Re: 442 Class

["Steve Zvillis" <szvillis@netspace.net.au>]

Rjaygee <dartmouthmotel@bigpond.com> wrote in message
fsPH6.16024$482.82393@newsfeeds.bigpond.com">news:fsPH6.16024$482.82393@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> Talk about whingers.

Whose whinging? I wasn't. (You most definatly are!) I was only making a
genuine enquiry about the rationale for the selection of 44211, as I couldnt
see its particular significance. Thank you to those correspondents who
replied privately and publically explaining the reasons behind 44211's
selection, I appreciate your POSITIVE and CONSTRUCTIVE advice and now
understand why No. 11 was nominated. Although I still hope someone takes
pity on the classleader and preserves it for historys' sake.

> State Rail gives the RTM a working 442 that looks
> superb now, at minimal cost to the RTM,  and some one complains its not
the
> right one.

I wasn't complaining. I'm glad 44211 has been preserved and restored to such
a fine standard. Its just that I would have preferred a historically more
significant class member - but thats just my personal opinion which counts
for nothing outside of my own preservation organisation.

> Wel just renumber it to 44201.

It will still be 44211 even if you renumber it to ABC123 and 44201 will
still be the first of the class and the one that was handed over to
McCusker.

> One bloody 442 Class diesel is
> much the same as another.

Give the man a lollipop! Most locos, steam or diesel of the same class (in
most cases, unless you count the V.R. "T" class!!) tend to be much the same
as each other. Thats how they were built and were meant to be. However, some
examples stand out by reason of their position on the construction line,
mechanical upgrades, modifications or events during their lifetime that make
them more interesting than their classmates.

 > Its a pretty ugly class of loco.

Your opinion. I think they are of a far more interesting design than some of
the more recent stupifyingly boring designs such as the V-Line "G" class,
A.N. "BL" class or Q.R. "2800" class.

>  Does 44201 still
> exist.

Yes. Still stored at Delec as far as I know.

>In any event its not really being kept for any historical reason
> rather that the RTM has something reliable to pull around its stainless
> steel coaches. Also the policy hyas changed since corporatisation in that
> State Rail now wants to sell its surplus diesel ala 42203 and 42220.
> Cheers
> Rod Gayford

I hope you arent as negative to my pending queries about the preservation
prospects or lack of, for some other notable ex N.S.W.G.R. diesels. If you
don't like particular diesels why read about them and comment?

Thanks to everyone else!

Regards,

Steve Z.