" a 
‘ 
i rr 
226 | DISCUSSION ON 
could be shown that by adopting a steeper grade the working 
expenses in relation to the capital expenditure were actually 
lessened, and would remain so for the first few years. He con- 
sidered that it was wiser to anticipate by a few years a heavy 
increasing traffic, than do that which would probably be a heavy 
drag on the working expenses for a life-time. Any one who has 
had any experience would know the difficulty and expense involved 
in lowering a grade, while that of increasing the radius of a curve 
was ordinarily a much more simple and less expensive matter. 
The adoption on light railways of motors similar to those used in 
Sydney was worthy of consideration. It might not be generally 
known that the strongest motors in use, with eleven inch cylinder, 
sixteen inch stroke, and thirty-five inch driving wheel, were 
capable of drawing six hundred and sixty-two tons on the level, 
one hundred and sixty-five tons on a one in one hundred grade, 
and ninety tons on a one in fifty grade. Taking a loaded truck 
to weigh ten tons, it would be seen that these motors were capable 
of taking nine loaded trucks up a one in fifty grade. As ona 
light line the services of a fireman were not required, the running 
expenses of a train were by this alone reduced thirty per cent. 
These motors were also capable of running round very sharp 
curves, even up to eighty-six feet radius. This, of course, was 
with the assistance of a guard rail, but were the depth of flange 
increased to the same as an ordinary railway line, they would 
successfully run round curves three and four chains radius without 
the assistance of the guard rail. A further saving would be in 
the capital cost of the motor, for which about £1,000 was a fair 
price, probably half the cost of an engine as described by the 
author ; the cost of repairs also would probably be less. Motors 
had one great disadvantage, viz., their small water carrying 
capacity, which however, might be largely increased without 
much extra expenditure. He was unfavourable to the reduction 
in the number of sleepers, and considered that the Americans had 
_shown their wisdom by keeping their sleepers close together rather 
‘than increase the depth of ballast. On the tramways he had 
ao 
