Re: Melbourne 881 971 in depot
IS Edit
Wednesday, April 17, 2002 1:33 PM
They weren't that logical, Herman.
They just kept going up by numbers in batches
picking up where the previous batch left off whether the same type or
not.
Even SF had their A, B and L types and a bunch of
others.
I find it annoyingly difficult as
well.
We used to refer to them as big cars and small
cars, the small ones being the W-2s which were narrower inside and had much less
room in the driver cabs.
By the time I drove for the M&MTB both the big
and small cars were basically standardised, anyway. Little cars had K-35
controllers (mostly) and big cars had RC controllers. Little cars rode like
shitwagons mostly and the big cars had nice suspension.
That's good enough for me.
Bob Murphy
----- Original Message -----From: Herman R. SilbigerSent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 10:24 PMSubject: Re: [TramsDownUnder] Melbourne 881 971 in depotIn the future I'll just refer to this type as W.
Why have these "class" designations anyway? Why not refer to them by
number, such as 800s etc. like they do in most of the rest of the world?
Herman
Malcolm Miles wrote:
>
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 21:25:53 +1000 (EST), you wrote:
>
> >To add even more to the confusion there were some W5s
> >that started as "CW5's" - built on old maximum
> >traction trucks to save money during the 30's Not
> >surprisingly they were a resounding failure and
> >converted to W5 fairly quickly - they carried numbers
> >681 to 685.
>
> Not that quickly. They were built in 1935 and not converted to W5s
> until 1956.
>
> --
> Best wishes,
> Malcolm
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
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.