Re: SAFETY WARNING FOR DANGEROUS BEHAVIOUR ON LIGHT RAIL TRACKS
  Richard Youl

While I don’t think the public particularly ever called the routes 96 and 111 (now 109) Light Rail, certainly crews at South Melbourne did, at least in the earlier days.

“Hey, what are you doing this week, Bob?”

“Light Rail”. Certainly easier than say 96 and, or 111.

With 111 taken from South, maybe today drivers call it 96s or St Kildas.

Maybe Schony can tell us.

Regards,

On 13 Jan 2019, at 12:57 pm, Ronald Besdansky shrdlu.junction@...> wrote:

Really think it's about time the government "bit the bullet" and resolved to just call them all TRAMS. It would simplify interaction with the public and avoid any confusion. I always thought using "light rail" was to avoid people thinking of toastracks etc and to sound "modern". I know we've had this discussion elsewhere but I REALLY can't see how you can call Newcastle, CSELR or Canberra "light rail" and not "tramways" - they're all "in or adjacent to public streets". As to IWLR, what's the point of distinguishing between the on- and off-street sections?

Melbourne has trams (though they tried the "light rail" thing with Pt Melbourne/St Kilda), Manchester has trams, Sheffield has trams etc. Give up Gladys!