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

[Tell <telljb@ozemail.com.au>]

Re your last line about the CR, logic and the North
Australia Railway.  The beginning of the NAR was the
Palmerston (Darwin) and Pine Creek Railway which was
constructed by the SOUTH AUSTRALIAN RAILWAYS back when
the NT was "owned" by the SA.
The Commonwealth Railways did not exist back then.!
The logic for 3'6" in the Top End of the Northern
Territory was purely SAR.

....Tell


>Paul Blair <pblair@pcug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Back in 1969 (Ithink it was) there was a meeting of Federal and State
> Transport Ministers (ATAC - Aus Transport Advisory Council) in Port
> Augusta. The main job was to "name" the new Sydney-Perth train.
> 
> After the meeting, everone was invited to ride in the new IP carriages
> up to Woomera and back, overnight. It was a very free and easy trip,
> with Ministers and staff partying. I had the chance to have a chat to
> Keith Smith, who was then CR Commissioner. We talked about the
> original Trans etc etc, and I asked why it had been built to SG.
> 
> There was a mix of reasons. The Fed Gov, who built the line, wanted to
> show the flag for SG to States. They had no idea that there would ever
> be through travel, and anyway, changing trains at 2am wherever
> required was considered "reasonable" in those days. Then there was the
> question of rolling stock. It would be cheaper, and more independent
> (!) to buy SG from overseas, so the CR management didn't become
> beholden to any local State organisation. As I say, a whole mix!
> 
> 3'6" would have been cheaper, saving on earthworks and sleepers. But
> that would have tied CR to WAGR. 5'3" would have had the same effect
> with SAR. So SG it was! Or so he told me.
> 
> Of course, different logic applied to the NAR!!
> 
> Paul Blair
> Canberra