Looks like the "Hoegh Jacksonville" offloaded 4444 plus 14 flat cars in Brisbane.

Photo posted and conversation has started on a private Facebook Group (New Zealand Locomotives).

"Hoegh Jacksonville" not due in Mackay till 0600 Thursday.

Photos (again from Facebook) indicated that the flatcars were loaded with the loco in Auckland.

Further 2 Martinus locos currently being moved from Wellington to Auckland 4571/4692

A few people caught it on the way north to Auckland.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ryL5kQu5po

Apparently Martinus have sold two of their DCs to Bowen Rail, so I gather they'll continue using them on work trains or for shunting on the new Carmichael line.

I'm wondering what Martinus will do with the other two. I thought perhaps re-gauge them for use on Inland Rail work trains?

Apparently Martinus have sold two of their DCs to Bowen Rail, so I gather they'll continue using them on work trains or for shunting on the new Carmichael line.

I'm wondering what Martinus will do with the other two. I thought perhaps re-gauge them for use on Inland Rail work trains?

I asked Martinus about this at AUSRAIL

There were two options: Return them to NZ for infrastructure work there or upgrade them for main line use (new radios and equipment) and lease them to Watco.

I guess we wait and see....

I failed to ask the locomotive numbers, sorry, but obviously they will be the two not sold to Bowen Rail...

Peter

4041 and 4571 returned to Brisbane at the beginning of March. That should leave 4444 and 4692 on the Carmichael Rail Network at the moment.

Apparently Martinus have sold two of their DCs to Bowen Rail, so I gather they'll continue using them on work trains or for shunting on the new Carmichael line.

I'm wondering what Martinus will do with the other two. I thought perhaps re-gauge them for use on Inland Rail work trains?

I asked Martinus about this at AUSRAIL

There were two options: Return them to NZ for infrastructure work there or upgrade them for main line use (new radios and equipment) and lease them to Watco.

I guess we wait and see....

I failed to ask the locomotive numbers, sorry, but obviously they will be the two not sold to Bowen Rail...

Peter

Watco and Qube are both power starved of narrow gauge locomotives at the moment. Providing the DCs can be accredited for use on the QR network, they could certainly be found a willing operator. From reports of their time on the Carmichael Rail Network they were remarkable workhorses despite only having four traction motors.

Together with a low axle load of 13.6-tonnes and short length of 14.01m, the DCs would also make a potential alternative to 1720s as second locos on the Central Line west of Emerald - curvature on the Drummond Range precludes the use of coupled WRAs or WRBs - leaving 1720s as the only alternative for a second locomotive (and probably one of the reasons Watco has just purchased 1723 from QR).

Watco also seem to have a requirement for narrow gauge locos over here in WA.  They recently just hired AB1535 off Rail Heritage WA for a couple of years.  Cheers.

Watco and Qube are both power starved of narrow gauge locomotives at the moment. Providing the DCs can be accredited for use on the QR network, they could certainly be found a willing operator. From reports of their time on the Carmichael Rail Network they were remarkable workhorses despite only having four traction motors.

Together with a low axle load of 13.6-tonnes and short length of 14.01m, the DCs would also make a potential alternative to 1720s as second locos on the Central Line west of Emerald - curvature on the Drummond Range precludes the use of coupled WRAs or WRBs - leaving 1720s as the only alternative for a second locomotive (and probably one of the reasons Watco has just purchased 1723 from QR).

Are there any other narrow gauge locomotives for sale overseas that Watco/Qube might look at to overcome the shortage?  Cheers.

Together with a low axle load of 13.6-tonnes and short length of 14.01m, the DCs would also make a potential alternative to 1720s as second locos on the Central Line west of Emerald - curvature on the Drummond Range precludes the use of coupled WRAs or WRBs - leaving 1720s as the only alternative for a second locomotive (and probably one of the reasons Watco has just purchased 1723 from QR).


My understanding was that the 1400 class were set up  with 15 tons on the motored axles and around 6 tons on the idler axles.
This was not adjustable since the springing for each axle was independent.
As the wheels wore out, the idler axles, since they did not slip, wore less than the powered axles, resulting in an increasing axle load on the idlers.
This effect could be simulated by placing packing on the idler axles between the springs and the axleboxes to reduce the load on the driving wheels. I'm told that some 1400s had up to 9 tons on the idler axles when checked, and that this made them liable to slip on grades.
However, if the bridge loading is critical, the lower total load on the span at a time might help.  

