That’s a good question Mick - I haven’t heard that myself (doesn’t sound like something you’d want to do in front of too many witnesses).
I saw the wheel spinning done on a test trip between Chullora and Delec on the Flemington-Campsie goods line, away from prying eyes, by a loco tester. Without sand it spun the wheels impressively up to about 20 mph, then the power was shut off.
That wheel spin would have left some evidence on the rail, and could have damaged the traction motors, so it was definitely in the “kids, don’t try this at home” category.
As they were low geared and built to pull, 60mph was pretty much top speed, but they could accelerate a passenger train up to that pretty quickly, with the ride quality becoming progressively more interesting as you got closer to the 70mph track speed. The short wheelbase contributed to the rough ride too. They were not a high speed passenger motor by any means.
Tony G
On 8 Feb 2016, at 8:18 pm, 'Brian Blunt'bblunt@... [TramsDownUnder] TramsDownUnder@...> wrote:
>
> I had a few drives of light 46s with one of my mates in years gone by. Inadvertently started off in S/P on one occasion, certainly got a kick up the bum from it.
>
>
>
> Brian (enjoying some Bishop’s Best Dark Ale)
>
>
>
> From:TramsDownUnder@... [mailto:TramsDownUnder@yahoogroups.com]
> Sent: Monday, 8 February 2016 19:39
> To:TramsDownUnder@...
> Subject: Re: [TramsDownUnder] L classes (Was Harris trains etc) maybe TAN
>
>
>
>
>
> Gday Tony
>
> I too like the 46 as well as the L
>
> Thanks for the 46 stories
>
> I like the full series and release the independent start
>
> I heard a light 46, from a standing start,at one end of the Penrith
> platform got to 60 MPH at the other. Is this poss ?
>
> Cheers, Mick
>
>
> On 6/02/2016 4:05 AM, Tony Gallowayarg@... [TramsDo wnUnder] wrote:
>
>
>
> Yeah, the 46s were powerful - the Ls weren’t intended to drag trains up 3% grades, and I reckon a 46 would beat a Hammersley C636 Alco on short term overload horsepower, as they could briefly deliver around 6,000hp + starting effort to the rail. But a 46 would begin to shimmy and gallop over 60mph, they were not built for speed. 4620, the Granville derailment engine, had a particularly bad rep for poor ride quality and probably should have been banned from everything but pusher duty. It had been in several derailments before Granville, and was regarded as a “hoo-doo”.
>
>
>
> After Granville it was scrapped.
>
>
>
> When I was just out of my apprenticeship I was working at Chullora loco works, doing a lot of bogie change work mostly on 44 and 45 class Alco diesels, the occasional EMD (42, 421, 422 classes) and 46s. With the diesels you had to crawl up between the traction motor and the bolster to disconnect the motor leads, but on a 46 the connections were inside the carbody - much easier and cleaner to get at.
>
>
>
> To start a dead 46 you’d raise and hold up one of the pans with a long wooden pole stowed on the engine, after closing the compressor switch - you’d need about 40-50lbs of compressed air to keep the pan against the wire.. They were different to drive from a diesel, having series, series-parallel and full parallel power notches plus the regenerative brake notches which could be used as a kind of “cruise control” - when the line voltage was higher than the back EMF they’d drive, when the motor voltage was higher they’d brake - can’t do that with a dynamic brake on a diesel loco.
>
>
>
> And if you wanted to do the equivalent of a full throttle, clutch-drop drag racing start with a light engine - notch up full series, watch the ammeter sweep round to the red zone, then release the air brake - it’d take off like a raped ape with all wheels spinning and throwing sparks - no diesel would do that anywhere near as well as a 46.
>
>
>
> Tony G
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>