XPT vs HST

[Stonesourscotty]

Can anyone tell me the differences other than the coaches used? i heard if HST's where exported they wouldn't be able to make the Climb through the Blue Mountains? Could the HST's be used as XPT Spares maybe?

 

[fowler9]

Can anyone tell me the differences other than the coaches used? i heard if HST's where exported they wouldn't be able to make the Climb through the Blue Mountains? Could the HST's be used as XPT Spares maybe?

I guess various alterations would be required but weren't the XPT engines down rated to a lower power output? Just guessing but I would think the power cars could make the climb. From my experience it was quite a steady climb with no where massively steep.

 

[ainsworth74]

Don't they have smaller engines to allow for a larger cooler group and air filter?

 

[fowler9]

Don't they have smaller engines to allow for a larger cooler group and air filter?

Ah right, that could be the case.

 

[gazthomas]

A quick Google gave this useful page:

http://www.railpage.org.au/xpt/specs.html

 

[tranzitjim]

The XPTs where Australian made, by what was then an Australian company.

They where given a different gear ratio, that cost it the speed, but gave it extra grunt for getting up hills.

I am not clear on if the Blue Mountains where the specific cause, or perhaps hills generally in Australia.

The XPT can only reach 180 km/h, where the HST can go quite faster.

Also, there was a need for better colling for the XPT, as Australia is a hotter and dustier place to that of England.

Furthermore, the suspension of the XPT is much more superior to that of the HST. Australian tracks at least back then where very rough, and our train had to have the ability to ride that out.

I would guess the HST could operate in place of the XPT, but you would need to change at least that gear ratio.

 

[fowler9]

The XPTs where Australian made, by what was then an Australian company.

They where given a different gear ratio, that cost it the speed, but gave it extra grunt for getting up hills.

I am not clear on if the Blue Mountains where the specific cause, or perhaps hills generally in Australia.

The XPT can only reach 180 km/h, where the HST can go quite faster.

Also, there was a need for better colling for the XPT, as Australia is a hotter and dustier place to that of England.

Furthermore, the suspension of the XPT is much more superior to that of the HST. Australian tracks at least back then where very rough, and our train had to have the ability to ride that out.

I would guess the HST could operate in place of the XPT, but you would need to change at least that gear ratio.

Are the hills more of an issue where they are used in Australia than they would be in the UK. The parts of Australia I have seen (Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland) didn't seem significantly more hilly than the UK, still very beautiful though.

 

[DownSouth]

Are the hills more of an issue where they are used in Australia than they would be in the UK. The parts of Australia I have seen (Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland) didn't seem significantly more hilly than the UK, still very beautiful though.

The bits near where the people live are quite hilly, including areas in all three of the eastern states that you mentioned. These states all have a wide variety of terrain, while Victoria is the smallest of the mainland states it is still larger than Great Britain. Only one of the six states (Western Australia) does not have a peak higher than Ben Nevis in Scotland, but its highest point of Mt Meharry still has plenty of margin over the highest points of England and Wales.

If you look at a topographical map of the country, you'll see the Great Dividing Range follows the eastern and southern coast for over 3,500km. Every inter-regional train leaving Sydney has to climb over some part of this range on the routes heading north, west, south or south-west from the greater Sydney area.

It's not territory covered by the XPT, but the first hour of an Adelaide-Melbourne train trip involves 23 kilometres of a near constant climb from sea level to an altitude of over 430 metres (Shap Summit is at 278 metres, for the sake of comparison) with most of the climb at gradients of 2% (1 in 50) or steeper. The plumb line from the start to the finish of that climb is 9.3km long but the rail line follows a course 23km long to keep the gradients below 2.2% (1 in 45). I'm not saying this is the hardest climb on the Australian railways (the Blue Mountains line and Sydney-Brisbane route are harder) but it's just the one for which I know the stats.


There are indeed lots of huge flat areas in this vast country, but the areas around the population centres are significantly more hilly than the equivalent in the UK, and the more rugged terrain generally must be crossed or circumnavigated to get the trains to the flat areas.

 

[fowler9]

The bits near where the people live are quite hilly, including areas in all three of the eastern states that you mentioned. These states all have a wide variety of terrain, while Victoria is the smallest of the mainland states it is still larger than Great Britain. Only one of the six states (Western Australia) does not have a peak higher than Ben Nevis in Scotland, but its highest point of Mt Meharry still has plenty of margin over the highest points of England and Wales.

If you look at a topographical map of the country, you'll see the Great Dividing Range follows the eastern and southern coast for over 3,500km. Every inter-regional train leaving Sydney has to climb over some part of this range on the routes heading north, west, south or south-west from the greater Sydney area.

It's not territory covered by the XPT, but the first hour of an Adelaide-Melbourne train trip involves 23 kilometres of a near constant climb from sea level to an altitude of over 430 metres (Shap Summit is at 278 metres, for the sake of comparison) with most of the climb at gradients of 2% (1 in 50) or steeper. The plumb line from the start to the finish of that climb is 9.3km long but the rail line follows a course 23km long to keep the gradients below 2.2% (1 in 45). I'm not saying this is the hardest climb on the Australian railways (the Blue Mountains line and Sydney-Brisbane route are harder) but it's just the one for which I know the stats.


