Re: Tenders for Mt Gambier line

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

On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 05:49:07 GMT, dbromage@fang.omni.com.au (David
Bromage) wrote:

>Dave Proctor (daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au) wrote:
>> "Maurie Daly" <mauried@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
>> 3a8cb355.19871655@can-news.tpg.com.au">news:3a8cb355.19871655@can-news.tpg.com.au...
>> > On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 03:23:22 GMT, dbromage@fang.omni.com.au (David
>> > Bromage) wrote:
>> >
>> > >The big question is whether Bracks will fund the regauging of the
>> > >Victorian bit of the Mt Gambier line at the same time. it works out a lot
>> > >cheaper if the same crew does the whole line.
>> >
>> > But is there any need to.??
>> > It would be far cheaper to simply build a triangle at Wolseley.
>
>> It could act as an alternate route in case the line between Geelong and
>> Wolseley is out of action for any reason. If the extra cost of converting
>> the Victorian bit at the same time is not large, then it could be
>> worthwhile.
>
>For example, when the line was blocked at Ararat for days with the loss of
>two Gs.
>
>Cheers
>David
>

Umm so what.
Absolutely no evidence that if Heywood to Mt Gambier was std guage
anything would have run that way.

Back in the BG days ,the Overland has run via Mt Gambier once since
1950.
Hardly a good reason for buiilding yet another alternative line.
If you are gong to atgue hat we need alternative lines to everywhere
then we would need to duplicate the entire Australian Rail Network.
Rail funding is very short, lets put the money where its really
needed.

MD