The orphan is being retired

 
  wn514 Chief Commissioner

Location: at a skyhooks concert living in the 70's
the orphan of the aurizon locomotive fleet in western Australia, ALZ3208 is being retired due to ongoing reliability problems and the fact that it seized a pinion last week and now has class 5 skidded wheels and it is not worth the cost of repairs.
wal.

Sponsored advertisement

  crisfitz Chief Commissioner

Location: Enroute somewhere
the orphan of the aurizon locomotive fleet in western Australia, ALZ3208 is being retired due to ongoing reliability problems and the fact that it seized a pinion last week and now has class 5 skidded wheels and it is not worth the cost of repairs.
wal.
wn514
Ha - good riddance. Never liked the ALF's. Cramped desk top controls. Only good thing was an excellent air con unit in summer!!
  greasyrhys Chief Commissioner

Location: MacDonald Park, SA
Never should've left SA in the first place...
  wn514 Chief Commissioner

Location: at a skyhooks concert living in the 70's
Never should've left SA in the first place...
greasyrhys

why?
  greasyrhys Chief Commissioner

Location: MacDonald Park, SA
Well, ALF25 was pretty much based here in SA until that day in '06 (could be wrong?), as well as the other CLF/CLP's.
  wn514 Chief Commissioner

Location: at a skyhooks concert living in the 70's
Well, ALF25 was pretty much based here in SA until that day in '06 (could be wrong?), as well as the other CLF/CLP's.
greasyrhys

that doesn't answer my question as to why it should never have left south Australia. is it your theory that certain locos should never venture beyond certain states borders, if that is so then it would not be very economical. as for alf25/alz3208 I don't know if you ever worked on it rhys but I did and it is a piece of shxt, as far as I am concerned south Australia could of had it back any day they wanted.
wal.
  Raichase Captain Rant!

Location: Sydney, NSW
why?
wn514
I'm hoping the logic behind that statement is "because it makes sense to keep a fleet of like locos together for ease of maintenence" and not "because it's a South Australian engine, and WA CAN'T HAVE IT". I'd expect the latter from a Victorian, but not a South Australian!
  wn514 Chief Commissioner

Location: at a skyhooks concert living in the 70's
I'm hoping the logic behind that statement is "because it makes sense to keep a fleet of like locos together for ease of maintenence" and not "because it's a South Australian engine, and WA CAN'T HAVE IT". I'd expect the latter from a Victorian, but not a South Australian!
Raichase

I hope you are right raichase. but according to an earlier post in this thread he wants the clp/clf's back to.
  Graham4405 The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dalby Qld
according to an earlier post in this thread he wants the clp/clf's back to.
It would seem that they are mainly unemployed now, so he might be able to store at least some of them in his backyard... Wink
  Gaz170 Junior Train Controller

Location: Gold Coast
I always wondered about the logic of how the locos were divided in the break up, and if a "one off" would have maintenance issues.

Still ironic that 3000hp locos are being retired, whilst B's S's GM's and 44's are still out there working.
  Raichase Captain Rant!

Location: Sydney, NSW
Still ironic that 3000hp locos are being retired, whilst B's S's GM's and 44's are still out there working.
Gaz170
Well, I'm inclined to agree with you at the face of it, although closer inspection...

This particular loco is owned by a large company who likely have no use for a single orphan with reliability issues. The 44's are no longer in commercial service (excepting the occasional Waratah EMU delivery by 3801ltd using a preserved 44 Class), and SSR seem to have very little work outside of coal, so the B's, S's and GM's are spending more time parked up than not working... I don't follow the exploits of the Metro B's, but I understand that BG motive power is quite a precious resource, so that might explain their continued action, and the S's from El Zorro are... well, we all know how that story went!
  alcoworldseries Deputy Commissioner

Location: Auburn
Why are older loco's remaining while newer (supposedly higher horsepower) loco's being put out to pasture, easily answered the KISS principle..................keep it simple stupid, far less to malfunction on the old beasts and a 442/700 used to be able to pull 100 tonnes less to Mt Lofty than a CLP/F/ALF, assuming said product of MKo was producing somewhere near rated horsepower
  nswtrains Chief Commissioner

Why are older loco's remaining while newer (supposedly higher horsepower) loco's being put out to pasture, easily answered the KISS principle..................keep it simple stupid, far less to malfunction on the old beasts and a 442/700 used to be able to pull 100 tonnes less to Mt Lofty than a CLP/F/ALF, assuming said product of MKo was producing somewhere near rated horsepower
alcoworldseries
You are not reading Raichase's posting properly. They are all not being used. And there is no logic in stating a 422 class etc is simpler than a CLP for instance. None of them are really complex machines at all. Applying the same logic to cars I guess an Austin 7 is simple compared to a modern car, but would you really want to travel in one interstate, or anywhere for that matter? I think sentimentality is overcoming practicality and the economics involved.
  emdrules Train Controller

Location: Port Augusta-Centre Of The Universe
I always wondered about the logic of how the locos were divided in the break up, and if a "one off" would have maintenance issues.

Still ironic that 3000hp locos are being retired, whilst B's S's GM's and 44's are still out there working.
Gaz170
It always seemed unusual that ARG kept one ALF when the other seven were retained by G & W. It would make sense to return it to South Australia where it would be used on the Darwin line. Similarly return the two NJ's, they would be needed at Port Lincoln. You can only patch up Alco's so much plus they are lower horsepower. There are some former ARG locos at Port Lincoln and Whyalla that could return west.
  Raichase Captain Rant!

