Re: Geelong Pengelleys
  Tony Galloway

Yeah, and the trucks were probably regarded as a maintenance hassle as well, as they had to be in good condition, with good tyres and flanges, to work as intended at all.

That was also the case with the Leeds “Pivotal” cars as their single axle trucks only tracked correctly on curves when rails, flanges and tyres were in pretty much unworn condition :

Eventually they just “locked it all up” and ran them as a long wheelbase rigid four wheeler, and sharp curves got water fountain lubricators to cut down the screeching.

This long wheelbase, radial axle four wheeler idea was intended as a money saver, but the maintenance required meant it was anything but that.

Tony G

> On 23 Jul 2017, at 2:06 pm, 'Roger Greenwood'efftech@... [TramsDownUnder] TramsDownUnder@...> wrote:

>

>

> Another cause of the Pengellys not be re-used after closure of Geelong, but less easy to quantify, may have been a disinclination to use radial axle trucks on the inferior-quality Ballarat & Bendigo tracks.

>

> Experience with three Launceston trams using this type of truck on rails past their use-by date was that they constantly hunted.

>

> Whilst radial axle trucks may have been satisfactory on the well-maintained Geelong lines, and also in Melbourne, the prospect of them running on tracks put down by the Electric Supply Company of Victoria in 1905/7, and re-furbished by the SEC in 1934 for a design life of only 15 years, may have ruled them out.

>

> Roger Greenwood

>

>

>

>

>

>

> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient Virus-free. www.avast.com https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient <x-msg://82/#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

>

>