Of course it could have been, but there is also the question of political
will. Or more correctly political won't.
>>So why didn't they use a single 48 on the Griffith train a few weeks ago?
>>I seem to recall a pair of them worked the train two weekends running, and
>>the second weekend an 81 took over at Goulburn on the up.
>
>How many passenger carriages, more than the WCR I assume.
Griffith gets a weekly train of 3 cars. Warrnambool trains are regularly 4
and 5 cars, 3 services on weekdays, 2 on Saturday and 1 on Sunday.
>>>Shows how stupid the current privatisation is. The WCR is to small to
>>>be able to make any real long term improvements to the service.
It's not that WCR is too small. There are much smaller short line
operations around the world making far more money than WCR ever will.
The problem is the 7 year contract isn't long enough to make investment
worthwhile. The British Rail franchises are 15 years long and already the
first order for new rollingstock (8 trains for the Gatwick Express) has
already been let to Metro-Cammel.
>>As the current contract stands, you mean. In the mean time we shouldn't
>>be critical of a group who beat many bus contractors to keep a line open.
>
>Which indicates the rail operation is cheaper than the buss
>alternative to run, nothing to do with private owernership, but the
>fundamental advantages rail has over road.
But it's not cheaper due to the larger overheads.
There are certain facts which cannot be disputed:
1) The government wanted to close the line.
2) Tenders were let out for the service.
3) Only one tender was for rail, all others were for buses.
4) The rail contract won.
Now that the decision is made, it is foolish to say the wrong decision was
made. Any reader of this newsgroup should be grateful that the line is
still open and trains are running at all.
Cheers
David