Location: Sydney, NSW
You are not reading Raichase's posting properly. They are all not being used. And there is no logic in stating a 422 class etc is simpler than a CLP for instance. None of them are really complex machines at all. Applying the same logic to cars I guess an Austin 7 is simple compared to a modern car, but would you really want to travel in one interstate, or anywhere for that matter? I think sentimentality is overcoming practicality and the economics involved.
nswtrains
I think that crew conditions and reliability far outweigh any notion of "it's simpler because it's older". Talk to any railwayman (I'm lucky that a few talk back) and they'll tell you that, even if they LIKE the older locos, the newer stuff is generally more reliable, more user-friendly, and can pull more. Take Qube's 44 Class, at their prime, they had a fleet of about nine of them. At any given time, the most you would see in service was three. Three from nine? Those are not good numbers - imagine if the 82 Class fleet, or the NR Class fleet had TWO THIRDS out of service at any given time...
  Sulla1 Chief Commissioner

It always seemed unusual that ARG kept one ALF when the other seven were retained by G & W. It would make sense to return it to South Australia where it would be used on the Darwin line. Similarly return the two NJ's, they would be needed at Port Lincoln. You can only patch up Alco's so much plus they are lower horsepower. There are some former ARG locos at Port Lincoln and Whyalla that could return west.
"emdrules"


That will be up to G&W making a cash offer Aurizon can't refuse...and considering G&W has just bought a bunch of new narrow and standard gauge locos, I doubt they're interested in buying some forty year old members of their legacy fleet.
  emdrules Train Controller

Location: Port Augusta-Centre Of The Universe
That will be up to G&W making a cash offer Aurizon can't refuse...and considering G&W has just bought a bunch of new narrow and standard gauge locos, I doubt they're interested in buying some forty year old members of their legacy fleet.
Sulla1

G & W purchased five new locos for the Whyalla system. Some 830 junk is cascading to Port Lincoln. The NJ's would be more economical than these. Regarding ALF's they would be good second units on the AD/DA services. They would have more potential than 1800hp GM's which are still around. The biggest problem with the ALF's is they only have one cab unlike the 81's and the G's.
  emdrules Train Controller

Location: Port Augusta-Centre Of The Universe
That will be up to G&W making a cash offer Aurizon can't refuse...and considering G&W has just bought a bunch of new narrow and standard gauge locos, I doubt they're interested in buying some forty year old members of their legacy fleet.

G & W purchased five new locos for the Whyalla system. Some 830 junk is cascading to Port Lincoln. The NJ's would be more economical than these. Regarding ALF's they would be good second units on the AD/DA services. They would have more potential than 1800hp GM's which are still around. The biggest problem with the ALF's is they only have one cab unlike the 81's and the G's.
  Grantham Minister for Railways

Location: I'm with stupid!
I think that crew conditions and reliability far outweigh any notion of "it's simpler because it's older". Talk to any railwayman (I'm lucky that a few talk back) and they'll tell you that, even if they LIKE the older locos, the newer stuff is generally more reliable, more user-friendly, and can pull more. Take Qube's 44 Class, at their prime, they had a fleet of about nine of them. At any given time, the most you would see in service was three. Three from nine? Those are not good numbers - imagine if the 82 Class fleet, or the NR Class fleet had TWO THIRDS out of service at any given time...
Raichase
Just to be a cuss, and not entirely contradicting...

The newer stuff might be generally more reliable, more user friendly and able to pull more, but the older stuff is cheaper and quicker to repair, adequately comfy and able to pull the job at hand. The expenses are far lower, even if the payload is not the same. For example, it is cheaper to keep two Jumbos and say, a B on a job than two Gs or other more modern engines. Wink

M
  Black Hoppers Chief Train Controller

Location: Banned
I think that crew conditions and reliability far outweigh any notion of "it's simpler because it's older". Talk to any railwayman (I'm lucky that a few talk back) and they'll tell you that, even if they LIKE the older locos, the newer stuff is generally more reliable, more user-friendly, and can pull more. Take Qube's 44 Class, at their prime, they had a fleet of about nine of them. At any given time, the most you would see in service was three. Three from nine? Those are not good numbers - imagine if the 82 Class fleet, or the NR Class fleet had TWO THIRDS out of service at any given time...
"Raichase"
  Black Hoppers Chief Train Controller

Location: Banned
I think that crew conditions and reliability far outweigh any notion of "it's simpler because it's older". Talk to any railwayman (I'm lucky that a few talk back) and they'll tell you that, even if they LIKE the older locos, the newer stuff is generally more reliable, more user-friendly, and can pull more. Take Qube's 44 Class, at their prime, they had a fleet of about nine of them. At any given time, the most you would see in service was three. Three from nine? Those are not good numbers - imagine if the 82 Class fleet, or the NR Class fleet had TWO THIRDS out of service at any given time...
"Raichase"


Funny you should quote those two classes as both when new had large chunks of them out of service awaiting mods or parts, not having a go just saying is all.
  Raichase Captain Rant!

Location: Sydney, NSW
Just to be a cuss, and not entirely contradicting...

The newer stuff might be generally more reliable, more user friendly and able to pull more, but the older stuff is cheaper and quicker to repair, adequately comfy and able to pull the job at hand. The expenses are far lower, even if the payload is not the same. For example, it is cheaper to keep two Jumbos and say, a B on a job than two Gs or other more modern engines. Wink

M
Grantham
As someone who freely admits that he has no experience with the freight side of the railways at all, that is very interesting to read! I was under the impression that the more modern locos were far less thirsty on the fuel, and combined with increased reliability made for lower overall running costs. Fascinating insight, thanks Grantham. Interesting indeed. I guess it was naive of me to suspect that the ONLY reason the clunkers got a second lease in life was a locomotive shortage.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

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