Re: Re: Panto on SW5.856
Andy B
Friday, December 20, 2002 11:55 PM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Dalton" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 10:19 AM
Subject: RE: [TramsDownUnder] Re: Panto on SW5.856
No idea. I'm disappointed really, because W's are pole trams. They always
have been, and always should be. The arguments against poles are driver
convenience (ie lazy drivers) and overhead alignment.
The W's have been modified so heavily over the last 5-10 years they are
beginning to lose their charm.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
From: "Steve Dalton" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 10:19 AM
Subject: RE: [TramsDownUnder] Re: Panto on SW5.856
W Classes and Pantos, we tried this once before and it failed, why allof
a sudden do they think it will work again.,
No idea. I'm disappointed really, because W's are pole trams. They always
have been, and always should be. The arguments against poles are driver
convenience (ie lazy drivers) and overhead alignment.
The W's have been modified so heavily over the last 5-10 years they are
beginning to lose their charm.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/