Re: New form of rail transportation

["Peter Berrett" <pberrett@optushome.com.au>]

Michael <usenet.spam@gunzel.net> wrote in message
8FEB9B722gunzelT333@139.130.239.94">news:8FEB9B722gunzelT333@139.130.239.94...
> Alex Pout <alpout@optusnet.com.au> wrote in article
>
> I've slightly changed my mind re a ring railway. Maybe a full ring railway
> is not needed after all, but joining some lines up to service areas that
> are largely not covered by rail, or where existing alignments exist would
> have some advantage. Example, extend the Alamein line to join up with the
> Glen Waverley line, extend the Glen Waverley line to
Rowville/Knox/Scoresby
> (the areas that need rail most). Run Glen Waverley locals via Alamein, and
> run the extended line trains direct via Burnley. You would then have a
> direct service to Chadstone shopping centre.

More is possible. The Alamein line was once part of the outer circle
railway. Just put it back in from Fairfield through Kew, East Camberwell,
Alamein and through to join up with the Dandenong line.

Glen Waverley line should be extended all the way to Ferntree Gully thus
making it possible to change to the Belgrave line.

cheers Peter


>
> With the electrification to Craigieburn (or Wallan - I have seen ads on TV
> that they are building housing estates in Wallan now!!),  reopen Upfield
to
> Somerton. If the airport line is routed via Broadmeadows, then it would be
> an advantage for V/Line pass trains to use the Upfield line instead. Ease
> traffic off the Broadmeadows line to provide frequent airport services.
>
> Admittedly, it's not much - but it would, while giving passengers the
> choice of two different routes (in the case of Glen Waverley), also
> disperse passengers to make trains less crowded (provided the frequencies
> of all the lines match the rest of Melbourne).
>
> M.
>
> --
> (To email me just remove ".spam" off my email address).
>
> Whip me, Beat me, just don't Windows ME