RE: Re: W 2 class trams

Roy Winslow
Monday, December 24, 2001 12:44 AM

The Union placed considerable pressure on the M&MTB to not follow up on the Y and Y1 Class design due to their being designed so that one man operation could have been a possibility. The 1980 edition of Destination City shows a Y1 with route number boxes when new. These were taken off due to union pressure. Another reason was the Depression in the early 1930's and WW2 at the end of the decade- no money to spend on trams that had a real chance of being blackbanned.

Although the Union did eventually support limited one man operation on the Footscray Lines and Point Ormond, the Y1's threatened the very existence of the Connie in that they would have replaced the W's as the standard type tramcar and did not require massive capital expenditure to refurbish for one-man.

In a recent visit to Melbourne I wondered just how much better and safer it would be if the Yappers had survived into the 1990's in service and were used as one man instead of the 'kit bashed' W's where their very nature makes one-man rather problematic.

Roy

-----Original Message-----
From: IS Edit [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 8:05 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [TramsDownUnder] Re: W 2 class trams

Good point, Peter. I bet the Tramways Union would have been against them. The real name of that union was the Australian Motor Omnibus and Employees Association. I had a top secret security clearance in the US Army in the mid-60s and I remember the DD-398 form "Application for Security Clearance" had a list of what they termed "subversive organisations" on it. You had to indicate if you had ever belonged to any of them. The only Australian organisation listed was the ATMO&EA because it was considered Maoist because of their Secretary Clarrie O'Shea. Bob Murphy ----- Original Message ----- From: "groompg" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 10:07 AM Subject: [TramsDownUnder] Re: W 2 class trams > --- In TramsDownUnder@y..., "IS Edit" <isedit@g...> wrote: > . . . No matter how good it was to read, > > it was a failure. > . . . > > Of course, a modern tramcar cost more to build (like it had > DOORS!); seems to me like a failure in imagination on the part > of M&MTB! They could have at least have run up some more > W2s for Collins and gone with Y derivatives for later builds. > > Not as much fun to ride as a W on a nice day, but mighty > welcome on a cool, wet one! Maybe too easy to one-man?? > > Peter Groom > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > >

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.