Location of the original Alice Springs station

 
  GeoffreyHansen Minister for Railways

Location: In a FAM sleeper
I understand that the current Alice Springs railway station is not the original and that the original was located somewhere else in the town.

Where abouts was the original located and are there any remnants of it?

Sponsored advertisement

  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Wiki is your friend
  woodford Chief Commissioner

I understand that the current Alice Springs railway station is not the original and that the original was located somewhere else in the town.

Where abouts was the original located and are there any remnants of it?
GeoffreyHansen



Going from memory from when I was i Alice in 1967 it was just west of Telegraph Terrace (where the current line runs, possibly just north of what is now Larapinta Drive, ie immediatley west of the current city centre (I think, remember it was over 50 years ago). There was no platform just a couple of Buildings and a station sign. I had a good talk with one of the drivers He said they were getting around 6mpg fuel consumption out of the loco's.

woodford
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
I had a good talk with one of the drivers He said they were getting around 6mpg fuel consumption out of the loco's.
woodford
woodford
Too high for mine?
That would give a loco with a 12,000 litre (2,640 gallon) tank a range of 15,800 miles or 25,500 km.
Can't see an NR doing 25 single trips Melbourne to Sydney.
  woodford Chief Commissioner

I had a good talk with one of the drivers He said they were getting around 6mpg fuel consumption out of the loco's.
woodford
Too high for mine?
That would give a loco with a 12,000 litre (2,640 gallon) tank a range of 15,800 miles or 25,500 km.
Can't see an NR doing 25 single trips Melbourne to Sydney.
YM-Mundrabilla
Where talking about 3ft 6 jn here. its the NSU's these had a Sulzer 6LDA28 of 840BHP, It may have been 4mpg, it was around that range. 4mpg implies a power of around 80 to 100bhp from the engine. Remember the line has few serious hills and there were not travelling very fast. Even at idle an NR would use (way) more than that.

I remember the conversation, the driver had just got out of the loco which  was sitting in the yard south of the station itself.
I was surprised how little fuel the loco used. I did not enquire on the load (it was a freight as there were no pass cars in the yard). But remember Alice Springs had a population of around 20,000 and was something like 900 kilometres from Marree, with almost nothing in between, so its unlikley that the train was huge. I remember though there was a reasonable amount of rolling stock around the yard.

The area north of Port Augusta up to the Alice is completely different now, not even the road is in the same place (Note 1), it did not go through Coober Pedy as it does now.

Note 1: this was around 1967, the road was not much more than a track and it was just starting to get a bit of tourist traffic, it was still not well travelled though.

woodford
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
Sorry Woodford, I still cannot accept the figures that you have been given.

I have a recollection (and that is all it is) that the GMs used something up to around 1.5 gallons per mile. Perhaps TW has some
EMD 567 mpg figures that would help.

It was not possible in normal circumstances to run the 1,108 miles from Port Pirie Junction to Kalgoorlie on one tank of fuel with a GM.

Fuel, to capacity, was taken at Cook westbound, but only enough to return to Cook was taken at Parkeston where, again, only sufficient to get back to Port Augusta/Port Pirie was taken. The aim being to minimise the haulage of fuel to line locations.

Marree to Alice Springs is 540 miles. Do I understand correctly that you have been told that an NSU would only consume 90 gallons of diesel on this trip at 6 mpg? Even at 4 mpg the figure is still only 135 gallons. A Holden car of the era at something around 25 mpg would use 22 gallons. (As an aside I know that the Budd railcars achieved approx 2.1 mpg.)

The NSUs carried 750 gallons of fuel and on the basis you have been given would have been capable of around 7 single trips over the Central Australia Railway between Marree and Alice Springs.

I have engine mileages of the early 1960s but not straightforward fuel consumption details. Distillate in those days was delivered by sea into the CR tank farm at Port Pirie. Distillate accounts were absolute bastards to process with costs ex Ras Tanura, exchange rates $US - £A, specific gravities and whatnot and I am happy not to remember them.

Please understand that I am not criticising you in this exercise it is just that I am having difficulty in accepting the figures that you were given.

Regards
YM
  woodford Chief Commissioner

An EMD SW1000 switcher uses an EMD 8-645E, this has a fuel consumption of 11.3 Imperial gallons per hour on notch 3, at 40 mph this equals 3.5mpg.
A EMD 12-645 (VLine N class) has a fuel consumption of 27 imperial gallons per hour at notch 3 (around 700bhp) at 100 kph this is just under 4 kilometres per gallon.

