Talk:New South Wales AD60 class locomotive

Most powerful Australian steam locomotive?
The introductory paragraph currently has the following statement: "They were the most powerful Australian steam locomotives."

I'm not sure that this is correct. The NSWGR D57 class had the highest nominal tractive effort - and the VR H class the highest measured drawbar horsepower - of Australian steam locomotive. So I'm wondering if this statement is based on some other measure of "power" and if there's a reference we can cite for it? - Zzrbiker (talk) 17:14, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Possible errors in the data
herb.garratt@yahoo.com.au via yahoogroups.com

21:11 (11 hours ago) to steam_tech (A yahoo group) G'day Peter,

The data at the url mentioned does say 6 chain (396'-0"\120.7m) radius was the intended\design minimum curve radius for the NSWGR AD60's, but there are the usual suspect Wiki bits accompanying the data.

1. Quote: - 'In 1949 twenty-five were initially ordered from Beyer, Peacock and Company, followed by a further twenty-five. Following a change of policy in favour of diesel traction, attempts were made to cancel part of the order. Forty-two complete locomotives were delivered, together with spare parts equating to approximately five further locomotives. The last three locomotives manufactured were sold to South African Railways by Beyer Peacock.' (end quote).

This may be correct, but I point out that the AD60's were equipped with cast beds for the units, thus any possibility of re-gauging the engine units from 4'-8.1/2" (NSWGR) to 3'-6" (SAR) gauge would be most unlikely. Perhaps the SAR bought them for their other bits and pieces, but, must say, I've never heard that one before?

2. Quote: - 'Amongst attempts to improve cab ventilation, 6011 was experimentally fitted in September 1952 with a large tube along the front bunker and boiler to funnel air from the front of the locomotive into the cab' (end quote).

There is no 'front bunker' on a Garratt locomotive. The only thing carried by the front unit apart from its propulsive and draught\drag arrangements, is a water tank (only).

3. The F of A is quoted as '4.73 or 4.99', I would imagine the two figures accounting for revamped 'mainline' version, and original branch-line design. But.....the weight of water and coal at those F of A's is not given. One assumes they apply at full tanks and bunker?

4. There are other piffling errors scattered about, some of which amount to probably little more than typos, though the entire collection show poor editing.

All in all, less than definitive, one suggests? There is a book dedicated to the 60's (which I do not possess), wherein the design minimum radius curvature may be mentioned. Perhaps a site member who has the book may be able to look it up?

Cheers, OP Note especially this statement: 1. Quote: - 'In 1949 twenty-five were initially ordered from Beyer, Peacock and Company, followed by a further twenty-five. Following a change of policy in favour of diesel traction, attempts were made to cancel part of the order. Forty-two complete locomotives were delivered, together with spare parts equating to approximately five further locomotives. The last three locomotives manufactured were sold to South African Railways by Beyer Peacock.' (end quote). And the observation: "This may be correct, but I point out that the AD60's were equipped with cast beds for the units, thus any possibility of re-gauging the engine units from 4'-8.1/2" (NSWGR) to 3'-6" (SAR) gauge would be most unlikely. Perhaps the SAR bought them for their other bits and pieces, but, must say, I've never heard that one before?". Peter Horn User talk 13:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * No mention of these three engines in

Peter Horn User talk 19:17, 22 April 2014 (UTC)