Re: The gauge question ...

BLI BLI <alcogoodwin@...>

Hi Peter,
The front page may require a rewording I
think. I just threw it together in a hurry this
Such operations would of course be considered in
topic. I tend to consider logging railways to be an
industrial operation and thus fit into #1 on the front
page. This may indeed be a wrong decision on my part.
The main reason for having the 3ft6 in #2 was to
avoid items like Queensland Rail which isn't within
the scope of Light Railways.
I pretty much use Light Railways as a guide to
topics covered with a small diversion in the inclusion
of modelling of industrial topics.

Anyway welcome to the group guys, it is great to
have you here.


--- sawdustoz <pevans@...> wrote:

Hi All,

Perhaps this group might like to consider light
railways with a gauge
greater than 3-ft 6-in? Victorian lines that spring
to mind are the
McIvor firewood line (5-ft 3-in), the early horse
trams of the Wombat
Forest south of Bendigo (also 5-ft 3-in), and the
David Mitchell
firewood tram (3-ft 6-in and, later, standard
gauge). In addition,
there were heaps of very traditional "light
railways" with a gauge of 3-
ft 6-in, especially in the Otway Forest and east of
the Powelltown line.


#### LocoShed Australasia Website ####
** Australian Industrial & Preserved Railways.
** Railways of the Philippines and South East Asia
** LocoShed Express in 'Railway Digest'
** Asst editor: Asia-Rail magazine.

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

Join to automatically receive all group messages.