Re: Latest news on Speedrail

["Tezza" <tezza2000@dingoblue.net.au>]

"Dave Proctor" <daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> "Tezza" <tezza2000@dingoblue.net.au> wrote in message
> > "Dave Proctor" <daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> > > "Tezza" <tezza2000@dingoblue.net.au> wrote in message
> >
> > > > Which still means that whatever travelling is needed to get to/from an
> > > > airport is still needed with a train station.
> > >
> > > And the three hours of productive work time en route will make it
> > > worthwhile, not to mention the reduced need for a second Sydney airport.
> >
> > Around a 4 hour trip each way by train destination to destination, may
> give him productive time enroute, but it hardly leaves any time for his
> meeting.
>
> 3 hours was the proposal (and it was achievable)

But Scotty isn't gonna beam you on board, there's still the travel time each end
that was added for plane travel, there's still the check-in time, there's still
the boarding time. You don't arrive on the platform at 2.59 for a 3.00
departure.

 - and compare it to the
> current situation. Although this brings me back to my thoughts that there is
> a market for an overnight sleeping service, appropriatelt priced, and
> CORRECTLY MARKETTED to the business community - and the operators paying a
> premium for priority. 1900 departure each end, 0700 arrival, arrive
> refreshed (after a shower and breakfast, dinner and breakfast included in
> the fare, and tickets interchangeable with the airlines) and it would work
> (countless of my corporate clients told me so).

As long as it was cheaper than plane/hotel combined.