 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blog Entry# 1602407
Posted: Sep 28 2015 (21:33)
34 Responses
Last Response: Sep 29 2015 (19:47)
34 Responses
Last Response: Sep 29 2015 (19:47)
#railwayengineering
**************** Rare Collection ******************
ASN WAP-6 22403
Link: ASN WAP-6
Courtesy: amit gupta6
Pic...
more...
**************** Rare Collection ******************
ASN WAP-6 22403
Link: ASN WAP-6
Courtesy: amit gupta6
Pic...
more...
32 Posts
There are some units of WAP1 which were 'upgraded' to WAP4 and again, reverted back to WAP1. Maybe those units were more 'volatile' as WAP4's. Example - WAP1 22029.
Regarding P7's, they too had limited usage earlier - mostly with the premier classes like Rajdhanis & Shatabdis. Eventually, they've emerged as more powerful alternatives to the P4's. Nevertheless, WAP4's have been the "most successful" passenger locos so far!
Regarding P7's, they too had limited usage earlier - mostly with the premier classes like Rajdhanis & Shatabdis. Eventually, they've emerged as more powerful alternatives to the P4's. Nevertheless, WAP4's have been the "most successful" passenger locos so far!
Cost was also not really different. CLW was just experimenting with the WAP design by trying to change whatever was possible and get more out of a proven platform. This is like how DLW did countless number of modifications on the successful ALCO platform and came up with many derivatives of the WDM2. In the end, it was a failed experiment though.
I guess you are right. WAP1's shell and underframe were designed for the TAO motors which were considerably lighter than the Hitachi motors of the P4. In the P4, the shell was also modified with lighter underframe and a generous use of Aluminium to reduce the weight. For some WAP1's the loco shell was not modified and while they did not fail outright, they did have several ride quality problems. The P1's which underwent a complete retrofit for conversion to WAP4, are functioning well though.
As far as I know, P7's were initially not preferred for long distance runs as there were concerns about the electronic cards ( containing the control systems) which were prone to overheating related...
more...
As far as I know, P7's were initially not preferred for long distance runs as there were concerns about the electronic cards ( containing the control systems) which were prone to overheating related...
more...
Even the bogies were changed to suit the Hitachi motors. WAP1's have Flexicoil Mark II bogies. WAP4's have Flexicoil Mark I bogies.
Travel SAFE
1. RailFanning does NOT MEAN dangerous pics/videos.
2. Doorplating pics/youtube videos are strictly FORBIDDEN in IRI.
3. Take plenty of food pics and other safe pics.
4. Write human interest narratives to make the pics interesting.
5. Enjoy blogging and travelling SAFELY.
REMEMBER: YOUR LIFE is the most precious thing, NOT RailFanning.
Scroll to Top