Re: The gauge question ...
When the LRRSA changed its name from Victorian Light Railway Research Society to Light Railway Research Society of Australia in 1968 (only 36 years ago) the coverage was intended to be:toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
(i) Any Australian railway or tramway with a gauge of less than 3 ft 6 in
(ii) Any Australian railway or tramway with a gauge of 3 ft 6 in or more which was not owned by the state government railways or the Commonwealth Railways.
This definition included city passenger carrying tramways, but these were largely (and deliberately) ignored because they were already well looked after by another organisation.
This definition was designed to include operations like the Emu Bay Railway, Kerang - Koondrook Shire Tramway, and the Queensland Shire Tramways.
I don't think we have ever officially changed from these definitions, although they have become more complicated to define since most of the operations in item (ii) above are now privatised.
I think if we changed our definition of "light railway" to the extent that it excluded operations like the 3 ft 6 in gauge Aramac and Beaudesert Shire Tramways, and the 5 ft 3 in gauge Koondrook Shire Tramway, we would be narrowing our focus too far, since they were all weird, poverty-stricken and eccentric operations, and surely these are some of the essential features of the traditional "light railway"!
At 02:34 PM 15/08/2006, you wrote: