Re: National guage standardisation - why 4'8.5"?

[Chris Brownbill <cbrnbill@enternet.com.au>]

Bradley Torr wrote:
> 
> I just have a question that's bugging me - when PM Andrew Fisher started
> building the Trans-Australian Railway in 1912 (or whatever year it was),
> why did the Commonwealth Railways engineers choose 4'8.5" for the railway,
> and all subsequent CR projects, right up to the Melbourne to Adelaide
> standardisation in the 1990's?
> 
> Out of the five mainland states, two had 3'6" (WA and QLD), two had 5'3"
> (VIC and SA) and only one had 4'8.5" (NSW).
> 
> I would have chosen 5'3" had I been a CR engineer way back then. Why?
> Because two states already had it, and 5'3" from Port Augusta to Kalgoorlie
> would have been a logical extension of South Australia's system. It would
> have been possible to travel all the way from Orbost VIC to Kalgoorlie WA
> on the one guage as well. Also, it seems kinda unfair for a guage used only
> by New South Wales to be imposed on the rest of the nation.
> 
> Regards
> BT
> 

I'd say because there's probably more need for Sydney to Kalgoorlie traffic than there is for Orbost to Kalgoorlie traffic :->

But seriously, the alternative I suppose would have been to build a broad gauge line from Albury to Sydney then Brisbane.  I suspect this would have been a lesser length of gauge conversion than what was actually built viz Port Augusta to Broken Hill plus Kyogle to South Brisbane plus Albury to Melbourne plus Crystal Brook to Adelaide plus Adelaide to Melbourne.