What if models

 
  DJPeters Assistant Commissioner

Years ago Clyde Engineering tendered for the CL class locomotives and some alternatives were also drawn up for these locomotives so having got the plans and the inclination to make both types I have started with the larger one and still have to make the slightly small one. At the moment this loco is being worked on almost continuosly by me and the paintwork needs a lot done to it to correct it. I cannot paint the roof at the moment as I still have to add 4 smaller fans to the roof and make exhausts for it. So here is not only the model of this loco but also the plans for both types of locomotive as well. It will hopefully be powered when I have finished the body of it.

The Lima 44 class is just there to show you how big the loco is in model form.







Sponsored advertisement

  The railway dog Junior Train Controller

A couple of those hammering along on the Trans would've been a sight. Interesting that the bigger engine harks back to E unit days with 2 engines.
  DJPeters Assistant Commissioner

They take a bit of making up the sides though, but being retired I have plenty of time on my hands to do things like this. I just used what I had at hand really, except for the bogies which are Bachmann spare parts that I ordered. Now to get on with the other one soon. I have the sides made for the second loco.
  SA_trains Deputy Commissioner

Location: ACT
Interesting could have been David.

Also interesting with both locos having four axles on each bogie. (Is that a DO-DO arrangement??? ShockedShocked) Laughing, Were they proposed to have a traction motor on each axle?

Anyway, an interesting bit of fun. Good on you for having some fun.

Cheers,

Dan
  Hafenbahn Station Master

Nice work. Thanks for sharing.
Shame they weren't built in real life. They would have been monsters.
  DJPeters Assistant Commissioner

Interesting could have been David.

Also interesting with both locos having four axles on each bogie. (Is that a DO-DO arrangement??? ShockedShocked) Laughing, Were they proposed to have a traction motor on each axle?

Anyway, an interesting bit of fun. Good on you for having some fun.

Cheers,

Dan
SA_trains
Yes Dan they were, so open the throttle and watch the track pull out from underneath the loco. Laughing

Well that is what they say "Model Railroading is fun".
  DJPeters Assistant Commissioner

Nice work. Thanks for sharing.
Shame they weren't built in real life. They would have been monsters.
Hafenbahn
Yes a pair of them thundering over the Nullabor would certainly stir up the dust a bit.  No problems when I start the other one I will keep you updated on the models.
  The_trolley Deputy Commissioner

Location: .
The Bachmann DD35/DD40AX bogie sideframe castings are overscale as is. Clyde wouldn’t have been able to use that truck casting on an Australian domestic loco due to weight and loading gauge restrictions. The local design may have been based on that type but would have not have used the US Domestic truck. They’d have been a lighter version and would have appeared as such.
  DJPeters Assistant Commissioner

The Bachmann DD35/DD40AX bogie sideframe castings are overscale as is. Clyde wouldn’t have been able to use that truck casting on an Australian domestic loco due to weight and loading gauge restrictions. The local design may have been based on that type but would have not have used the US Domestic truck. They’d have been a lighter version and would have appeared as such.
The_trolley
Yes that might be true but as no other DD type trucks are available to buy as spare parts it was them or nothing at all. Beggars cannot be chooses in this instance. I am not after a dead scale model as no model is that anyway not even mass produced RTR stuff there is always some compromise made on a model to get it to work properly, spaces like 20 mm in real life do not come out the best in HO scale more so if it is a body that just misses a bogie or something. Our models might be what is termed scale models but curves and grades on most home layouts are that tight or steep as to be almost 90 degree bends or inclines on the prototype that should be roped worked really.
  Donald Chief Commissioner

Location: Donald. Duck country.
Waiting to see The Trolly's work so we can get stuck into it for not having the right number of rivets!
  gw0071 Deputy Commissioner

You guys!
  M636C Minister for Railways

Years ago Clyde Engineering tendered for the CL class locomotives and some alternatives were also drawn up for these locomotives so having got the plans and the inclination to make both types I have started with the larger one and still have to make the slightly small one. At the moment this loco is being worked on almost continuosly by me and the paintwork needs a lot done to it to correct it. I cannot paint the roof at the moment as I still have to add 4 smaller fans to the roof and make exhausts for it. So here is not only the model of this loco but also the plans for both types of locomotive as well. It will hopefully be powered when I have finished the body of it.

The Lima 44 class is just there to show you how big the loco is in model form.







DJPeters
I had heard of these proposals.

These were somewhat earlier than the CL.

Notes obtained from Tulloch Limited refer to these proposals and they were  not purchased but the last batch of GM class were purchased instead. The Tulloch proposal was a single ended version of the Brush "Kestrel" locomotive, which was about 3600 HP.

The Clyde model numbers suggest that 567C engines are being used.

The model numbers with 645E engines involved adding 10 to the number of cylinders.
But that reference might have postdated these proposals.

The twin engine locomotive (Model A32D) could have had two 16-567C engines for 3600 HP total or two 645E engines for 4000 HP total.

