AUS CARS 6 RE TEST AUSTRALIA CONTACT
Subject: Re: TEST AUSTRALIA -Contact
From: Brett Martin (brett@no-spam)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 09:34:49 GMT


"Tony Smith" <tonyREMOVE@no-spam> wrote in news:newscache$cs7zgh$y6e$1@no-spam
<SNIP>
> > Similarly 51(xxix) is how (and I haven't looked it up so I don't know > the details) in 1949 they could sign a UN charter on uniform traffic > signals or whatever.

Most states did pass new traffic acts in 1949 following the signing of this treaty. In effect they were all pretty similar although they do diverge on heavy vehicles. The problem developed with the application of the laws and the inconsistent enforcement of the constitution (particularly free trade across state boundaries) Qld introduced a new traffic act in 1962 but did not repeal the prior act meaning that quite a few items remained. In 1995 they repealed the previous acts and replaced them with the Traffic Operations (Road Use Mangement). The road rules legislation was introduced as a regulation following the practice introduced under Goss (and a bloody good thing it is too)

These changes are similar to those undertaken by other states for example - Road Safety (Road Rules) Regulations 1999 [Vic],Road Safety (Road Rules) (Road Rules Modification No. 2) Regulations 2000 [NSW]. The orginating act in these cases is also a 1995 act reflecting UN/Commonwealth changes. The reason that road rules legislation was introduced in NSW later than other states is to do with order of precedence (in NSW acts come into force on 1 January for some reason)
The original UN charter was developed into the MUTCD and signage design guides and traffic engineering guides as they were written. Since they were/are the Australian Standards they are binding to an extent on engineers and particularly those who are members of the institution.

> > BUT. If they never introduced enabling legislation, then it can sit on > the books forever having no effect. My guess is that they must have > done so in the past few years.

The states did introduce the legislation.

> > You can have a look on both the UN and ILO sites and see that there > are a staggering number of conventions, covenants, charters and > agreeements that Australia has signed, but never ratified.
> > A lot longer that you want I expect, but there it is.

Quite a few of these are not in our interest in any way so we probably shouldn't sign them. It is like the Kyoto Protocol, the debate was railroaded by Europe and disadvantages Australia and the US very badly due to our dependance on heavy transport. Canada signing was a suprise but we really shouldn't sign the thing.

> > But perhaps you see now how it is that it is *because* of Sect > 51(xxix) they can do it, not the reverse.
>
Of course the way that they do influence the states is primarily down to funding. Since the feds collect income and GST on behalf of the states the states remain dependant on the feds for operating funds.

You really wonder about the current division of power. Back when the states were federating the priority was to maintain states independance and powers. Hence the plenary powers of states not the Commonwealth. But they forgot about the money, effectively making the states dependent on the Commonwealth. You start to wonder if we would be better without the large states and moving instead to a county/province system (more similar to the US, UK and Canada) Then again we'd probably end up with more bureaucrats.

Cheers Brett

From: "conehead" (conehead@no-spam)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 11:54:13 GMT

"Scott Hillard" <shillard@no-spam> wrote in message news:PkTJa.119$JS.5466@no-spam >
> "SG1" <spamers_should_make_money_honestly@no-spam> wrote in > message news:3EF309CF.2090106@no-spam > > Flashing your high beams on overtake is one method of signalling an > > overtake, it also confuses the driver in front.
>
> Only if they're an idiot, and in that case they're likely confused anyway.
>
> > I find its more effective to come up behind another vehicle with my > > indicator on. They know I want to pass before I get to them.
>
>
>
> Presuming they actually see your indicator, which they probably won't if you > don't flash them.
>
>
Just my luck. Here I am reading stuff on Tuesday, when some fuckwit from aus.politics is already posting on Wednesday.

It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't such peurile crap.
--
Conehead You always know what to do, banana

Subject: Re: TEST AUSTRALIA -Contact
From: Brett Martin (brett@no-spam)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 19:45:43 GMT

"Tony Smith" <tonyREMOVE@no-spam> wrote in news:newscache$18hzgh$bfe$1@no-spam
> Interesting, but wrong conference, but I just got to say that I've > been a believer in 2 tier government (federal and local) for more > years than I care to remember.

