A 90 has 45t over one of these and a NR 12t so I'm pretty sure normal 3 axle bogies would be more than adequate to travel over ARTC trackage (especially if drained of fluids).The 90's and NR's are also designed to run on standard gauge with an axle loading of ~27 tonnes. If these were going to be fitted with freight bogies as they're narrow-gauge units, then they'll be running 30TAL, considerably higher than currently permitted for the DIRN, notwithstanding their lower live weights...
They may not be able to operate in Queensland as 001, 002 and 003 as the DTC authorities needed notth of Townsville and west to Mt Isa are not alphanumeric and will confuse these locos with PN 001 to 003 apparently. Another renumbering is likely it seems.I'd expect them to be used on coal traffic.
The current thinking remains that they will be allocated to Townsville to be close to UGL. Added to that the PH class allocation appears to be in line with PNQ and PN intermodal numbering, whereas all PN Bulk Division locos in Queensland have retained the ex-NSW four digit numbering system. Time will tell, but at the moment the numbering for the PHs does not appear to have been thought through for use in Queensland.At the Heavy Haul Conference at Mackay last August, the PN speaker made a point of indicating that PN had been reorganised eliminating the internal divisions between intermodal and bulk operations. I know that that is what they say at such events, but there have been significant indications that such a change has happened on the standard gauge. For example, intermodal 81 class lacked the large side numbers. Currently 81s with large numbers are appearing on intermodal and steel trains (and on the Ghan). Equally, 82 class are appearing behind NRs on intermodal and steel trains.
The issue is that the PHs have the same numbers as the PNs. DTC authorities (similar to train orders or track warrants, but with added computer interlocked safety overlays) only recognise loco numbers, not letters, so on a DTC controlled section of track in Queensland, PH001 is the same as PN001. Aside from the physical dangers and confusion of two locomotives with the same number meeting or moving along the same section of track, DTC computers would also recognize the "error" and prevent the second loco with the same number entering that section of track, which could cause all sorts of problems for say PH001 trying to leave Cairns when PN001 is still five hours south and heading to Cairns. A simple solution would be to renumber the PHs as 101-103 or 021-023, just not 001-003.
In Queensland a PH8101 could still be mistaken for another 8101, the numbers matter, not the letters...at the time the computer systems were put in place by QR in the 1990s it had no need to consider alternative numbering systems to the one it used.
In low speed, hill climbing coal service, tractive effort can matter more than horsepower, and while having significantly more horsepower to use once a train is moving, the PHs, with a similar tractive effort to the 83s, will still only be able to start a similar sized train to the 83s. Once moving the train could accelerate and haul it faster...the latter making them theoretically better for intermodal, but also useful for 80km/h coal trains. Purely my own speculation, but the new Mt Isa Glencore container traffic (probably needing three single loco container sets) PN will start hauling in February could use the PHs, or use 83s freed up by the PHs elsewhere. We're going to find out pretty soon I'd say.
Subscribers: 7334, Beta4Me, bevans, beyerpeacock, biqua, Boss, D3639, DounutCereal, EMBaldwin, fzr560, garethsh, Greensleeves, Hairy, james.au, jt393, KngtRider, KRviator, Lord-Data, NR58, phower, PILBARAMAN, Pressman, QR-INTERAIL, Raichase, rhino, seb2351, Shacks, speedemon08, splodgelet, trainman3801, walfactor, Wallip, wn514, wurx
We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.