Given they seem to be imminently losing the steel traffic, you wonder what will replace it as part of their projected increases?

Adding they have lost a lot of traffic in Victoria.

That doesn't agree with my observations.

PN have or are about to loose the steel contract and the Sadlers contract. With talk of Aurizon buying graincorp, they could very well loose all of those contracts as well. I guess with lockdown not all of us can see what you sound like you are, but care to share?

Given they seem to be imminently losing the steel traffic, you wonder what will replace it as part of their projected increases?

Adding they have lost a lot of traffic in Victoria.

That doesn't agree with my observations.

PN have or are about to loose the steel contract and the Sadlers contract. With talk of Aurizon buying graincorp, they could very well loose all of those contracts as well. I guess with lockdown not all of us can see what you sound like you are, but care to share?

I'm not at all interested in grain and have no idea what bulk are doing in Victoria but I wish them well. Intermodal loading has been very strong since the start of the pandemic with extra Perth and Brisbane "peak" services running continuously since early 2020. I strongly suspect that PN purposely priced themselves out of Sadleirs due to the increased East West container traffic to increase profitability. Sadleirs traffic finished at the end of last month and Melbourne Perth services are still running at close maximum length.

Yes, steel is going but I don't know what the "lot of traffic" PN have lost in addition to the steel in Victoria Bevans is speaking of.

I'm not at all interested in grain and have no idea what bulk are doing in Victoria but I wish them well. Intermodal loading has been very strong since the start of the pandemic with extra Perth and Brisbane "peak" services running continuously since early 2020. I strongly suspect that PN purposely priced themselves out of Sadleirs due to the increased East West container traffic to increase profitability. Sadleirs traffic finished at the end of last month and Melbourne Perth services are still running at close maximum length.

Yes, steel is going but I don't know what the "lot of traffic" PN have lost in addition to the steel in Victoria Bevans is speaking of.

50% of Traffic which Bevans complains about, would have been lost irregardless of operator... Cant really load, say, logs or fuel on rail if the main supplier doesnt want to have a rail loader for fuel traffic/cant load a train of logs due to no product *due to major bushfires*.

PN still have the non bluescope Whyalla steel traffic IIRC.

Given they seem to be imminently losing the steel traffic, you wonder what will replace it as part of their projected increases?

Adding they have lost a lot of traffic in Victoria.

That doesn't agree with my observations.

PN have or are about to loose the steel contract and the Sadlers contract. With talk of Aurizon buying graincorp, they could very well loose all of those contracts as well. I guess with lockdown not all of us can see what you sound like you are, but care to share?

I'm not at all interested in grain and have no idea what bulk are doing in Victoria but I wish them well. Intermodal loading has been very strong since the start of the pandemic with extra Perth and Brisbane "peak" services running continuously since early 2020. I strongly suspect that PN purposely priced themselves out of Sadleirs due to the increased East West container traffic to increase profitability. Sadleirs traffic finished at the end of last month and Melbourne Perth services are still running at close maximum length.

Yes, steel is going but I don't know what the "lot of traffic" PN have lost in addition to the steel in Victoria Bevans is speaking of.

This.

I don’t remember having seen this information before – suggesting that eventually up to 123 units could be involved, with an initial firm order for 50.

https://www.railwaygazette.com/traction-and-rolling-stock/pacific-national-orders-ugl-evolution-diesel-locomotives/60106.article?ID

I don’t remember having seen this information before – suggesting that eventually up to 123 units could be involved, with an initial firm order for 50.

https://www.railwaygazette.com/traction-and-rolling-stock/pacific-national-orders-ugl-evolution-diesel-locomotives/60106.article?ID

Interesting but not surprising that they plan on replacing the entire NR fleet.

I'd be thinking more likely the 80s 81s 82s DLs ANs 90s , pretty much anything pre NR first .

If the eco Nazis start acting up these would be the greatest liability .
Also consumption wise the old girls would be more expensive to run nowdays .

I'd be thinking more likely the 80s 81s 82s DLs ANs 90s , pretty much anything pre NR first .

If the eco Nazis start acting up these would be the greatest liability .
Also consumption wise the old girls would be more expensive to run nowdays .

I think the NRs will replace the locos that you mention and these new locos will take over as the primary traction for intermodal.

Aurizon is certainly a fair way through retiring its 645-engined fleet. I'd suspect the 645-engined classes will go first, plus the Alcos
.

Aurizon is certainly a fair way through retiring its 645-engined fleet. I'd suspect the 645-engined classes will go first, plus the Alcos
.

From what I hear you're spot on. The 81s are rumoured to be on the chopping block soon.

Cascade the NRs down to Rural & Bulk?

Cascade the NRs down to Rural & Bulk?

