Re: Camden Trams

[bf0017@hotmail.com]

That's the idea, if it is adopted.

18 was donated to the NSWRTM in pieces and without tender.  When the
NSWR re-assembled it, the present tender (TAB 62 - 2408) was coupled to
it to make 18 more complete.

When labour & time permits, a more appropriate livery will be applied.

Brett

In article <971863652.100296@unity.swspn.net.au>,
  Craig Warton <craigw@wolf.net.au> wrote:
> Regretably Chris, most (all) of the groups are only really
playing "choo choos"
> and have no interest in preservation or a sense of history - or an
appreciation
> of history. Going by the RTM, private railways do not count either -
have a look
> at the butchered condition of number 18. It is painted in a very
fanciful colour
> scheme and fitted with a B class tender. There is a Beyer Peacock 6
wheel tender
> down the back and it would be quite easy - and appropriate to restore
it to
> Corrimal Coal and Coke condition (Now that is an idea!)
>
> Craig
>
> Chris wrote:
>
> > I am really amazed that there are a few large rail groups who seem
to think
> > that only the 1960's era is worth preserving. Look out the back of
their
> > museums any you can see historically far more important 19th and
early 20th
> > century exhibits neglected and rusting away. Like the 10,12, 13, 18
class ,
> > and Mersey tank, E18, plus early passenger and freight vehicles at
the RTM.
> > They are far more interested in acquiring crapped out diesels with
little
> > historical significance and spending large sums on repairing them.
> > I wonder how long before the SRA takes back some of the exhibits at
RTM?
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > "Craig Warton" <craigw@wolf.net.au> wrote in message
> > news:971694293.293019@unity.swspn.net.au...
> > > Thank you Bob for adding a bit of historical - and factual
information to
> > the
> > > guesses! One day people may realise that the history and
operation of the
> > NSWR
> > > actually predated the 1960's!
> > >
> > > Craig
> > >
> > > Bob Merchant wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Tezza" <tezza2000@dingoblue.net.au> wrote in message
> > > > news:39ea5645$0$11607$7f31c96c@news01.syd.optusnet.com.au...
> > > > <snipped>
> > > > | But why were they called Camden trams?
> > > >
> > > > In 1879 an International Exhibition was held in the Sydney
Botanical
> > Gardens
> > > > and to provide transport from the Redfern Station the
government built a
> > > > street tramway operated by small Baldwin-built steam "motors".
This was
> > > > hugely successful and engendered the "Tramway Extension Act" of
29 April
> > > > 1880, which authorised construction of 14 additional tramways
to extend
> > the
> > > > service to those suburbs not having railway communication with
Sydney.
> > > >
> > > > During the debate prior to the passing of the act, it was felt
that a
> > rural
> > > > route should be included to test whether such a line would be
> > successful.
> > > > The route selected, and included in the act, was from
Campbelltown to
> > Camden
> > > > because it was close to Sydney, well populated and could be
expected to
> > > > generate large quantities of goods for forwarding to the
markets in
> > Sydney.
> > > >
> > > > The Sectetary for Public Works stated "...the object of the
government,
> > in
> > > > proposing the construction of a tramway from Campbelltown to
Camden, was
> > to
> > > > test the practicability of working tramways for goods traffic in
> > connection
> > > > with the railways and because ... it afforded means for a fair
test."
> > > >
> > > > The tramway opened on 10 March 1882 using two Baldwin steam
tram motors
> > and
> > > > three large end-loading trailers.  These were similar to but
smaller
> > than
> > > > the American type end-loading carriages.  Goods traffic was
carried in
> > > > railway wagons.
> > > >
> > > > It should be noted that until 1932 the Tramways were under the
control
> > of
> > > > the Commissioner(s) for Railways and Tramways so harmonious
relations
> > could
> > > > be expected in the matter of interdepartmental dealings.
> > > >
> > > > The use of tramway rolling stock was a temporary expedient, as
two small
> > > > 0-6-0 tank engines were ordered from Manning Wardle in 1883 and
two
> > > > specially constructed composite cars, by Hudson Bros., later
coded KA,
> > took
> > > > over all services and to a great extent vitiated any "fair
trial" of the
> > > > tramway principle as applied to feeder branch lines.  The
pretence was
> > > > abandoned altogether on 1 January 1889 when the line was
officially
> > > > transferred to the Railway Department.
> > > >
> > > > Here endeth the lesson... :-)
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Bob Merchant
> > >
>
>


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.