waste of money. And what's this stupidity of removing 2 traction motors so they can run down the west coast! FIX THE TRACK would be a better alternative?! What's the point of spending 60+ million on new locos that do what the D's and 2050's do and still be running at horse and cart speeds - that's not progress in my book!

  12CSVT Chief Commissioner

Location: Drowning in accreditation red tape!



While I do look forward to seeing TasRail's new PR22L's in service - I personally think for the cash outlay of $60 million plus, there are/were better options!
"neil steel"


You may well think so, but Tasrail management carefully examined the available options and decided the PR22Ls were the best choice for Tas. They have to justify their choice to the Board and the Minister and have to live with their decision. from what I have heard, they are quite comfortable with their selection.

In a perfect world the Tasmanian government should of used 41kg rail in it's rail rehabilitation package of the last few years but as we all know - that's not reality. Unfortunately due to this oversight/lack of funding whatever - TasRail have no other option than to purchase DC 2000hp locomotives of around 110 tons (PR22Ls 111tons).!
"neil steel"


You have just answered your own question about why tasrail did what they did. Tasrail have only got so much money to play with which has to be carefully balanced between track upgrades, new locos and new wagons. Its pointless blowing every cent on Pilbara standard track and then being unable to afford the locos to use on it!

The best narrow gauge locomotive for your dollar is the EDI GT42Ace, 3000hp AC traction - 180 units are now in service for Aurizon (QR National), Pacific National and GWA. They are now the most successful narrow gauge locomotives in Australian railway history - yet we can't get them due to the inferior track in Tasmania!

While the PR22L's are stated at pulling 750tons up a 1 in 40 grade - the fact remains that the GT42ACe are rated at 1500 tons up the same gradient! Yes there length is a problem, but their height at 3900 above rail, could fit through the tunnels on the west coast!).!
"neil steel"


You have acknowledged the weight limits of the track are the biggest obstacle for getting something like the EDI GT42Ace, so what is the point in harping on about how much better they would be? Maybe in the future when the track is finally up to scratch (all concrete sleepers, new rail, etc.) something equivalent to that may indeed replace the PR22Ls when their time is up.

A far better option would of been purchasing all 14 members of the 2150 class from QRN (another would of been buying 2250/2300 12 cylinder EMD's) from QRN and save $40 million which could of been spent on removing the worst of the 200 year old, hideous small chain curves from the system.
"neil steel"


NO! NO! NO! How many times has it been stated that Tasrail are FED UP with settling for second hand cast offs, with their lack of warranty, service support, state of the art technology, poor fuel economy and maintenance headaches. Tasmania has lived with that since 1975 and most local rail industry people have had a gut full of all that crap!

It is a HUGE gamble to purchase a locomotive with a caterpillar prime mover, while it may power countless locomotives overseas - no other Australian rail operator has touched Caterpillar since the disastrous NSWGR 47 class debacle of the 70's - most were scrapped before 20 years of service!.
"neil steel"


Now that is just rubbish. Caterpillar were quite successfully used in the EBR 10's & 11's to the end of vacuum brake. It was also used in their contemporaries (The NSWGR '73's / QR ' DH's / WAGR 'M/MA's - most now successfully being re-used on the Qld. sugar cane network). The '47's main problem (from what I have been told) was poor servicing and undersized and choked radiators - a big handicap when working on the Western Line. Since LVR resolved the lack of care and attention, their 47's have been working quite successfully on loco hire duties. The Cat 3612 is a proven engine with plenty of sales and service support and ease of replacement, modern, fuel efficient and cost effective. There is no reason Caterpillar can't be very successful in Tas and set a precedent for elsewhere in Australia

If they perform without too many problems, then that's great but I think it's a waste of money. And what's this stupidity of removing 2 traction motors so they can run down the west coast! FIX THE TRACK would be a better alternative?! What's the point of spending 60+ million on new locos that do what the D's and 2050's do and still be running at horse and cart speeds - that's not progress in my book!
"neil steel"


If the selection of the PR22Ls was a waste of money, the Board, carefully trying to manage limited capital funds, wouldn't have approved it! In fact, your "alternative" is the waste of money. Stupidity of removing 2 traction motors to work the West Coast? Rather, it is a clever way of a] not wasting money on getting different types of locos to accommodate one line (the track is not the problem, its the bridges (well one in particular)) and b] when the Melba Line IS finally brought up to scratch, all the PR22Ls can be standardised and not leave any pointless orphan locos on the network.

  msilsby Deputy Commissioner

Location: Canberra

Does anybody know if in the contract for the new loco's or rolling stock, there was an option to purchase more as part of the existing contract?



