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

[mauried@tpg.com.au (Maurie Daly)]

On 16 Apr 2001 20:40:20 +1000, "Bradley Torr"
<truenorth@one.net.au.SPAMTRAP> 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
> 
Yes , its a fair question and one that has puzzled me too.
TAR was completed on 17 Oct 1917.
The BG line from Adelaide to Pt Pirie wasnt completed until around
1925 ,(I only have the date it got to Red Hill.)

An even more interesting question is why was it necessary to create
the Commonwealth Railways to operate the TAR.
It could have easily been operated by the SAR and the WAGR using
rolling stock paid for by the Feds .
Why did we need a completely new railway bureacracy to operate just
one line ?

MD