The single engine locomotive has a turbocharged 20 cylinder engine.
As far as I know, no 20 cylinder turbocharged 567D was ever designed or built.
The Clyde Model number of AT20D implies a 567 engine, but it may have been a 20-645E3, simply before the standard "+10" designations were introduced for 645 export models.

A 20-567D3 would be good for about 2880 HP, a bit less than the desired 3600 HP

A 20-645E3 would be 3600 HP of course.
With careful design you could build a 3600HP unit weighing only 126 tonnes not needing eight axles (See the QUBE 1400 for example).

A hood unit version of the Clyde AT20D was actually built for metre gauge for Vale's metre gauge iron ore lines in Brazil, basically an SD45 on Do Do trucks, model DDM45 (not a proper export designation).

That is an easy kitbash using the old Athearn SD45 and Athearn DD40 bogies.

Eventually we had the CL class (AT26C) instead.

Peter
  DJPeters Assistant Commissioner

Thanks M636C some interesting info in that lot.
  M636C Minister for Railways

Thanks M636C some interesting info in that lot.
DJPeters
This is the Tulloch Internal Document. Note the date of early 1966.


25th February 1966


PROTOTYPE LOCOMOTIVE


This tender has now been decided on the basis of 8 standard 2,000 h.p. locomotives to Clyde at a price not exactly known, but believed to be approx. £A115,000 with a duty of approx. £6-7,000, this being 7%% on the imported content, the main imported components being engine, generator, traction motors, traction gearing, and all controls. 7% is the by-law and/or minimum duty for Most Favoured Nation and U. S. components for these locomotives. Clyde's traction motor plant only builds the narrow gauge or D29 series motors and the small generator. The previous tendered price for this locomotive by Clyde was £123,000 plus £7,000 duty, making a total of £A130,000 and therefore two would be equivalent to a purchase price of £A260,000.



Contact with the Commissioner indicates that he has left two out of the present purchase for budget reasons to enable him to negotiate for one prototype but not necessarily at the price of two standard locomotives.


During late December the Commissioner indicated that he would favourably consider a proposal to try out a prototype 4000 h.p. locomotive, but based on certain conditions.


It would not be a twin engine locomotive under any circumstances. It must be a 20-ton axle load maximum and with adequate fuel capacity. It must have a full car body and be pressurised to Commonwealth standards. He would not under any circumstances, consider a Do-Do. He was not interested in the prototype development of G.M.s 20- cylinder engine. He was not interested in 1-1/2 size locomotives, i.e. 3000 h.p., and it would have to be Australian built in view of the number of Australian manufacturers who would object to a fully imported locomotive. If the locomotive proved satisfactory, it would be adopted as a standard locomotive for Trans- continental trains of 2,000 tons operating on an average speed of 60 m.p.h., and there would be a foreseeable market in the next few years for 20 or 30 locomotives. It is not settled yet as to whether these locomotives would only operate on the Commonwealth section of the system or from Perth to Lithgow, as the whole of this track is of flat grades and the trains will be through-trains.



There is talk in Australia of a joint railway Company being formed to operate this Trans-Continental system and the passenger stock will be jointly owned and operated by Commonwealth Railways for themselves and the various states. There is every indication that this will be through operation, which could increase the ultimate number of locomotives.



Late in 1968 is the commencing date for the through train from Perth to Sydney. In explanation, Lithgow to Sydney is the Blue Mountains and electrically operated by twin, 4500 h.p. Metro Vickers engines and there would be no purpose in bringing diesels over the Blue Mountains.



Commercial Proposal


The idea Mr. Smith had in mind was to buy one locomotive on a down-payment with a leasing plan over a period of 12 months, and if satisfactory at the end of 12 months or before purchase outright, for a residual amount of money. In the extremely remote event that the locomotive was not satisfactory and a complete failure, there would be a lump sum payment for re- conditioning of this locomotive for sale elsewhere.

The Commissioner emphasised that he already had Ministerial approval for this type of deal as it has been already put into practice in the case of mechanised track maintenance equipment to the value of between £A30-50,000, which had, after some teething troubles, been proved satisfactory and had been purchased outright.

He quoted the case of virtually a three-party arrangement whereby Sulzer, Tulloch and Comrails developed the NT locomotive as the lightest locomotive of this power on this axle load in the world for Central Australian Railways, and cited the utmost co-operation in teething troubles in getting this locomotive to its final stage of development. He said, if this is possible on this locomotive, we can surely do the same exercise on a larger locomotive.

Translating this idea into some practical reality, we have in mind that we could perhaps sell the locomotive on the basis of £A100,000 down payment with a hire arrangement for 12 months at the rate of, say, £A10,000 per month, making a total of £A220,000 and a final payment on acceptance at the end of 12 months of, say, £A20,000. They would have an option of purchasing 5-10 identical locomotives with any improvements during the prototype period for a pre-determined figure of, say, £A185,000. This means that all of the development charges by both ourselves and Brush are recovered on the first, and the remainder, on which he would have the option, would become a normal commercial proposition.

