On 13/5/19 10:25 am, David McLoughlin wrote:
> Matthew Geier wrote:

>

> > I know a lot of people don't like 'modern plastic caterpillars', but

> 2107 is a solidly built stainless steel monster. It's a tribute to the

> design and construction teams who worked on her.

>

> I think I am one of those gunzel rarities -- I much prefer modern

> trams. I grew up with W2s and cheered to see the end of them. I am

> pleased to see Milano finally ordering enough new trams to replace

> (hopefully all) its hideous Peter Witts.


They seem to have achieved the same status was Melbourne Ws.

And it annoys me to call them 'Peter Witt' cars - they ran with Peter
Witt passenger flow design for something like less than 5 years before
the operator decided that wasn't going to work and cut extra doors into
them. Better to call them Ventottos - they were introduced in 1928.

The STMs Ventotto will be made operational shortly - with the need to
make the overhead pantograph compatible for a Sydney tram, instead of
trying to re-invent a trolley bridge the car hasn't had fitted for over
40 years (and then x2 because its been double-ended since then), the
pantograph is going back on.

>

> I liked the Variotrams and remain surprised such new trams were

> replaced when so young (but at least with more new trams rather than

> the alternative).

NSW is so rich that it can replace assets that normally would have much
longer lifetimes, not just trams, but exhibition and convention centres
and stadiums too.

The CAF trams may not last 20 years - the CAFs appear to be built to a
price not a spec. I don't know if driving the price down (with
unfortunate side effects in reduced quality) is a good thing or not.
Cheaper trams may mean more of them and that can only be a good thing ?