Are NRs permitted EVERYWHERE that the Gs, BLs and 81s are allowed or will this create yet another anti competitive facet to rail like speeds, fuel capacity, single ended operation and overall axle loads etc?

Cascade the NRs down to Rural & Bulk?

Are NRs permitted EVERYWHERE that the Gs, BLs and 81s are allowed or will this create yet another anti competitive facet to rail like speeds, fuel capacity, single ended operation and overall axle loads etc?

Dont know about outside of Vic, but you wouldn't want to even try and put an NR on the branches like the portland, rainbow, houpeton or oaklands line. The latter currently has a 30km/h speed restriction on it for most of its length, with 10km/h over the last 50 or so km. We know an NR has been put on the mildura line as far as Dunolly, but was fuel/weight restricted. Probably would be a stretch to think they could make Melbourne-yelta (and murrayville) and back on a tank.

In vic at least, the legacy vic classes like the G/XR and their variants will still have a place for a while yet

Dont know about outside of Vic, but you wouldn't want to even try and put an NR on the branches like the portland, rainbow, houpeton or oaklands line. The latter currently has a 30km/h speed restriction on it for most of its length, with 10km/h over the last 50 or so km. We know an NR has been put on the mildura line as far as Dunolly, but was fuel/weight restricted. Probably would be a stretch to think they could make Melbourne-yelta (and murrayville) and back on a tank.

In vic at least, the legacy vic classes like the G/XR and their variants will still have a place for a while yet

The fact that SSR has run their Cs and SSRs along the Oaklands Line, all be it at reduced fuel loading, multiple times, it would not be beyond the possibility that a pair of NRs could do the same considering that they are 2t lighter than the Cs and SSRs. The same goes for the other lines that you have mentioned, it is not beyond the realm of possibility in the future. And with the proposed building of a new fuel point at Ouyen, it would eliminate the argument of they aren't capable to make the trip on one tank.

The XRs would be the best option if you were to purely be looking at weight, as they are the lightest Operational Mainline Locomotive in PN's fleet.

Aurizon is certainly a fair way through retiring its 645-engined fleet. I'd suspect the 645-engined classes will go first, plus the Alcos
.

From what I hear you're spot on. The 81s are rumoured to be on the chopping block soon.

Given PNs track record and method of disposing surplus/redundant rolling stock, what’s the likelihood of an 81 and/or a DL making it into the hands of a museum?

Dont know about outside of Vic, but you wouldn't want to even try and put an NR on the branches like the portland, rainbow, houpeton or oaklands line. The latter currently has a 30km/h speed restriction on it for most of its length, with 10km/h over the last 50 or so km. We know an NR has been put on the mildura line as far as Dunolly, but was fuel/weight restricted. Probably would be a stretch to think they could make Melbourne-yelta (and murrayville) and back on a tank.

In vic at least, the legacy vic classes like the G/XR and their variants will still have a place for a while yet

The fact that SSR has run their Cs and SSRs along the Oaklands Line, all be it at reduced fuel loading, multiple times, it would not be beyond the possibility that a pair of NRs could do the same considering that they are 2t lighter than the Cs and SSRs. The same goes for the other lines that you have mentioned, it is not beyond the realm of possibility in the future. And with the proposed building of a new fuel point at Ouyen, it would eliminate the argument of they aren't capable to make the trip on one tank.

The XRs would be the best option if you were to purely be looking at weight, as they are the lightest Operational Mainline Locomotive in PN's fleet.

I don't think the NRs are lighter than the SSR class.
The NR class suffered a lot of traction motor failures when new and the GE793 traction motors had to be replaced with slightly heavier Ge 793A1 motors. I think many were completed with the 793A1, but I remember finding NR 1 stopped at Yass Junction with traction motor problems.

The new motors were said to be at least one tonne heavier, (together) and in theory the fuel load of the NR was reduced by 1000 litres (to 11 500 l) to compensate.

Even the 793A1 isn't much of a motor and the NR are less suitable for slow heavy trains than an 81 or 82 which have significantly bigger traction motors.

Peter

Aurizon is certainly a fair way through retiring its 645-engined fleet. I'd suspect the 645-engined classes will go first, plus the Alcos
.

From what I hear you're spot on. The 81s are rumoured to be on the chopping block soon.

Given PNs track record and method of disposing surplus/redundant rolling stock, what’s the likelihood of an 81 and/or a DL making it into the hands of a museum?

I could see an 81 ending up at Thirlmere, but I wouldn't hold my breath for a DL to survive.

Aurizon is certainly a fair way through retiring its 645-engined fleet. I'd suspect the 645-engined classes will go first, plus the Alcos
.

From what I hear you're spot on. The 81s are rumoured to be on the chopping block soon.

Given PNs track record and method of disposing surplus/redundant rolling stock, what’s the likelihood of an 81 and/or a DL making it into the hands of a museum?

