IRFCA Mailing List Archive

Messages 7721 - 7740

Previous 20 Messages          Archive Index          Next 20 Messages

From: S.Shankar <>

Subject: Bangladesh Railways

Date: 20 Aug 1999 04:07:35 -0500


Hello Mike,
I'm glad you liked the 'neighbors' website of Pak railways.

Actually, there used to be a time I used to collect books, pics and info
on railways worldwide. That ceased when I left India (call it love of
the land) and I dumped whatever I had. (I kick myself for that now!)
That included three photos from the Bangladesh Railways.

I have been browsing since yesterday morning for more images for my Pak
site as well as for images for Bangladesh, but both countries are very
poorly represented, probably due to their primitive ways.

For Bangladesh however, I can provide you with links to some of our
other members' works. Here are two, one from Larry Russell and another
from Rolf Stumpf.

Bangladesh Railway links:

From Larry Russell:(EMD sourced beasts):

<A HREF="http://EMDExport.Railfan.net/bangladesh.html">http://EMDExport.Railfan.net/bangladesh.html</A>

From Rolf Stumpf :(Alco sourced beasts):

<A HREF="http://alcoworld.railfan.net/bangla.htm">http://alcoworld.railfan.net/bangla.htm</A>

Though I am sure both Larry and Rolf would have grabbed me by my throat
if I went around pinching pictures from their websites and grafting them
into my own, I'm sure they certainly won't mind my forwarding selected
pages to the irfca as urls!

Cheers.

Shankar




Mike Brooker wrote:
>
> >Check out my small webpage on Pakistan's railways.
> >
> ><A HREF="http://members.tripod.com/shankaronline/neighbors.htm">http://members.tripod.com/shankaronline/neighbors.htm</A>
> >
> >I'h having trouble with one of the images: I have been working at it
> >since 1500 hrs: its now nearly 0000 hrs, but that goddam thing
still
> >refuses to upload.
> >
> >Tripod keeps saying upload successful. Maybe I have exceeded my 11
mb.
>
> Nice site..I had no problem viewing the images. How about a site on
> Bangladeshi railways??
>
> How much does the current edition of "Trains at A Glance" sell for?
In 1995
> I paid $5.00 U.S. for a copy. An inflated price to fleece westerners,
as is
> the cost of the Indrail pass.
>
> ********************************************************************
> Mike Brooker
> 99 Wychcrest Ave.,
> Toronto, ON M6G 3X8
> CANADA
> (416) 536-7406
> ********************************************************************

From: John Lacey <>

Subject: Re: Garratt

Date: 20 Aug 1999 04:17:52 -0500


S.Shankar wrote:
>
> Hello,
> For all ye diehards, (me included!)
> Just stumbled across this list of engines produced by Garratt.
> The ng DHR one and the mg Assam-Bengal one are mentioned here. I
didnot
> scroll enough to spot the bg BNR beasts though.
>
> Take a look at:
>
> <A HREF="http://users.powernet.co.uk/hamilton/bp.html">http://users.powernet.co.uk/hamilton/bp.html</A>
>
> No pics, unfortunately.
>
> Cheers.
> Shankar

The BNR locos appear later in the list; scroll down to the end where
there is an Index which leads on to 4 pages of photos. Two are of
Burmese Garratts; there are no Indian photos. The index also leads to
other beyer Peacock locos.
Cheers
John Lacey

From: John Lacey <>

Subject: Re: Garratt

Date: 20 Aug 1999 04:37:17 -0500


Apologies for error: last line should read " The index also leads to
Garratt locos built by other than Beyer Peacock."
John lacey

From: ranand <>

Subject: Re: DLW news in the TOI

Date: 20 Aug 1999 05:16:54 -0500


Ken,

Thanks for your message. This clears up an old mystery
(for me at least!). I am sure that these locos must be long since
retired. I recall that they often had a lot of trouble starting the
heavy goods rakes and had to be used in multiple.

Would anyone know the IR designation of these shunter engines?

Anand

Internet: anand@watson.email
External tel: (914) 784 7054
Notes: Rangachari Anand/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
Tie-line: 863 7054

From: S.Shankar <>

Subject: Bangladesh steam

Date: 20 Aug 1999 06:33:17 -0500


Hello,

The good news is, I had not dumped the three Bangla Railway photos after
all. I found two (steam), the third one (diesel) is still missing. No
worry, a diesel just like that is already on Larry's site which I had
forwarded earlier.

Check out the two Bangla steamers at:

<A HREF="http://members.tripod.com/shankaronline/bangladeshsteam.htm">http://members.tripod.com/shankaronline/bangladeshsteam.htm</A>

As there were two pics only, I did not bother to thumbnail them. I hope
they are not the massive 256 kb as the Pak images.

Cheers.

Shankar

From: S.SRINIVAS <>

Subject: subscribe

Date: 20 Aug 1999 06:51:16 -0500


subscribe

From: shubh <>

Subject: Re: Turntable fears for WDG4

Date: 20 Aug 1999 08:56:06 -0500


General Motors did not really have any design of a twin cab loco. In
fact in their entire history they have made only one twin cab design.

The GT46MAC (WDG4) is based on the SD70MAC design. The SD70 was a tall
locomotive, since the envelope (maximum moving dimensions) allowed on
the American Railroads are quite liberal. When they set about designing
the GT46MAC, they had to spread the equipment along the length of the
locomotive to reduce the height. The locomotive thus became rather long
and their was no possibility of adding another cab at the other end.

When we were negotiating with GM for the passenger loco knowhow
(GT46PAC), we aksed them to provide us with a twin cab design. They said
that it would be expensive. However, they have agreed to help DLW, if we
decide to develop a twin cab design of our own. With limitations of axle
load and overall length of the locomotive, however, chances of a
successful design in the near future appear remote. GT46PAC must have
even lower axle load for high speed operations. In all probability the
GT46PAC loco will look exactly same as GT46MAC. It will however have a
3000 hp engine (12 cylynder V as against 16 cyl for the freight
version). It will also have only foru traction motors. The central axle
on both the bogies will be without traction motors.

It is true that the WDG4's will be used for freight operations only, at
least to start with. But since their hauling power is almost twice that
of WDM2's, even though the horsepower is not doubled (thanks to its
microprocessor based wheel slip control), they will not be used in MU
mode.


---- you wrote:
> Thank you for the detailed info. Could you please clarify still why
this
> design of cab was choosen over `cab at both ends'. Iam sure that two
cab
> driver viewpoint is still the best and now that we have our in-house
design
> and experience of the same with the WDP2s.
>
> Did it have a big price implication tag from GM?
>
> Harsh
>
> P.S. It is clear that the WDG4s will be mostly on freight haul duties
where
> they will never exceed 75 Kmph so running long hood should not be much
of a
> problem actually.
> Also these may be frequently MUed also so both ends can be short hood
> leading there.
> Still I would like to know why a universal cab design was preferred
over two
> cab.
>

>


----------------------------------------------------------------
Get your free email from AltaVista at <A HREF="http://altavista.iname.com">http://altavista.iname.com</A>

From: shubh <>

Subject: Re: Turntable fears for WDG4

Date: 20 Aug 1999 09:00:22 -0500


General Motors did not really have any design of a twin cab loco. In
fact in their entire history they have made only one twin cab design.

The GT46MAC (WDG4) is based on the SD70MAC design. The SD70 was a tall
locomotive, since the envelope (maximum moving dimensions) allowed on
the American Railroads are quite liberal. When they set about designing
the GT46MAC, they had to spread the equipment along the length of the
locomotive to reduce the height. The locomotive thus became rather long
and their was no possibility of adding another cab at the other end.

When we were negotiating with GM for the passenger loco knowhow
(GT46PAC), we aksed them to provide us with a twin cab design. They said
that it would be expensive. However, they have agreed to help DLW, if we
decide to develop a twin cab design of our own. With limitations of axle
load and overall length of the locomotive, however, chances of a
successful design in the near future appear remote. GT46PAC must have
even lower axle load for high speed operations. In all probability the
GT46PAC loco will look exactly same as GT46MAC. It will however have a
3000 hp engine (12 cylynder V as against 16 cyl for the freight
version). It will also have only foru traction motors. The central axle
on both the bogies will be without traction motors.