                                                                                  Peter

 

Watco and Qube are both power starved of narrow gauge locomotives at the moment. Providing the DCs can be accredited for use on the QR network, they could certainly be found a willing operator. From reports of their time on the Carmichael Rail Network they were remarkable workhorses despite only having four traction motors.

Together with a low axle load of 13.6-tonnes and short length of 14.01m, the DCs would also make a potential alternative to 1720s as second locos on the Central Line west of Emerald - curvature on the Drummond Range precludes the use of coupled WRAs or WRBs - leaving 1720s as the only alternative for a second locomotive (and probably one of the reasons Watco has just purchased 1723 from QR).

Are there any other narrow gauge locomotives for sale overseas that Watco/Qube might look at to overcome the shortage?  Cheers.

Aurizon sold around 140 narrow gauge Queensland and Western Australian locomotives overseas between 2012 and 2016, most going to Southern Africa, but twelve 2170s also went to Chile for conversion to metre gauge. To date most locomotives repatriated by Watco, One Rail and Progress (leasing to Glencore/Qube) have come from South Africa's Transnet fleet. 11 2250s returned to Australia for One Rail and Progress, and eight 2170s have been returned for Watco (Watco may actually own another three ex-Transnet 2170s still in South Africa, and Progress may also own some of the remaining 14 ex-Transnet 2250s still in South Africa).

Long story short, there's still a lot of Queensland and WA suitable locomotives scattered around Southern and Central Africa, and South America, but their current owners - which includes tourist, freight and lease operators - may not be in a hurry to part with them.

Together with a low axle load of 13.6-tonnes and short length of 14.01m, the DCs would also make a potential alternative to 1720s as second locos on the Central Line west of Emerald - curvature on the Drummond Range precludes the use of coupled WRAs or WRBs - leaving 1720s as the only alternative for a second locomotive (and probably one of the reasons Watco has just purchased 1723 from QR).


My understanding was that the 1400 class were set up  with 15 tons on the motored axles and around 6 tons on the idler axles.
This was not adjustable since the springing for each axle was independent.
As the wheels wore out, the idler axles, since they did not slip, wore less than the powered axles, resulting in an increasing axle load on the idlers.
This effect could be simulated by placing packing on the idler axles between the springs and the axleboxes to reduce the load on the driving wheels. I'm told that some 1400s had up to 9 tons on the idler axles when checked, and that this made them liable to slip on grades.
However, if the bridge loading is critical, the lower total load on the span at a time might help.  

                                                                                  Peter

 

Axle loads of 15.75-tonnes are permitted on the Central Line west of Emerald - as far as I know the initial ban of two 93.0 or 94.5-tonne locomotives coupled together west of Emerald was due to the 17.04-metre length of 2400 and 2100 series locomotives caused various issues on the 80-metre radius curves on the Drummond Range - although QR policy may have since morphed into a policy of all second trailing locomotives having to be also axle load as well as length restricted.

On occasions it sometimes appears past engineering decisions made by long since retired QR staff are upheld by tradition rather than the current status of the infrastructure in question.

Watco and Qube are both power starved of narrow gauge locomotives at the moment. Providing the DCs can be accredited for use on the QR network, they could certainly be found a willing operator. From reports of their time on the Carmichael Rail Network they were remarkable workhorses despite only having four traction motors.

Together with a low axle load of 13.6-tonnes and short length of 14.01m, the DCs would also make a potential alternative to 1720s as second locos on the Central Line west of Emerald - curvature on the Drummond Range precludes the use of coupled WRAs or WRBs - leaving 1720s as the only alternative for a second locomotive (and probably one of the reasons Watco has just purchased 1723 from QR).

Are there any other narrow gauge locomotives for sale overseas that Watco/Qube might look at to overcome the shortage?  Cheers.

Aurizon sold around 140 narrow gauge Queensland and Western Australian locomotives overseas between 2012 and 2016, most going to Southern Africa, but twelve 2170s also went to Chile for conversion to metre gauge. To date most locomotives repatriated by Watco, One Rail and Progress (leasing to Glencore/Qube) have come from South Africa's Transnet fleet. 11 2250s returned to Australia for One Rail and Progress, and eight 2170s have been returned for Watco (Watco may actually own another three ex-Transnet 2170s still in South Africa, and Progress may also own some of the remaining 14 ex-Transnet 2250s still in South Africa).

Long story short, there's still a lot of Queensland and WA suitable locomotives scattered around Southern and Central Africa, and South America, but their current owners - which includes tourist, freight and lease operators - may not be in a hurry to part with them.

Interesting comments @Sulla1.  Off on a tangent, but are other regions of the world seeing the same demand uptick for locos/trains that we are and are they seeing similar demand for locos?