The only real problem is the disparety in size of local governments. The feds can push them around to easily. The main purpose of the states is to ensure equitable distribution of funds but they are becoming more and more like local government in the way the budgets are solely aimed at vote buying.

> > Times move on and the States have really largely lost their relevance.
> > Perhaps a bounty could be declared on Public Servants?

I should point out that I'm one btw. The potential issue is the way the feds have gotten rid of professionals over the years. For example DOTARS has next to no engineers. They are not informed buyers and really don't have the capability to assess proposals in infrastructure or development. They passed this responsibility on to the States.
> One other small thing. There is no constitutional or other reason why > NSW legislation would come into effect on 1 Jan or each year, and in > fact it would be a major clog on legislation if there were.
> > Must have been some other reason.

Yeah, I only mentioned it because it seemed odd. That is the date on most of their newer legislation.

Cheers Brett

From: sgam@no-spam (st3ph3nm)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: 24 Jun 2003 20:09:44 -0700

SG1 <spamers_should_make_money_honestly@no-spam> wrote in message news:<3EF3DF6B.2070802@no-spam>...

> > Flashing high beams behind someone to signal your overtaking is annoying > to the driver in front. Do it to me and I'll flash you back when you get > passed.

At the risk of a flame-war, if people moved out of the far right lane to begin with, we wouldn't need to flash at all, would we? Except at cricket matches, of course, but that's another matter altogether. :)
>
Cheers,
Steve

From: "Scott Hillard" (shillard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 17:48:50 +1000

"SG1" <spamers_should_make_money_honestly@no-spam> wrote in message news:3EF309CF.2090106@no-spam > Flashing your high beams on overtake is one method of signalling an > overtake, it also confuses the driver in front.

Only if they're an idiot, and in that case they're likely confused anyway.

> I find its more effective to come up behind another vehicle with my > indicator on. They know I want to pass before I get to them.

Presuming they actually see your indicator, which they probably won't if you don't flash them.


From: "Scott Hillard" (shillard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 17:50:10 +1000

"SG1" <spamers_should_make_money_honestly@no-spam> wrote in message news:3EF3DF6B.2070802@no-spam
> Flashing high beams behind someone to signal your overtaking is annoying > to the driver in front.

So piss off out of the way.

> Do it to me and I'll flash you back when you get passed.

Do that to me and you will regret it.


From: "Scott Hillard" (shillard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 17:52:15 +1000

Some gutless poser cowering behind the nerdy alias of "SG1" <spamers_should_make_money_honestly@no-spam> wrote in message news:3EF55CB9.6060401@no-spam > mathewm wrote:

> > Bet you can't guess why a lot of people have a 150W spotty pointing > > backwards off their Landcruiser utes. One use is for tailgaters...

> Cant say I tailgate as I have a 4wd and it doesnt brake as well as a car.
> But if someone was to use their bastard light on me I dont know what I'd > end up doing.

You don't seem to know much at all.

> Possibly running them off the road, or reporting them, or following till > they stop and smashing the light with extendable batton - possibly > continuing if it took too long to catch them - depends on the mood I guess.

Which would be quite amusing, if they simply shot you when you approached their vehicle with a weapon in hand.

> Actually I'd take the plate down and if I couldnt catch them I'd report > them. Justice in one way or another.

That could be almost as dangerous....for you.


From: "Scott Hillard" (shillard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 17:54:53 +1000

"kevcat" <KevAlone@no-spam> wrote in message news:3EF46CB6.A2D80594@no-spam > You don't drive a truck do you Tony?
> Motorists first thought is, How can I be a cunt and keep this truck > behind me
If they are prepared to die to prevent you overtaking them, you have my endorsement to give them every assistance in that endeavour. :)


From: "conehead" (conehead@no-spam)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2003 11:26:36 GMT

"Scott Hillard" <shillard@no-spam> wrote in message news:SBeLa.425$_I3.21179@no-spam > Some gutless coward calling itself > "conehead" <conehead@no-spam> wrote in message > news:3ef83be4@no-spam > > "Scott Hillard" <shillard@no-spam> wrote in message > > news:PkTJa.119$JS.5466@no-spam >
>
> > > Presuming they actually see your indicator, which they probably won't if > > > you don't flash them.
>
> > Just my luck. Here I am reading stuff on Tuesday, when some fuckwit from > > aus.politics is already posting on Wednesday.
>
> Life's tough, you could always cap yourself if it's too much of a challenge.
>