It is true that the WDG4's will be used for freight operations only, at
least to start with. But since their hauling power is almost twice that
of WDM2's, even though the horsepower is not doubled (thanks to its
microprocessor based wheel slip control), they will not be used in MU
mode.


---- you wrote:
> Thank you for the detailed info. Could you please clarify still why
this
> design of cab was choosen over `cab at both ends'. Iam sure that two
cab
> driver viewpoint is still the best and now that we have our in-house
design
> and experience of the same with the WDP2s.
>
> Did it have a big price implication tag from GM?
>
> Harsh
>
> P.S. It is clear that the WDG4s will be mostly on freight haul duties
where
> they will never exceed 75 Kmph so running long hood should not be much
of a
> problem actually.
> Also these may be frequently MUed also so both ends can be short hood
> leading there.
> Still I would like to know why a universal cab design was preferred
over two
> cab.
>

>


----------------------------------------------------------------
Get your free email from AltaVista at <A HREF="http://altavista.iname.com">http://altavista.iname.com</A>

From: Apurva Bahadur <>

Subject: Re: Dual Cab Diesels

Date: 20 Aug 1999 09:59:05 -0500


Great site for interesting info, thanks Shanku and Craig.

Shanku Niyogi wrote:

> For some interesting info off the web on the cab issue, what steam
> generators in locomotives had to do with it, and why American designs
look
> the way they do, check out
>
> <A HREF="http://www.crisny.org/not-for-profit/railroad/en_info.htm#looks">http://www.crisny.org/not-for-profit/railroad/en_info.htm#looks</A>

From: S.Shankar <>

Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Pakistan Railways]

Date: 20 Aug 1999 10:05:01 -0500


Hello,
Thanks to Appu for raising the issue and to John for the clarification.
I have often wondered about it myself.

I think I have seen (can't remember where) a video or movie of a steamer
puffing along. The plate was bobbing up and down in keeping with the
blast from the smokestack.
Other pics I have seen seem to suggest that the plate has to be turned
to open it. It does not open like a trapdoor: you have to swing it right
round till the smokestack is open.
I initially thought it was to prevent sparks from the chimney setting
fire to the countryside.
Anyway, John's explanation does make a lot of sense.
I have seen some road vehicles in India with a small swinging door
fitted to the tip of the exhaust pipe. Of course, that is more of a
decorative piece, and does not serve any purpose.(I think).
Cheers.
Shankar


> Apurva Bahadur wrote:
> >
> > Have you noticed a hinged plate that covers the smokestack (when not
in use ?) in the
> > steam powers of the PR? I guess it is required when the loco is
stabled outdoors. Why
> > did the IR lack this feature ? I have seen this feature on Russian
and South Asian
> > steam locos also.
> >
> > Apurva
>
> These plates were often fitted to oil-fired locos.
> >From memory, I think the reason was to keep rain water out when locos
> were stabled outside, but more seriously they were designed to protect
> the tubes and flues from sudden cooling which was a cause of greater
> corrosion in oil fired rather than coal fired locos.
> The plates also played some part ( I can't remember what) in the
> lighting up process for at some stage in the procedure the cover was
to
> be removed from the chimney.
> I saw quite a number of oil fired locos ( all? fitted with the covers)
> in Java, both stored and in use, but cannot recall ever seeing one
with
> its chimney plate in the " closed " position!

From: S.Shankar <>

Subject: Re: Turntable fears for WDG4

Date: 20 Aug 1999 10:15:41 -0500


Hello,
Don't you think that the lengthening of the engine is all the more
reason to try and have a cab at the other end? Longer the long hood,
more uncomfortable it is to drive, and poorer the lookout, bay windows
or no bay windows. May be acceptable as long as speeds are low, but high
speeds and curved track, its downright dangerous.
I mean, how much sense does it make to have an engine that is nice to
drive for 50% of the time, and absolute hell to drive the other way.
And believe me, the GT Mac has those wings on the side for the radiator
fans, and despite the bay windows, will not be fun to drive at all with
the long hood leading.
Was the GT Mac an off the shelf purchase with minor changes to suit the
IR? GM I thought usually build as per the customers' specifications.
If you visit Larry Russell's site (he is one of our more knowledgeable
members) you will see that EMD has built dual cab machines for quite a
few railways worldwide:

<A HREF="http://EMDExport.Railfan.net/country.html">http://EMDExport.Railfan.net/country.html</A>

How did you manage a dual cab design with the WDP/1?
Point is, when the attempt is to change the age old uncomfortable
designs for the 1950s with one long and one short hood, then why succumb
to something that is equally bad if not worse when inducting new
designs?
One solution would be to have two articulated engines permanently
coupled back to back, of say 2000 hp each, as is the case with some of
the older engines on the Swedish Railways. Of course, this would be
going back in technology, and would mean double the cost! Hence not
workable.
Unless GM is twisting our arm, I'm sure they can develop a dual cab
design as per our requirements.
With IR speeds going up and up, dual cab will ensure maximum safety.
Pakistan Railways is having problems with their new equally
uncomfortable new diesels from AdTranz.
Although so called 'bi-directional', the new beasts are as bad as the
GTMac. I believe the drivers absolutely refuse to drive long hood
leading. PR is now considering turning the engines round each time.
Cheers.
Shankar




shubh@altavista.email wrote:
>
> General Motors did not really have any design of a twin cab loco. In
fact in their entire history they have made only one twin cab design.
>
> The GT46MAC (WDG4) is based on the SD70MAC design. The SD70 was a tall
locomotive, since the envelope (maximum moving dimensions) allowed on
the American Railroads are quite liberal. When they set about designing
the GT46MAC, they had to spread the equipment along the length of the
locomotive to reduce the height. The locomotive thus became rather long
and their was no possibility of adding another cab at the other end.
>
>
>
> It is true that the WDG4's will be used for freight operations only,
at least to start with. But since their hauling power is almost twice
that of WDM2's, even though the horsepower is not doubled (thanks to its
microprocessor based wheel slip control), they will not be used in MU
mode.
>
> ---- you wrote:
> > Thank you for the detailed info. Could you please clarify still why
this
> > design of cab was choosen over `cab at both ends'. Iam sure that two
cab
> > driver viewpoint is still the best and now that we have our in-house
design
> > and experience of the same with the WDP2s.
> >
> > Did it have a big price implication tag from GM?
> >
> > Harsh
> >
> > P.S. It is clear that the WDG4s will be mostly on freight haul
duties where
> > they will never exceed 75 Kmph so running long hood should not be
much of a
> > problem actually.
> > Also these may be frequently MUed also so both ends can be short
hood
> > leading there.
> > Still I would like to know why a universal cab design was preferred
over two
> > cab.
> >
>
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Get your free email from AltaVista at <A HREF="http://altavista.iname.com">http://altavista.iname.com</A>

From: S.Shankar <>

Subject: Re: Turntable fears for WDG4

Date: 20 Aug 1999 10:23:46 -0500


Hello,
Further to my earlier post, particularly look under Europe, under
Ireland.
Cheers.
Shankar



