Re: New locos for the RTM

[gioia9499@my-dejanews.com]

In article <71b25j$n9f$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
  catchpoints@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <719kkg$ls7$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
>   gioia9499@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> > In article <71975u$45m$6@news.mel.aone.net.au>,
> >   dbromage@fang.omni.com.au (David Bromage) wrote:
> > > Gill (torpan@ozemail.com.au) wrote:
> > > > Great news ...but where will they be stored.
> > >
> > > Junee? :)
> > >
> > > Seriously, how about at least one to Valley Heights?
> > >
> >
> >  They couldn't possibly do that. They would first have to rip the engine out
> > or make it inoperable in some way so as to stop the Valley Heights group of
> > the RTM (yes the same RTM) from having something that was operable. It's a
> > bit like the things that were taken off 5461 before it went up there. Cheers
> > Bob
>
> Yes, certain re-usable spare parts were removed from the static exhibit loco
> 5461 before it's journey west. After all, if people remember back to when
> Valley Heights was wished on the RTM, it was to be a *NON-OPERATING* group
> i.e. an annex to the Museum, not another mainline steam operator. Why send
> items such as air compressors etc. away from where they are most likely to be
> needed ? Cheers,

 Is it the RTMs policy to deny the Valley Heights group the right to operate
trains or is this just the opinion of the Thirlmere working members? Sure is
was to have been a static museumbut why not let them run? The RTM has had the
attitude for many years that they are "it" and no one else exists. With such
an attitude it is no wonder that they are getting nowhere these days. Also
why are they so much against the restoration of 5711? Could this have
something to do with the fact that it would be too big to be based at
Thirlmere as an operable loco and may have to live in Sydney? Cheers Bob

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own