Re: How to save Countrylink

["Mark Nolan" <marknolan@email.msn.com>]

Having travelled on Countrylink from Bris to Syd, the major problems I felt
were that the train spelt of diesel fumes, speed was restricted and service
was ordinary. This is not aportion blame on anyone, it is after all, an
extremely exp[ensive exercise to rectify these faults.

I personally believe that only privatisiation would really solve these
problems. Why?, because Govt's will always use funding of roads/ railways as
a means of securing votes. ie. a decision to spend money on rail/road is
based on votes, not economics.

Thus we see Govt's committing billions to roads which effectively subsidises
those road users who derive income from their use. meanwhile, railways and
in particular freight, are not readily used by the public, who don't really
know/nor care about the infrastructure of a railway. They do, however, care
about the state of the road that they use to drive kids to school or go to
shops.

This is off the point from Countrylink post (a little), but it is a
fundamental issue, as to pernmit Govt's decide funding for railways is to
forever condemn them.

Many people complain about lack of Govt assistance or funding and there is
sytrong merit for this, consider it from a Govt's view in lifght of the
foregoing. If you want to get or remain elected (which is the whole point of
politics) what would you do, spend money on roads that your consistuents use
or pump money into a frieght railway which by and large is unseen by the
public.

Anyway, back to David's comments about Country Link, if privatised, and that
company was able to upgrade the railway infrastructure, perhaps a two fold
strategy would be best. One would be a relatively high service, 1st class
overnight sleeper train between Bris-Syd-Melb which would cover the distance
at reasonable speed, but with only a few stops.

The other would be a lower cost train that would service the intermediate
regions. The number of stops that the train to Sydney from Bris makes really
affects time for through pass, however a daylight all stops train might pick
these people without need to affect through travellers.

The other issue to consider is the possible new line from Melb-Bris, which
would provide a higher speed service.

Mark Nolan

"Geoff Lillico" <glillic@msn.com.au> wrote in message
tAEo6.8286$v5.31910@newsfeeds.bigpond.com">news:tAEo6.8286$v5.31910@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> Unfortunately, you have overlooked a major point.
>
> As romantic as your proposals are, they do not address the fact that the
> government believes it has a mandate to provide the top class train seats
to
> pensioners at next to no cost. If they could be fobbed off to the bus
lines,
> then we might be able to provide a premium service to those willing to pay
> without having to provide the same service to pensioners.
>
> --
> Geoff Lillico
>
>
> "David Bromage" <dbromage@fang.omni.com.au> wrote in message
> 3AA30B5C.210171E6@fang.omni.com.au">news:3AA30B5C.210171E6@fang.omni.com.au...
> > 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).
> >
> > 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'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that Countrylink needs to transform
> > itself into something different, but not too different. It doesn't have
> > to be a GSR or a QR. If you can't compete on journey time or
> > "experience", you have to compete on service.
> >
> > The best parallel I can find is EuroCity and EuroNight. Passengers
> > regularly cover similar distances and journey times to the XPT in these
> > trains, and at premium fares. But you need a new fleet of cars to
> > emulate this, and probably new locos (i.e. "real" diesel locomotives
> > suitable for 160km/h running).
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > It would need proper sleeping cars, couchettes (doubling as 6 seat
> > comparments during the day), dining cars, sitting cars with decent
> > seats, and sufficient luggage space. You can still offer el cheapo coach
> > class for the backpackers, since the cheap airlines don't service Coffs
> > Harbour and Byron Bay.
> >
> > An option which I don't think has been tried on rail yet is the sleeper
> > beds used in first class on many airlines. You should be able to fit
> > about 9 rows of 1+2 into a 24m car, which is about 35% more than for a
> > full sleeper.
> >
> > 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?
> >
> > Cheers
> > David
>
>