S.Shankar wrote:
>
> Hello,
> Don't you think that the lengthening of the engine is all the more
> reason to try and have a cab at the other end? Longer the long hood,
> more uncomfortable it is to drive, and poorer the lookout, bay windows
> or no bay windows. May be acceptable as long as speeds are low, but
high
> speeds and curved track, its downright dangerous.
> I mean, how much sense does it make to have an engine that is nice to
> drive for 50% of the time, and absolute hell to drive the other way.
> And believe me, the GT Mac has those wings on the side for the
radiator
> fans, and despite the bay windows, will not be fun to drive at all
with
> the long hood leading.
> Was the GT Mac an off the shelf purchase with minor changes to suit
the
> IR? GM I thought usually build as per the customers' specifications.
> If you visit Larry Russell's site (he is one of our more knowledgeable
> members) you will see that EMD has built dual cab machines for quite a
> few railways worldwide:
>
> <A HREF="http://EMDExport.Railfan.net/country.html">http://EMDExport.Railfan.net/country.html</A>
>
> How did you manage a dual cab design with the WDP/1?
> Point is, when the attempt is to change the age old uncomfortable
> designs for the 1950s with one long and one short hood, then why
succumb
> to something that is equally bad if not worse when inducting new
> designs?
> One solution would be to have two articulated engines permanently
> coupled back to back, of say 2000 hp each, as is the case with some of
> the older engines on the Swedish Railways. Of course, this would be
> going back in technology, and would mean double the cost! Hence not
> workable.
> Unless GM is twisting our arm, I'm sure they can develop a dual cab
> design as per our requirements.
> With IR speeds going up and up, dual cab will ensure maximum safety.
> Pakistan Railways is having problems with their new equally
> uncomfortable new diesels from AdTranz.
> Although so called 'bi-directional', the new beasts are as bad as the
> GTMac. I believe the drivers absolutely refuse to drive long hood
> leading. PR is now considering turning the engines round each time.
> Cheers.
> Shankar
>
> shubh@altavista.email wrote:
> >
> > General Motors did not really have any design of a twin cab loco. In
fact in their entire history they have made only one twin cab design.
> >
> > The GT46MAC (WDG4) is based on the SD70MAC design. The SD70 was a
tall locomotive, since the envelope (maximum moving dimensions) allowed
on the American Railroads are quite liberal. When they set about
designing the GT46MAC, they had to spread the equipment along the length
of the locomotive to reduce the height. The locomotive thus became
rather long and their was no possibility of adding another cab at the
other end.
> >
> >
> >
> > It is true that the WDG4's will be used for freight operations only,
at least to start with. But since their hauling power is almost twice
that of WDM2's, even though the horsepower is not doubled (thanks to its
microprocessor based wheel slip control), they will not be used in MU
mode.
> >
> > ---- you wrote:
> > > Thank you for the detailed info. Could you please clarify still
why this
> > > design of cab was choosen over `cab at both ends'. Iam sure that
two cab
> > > driver viewpoint is still the best and now that we have our
in-house design
> > > and experience of the same with the WDP2s.
> > >
> > > Did it have a big price implication tag from GM?
> > >
> > > Harsh
> > >
> > > P.S. It is clear that the WDG4s will be mostly on freight haul
duties where
> > > they will never exceed 75 Kmph so running long hood should not be
much of a
> > > problem actually.
> > > Also these may be frequently MUed also so both ends can be short
hood
> > > leading there.
> > > Still I would like to know why a universal cab design was
preferred over two
> > > cab.
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > Get your free email from AltaVista at <A HREF="http://altavista.iname.com">http://altavista.iname.com</A>

From: prakash <>

Subject: Re: DLW news in the TOI

Date: 20 Aug 1999 10:24:31 -0500




Ken,

No. The locos you are talking about are WDS1, Diesel-Electric by GE made
in 1944. Most of them were on WR with at least one to Colombo. They were
380 HP and had no side rods.

The locos Anand is talking about are WDS2, Diesel_hydraulic with some
600 -700 HP. they were made by KrM in 1954-56 time frame. I've a JPEG
image and I'll be glad to send one to you.

Prakash



"Dr. K.J. Walker" <kjw_meh@powerup.email on 08/20/99 02:10:40 AM

Please respond to "Dr. K.J. Walker" <kjw_meh@powerup.email

To: Rangachari Anand/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
cc: irfca@cs.email
Subject: Re: DLW news in the TOI





Dear Anand,
The locos you remember are probably the first diesel-electric
shunters
India had. The BBCI bought a batch during the late 1930s; except for
track
gauge, they were nearly identical to the earliest design used by the LMS
in
Britain, with inside bearings and a jackshaft drive. (All later UK d-e
shunters had outside frames with direct drive and rod-coupled axles --
all
the UK railways bought them, BR built hundreds as the 08 class, there
were
lots in Holland, and Victoria had a small class of them -- the Fiesels).
All these designs were enormously successful. Each engine
normally
replaced about three steam tank engines, and could be worked for a
fortnight
straight before being stopped for preventive maintenance, whereas the
stream
engines generally had to be stopped every 2-3 days and sometimes every
24
hours. (It depends on water treatment, etc.)
Apart from the move away from jackshaft drive, the only other
real
change was a gradual increase in horsepower; most of the early ones were
350hp, but that rose to 500-600hp as standard. BR are still operating
some
08s.
I hope that helps
Cheers
Ken Walker

