Re: How to save Countrylink

[Dion Williams <onamission@today.com.au>]

David Bromage wrote:
 
> The XPT hasn't changed all that much since the early 1980s. It was great
> then compared to what it replaced, and before the advent of cheap
> airlines. Certainly the trains have got longer and they added sleepers,
> but it's simply not going to work.
> 
> I'm wondering if the XPT has outlived its usefulness on its current
> routes. That doesn't mean it's totally useless. It should be used on the
> sort of route it was designed for, that is a semi-intensive service of
> fast sprints of a couple of hours. For example, 6 express services per
> day to Canberra (this was envisaged back in 1980).

It's bizarre how, with tourism so greatly on the rise and mainly
consisting of young backpackers looking for a cheap and convenient way
to get around and who don't want to just go the the capitals but stop at
points in between, Countrylink actually seems to be going backwards in
terms of promoting its services. Personally I'd much rather catch a
service I know is going to run on time and give me quality of on-board
service rather than one that is particularly fast. Young tourists are
used to roughing it in all kinds of ways; why not make them feel
comfortable and give them more than they expected for the price? They'll
be sure to tell their fellow travellers about it.

> But where does this leave Melbourne and Brisbane? I've been thinking
> about this for some time, and something radical. There was another
> proposal to complement the XPT on longer journeys such as this - the
> HPT. It was to be a 140km/h train with a 3000hp loco on each end.
> Initially it would use existing 50t stainless steel cars, but they would
> eventually be replaced with new cars of about 42t each. The project was
> abandoned after a change of government, but the loco lived on as the EL.

I remember various proposals being made about these in Railway Digest
around 1983-84. To be sure, you can bet that the cars it starts
operating with will be the ones it uses for life. It's a noble idea but
you're simply not going to get speed out of either the North Coast line
or the south past a certain point on the current alignments and grades.
Without major improvements there I can't see the point of promotion on
the issue of journey time at all.

> One of the shortcomings of the XPT is the fixed set. The advantage of
> loco hauled trains is that you can divide and join trains wherever you
> need to, eg. through cars for Murwillumbah detached at Casino.

True, but it's also time-comsuming and disrupts a smooth ride. Using
some of the freed-up Explorers as shuttles along the Murwillumbah branch
to and from Brisbane services and say to Canberra or Griffith from
Melbourne services would be an idea IMO.

> I know much of this is wishful thinking and Scully isn't going to fork
> out for new trains. But any thoughts on the principle?

I agree that going back to some kind of loco-hauled service with luxury
and service as the selling points is the way to go. In terms of time
performance IMO reliability is as big a factor in the public mind as
speed. At the end of the day people don't mind so much about how fast
they can get to their destination, given that it's within a certain
percentage difference compared to the alternative, so long as they get
there when the timetable said they would. Fix that and you'll have
solved half the problem IMO, no matter what quality of ride you provide.

Dion