We would suggest that the down-payment of £A100,000 would be made by Commonwealth Railways on delivery rails Port Augusta, and that this down-payment would then be shared equitably by Brush, Tulloch and Sulzer in relation to their respective share. Similarly, the monthly payments would be shared in proportion.

In regard to available finance, Commonwealth Railways would have expected to have paid £A130,000 with duty for the standard locomotive, and would therefore have budgeted for ten times this figure, and if they purchase eight locomotives, each £9,000 cheaper, they have at the present time £72,000 on hand ahead of budget, plus £260,000 for the two extra locomotives.


In regard to the option on additional locomotives at an agreed price, this will be subject to British escalation under the CPA formula and Australian escalation under material and labour variations.

Each group should cover its own financing charges on this deal.


On a prototype locomotive such as this, it would be expected that the engine manufacturer and the electrical transmission manufacturer would provide respective service engineers to see that the equipment operated satisfactorily and all necessary tests were properly carried out.

It would be expected under such a consortium arrangement, that normal warranty conditions for the failure of the locomotive or its components would apply. Each supplier would be responsible for his own components over this 12 months period. The main contractor on this prototype locomotive would be Brush Electrical Engineering. In effect this means that the Brush tender for the last contract would be the tender which would be modified to comply with these requirements, not the Tulloch-Sulzer Tender.



Australian Manufacture


If we are able to negotiate a satisfactory contract along the above, or similar lines then it is considered that the first prototype locomotive would have to be built in Australia for the following reasons:



Political, referred to above.


If the first locomotive was built in England, a considerable amount of Know-how and development is involved and this would have to be repeated in Australia for any subsequent locomotives, with added costs and delay. Again, it is not to Brush's advantage to learn how to build a 4,000 h.p. locomotive as this is a highly specialised locomotive for one customer.

Tulloch, having had some experience with previous locomotive designs have found that detailed manufacturing design carried out in England does not necessarily suit Australian manufacture, either in materials or in regard to workshop practice, and considerable drawing revision would have to be made to translate the English version into a satisfactory Australian version.




Customer Participation


Right from the very beginning of the project, there is close customer participation to ensure that their exacting needs are fully met. It is important to ensure that Comrails as an organisation feel intimately identified with the design and construction from its inception onwards.
  Gremlin Assistant Commissioner

Just a small side issue, interesting to see that the document, dated 25th February 1966, expresses Australian financial values in £ even though decimal currency was formally in operation from 14th February 1966 Smile
  M636C Minister for Railways

Just a small side issue, interesting to see that the document, dated 25th February 1966, expresses Australian financial values in £ even though decimal currency was formally in operation from 14th February 1966 Smile
Gremlin
To be fair, most of the references were to the contract for eight GM class that were ordered in late 1965 under the old currency.

I was working in a financial institution in early 1966 and I can assure you that everything was computed in dollars and cents before the day of changeover. I for one was not unhappy to not have to calculate in twelves and twenties.

What was being discussed was budget figures for locomotives, for which familiar numbers would have been preferred even eleven days after the changeover.

I am a bit surprised that Tulloch seemed to know details of the contract not formmally released, and that Clyde apparently gave a discount on this last order of GM class.

EMD only released the domestic locomotives with 645 engines in 1966, so the (presumably) 20-645E3 could indeed be regarded by Keith Smith as untested.

The comments about through standard gauge (expected in 1968, but acheived in 1970) suggest that traffic increases were expected.

It appears that construction had not yet commenced on HS4000 Kestrel and that Tulloch thought they could build it instead of Brush.

With that letter I also obtained the Tulloch tender to CR for the 4000HP locomotive but I passed that on to the ARHS(NSW) archives who appear to have lost it. It is interesting that both Brush and AEI submitted tenders for effectively the same locomotive and for whatever reason Brush seem to have won out as far as Tulloch were concerned.

But this dates David's drawings to (say) mid 1965, wheras the CL was first built in late 1969, just in time for the inaugrural passenger train in 1970....



Peter
  M636C Minister for Railways

The Bachmann DD35/DD40AX bogie sideframe castings are overscale as is. Clyde wouldn’t have been able to use that truck casting on an Australian domestic loco due to weight and loading gauge restrictions. The local design may have been based on that type but would have not have used the US Domestic truck. They’d have been a lighter version and would have appeared as such.
The_trolley
The bogie dimensions on the Clyde drawings exactly match those of the bogies on the DD35 and DD40AX.
They may have been lighter but they look to be the same size and shape as the US versions.

Peter
  DJPeters Assistant Commissioner

Thanks again Peter for more information on these proposed locomotives it certainly opens one eyes what went on back then though, especially in the instance of Tulloch knowing what Clyde were doing as most things back then were kept secret by manufacturers till something actually rolled out of their plant. Maybe some industrial spying went on back then.  Must have by the looks of it but kept quite.  Laughing

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: Gremlin

Display from: