26.01.2011, 19:19
26.01.2011, 19:19
26.01.2011, 22:14
Could all people reading the above message please note that the poster has inaccurately quoted Brush Car 634 as being a Crich acquisition.
'Limited research' would have shown that Brush Car 634 is owned by myself and is located at Rushden Historical Transport Society in Northamptonshire.
I have no intention of selling the car or allowing it to become a donor for other vehicles and there are no plans to relocate the car to Crich.
I suspect that the poster has failed to correctly identify the cars acquired by the TMS and has simply made a clerical error but I wish it to be noted that my car has been incorrectly reported in this thread.
Yours sincerely
Andy Ashton.
26.01.2011, 22:27
26.01.2011, 23:06
27.01.2011, 15:52
Chris Rowe wrote:It would be nice to see 630 + 298 both survive, the progression of the tramcar and what might have been on other systems, however, because it is a Blackpool car, snooty views will come in. The moment that 630 gets chopped is the moment that any perspective donations from myself will cease and all donations will go in the Heaton Park, Birkenhead direction.
Its no shock to see little research as 'Its a Blackpool Tram'.
As Blackpool is where a lot of younger enthusiasts have got there passion from, the TMS should maybe show a bit of respect to this fact and bear in mind that the younger generation will probably want to see Twin Cars, Railcoaches and Balloons operate more than a tram they can not recognise from their own experiences. I am not saying bin all traditional trams in favour of Blackpool trams, but at least think a bit before such nonsense is posted and try and embrace the younger breed of enthusiast rather than deflect them to other organisations through your bogus opinions.
Andrew Blood wrote:Totally agree with Chris - it will be a disgrace if 630 is dismantled, especially bearing in mind that there is a huge waiting list for people to acquire Blackpool trams so 630 could have a secure future in other hands. Can't believe people are saying that a Twin or 762 are not historically important - especially as valuable resources are being used at crich to 'restore' trams like 159 which are practically brand new anyway. But as its London and not Blackpool thats OK!
Chris Rowe wrote:I personally think they will overlook the fact that they are in a position to showcase a design of tram which has lasted over 70 years in front line service and show an as built and as 'retired' look. They are the only museum in a position to do this and others would jump at the chance to be able to do this.
Don't get me started on the twin car debate, 'Not worthy of exhibiting'. Well excuse me but, 50 years in service and a success, yet some of the trams at the NTM managed only half of that yet are drooled over. I still don't understand the policy of if a minor fault occurs then it is a full strip down and out of service for months instead of a simple repair. Its a good job that this doesn't happen on the real tramways or there wouldn't be a service to run!
Andrew Blood wrote:Months! Thats optimistic - usually its years - Blackpool 49 - leaking roof and now 19 years out of service!
27.01.2011, 17:30
27.01.2011, 21:17
27.01.2011, 21:56
29.01.2011, 12:53
29.01.2011, 15:26
Bei iphpbb3.com bekommen Sie ein kostenloses Forum mit vielen tollen Extras
Forum kostenlos einrichten - Hot Topics - Tags
Beliebteste Themen: Mode, Web, Erde, Air, NES
Impressum | Datenschutz