[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [melb]Swanston don't want W-Class

Subject: Re: [melb]Swanston don't want W-Class
From: Evad Rehtona <davemclAXETHIS@iprolink.co.nz>
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 15:04:15 +1200
Newsgroups: aus.rail
Organization: Obscure
References: <3938ec83.504656@news.one.net.au> <jd3ijsc09m0v99qrimudi725n3qstt9gog@4ax.com> <3939b7d2$0$8458$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au> <3939fe6c@news.iprimus.com.au> <393a0a5c$0$8459$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au> <8Fp_4.53$2j.616041@news0.optus.net.au>
Xref: bclass.spectrum.com.au aus.rail:11546

Dave Proctor wrote:
> 
> "James C" <jamesccj@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> 393a0a5c$0$8459$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au">news:393a0a5c$0$8459$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au...
> > Also Adelaide's tram line having longer stop gap then most Melbourne's
> tram
> > line  therefore less breaking needed.
> 
> Less breaking would be good for the trams, wouldn't it?

Certainly, if the brakes on the old trams worked better, there would be
fewer instances of driver's legs breaking in rear-enders. And fewer
cases of the trams themselves breaking up in smashes after brake
failures.

David McLoughlin
Auckland New Zealand

References:
- [melb]Swanston don't want W-Class
  - From: tram@ding.ding (W-Class)
- Re: [melb]Swanston don't want W-Class
  - From: billboltonREMOVE-TO-EMAIL@computer.org (Bill Bolton)
- Re: [melb]Swanston don't want W-Class
  - From: "John Wayman" <trecker@optusnet.com.au>
- Re: [melb]Swanston don't want W-Class
  - From: "Eric Cartman" <erkV69@erk.au.com>
- Re: [melb]Swanston don't want W-Class
  - From: "James C" <jamesccj@optusnet.com.au>
- Re: [melb]Swanston don't want W-Class
  - From: "Dave Proctor" <daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au>

Prev by Date: Outline of the Benefits of Age Reversal 10023
Next by Date: Re: [melb]Swanston don't want W-Class
Prev by thread: Re: [melb]Swanston don't want W-Class
Next by thread: Re: [melb]Swanston don't want W-Class
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread