Re: Goodbye Overland

[mauried@commslab.gov.au (Maurie Daly)]

In article <8ECA8FAD5telstraNews@vic.news.telstra.net> Michael Kurkowski <mk@netstra.com.au> writes:
>Subject: Re: Goodbye Overland
>From: Michael Kurkowski <mk@netstra.com.au>
>Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2000 02:59:54 GMT

>Dion Williams said in message <3891DF2A.5B94@start.com.au>, I therefore
>quote: 

>>I think inevitably its days are numbered. Perhaps it's for the best to
>>preserve the memories for those who rode it when it was still proud,
>>much as the wretched Sydney/Melbourne Express mentioned before merely
>>prolonged the agony.

>There still needs to be a rail alternative for between Melbourne and 
>Adelaide. How far fetched would it sound to re-instate broad guage between 
>Melbourne and Adelaide, either a) solely broad guage b) dual guage all the 
>way. Run the overland via Ballarat once again, stopping at some/all of the 
>more major cities once again. Doesn't most or all freight get re-marshalled 
>in Melbourne and Adelaide anyway? 


Why does there have to be a rail alternative ?
For the 1% or less of the travelling public who prefer to go by train.
A quick look at the airline and bus timetables show that there are 14 flights 
per day between Adelaide & Melb (thats just Qantas and Ansett) ,and at least 
5 busses, (just including Greyhound and Vline.)
The busses serve all the towns along the way.
No reason to have a train at all unless one can be run at a profit.


>Running the Overland via Brooklyn then Geelong is what I see is killing it. 
>You are adding hours for no reason whatsoever. My thoughts originally, were 
>to run standard guage from Ararat to Ballarat, then dual-guage Ballarat-
>Melbourne (with enough crossing loops between Melbourne and Ballarat on 
>both guages, surely you wouldn't affect passenger services too much... 
>would you?)

The route has virtually nothing to do with it.
Its simply a problem of too few people outside of rail fans who want to travel 
by train and are prepared to pay full fares.
When rail fares = bus fares then trains will have a chance.)
Most rail travellers on the Overland and on the XPTs for that matter are 
people who qualify for some sort of concessions.
You can run Govt operated trains like this , but no way can a private company 
survive on concession fares.


>>Seems like an XPT would be ideal for it, times would easily be cut to
>>less than 10 hours; even with day and night services it leaves plenty of
>>maintenance time. If Countrylink go ahead with purchasing tilt trains in
>>the next few years they'd no doubt have the inside running.

>An XPT would die in the Adelaide Hills. At least while geared for 160kph 
>which is what they are designed to do. Take them back to 130kph and they 
>might do fine. I'll let someone else do their sums here, my maths suck(tm).

Why?
XPT with 7 cars and two power cars is 7 HP /tonne.
Worst grade is Goodwood to Mt Lofty Loop,averages 1:45 with some curves 
reaching 1:40, distance = 16 km. 
XPT wouldnt  even be in 8th notch going thru the hills as the curves are way 
too speed limited. (7 HP/tonne up 1:45 = 76 km/h)
Melb XPT has on a number of occasions had to travel via Wollongong / Moss Vale
where the climb up the hill from Unanderra to Summit Tank (dist 20 km) is a 
constant 1:30 with no probs.
There have also been Dubbo XPTs with 1 power car & 
4 carriages (6 HP /tonne) climbing the Blue Mtns (1:30 with no problems.)

The Adelaide Hills would be a snap.
The problem with an XPT solution is that Countrylink would not provide it 
unless they were paid by someone,(cant see the NSW Govt funding a rail service 
for the residents of Vic and SA) and I cant see the Vic and SA Govts funding 
an XPT service.
An XPT service however , if it could be run by anyone , would have a 
chance,especially if it were allowed decent speeds , like 160 km/h from Ararat 
to Tailem Bend.
It doesnt have to be an XPT service , just has to be fast enuf to get the 
infrastructure utilization up a bit.,ie a return trip by the train per 
day.
Even something like SG sprinters or Explorers would do,7 cars on Fridays 
and Weekends and less during the week.


MD


>Regards
>Michael

>-- 
>Michael Kurkowski
>Email: mk@netstra.com.au
>Website: http://www.netstra.com.au/~mk [UPDATES COMING SOON - I PROMISE!]
>ICQ: 1459118
>Telephone: 0416-044-124

>Children in the back seat cause accidents.
>Accidents in the back seat cause children.