  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE

The QR 4000/4100/PN/etc classes have been prmarly purchases for bulk haulage, ie known large tonnages with contracts to support them. PN uses them on overpowered short train container services but there was a grander plan from the outset. So now they have one fleet of diesels and one fleet of sparks and they know the standard of build, quality and local (via rail) support. But they were not cheap. At one stage PN were pushing for a 1300m length container train trial along the NCL from Gympie up, but it was cancelled and never heard anything since. These longer trains with a pair of these locos running back to back would improve operations I would imagine, no engine turning and you should a loco fail, you have one that as long as you are not on a steep hill will get you to a siding.

It would cost many many millions to get the rails up to a standard that allowed this 3100HP monsters on Tasrail tracks and take about 5 years to achieve the goal, you will never get your money back based on potential limited tonnages available in the state. The Aussie dollar is placing increased pressure on the major customers of Tasrail and there is a real possiblilty some of these aging plants could reduce output or close in the short to mid-term. Should Boyer close, what would be the viability of the southern line?

Tasrail has given the track a sustainabilty upgrade and purchasing new reliable gear to run on it, including wagons. Should the systems economic situation improve, money will I'm sure be progressively diverted to rails for further improvements like curve easing, by-passes etc. However should the opposite occur, at least the rollinig stock is portable and be reallocated internally or sold. State of the art concrete sleepered track with 60kg rails  is not worth the paper its price is written on if there are no customers at the end of the line.

  dw54 Assistant Commissioner

Location: Devonport, Tas

We've all had our chances to explore in this forum the many potential scenarios. Like CBH in WA, the decision has been made, and is somewhat unconventional. CBH will live with their choice, as will Tasrail.

While there's a place for reflecting on what could have been - after all it is an open forum - I think it somewhat pointless raising criticism of Tasrail's decision making when the choice has been made, legally binding contracts entered into, and it's now a fait accompli.

By the way, the selection criteria were weighted heavily towards whole-of-life cost, which includes fuel, maintenance and capital acquisition.

The high $AUD and high unemployment in the US, especially in the traditionally poorer areas, means that buying fully made up units from the US is now cheaper than having a local fabricator (eg Downer Rail) put down the frame and superstructure and install US built parts.

In terms of making a business case, Tasrail clearly is able to make a case for pre-loved locos where time is of the essence (ie the 2050 class). That they elected to avoid this approach when re-equipping writ large means that, apart from the benefit of earlier delivery, the other major factors weighed against this scenario - especially ongoing maintenance and fuel costs.

DW in Don

  SPSD40T2 Chief Commissioner

Location: Platform 9-3/4 and still waiting !!

Not wishing to fan flames etc , as Tas have made a commercial decision  and thats fine, but just to add a bit of a footnote to all this.

it was touted by some here that you could /should be able to find a way to put decent horsepower to the rails, do it with AC traction and still come in under the axle load.

you can
http://www.vossloh-innotrans.com/media/downloads/pdfs/vrv/Vossloh_ASIALIGHT_us.pdf


arguably a more boxy design , even a single ended version  would do..

Just posting for the interested.

cheers

  jmt Deputy Commissioner




you can
http://www.vossloh-innotrans.com/media/downloads/pdfs/vrv/Vossloh_ASIALIGHT_us.pdf


"SPSD40T2"


Looks like their Mac Jockey was having a wet dream with Photoshop

Any evidence that this type has actually made a sale?

Similar concept to Siemens Asia Runner, which has been touted at various rail exhibitions for years, and has only scored 16 runs in Vietnam

Most of the locos of this type, gauge, and weight will be purchased by government railways, and the Europeans will find it hard going, as most are hindered by anti bribery legislation in their home countries, so have little hope bidding against the Chinese into the third world.



  jmt Deputy Commissioner


Still no news out of Patterson

However Muncie is awash with Cape gauge

44 GT38AC for PTKA in Sumatra, order number 20098249 (CC205.07-CC205.50)

http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3383310

With BHP 4405
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPicture.aspx?id=3383342


Meter Gauge GT46AC slug mothers for Ferronor Chile due out next

Cross posted from LocoNotes

  Draffa Chief Commissioner

However Muncie is awash with Cape gauge
"jmt"
Must be a field day for the locals, having something new to look at.
  nstobyt Beginner


Hi all, I know I promised some pictures and ain't followed through, but maybe this is one. Then again maybe it aint.

I can't tell what it is other than something little and it got a yellow cat motor. Look like they switching it to another track. That shop laid out with lots of short tracks side side so most shops like that they do certain jobs on one track then move to next track. Almost like an assembly line but it move slow real slow. That how our NS shops do overhauls move units from from stage to stage.

My cousin-in-law a csx conductor he took this from the csx main line by progress rail patterson. He zoomed in the middle way up close and crop it, that picture taken from way far back so sorry it not any clearer than this.

https://plus.google.com/photos/101076501901548664984/albums/5856862560760670513?banner=pwa

I not very good at posting pictures and my wife will help post pictures of the kids but she cant be bothered help me with pictures of motors so somebody let me know if this works or not.

Toby

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

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