-----Original Message-----
From: ranand@us.email <ranand@us.email
To: Apurva Bahadur <iti@vsnl.email
Cc: irfca@cs.email <irfca@cs.email
Date: 19 August 1999 1:33
Subject: Re: DLW news in the TOI


> I remember that there were 0-6-0 diesel shunter locomotives that
>used to pull these trains back and forth. These shunters had side
> rods like the WDS4 but they look like the standard British shunter
> with the main drive axle on one side rather than between
>the wheels like the WDS4. I think these locos were diesel mechanical
> but I am not sure. Can anyone confirm even the existance of these
> engines?
>
>Anand
>

From: Vijay Balasubramanian <>

Subject: FAQ - Trivia Update

Date: 20 Aug 1999 11:20:13 -0500


Recently recevied my CR, WR, CR - Suburban and TAAG railway TTs.
Will give my observations soon.

1. Here is a change to the longest distance
between consecutive passenger halts. The 2141/2142 Kurla-Patna
superfast exp. now takes the top spot - it has no intermediate
passenger halts in its 975 km. run between Lokmanya Tilak
Terminus (Kurla) and Jabalpur. Since I do not have the lastest working
TT,
my guess is that it has three techincal halts - Igatpuri, Bhusaval and
Itarsi.
IMHO, these are both necessary and sufficient.

2. The same train has just two passenger halts - Jabalpur and
Mughalsarai
in its 1648 km. run - that gives it an average
inter-passenger-halt distance of 549.3 km. This is the highest for any
IR
train.
Next is the Chennai Rajdhani with four passenger halts in its 2184 km.
run -

this gives an average inter-halt distance of 436.8 km.

3. If we consider all halts (passenger as well as technical) then the
Mumbai
Rajdhani exp.
emerges as the leader. It has three halts in its 1384 km. run giving it
an
average inter-halt
distance of 346 km.

Vijay

From: Vdate <>

Subject: Re: IR stamps

Date: 20 Aug 1999 14:33:44 -0500


In a message dated 8/20/99 12:21:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
shankie@emirates.email writes:

<< <A HREF="http://www2.biglobe.ne.jp/~venus/se_in.html">http://www2.biglobe.ne.jp/~venus/se_in.html</A>
>>
Thank you for this URL address. Nice collection

From: Tim & Anita Wakeman <>

Subject: check out this page

Date: 20 Aug 1999 18:48:28 -0500


Hello all,

I came across this USA page I thought you might like to see. Has some
great snow removal photography.

Regards, Tim

<A HREF="http://pangea.flame.org/derail/">http://pangea.flame.org/derail/</A>

From: Mike Brooker <>

Subject: Re: IR stamps

Date: 20 Aug 1999 20:13:13 -0500



>I know this has been through this forum before, but just check out this
>interesting url about IR stamps:
>
><A HREF="http://www2.biglobe.ne.jp/~venus/se_in.html">http://www2.biglobe.ne.jp/~venus/se_in.html</A>
>

To view Canadian railway-related stamps, click on
<A HREF="http://www2.biglobe.ne.jp/~venus/se_ca.html">http://www2.biglobe.ne.jp/~venus/se_ca.html</A>

********************************************************************
Mike Brooker
99 Wychcrest Ave.,
Toronto, ON M6G 3X8
CANADA
(416) 536-7406
********************************************************************

From: Mike Brooker <>

Subject: Re: TAG

Date: 20 Aug 1999 20:26:41 -0500


>> How much does the current edition of "Trains at A Glance" sell for?
In
1995
>> I paid $5.00 U.S. for a copy. An inflated price to fleece
westerners, as
is
>> the cost of the Indrail pass.
>
>Last week I bought one for Rs.25/-.
>
Which less than $1.00 Canadian -- last time I checked, one CDN$ was
trading
at about 28 Rs. I got the TAG from Hari-World Travel, the GSA for IR
here
in Toronto. Next time I go to India (if there is a next time, sometime
next
century), I will wait until I get there before buying a copy of TAG, or
I
won't bother with it, since I can download the major BG schedules from
the
web. Something I couldn't do in '95.

