Re: Melbourne's grey white trams

[Chris Brownbill <cbrnbill@enternet.com.au>]

David McLoughlin wrote:
> 
> Chris Brownbill wrote:
> >
> > I finally saw one the other day - and they look OK but unspectacular.  The thing
> > that bothered me most, and should have all self respecting anal-retentive
> > gunzels up in arms is that apart from very small stickers at the top of the
> > drivers windows they have no indication of road numbers.  The trams are
> > anonymous!  This breaks a long tradition and in my opinion is a mistake which
> > should be rectified.
> 
> Surely it's also illegal? Trams do not require a numberplate like other
> road vehicles, but they do need to have an identifying fleet number.
> This is a requirement all round the world where trams run (I know of no
> place where they need a car-style numberplate, which even buses do, but
> they do all have a fleet number).
> 
> Or are you talking about the depot run numbers which used to be black on
> yellow on a card on the windscreen, ie GH 59 or P 78  ?
> 
> David McLoughlin
> Auckland New Zealand

Well that's an interesting point.  I am talking about the fleet number (eg A
class no 266) not the run number (eg GH59).  I dont know what the legal position
is regarding identification, but the trams do actually have their number on the
windscreen, but its quite small and you'd have to be pretty close to see it.  I
was thinking more about how photographs will be devalued as historical records
because it will rarely be possible to identify the actual tramcar.