Re: R/R1 and P/O capacity and tie rods, was: Couplers and Moonee Ponds
  Tony Galloway

A bit of poking around looking for something else in that excellent resource the Trolley Wire Online Archive has uncovered the full text of the 1932 Fergus Maclean paper on tramcar design and developments :

https://www.sydneytramwaymuseum.com.au/members.old/Trolley_Wire/226%20-%20Trolley%20Wire%20-%20Oct%201986.pdf https://www.sydneytramwaymuseum.com.au/members.old/Trolley_Wire/226%20-%20Trolley%20Wire%20-%20Oct%201986.pdf

Tony G

> On 11 Oct 2017, at 12:46 am,prescottt@... [TramsDownUnder] TramsDownUnder@...> wrote:

>

> Dudley your experience on the Watsons Bay line I think verifies why Maddocks saw the R/R1 as a tier 2 tram in terms of capacity. Nominally, it could carry as many as an O or P, but the fewer doors (still more generous and better distributed than an SW6 would have offered though) meant that the practical prospects of loading to that capacity in a short dwell were slightly poorer.

>

> As for trying to run loading experiments on the various classes at Loftus, I fear that too much human "evolution" has occurred (thanks to fast junk food) to replicate conditions of the 1930s. I look at the photos taken inside R/R1s in the 1930s with everybody tucked neatly into their seats and then I look at my photos inside similarly crowded trams at Loftus and the aisle is narrowed to a slit by hips, thighs and robust legs bulging sideways from the seats!

>

> Perhaps the crowd will have to be recruited from Jenny Craig.

>

> Tony P

>

>