********************************************************************
Mike Brooker
99 Wychcrest Ave.,
Toronto, ON M6G 3X8
CANADA
(416) 536-7406
********************************************************************

From: Sunil Bajpai <>

Subject: Re: Turntable fears for WDG4

Date: 20 Aug 1999 20:30:53 -0500


Hello Shubranshu,

Welome to the list!

May I add for information of list-members that the WDG4 cab was modified
and
the "bay windows" provided to address IR's concerns for visibility. At
one
stage GM even suggested that a video camera be mounted on the long hood
side.

Cheers!

Sunil
-----Original Message-----
From: shubh@altavista.email <shubh@altavista.email
To: irfca@cs.email <irfca@cs.email
Date: 19 August 1999 22:39
Subject: Turntable fears for WDG4


>There is a widespread concern about the WDG4 not being able to do long
hood
leading runs. This is totally unfounded.
>
>It is true that the long hood is longer than other locos in service,
but it
has been designed to be a bidirectional loco. Sine the basic design was
of a
mono cab loco, therefore the unsightly view end at the long hood end.
>
>Please note the sideways extension of the windows in the cab. These
were
added to enable the assistant driver to have a better view of the signal
and
the track.
>
>In a departure from existing locomotive cab layouts, the driver in the
WDG4
sits on the left side (the signal side) of the cab. Hence he has a clear
view of the signal, even without the extension windows (EMD calls them
bay
windows). The bay windows are meant for the assistant driver only. It is
also better than the long hood of WDM2's, since the driver in the older
locos sit on the right side of the cab. The view of the signal in this
case
is actually as good as that in the short hood leading runs.
>
>
>Shubhranshu
>Dy Chief Project Manager
>GM Loco Project
>Diesel Locomotive Works
>Varanasi, INDIA.
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>Get your free email from AltaVista at <A HREF="http://altavista.iname.com">http://altavista.iname.com</A>
>

From: HVC <>

Subject: Re: Pakistan Railways

Date: 20 Aug 1999 21:49:09 -0500


Dear John and others,
I can add something to this for
those
who may be interested in the details.

All Paki steam locos used to burn oil and furnace oil that is. This poor
grade of FO contains as much as 4.5% of Sulphur(Coal has negligible
Sulphur)
which when combusted forms its di-oxides and trioxides which heavily
corrode
steel. This corrosion is enhanced at lower temperatures called as
sulphur
due point. To keep the stack temp. from reaching the due point during
rains,
the cover is provided.

The cover is also useful when lighting up the loco which is done with a
lighter auxilliary fuel. The light fuel require much less air for
burning
compared to FO and hence the lid has to be dropped down for this
operation.
When the FO is heated up and the fuel is changed the lid comes back in
operation.

Harsh


>Apurva Bahadur wrote:
>>
>> Have you noticed a hinged plate that covers the smokestack (when not
in
use ?) in the
>> steam powers of the PR? I guess it is required when the loco is
stabled
outdoors. Why
>> did the IR lack this feature ? I have seen this feature on Russian
and
South Asian
>> steam locos also.
>>
>> Apurva
>
>These plates were often fitted to oil-fired locos.
>>From memory, I think the reason was to keep rain water out when locos
>were stabled outside, but more seriously they were designed to protect
>the tubes and flues from sudden cooling which was a cause of greater
>corrosion in oil fired rather than coal fired locos.
>The plates also played some part ( I can't remember what) in the
>lighting up process for at some stage in the procedure the cover was to
>be removed from the chimney.
>I saw quite a number of oil fired locos ( all? fitted with the covers)
>in Java, both stored and in use, but cannot recall ever seeing one with
>its chimney plate in the " closed " position!
>
>

The content of the individual messages displayed here is subject to copyright by the original authors and may not be reproduced outside the context of IRFCA without permission.
Note: This site is not officially affiliated with Indian Railways! The official web site of Indian Railways is: http://www.indianrailways.gov.in
Site contact: webmaster@irfca.org
Copyright © 2010, IRFCA.org. About IRFCA  Contact Us  Search this site  Site Map  Links   Acknowledgements  Legal Information & Disclaimers