I could see an 81 ending up at Thirlmere, but I wouldn't hold my breath for a DL to survive.

Aurizon have disposed of many of their locomotives with 645E Blower engines, which have relatively poor fuel economy.
They have kept most of the 2300 class, which were rebuilt with 645E3 Turbo engines, which have overall fuel economy similar to GE four stroke engines.

The 81 class have 16-645E3 turbo engines, with good fuel economy.
The 81 class are used for Southern grain traffic, which involves hauling heavy trains (40 NGPF/NGKF) on steep (1 in 66) grades.
I invite anyone to go to the top bridge on Cullerin bank and watch double 81s on a loaded grain. This is what is meant by "maximum load".

Two NRs would not be able to do that job because they have smaller traction motors.
They might be able to haul the load, but the smaller motors would reach their heat limit earlier, so the train would need to run more slowly on the grade. The train might have to stop to cool the motors.

Because the NRs are inherently limited by their smaller traction motors there are not many secondary jobs that they can do.

82s, built about the same time as NRs, have bigger motors and they are suitable for heavy slow trains and they can do exactly the same job as an 81 (and are doing so on a daily basis). But there aren't enough 82s for all the slow heavy trains.

Peter

A long shot but provided PN still have BG traffic in Victoria in say 5 years time, could some nr’s end up on the wider gauge? I don’t think their current bogies can be gauge converted but could BG bogies be built for them? Eventually the G’s, BL’s & XR’s won’t be around forever

Would be interesting to see if the NRs got 752s and a reduced fuel load to go into those sort of services once bumped off intermodal.

Would be interesting to see if the NRs got 752s and a reduced fuel load to go into those sort of services once bumped off intermodal.

After a Google search, the 752 motor is said to weigh 7000 lbs and the smaller 731 motor weighed 5600 lbs.

Various people assured me that the 769 motor was similar in size to the 731, so we could assume the weight was the same...

Substituting 752 motors on an NR would therefore add 6 x 1400 = 8400 lbs = 3.75 long tons = 3.81 tonnes.

Assuming oil with a specific gravity of 0.8 you would lose 4764 litres from maybe 11500 litres, leaving 6736 litres, not much more than half the current fuel capacity.

I don't think this is a practical proposition.

Peter

I don't think the NRs are lighter than the SSR class.
The NR class suffered a lot of traction motor failures when new and the GE793 traction motors had to be replaced with slightly heavier Ge 793A1 motors. I think many were completed with the 793A1, but I remember finding NR 1 stopped at Yass Junction with traction motor problems.

The new motors were said to be at least one tonne heavier, (together) and in theory the fuel load of the NR was reduced by 1000 litres (to 11 500 l) to compensate.

Even the 793A1 isn't much of a motor and the NR are less suitable for slow heavy trains than an 81 or 82 which have significantly bigger traction motors.

Peter

So, all the official documentation that I can find has the NRs weighing 132 t and the GT46C-ACe weighing in at 134t, but you are saying that this isn't correct?

Hang on, 731? 769? I thought they had 793A1....

Peter I think you sell the NRs short .
Earlier traction motor issues were actually pinion issues , not motors melting .

Aside from this I always though their adhesion issues were cause by their hardly hi tech bogie design .
I've told you of these times before .
Please explain how I got 1999 tonnes up Demondrille with one in admittedly good conditions , 1300 amps at 13 km/h down to about 8 over the top . Never missed a beat . Also got a bit more up Jerrawa with one in the dry .
One you wouldn't know about was the time we set sail out of Coot West one evening on PS6 . This one had part off a steel train attached out of Parks and weighed in at 4200 tonnes - a full load . As circumstances would have it the controller in Junee kept us going through Yass behind a wheatie , in the wet , that was leaking grain onto the rail heads .
Crawled up the Cullerin ranges as you'd imagine at 14-16 KM/H , never looked like slipping to a stand .
Unless things have changed full loads on the up south north of Junee were 1780 for Gs and 1840 for 81s , I think NRs were 2100 . I think you could easily substitute a pair of NRs on a wheatie that two 81s typically haul .
I think the best thing you could do was fit them with the later flexi curve bogies if suitable . I reckon that if you can get them to hold their feet you have a better chance of maintaining a speed at which the traction motors won't overheat .

Also , no spoke about it much but 81s didn't tend to survive too long tripping steel rakes out of Cringilla . Generally about a week or two and they would fry traction motors . They are good things but even the best can be beaten .

A long shot but provided PN still have BG traffic in Victoria in say 5 years time, could some nr’s end up on the wider gauge? I don’t think their current bogies can be gauge converted but could BG bogies be built for them? Eventually the G’s, BL’s & XR’s won’t be around forever

This is exactly (one of) the reasons that Murray Basin was proposed.  And this problem will still be there in 5 years time, if not moreso.