If you'd like a battle of wits I suggest you be more than half-prepared next time, girly.
--
Conehead Welcome to Sunday

From: "kiwipete" (chatteris@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 16:30:00 +1200

Donate yours... oops he needs an undamged one huh!

kiwipete with a bit of mirth "SG1" <spamers_should_make_money_honestly@no-spam> wrote in message news:3EFE6345.4000709@no-spam >
>


From: "Scott Hillard" (shillard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 18:55:50 +1000

Some gutless coward hiding behind the pathetic alias of "SG1" <spamers_should_make_money_honestly@no-spam> wrote in message news:3EFE6345.4000709@no-spam
Wow, in 8 years of usenet posting, this is without a doubt the most pissweak effort I've ever seen.

Congratulations, gutless.


From: "Silmaril" (johndoe@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 09:38:52 GMT

At least SG1's has never been used...

"kiwipete" <chatteris@no-spam> wrote in message news:3efe6b49@no-spam > Donate yours... oops he needs an undamged one huh!
>
> kiwipete with a bit of mirth > "SG1" <spamers_should_make_money_honestly@no-spam> wrote in > message news:3EFE6345.4000709@no-spam > >
> >
>
>


From: "Scott Hillard" (shillard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 21:06:35 +1000

Some gutless coward calling itself "conehead" <conehead@no-spam> wrote in message news:3ef83be4@no-spam > "Scott Hillard" <shillard@no-spam> wrote in message > news:PkTJa.119$JS.5466@no-spam
> > Presuming they actually see your indicator, which they probably won't if > > you don't flash them.

> Just my luck. Here I am reading stuff on Tuesday, when some fuckwit from > aus.politics is already posting on Wednesday.

Life's tough, you could always cap yourself if it's too much of a challenge.


From: "Scott Hillard" (shillard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 21:08:11 +1000

"SG1" <spamers_should_make_money_honestly@no-spam> wrote in message news:3EFAD27A.8090800@no-spam
> >>Cant say I tailgate as I have a 4wd and it doesnt brake as well as a car.
> >>But if someone was to use their bastard light on me I dont know what I'd > >>end up doing.

> > You don't seem to know much at all.

> Were you born an idiot or did you take lessons from someone close to > you, !! Simple fact, 4wd do not brake as well as cars (presuming brakes > are in good working order !!

So maintain more separation from the vehicle in front, than you would in a standard car.

Or trade your "never seen dirt, never will" Toorak Tractor in for something worthwhile.

> >>Possibly running them off the road, or reporting them, or following till > >>they stop and smashing the light with extendable batton - possibly > >>continuing if it took too long to catch them - depends on the mood I
> > guess.

> > Which would be quite amusing, if they simply shot you when you approached > > their vehicle with a weapon in hand.

> Hasnt happend yet. LOL.

First time for everything.


From: "Scott Hillard" (shillard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 10:41:49 +1000

Some gutless prawn calling itself "conehead" <conehead@no-spam> wrote in message news:3efd7b6b$1@no-spam > "Scott Hillard" <shillard@no-spam> wrote in message > news:SBeLa.425$_I3.21179@no-spam
> > Life's tough, you could always cap yourself if it's too much of a > > challenge.

> If you'd like a battle of wits I suggest you be more than half-prepared next > time, girly.

I offered Andrew Denton some more rope, since he clearly didn't have enough.
Still plenty left for the likes of you.


From: "Scott Hillard" (shillard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 18:34:49 +1000

Some gutless wonder cowering behind the alias of "SG1" <spamers_should_make_money_honestly@no-spam> wrote in message news:3EFE62AA.4000009@no-spam > Scott Hillard wrote:
> > "SG1" <spamers_should_make_money_honestly@no-spam> wrote in > > message news:3EFAD27A.8090800@no-spam
> >>Were you born an idiot or did you take lessons from someone close to > >>you, !! Simple fact, 4wd do not brake as well as cars (presuming brakes > >>are in good working order !!

> > So maintain more separation from the vehicle in front, than you would in a > > standard car.

> My and your original posts are quoted, try reading them retard.

You expect us to believe anything you write? You're likely a habitual arse sniffer behind the wheel.

> > Or trade your "never seen dirt, never will" Toorak Tractor in for something > > worthwhile.

> You still talk shit, you know nothing.

So now you're out destroying native bushland? A likely story. Your driveway doesn't count as "offroad", bushranger Bob.


From: "Scott Hillard" (shillard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 18:36:34 +1000

Some gutless coward hiding behind the pathetic alias of "SG1" <spamers_should_make_money_honestly@no-spam> wrote in message news:3EFE62F2.3040507@no-spam
> You retred, keep off the newsgroups or subscribe to fools.post.rediculously
You're clearly not the moderator of alt.spelling......


From: "Scott Hillard" (shillard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 18:53:49 +1000

Some pathetic coward calling itself "Smee" <Smee@no-spam> wrote in message news:3EFEB5BC.94D842F@no-spam > Scott Hillard wrote:

> > Congratulations, gutless.

> The only gutless one is yourself Scotty
Pathetic, boy. Even you can do better than that.

> shillard@no-spam > shillard@no-spam > shillard@no-spam > shillard@no-spam > shillard@no-spam > shillard@no-spam
You think that's going to make a difference, boy?

Pathetic.


From: "Scott Hillard" (shillard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 18:55:16 +1000

"Smee" <Smee@no-spam> wrote in message news:3EFEC72A.AB1ECC3@no-spam
> Maybe so but hillard tries to imitate rod speed instead of using his own > posting style.

Wrong - again.

> I've crossed swords with the fat prick a few years back and really > rattled his cage though he may not think so.

So memorable that I don't even recall.....clearly you got that wrong.
Again.

> every now and then he neds a reality check.

Who is Ned?

> He still is a laughing stock particularly in aus.motorcycles
Clearly the greatest collection of minds on the net.....

> He'll probably challenge this with a simplistic idiotic one liner in the > rod speed fashion or try and sway this his way unsucessfully mind you.

Wrong, again.......


From: "Ron Beckett" (thebecketts@no-spam)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 19:47:07 +1000

"SG1" wrote > >>Were you born an idiot or did you take lessons from someone close to > >>you, !! Simple fact, 4wd do not brake as well as cars (presuming brakes > >>are in good working order !!

Tell that to the bloke in a Mazda 323 who ran up my Range Rover's bum. He didn't think the Rangie could stop at the red lights and was gunna run it.

Ron

From: "Rainbow Warrior" (QWERTY@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 19:59:58 +1000

Smee <Smee@no-spam> wrote in message news:3EFFA59D.72DB1375@no-spam > hillard deserves what he gets like all racist rednecks who enjoy the ballet.
> If he's too stupid to keep his real email address then he reaps what he sows.
> You can't compare me to pesty because some (not all) my posts have substance.

Don't forget those ballet loving non racist rednecks too and the non redneck racist ballet lovers and the ballet hating racist rednecks, and the racist smoking, ballet hating rednecks, and the greenneck, soccer hating, VB drinking, right lane hogging, short arsed, chocolate lovers too.

Pat Brisbane, Australia http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~mangey/

> Damien wrote:
> >
> > "Smee" <Smee@no-spam> wrote in message > > news:3EFEB5BC.94D842F@no-spam > >
> > De-spamming people's addresses is on par with Serialpest. I don't think this > > puts you in any position to criticise anyone - except maybe Rod Speed > > himself.
>
> --
> Look beyond the window, don't just focus on your own reflection.
> abuse@no-spam > for all spam.


From: "Rainbow Warrior" (QWERTY@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 20:03:40 +1000

SG1 <spamers_should_make_money_honestly@no-spam> wrote in message news:3F01530C.9060509@no-spam >
> However a a bit more abuse couldnt hurt.
> Retred.
>
> sg1

You keep missing an "a" in retread.

Pat Brisbane, Australia http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~mangey/


From: "Rainbow Warrior" (QWERTY@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 20:05:25 +1000

Scott Hillard <shillard@no-spam> wrote in message news:8ZbMa.98$35.6014@no-spam > Some pathetic coward calling itself > "Smee" <Smee@no-spam> wrote in message > news:3EFEB5BC.94D842F@no-spam > > Scott Hillard wrote:
>
> > > Congratulations, gutless.
>
> > The only gutless one is yourself Scotty >
> Pathetic, boy. Even you can do better than that.
>
> > shillard@no-spam > > shillard@no-spam > > shillard@no-spam > > shillard@no-spam > > shillard@no-spam > > shillard@no-spam >
> You think that's going to make a difference, boy?
>
> Pathetic.

The only thing that is worse than Rod Speed is somebody who thinks his style is worth copying.

Pat Brisbane, Australia http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~mangey/


From: "Rainbow Warrior" (QWERTY@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 20:07:05 +1000

Scott Hillard <shillard@no-spam> wrote in message news:v_bMa.99$35.6136@no-spam >
> "Smee" <Smee@no-spam> wrote in message > news:3EFEC72A.AB1ECC3@no-spam >
> > Maybe so but hillard tries to imitate rod speed instead of using his own > > posting style.
>
> Wrong - again.

Pathetic really.

>
> > I've crossed swords with the fat prick a few years back and really > > rattled his cage though he may not think so.
>
> So memorable that I don't even recall.....clearly you got that wrong.
> Again.
>
> > every now and then he neds a reality check.
>
> Who is Ned?
>
> > He still is a laughing stock particularly in aus.motorcycles >
> Clearly the greatest collection of minds on the net.....
>
> > He'll probably challenge this with a simplistic idiotic one liner in the > > rod speed fashion or try and sway this his way unsucessfully mind you.
>
> Wrong, again.......
>
>


From: "Theo Bekkers" (theo@no-spam)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 19:15:41 +0800

"Moike" wrote > <giggle>
> pot... kettle....
>
> Maybe you two should find somewhere nice and quiet and kiss and make up.

Wangaratta?

Theo

From: "JohnB" (j0hn5mailb0x@no-spam)
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 17:41:38 +0100

Christmas Island?

JohnB
"Moike" <moike@no-spam> wrote in message news:bds005$voi7u$1@no-spam >
> "Theo Bekkers" <theo@no-spam> wrote in message > news:zTdMa.725$oN.26595@no-spam > > "Moike" wrote > > > <giggle>
> > > pot... kettle....
> > >
> > > Maybe you two should find somewhere nice and quiet and kiss and make > > up.
> >
> > Wangaratta?
>
> Not far enough away.
>
> Moike >
> (well, maybe for you...)
>
>


From: xxtonyxx@no-spam
Subject: Re: High beam flash on overtake
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 23:59:02 +0800

Hey !

Don't send the silly buggers over this neck of the woods thanks....

Keep them over there.

On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 17:41:38 +0100, "JohnB" <j0hn5mailb0x@no-spam>
wrote:

>Christmas Island?
>
>JohnB >
>
>"Moike" <moike@no-spam> wrote in message >news:bds005$voi7u$1@no-spam >>
>> "Theo Bekkers" <theo@no-spam> wrote in message >> news:zTdMa.725$oN.26595@no-spam >> > "Moike" wrote >> > > <giggle>
>> > > pot... kettle....
>> > >
>> > > Maybe you two should find somewhere nice and quiet and kiss and make >> > up.
>> >
>> > Wangaratta?
>>
>> Not far enough away.
>>
>> Moike >>
>> (well, maybe for you...)
>>
>>
>


From: "Scott Hillard" (shillard@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2003 11:01:24 +1000

"Smee" <Smee@no-spam> wrote in message news:3F03ED65.6047CA44@no-spam > So am I > *AT* Scotty
Along with all of your mates?


From: Toby Ponsenby (lord_ponsenby@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2003 13:43:26 +1000

On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 12:32:07 +1000, SG1 wrote:

> Scott Hillard wrote:
>> "Smee" <Smee@no-spam> wrote in message >> news:3F03ED65.6047CA44@no-spam >> >>>So am I >>>*AT* Scotty >> >> >> >> Along with all of your mates?
>> >> >> > > you still posting loser?
> catch a train, its headed your way..
> * . . . . o o o o o > * _____ o _______
> * ____==== ]OO|_n_n__][. |lamer|
> * [________]_|__|________)< |ville|
> * oo oo 'oo OOOO-| oo\\_ ~~~|~~~
> * +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+-$1-+--+--+--+--+
> > sg1

Ohhh, a 2-4-2 !
-- Toby

quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur

From: "Rainbow Warrior" (QWERTY@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 19:55:39 +1000

Toby Ponsenby <lord_ponsenby@no-spam> wrote in message news:hnx2gqii1ukr$.1n5sj3r198odz.dlg@no-spam > On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 12:32:07 +1000, SG1 wrote:
>
> > Scott Hillard wrote:
> >> "Smee" <Smee@no-spam> wrote in message > >> news:3F03ED65.6047CA44@no-spam > > catch a train, its headed your way..
> > * . . . . o o o o o > > * _____ o _______
> > * ____==== ]OO|_n_n__][. |lamer|
> > * [________]_|__|________)< |ville|
> > * oo oo 'oo OOOO-| oo\\_ ~~~|~~~
> > * +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+-$1-+--+--+--+--+
> >
> > sg1
>
> Ohhh, a 2-4-2 !
> --
> Toby
Looks more like a 2-4-0 to me :-)
Or is it a 2-4-6, it's been a long time since I've had my trainset out.

--
Pat Brisbane, Australia http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~mangey/


From: Biggus The Greatest (nojunkmailplease-fu_kew@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 20:04:14 +1000

On Mon, 7 Jul 2003 19:55:39 +1000, "Rainbow Warrior"
<QWERTY@no-spam> wrote:

>Toby Ponsenby <lord_ponsenby@no-spam> wrote in message >news:hnx2gqii1ukr$.1n5sj3r198odz.dlg@no-spam >> On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 12:32:07 +1000, SG1 wrote:
>>
>> > Scott Hillard wrote:
>> >> "Smee" <Smee@no-spam> wrote in message >> >> news:3F03ED65.6047CA44@no-spam >> > catch a train, its headed your way..
>> > * . . . . o o o o o >> > * _____ o _______
>> > * ____==== ]OO|_n_n__][. |lamer|
>> > * [________]_|__|________)< |ville|
>> > * oo oo 'oo OOOO-| oo\\_ ~~~|~~~
>> > * +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+-$1-+--+--+--+--+
>> >

Wouldnt it be a 4-8-4 2 front 4 middle and 2 rear on each side.. was when I was into N Scale, which is last 20 yrs.

>Looks more like a 2-4-0 to me :-)
>Or is it a 2-4-6, it's been a long time since I've had my trainset out.


From: "Rainbow Warrior" (QWERTY@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 20:23:54 +1000

Biggus The Greatest <nojunkmailplease-fu_kew@no-spam> wrote in message news:jbhigvklvmk7p6jkb7raidi1ui7c22lnvh@no-spam > On Mon, 7 Jul 2003 19:55:39 +1000, "Rainbow Warrior"
> <QWERTY@no-spam> wrote:
>
> >Toby Ponsenby <lord_ponsenby@no-spam> wrote in message > >news:hnx2gqii1ukr$.1n5sj3r198odz.dlg@no-spam > >> On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 12:32:07 +1000, SG1 wrote:
> >>
> >> > Scott Hillard wrote:
> >> >> "Smee" <Smee@no-spam> wrote in message > >> >> news:3F03ED65.6047CA44@no-spam > >> > catch a train, its headed your way..
> >> > * . . . . o o o o o > >> > * _____ o _______
> >> > * ____==== ]OO|_n_n__][. |lamer|
> >> > * [________]_|__|________)< |ville|
> >> > * oo oo 'oo OOOO-| oo\\_ ~~~|~~~
> >> > * +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+-$1-+--+--+--+--+
>
> Wouldnt it be a 4-8-4 2 front 4 middle and 2 rear on each side.. was > when I was into N Scale, which is last 20 yrs.

Looking at the drawing the 5th and 6th axle from the left appear to be under the coal carrier than the Locomotive though, making it a 4-8-0 then or were the coal carriers wheels included?

"N" scale rules (well at least fits on half a table tennis table better anyway) :-)

Pat Brisbane, Australia http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~mangey/

> >Looks more like a 2-4-0 to me :-)
> >Or is it a 2-4-6, it's been a long time since I've had my trainset out.
>


From: Toby Ponsenby (lord_ponsenby@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 16:13:23 +1000

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 15:39:37 +1000, Dave Horsfall wrote:

> On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Rainbow Warrior wrote:
> >>> >> > * . . . . o o o o o >>> >> > * _____ o _______
>>> >> > * ____==== ]OO|_n_n__][. |lamer|
>>> >> > * [________]_|__|________)< |ville|
>>> >> > * oo oo 'oo OOOO-| oo\\_ ~~~|~~~
>>> >> > * +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+-$1-+--+--+--+--+
>>>
>>> Wouldnt it be a 4-8-4 2 front 4 middle and 2 rear on each side.. was >>> when I was into N Scale, which is last 20 yrs.
>>
>> Looking at the drawing the 5th and 6th axle from the left appear to be >> under the coal carrier than the Locomotive though, making it a 4-8-0 then or >> were the coal carriers wheels included?
> > You sure you're viewing this in a fixed-width font (as if there was > any other way)?
> > Definitely a 2-4-2 - you count the wheels on one side...
> > -- Dave
Thanks Dave - I was starting to wonder about trivia retention in aus.cars readers:-)

-- Toby

quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur

From: "Rainbow Warrior" (QWERTY@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 21:46:58 +1000

Dave Horsfall <daveh@no-spam> wrote in message news:20030708153721.M28726@no-spam > On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, Rainbow Warrior wrote:
>
> > > >> > * . . . . o o o o o > > > >> > * _____ o _______
> > > >> > * ____==== ]OO|_n_n__][. |lamer|
> > > >> > * [________]_|__|________)< |ville|
> > > >> > * oo oo 'oo OOOO-| oo\\_ ~~~|~~~
> > > >> > * +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+-$1-+--+--+--+--+
> > >
> > > Wouldnt it be a 4-8-4 2 front 4 middle and 2 rear on each side.. was > > > when I was into N Scale, which is last 20 yrs.
> >
> > Looking at the drawing the 5th and 6th axle from the left appear to be > > under the coal carrier than the Locomotive though, making it a 4-8-0
then or > > were the coal carriers wheels included?
>
> You sure you're viewing this in a fixed-width font (as if there was > any other way)?
>
> Definitely a 2-4-2 - you count the wheels on one side...
>
> -- Dave
That's probably what he meant but I think the 7th & 8th axles from the front should be under the cab, not the coupling.

--
Pat Brisbane, Australia http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~mangey/


From: "Rainbow Warrior" (QWERTY@no-spam)
Subject: Re: Wanted - Brain for Scott Hillard.
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 21:49:44 +1000

Dave Horsfall <daveh@no-spam> wrote in message news:20030709142258.U79578@no-spam > On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Rainbow Warrior wrote:
>
> > > > > >> > * . . . . o o o o o > > > > > >> > * _____ o _______
> > > > > >> > * ____==== ]OO|_n_n__][. |lamer|
> > > > > >> > * [________]_|__|________)< |ville|
> > > > > >> > * oo oo 'oo OOOO-| oo\\_ ~~~|~~~
> > > > > >> > * +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+-$1-+--+--+--+--+
> > > > >
> > > > > Wouldnt it be a 4-8-4 2 front 4 middle and 2 rear on each side..
was > > > > > when I was into N Scale, which is last 20 yrs.
> > > >
> > > > Looking at the drawing the 5th and 6th axle from the left appear to be > > > > under the coal carrier than the Locomotive though, making it a 4-8-0
> > then or > > > > were the coal carriers wheels included?
> > >
> > > You sure you're viewing this in a fixed-width font (as if there was > > > any other way)?
> > >
> > > Definitely a 2-4-2 - you count the wheels on one side...
> >
> > That's probably what he meant but I think the 7th & 8th axles from the front > > should be under the cab, not the coupling.
>
> They *are* under the cab; what font are you using?
>
> -- Dave
This one I think :-)

Pat Brisbane, Australia http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~mangey/