South Africa's Transnet network is moving to Open Acces in April, which I suspect will put a lot of pressure on African lease fleets and privately owned locos in Southern Africa.

Although that probably also means Transnet will be keen to sell surplus locomotives overseas and not to competing operators.

Together with a low axle load of 13.6-tonnes and short length of 14.01m, the DCs would also make a potential alternative to 1720s as second locos on the Central Line west of Emerald - curvature on the Drummond Range precludes the use of coupled WRAs or WRBs - leaving 1720s as the only alternative for a second locomotive (and probably one of the reasons Watco has just purchased 1723 from QR).


My understanding was that the 1400 class were set up  with 15 tons on the motored axles and around 6 tons on the idler axles.
This was not adjustable since the springing for each axle was independent.
As the wheels wore out, the idler axles, since they did not slip, wore less than the powered axles, resulting in an increasing axle load on the idlers.
This effect could be simulated by placing packing on the idler axles between the springs and the axleboxes to reduce the load on the driving wheels. I'm told that some 1400s had up to 9 tons on the idler axles when checked, and that this made them liable to slip on grades.
However, if the bridge loading is critical, the lower total load on the span at a time might help.  

                                                                                  Peter

 

Axle loads of 15.75-tonnes are permitted on the Central Line west of Emerald - as far as I know the initial ban of two 93.0 or 94.5-tonne locomotives coupled together west of Emerald was due to the 17.04-metre length of 2400 and 2100 series locomotives caused various issues on the 80-metre radius curves on the Drummond Range - although QR policy may have since morphed into a policy of all second trailing locomotives having to be also axle load as well as length restricted.

On occasions it sometimes appears past engineering decisions made by long since retired QR staff are upheld by tradition rather than the current status of the infrastructure in question.

Quote from another place:
David Schonfeld:
Coupler pocket side packer blocks:
It is these blocks that are the concern on tight curves. ie Drummond Range. Currently, two multi 90t locos cannot traverse the range. There is a study to look at allowing them to operate in multi configuration due to short supply of operational 1720 class locomotives as a second unit.

4444 will lie down under the blankets when it gets tired!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mollyschase/13988679490/in/album-72157644663678235/

Watco and Qube are both power starved of narrow gauge locomotives at the moment. Providing the DCs can be accredited for use on the QR network, they could certainly be found a willing operator.

There's still about 20 DCs in New Zealand that are either laid up or will be available in the next year or two, if indeed they are deemed valuable by Australian operators.  And beginning in about three years there will be a few dozen C26-MMI and C30-MMI (rebuilt U26C GE locos) available, in the 2750-3300hp range.

Together with a low axle load of 13.6-tonnes and short length of 14.01m, the DCs would also make a potential alternative to 1720s as second locos on the Central Line west of Emerald - curvature on the Drummond Range precludes the use of coupled WRAs or WRBs - leaving 1720s as the only alternative for a second locomotive (and probably one of the reasons Watco has just purchased 1723 from QR).


My understanding was that the 1400 class were set up  with 15 tons on the motored axles and around 6 tons on the idler axles.
This was not adjustable since the springing for each axle was independent.
As the wheels wore out, the idler axles, since they did not slip, wore less than the powered axles, resulting in an increasing axle load on the idlers.
This effect could be simulated by placing packing on the idler axles between the springs and the axleboxes to reduce the load on the driving wheels. I'm told that some 1400s had up to 9 tons on the idler axles when checked, and that this made them liable to slip on grades.
However, if the bridge loading is critical, the lower total load on the span at a time might help.  

                                                                                  Peter

 

Axle loads of 15.75-tonnes are permitted on the Central Line west of Emerald - as far as I know the initial ban of two 93.0 or 94.5-tonne locomotives coupled together west of Emerald was due to the 17.04-metre length of 2400 and 2100 series locomotives caused various issues on the 80-metre radius curves on the Drummond Range - although QR policy may have since morphed into a policy of all second trailing locomotives having to be also axle load as well as length restricted.

On occasions it sometimes appears past engineering decisions made by long since retired QR staff are upheld by tradition rather than the current status of the infrastructure in question.

Quote from another place:
David Schonfeld:
Coupler pocket side packer blocks:
It is these blocks that are the concern on tight curves. ie Drummond Range. Currently, two multi 90t locos cannot traverse the range. There is a study to look at allowing them to operate in multi configuration due to short supply of operational 1720 class locomotives as a second unit.

What would be the reason/rationale behind these coupler pocket packers?
Does the 'need'  still exist?