Same Loco hauling a heavy freight up a 1 in 48 will be using around 104 imperial gallons per hour, it could take 3/4ers of an hour to climb the inglsiton bank and thus use around 70-80 gallons of fuel, this is why loco's have decent sized fuel tanks.

On level ground trains use little fuel, this in the end will be there greatest strength.

The reason why steam loco's went out of use is because they needed water so often and the infrastructure for this cost a fortune, a diesel will do thousands of kilometeres on a tank of fuel.

woodford
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
An EMD SW1000 switcher uses an EMD 8-645E, this has a fuel consumption of 11.3 Imperial gallons per hour on notch 3, at 40 mph this equals 3.5mpg.
A EMD 12-645 (VLine N class) has a fuel consumption of 27 imperial gallons per hour at notch 3 (around 700bhp) at 100 kph this is just under 4 kilometres per gallon.

Same Loco hauling a heavy freight up a 1 in 48 will be using around 104 imperial gallons per hour, it could take 3/4ers of an hour to climb the inglsiton bank and thus use around 70-80 gallons of fuel, this is why loco's have decent sized fuel tanks.

On level ground trains use little fuel, this in the end will be there greatest strength.

The reason why steam loco's went out of use is because they needed water so often and the infrastructure for this cost a fortune, a diesel will do thousands of kilometeres on a tank of fuel.

woodford
woodford
Thanks Woodford.
An interesting exercise, where we will agree to disagree, there are just too many variables and unknowns.
Keep smiling. Smile
  woodford Chief Commissioner

An EMD SW1000 switcher uses an EMD 8-645E, this has a fuel consumption of 11.3 Imperial gallons per hour on notch 3, at 40 mph this equals 3.5mpg.
A EMD 12-645 (VLine N class) has a fuel consumption of 27 imperial gallons per hour at notch 3 (around 700bhp) at 100 kph this is just under 4 kilometres per gallon.

Same Loco hauling a heavy freight up a 1 in 48 will be using around 104 imperial gallons per hour, it could take 3/4ers of an hour to climb the inglsiton bank and thus use around 70-80 gallons of fuel, this is why loco's have decent sized fuel tanks.

On level ground trains use little fuel, this in the end will be there greatest strength.

The reason why steam loco's went out of use is because they needed water so often and the infrastructure for this cost a fortune, a diesel will do thousands of kilometeres on a tank of fuel.

woodford
Thanks Woodford.
An interesting exercise, where we will agree to disagree, there are just too many variables and unknowns.
Keep smiling. Smile
YM-Mundrabilla
I am not making the above figures up, they come from fuel consumption tables from the American Railroad asociation and I also have checked them for validity. As stated I was surprised at the low fuel consumption but the figures do check out in my own train simulation program.

I will always give as good as info as I can, it actually does not bother me who believes what as long as we all treat each other with respect, Railpage is so far the ONLY web site I have been on where this has happened..

woodford
  NG Sulzers Deputy Commissioner

Location: Quorn
I have driven both NT and NSU class diesel loco's, and still do, the most recent time being a mere six weeks ago. The 6LDA28 B and C engines hauling a train are closer to 1mpg, like their EMD counterparts.
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
I have driven both NT and NSU class diesel loco's, and still do, the most recent time being a mere six weeks ago. The 6LDA28 B and C engines hauling a train are closer to 1mpg, like their EMD counterparts.
NG Sulzers
Thanks NG Sulzers.
Your figures are a closer 'ball park' fit to my broad understanding of loco fuel consumption.
I thought afterwards (hoped) that you or someone else close to the NSUs now or back in the days would be either able to confirm my thoughts or shoot me down in flames.
Regards
YM
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
Fuel consumption of an engine (doesn't really matter what type) Is measured by a formula of grams of fuel per kilowatt-hour (ounces of fuel per bhp-hour)

The harder an engine works, the more fuel Is consumed (though some engines defy this rule to some extent)

The power output required by a locomotive would be highly variable, depending on many factors, load, speed, driver style, weather, etc
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
Fuel consumption of an engine (doesn't really matter what type) Is measured by a formula of grams of fuel per kilowatt-hour (ounces of fuel per bhp-hour)

The harder an engine works, the more fuel Is consumed (though some engines defy this rule to some extent)

The power output required by a locomotive would be highly variable, depending on many factors, load, speed, driver style, weather, etc
Nightfire
Agree, but over time a 'fair average' figure becomes common.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: Nightfire

Display from:   

Quick Reply

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