[
Date Prev
][
Date Next
][
Thread Prev
][
Thread Next
][
Date Index
][
Thread Index
]
Re: 520 or 621
Subject
: Re: 520 or 621
From
: Michael Milway <
Michael_Milway@uow.edu.au
>
Date
: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 15:38:15 +1100
Newsgroups
:
aus.rail
Organization
: University of Wollongong, Australia
References
: <
36dd2b79@dnews.tpgi.com.au
> <
36df922b.666443@news.chariot.net.au
> <
36e4c565.3871705@news.chariot.net.au
> <
36E6E67C.7B959898@dehaa.sa.gov.au
> <
36e73a71.16780072@news.camtech.net.au
> <
3704951e.2957933@news.ozemail.com.au
> <
36ECC780.1D9EDDDE@melbpc.org.au
>
John Duncan McCallum wrote:
Follow-Ups
:
Re: 520 or 621
From:
John Duncan McCallum <mccallum@melbpc.org.au>
References
:
520 or 621
From:
"Jo & Paul" <curry@tpg.com.au>
Re: 520 or 621
From:
chester@chariot.net.au (Chester)
Re: 520 or 621
From:
chester@chariot.net.au (Chester)
Re: 520 or 621
From:
Neil Waller <nwaller@dehaa.sa.gov.au>
Re: 520 or 621
From:
ranger@camtech.net.au (bob green)
Re: 520 or 621
From:
telljb@ozemail.com.au (< Tell >)
Re: 520 or 621
From:
John Duncan McCallum <mccallum@melbpc.org.au>
Prev by Date:
Re: Air Raid Precautions
Next by Date:
Re: New logic on Metcard
Prev by thread:
Re: 520 or 621
Next by thread:
Re: 520 or 621
Index(es):
Date
Thread