There are indeed lots of huge flat areas in this vast country, but the areas around the population centres are significantly more hilly than the equivalent in the UK, and the more rugged terrain generally must be crossed or circumnavigated to get the trains to the flat areas.

Cheers for the info mate. Much appreciated. I've been on the Blue Mountains line to Katoomba. Very nice it was to.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Cheers for the info mate. Much appreciated. I've been on the Blue Mountains line to Katoomba. Very nice it was to.

Did you visit the nearby caves? My wife and I crawled through them many years a go! I worked with a fair few people who lived "out west". I don't think they realised how lucky they were to have such magnificent scenery nearby although it can get pretty chilly in winter!

 

[fowler9]

Did you visit the nearby caves? My wife and I crawled through them many years a go! I worked with a fair few people who lived "out west". I don't think they realised how lucky they were to have such magnificent scenery nearby although it can get pretty chilly in winter!

I didn't mate. We were on quite a low budget trip but managed to fit quite a bit in. We got the train from Sydney to Katoomba and then got the tourist bus to near scenic world. Then we walked around some of the trails past the Three Sisters to near Leura and got the bus back to Leura station for the train. It was a lovely day out. We spent 2 months in Australia, about a week in Sydney visiting the surrounding area. Our budget was tiny, ha ha. We were out of the UK for about 7 months in total.

 

[185]

Done both Brisbane-Sydney and Sydney-Melbourne more than once. Very comfy, good service ran mega late every time, but was worth it for the (bargain) price. XPT is bizarrely like the original interior of a HST coach seen in the eighties.... well, with the exception of a drinking water tap in every car.

 

[fowler9]

Done both Brisbane-Sydney and Sydney-Melbourne more than once. Very comfy, good service ran mega late every time, but was worth it for the (bargain) price. XPT is bizarrely like the original interior of a HST coach seen in the eighties.... well, with the exception of a drinking water tap in every car.

I would have loved to have done those journies by train, sadly budget dictated that it was going to be Greyhound. Ah well, next time.

 

[LesS]

I am unsure how old that Railpage posting is.
The original Paxman/Valenta engines were renewed with 2200hp engines several years ago..

The customisation for NSW included much stronger engine cooling. Ambient temperatures are often above 35C during summer and no snow and ice to contend with during the winter. The gearing was altered mainly because of the grades. The suspension was substantially changed due to the lower track standards.

The ruling grade on NSW main lines is 1 in75. There are some very long sections on all of the main lines at these grades and sometimes steeper. For example on the north from Sydney UP trains have to climb from sea level to nearly 700 ft in less than 7 miles.

The major problem keeping the train speeds slow is the curves. There are many. Quite often there is enough power to overcome the grades but speed restrictions on the curves keep the speed down.

Put simply the NSW trains are worn out and past their use by date. Unlike their UK counterparts. They are worked to death. The economic term for this is "sweating the assets".

For example and set working a return trip Sydney to Melbourne will be operating without break for 26 hours. That is main engines and ancilliary motors etc are started when they leave their depot in Sydney and remain running until they return to the depot. A return trip to Brisbane means about 33 hours of non stop running.

Breakdowns are not unusual. In January a semi-charter to Parkes broke down when it tackled a steep grade west of Bathurst. Friends who work on these trains have be told me of many instances of mechanical failures in service.

The government have no announced plans for their replacement. Most likely as they fail beyond repair they will be scrapped and services replaced by busses.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

I am unsure how old that Railpage posting is.
The original Paxman/Valenta engines were renewed with 2200hp engines several years ago..

The customisation for NSW included much stronger engine cooling. Ambient temperatures are often above 35C during summer and no snow and ice to contend with during the winter. The gearing was altered mainly because of the grades. The suspension was substantially changed due to the lower track standards.

The ruling grade on NSW main lines is 1 in75. There are some very long sections on all of the main lines at these grades and sometimes steeper. For example on the north from Sydney UP trains have to climb from sea level to nearly 700 ft in less than 7 miles.

The major problem keeping the train speeds slow is the curves. There are many. Quite often there is enough power to overcome the grades but speed restrictions on the curves keep the speed down.

Put simply the NSW trains are worn out and past their use by date. Unlike their UK counterparts. They are worked to death. The economic term for this is "sweating the assets".

For example and set working a return trip Sydney to Melbourne will be operating without break for 26 hours. That is main engines and ancilliary motors etc are started when they leave their depot in Sydney and remain running until they return to the depot. A return trip to Brisbane means about 33 hours of non stop running.

Breakdowns are not unusual. In January a semi-charter to Parkes broke down when it tackled a steep grade west of Bathurst. Friends who work on these trains have be told me of many instances of mechanical failures in service.

The government have no announced plans for their replacement. Most likely as they fail beyond repair they will be scrapped and services replaced by busses.

If they went for a DEMU design, with an engine per coach could they do the journey with half the engines they do say 500 miles then switch engines (the ones that were used then get shut down), the second set of engines does 500
miles and then they swap back?