Re: R/R1 and P/O capacity
  Noel Reed

Tony G wrote -

I also wonder if the assertion that the corridor cars were regarded as
second tier cars was always the intention, as tender specs for MU operation
were included but rejected due to cost. It would have been interesting to
listen in to the discussion on the tender selection committee, with the
traffic branch pushing for MU cars and the treasury gnomes insisting on the
lowest price. Maybe the second tier idea emerged after MU operation of these
cars was rejected.


Sydney R & R1 class trams were operated coupled together as motor and
trailer when they were being transferred out of Port Macquarie Depot [see

and also at the end of the tramway system, when they were transferred for
the last time from Dowling St Depot to Randwick Workshops.

Could 'MU' operation be trialled with R or R1 trams in a museum environment
by coupling the trams in the normal way and using a driver in each tram ?

This type of operation replicates the railway practice of having non MU
compatible locos with or without a train or non MU rail motors with

or without trailers.

An example in Victoria was the practice with coupled non MU DERM's [rail
motors] on the several branch line routes north of Bendigo. Each DERM had
its own driver when departing from Bendigo and they were able to
successfully co-ordinate their driving procedures until they were uncoupled
at the branch line junction.