>- The current Comeng rollingstock is excellent for accessibility by those
>with bikes, strollers, prams, walking frames, etc as it is single deck
>throughout as opposed to the 4D which is only accessible at the ends by
>these types of passengers.
>- When the 4D was introduced, it was found it was considerably slower
>loading and unloading compared to a Comeng as the 4D had only two doors per
>carriage as opposed to the Comeng which had 3. This would need to improve
>for future designs.
Isn't this because the 4D has four cars which are only slightly longer than
3-car Comeng?
>- The 4D cost $20m for the four car set vs.. $6m for a Comeng three car
set.
>Would the new private companies be so keen on double decker trains if the
>cost continues to be similarly high compared to the equivalent Comeng.
After
>all, you can fit far more people into 3 three car Comeng sets than 1 double
>deck four car set.
The cost is a big problem, but the 4D only cost so much because only 1 was
built... wouldn't be cheaper in quantities? The passenger numbers would be
about the same if not the other way? Its just that people don't want to move
in in the seats so that more people can sit down.. It is impossible to get
out of without making every1 move out first....
>I would suggest that most companies investing in transport would probably
>see our current rollingstock being quite adequate for a number of years.
>Given an economic life of a train is around 30 years with a 15 year
>refurbishment, the Hitachis as our oldest train would be regarded as being
>life expired from 2002 on. Given they have just recently (and still are in
>dribs and drabs) had their half life refurbishment, it is likely that they
>will last somewhat longer and given their reliability is seemingly higher
>than the Comengs from my understanding of the figures and the Upfield line
>experience I have referred to in previous posts, I doubt we will see
>replacement trains for current rollingstock for at least 5-10 years.
There was an article ages ago in the age which said that the life of
Hitachis were 25 years... which would make it 1997. but the refurbishments
only started in 1995 or so... maybe they're trying to squeeze double life
out of them?? or just keeping them barely running until they sell them off
(not exactly a good image for potential buyers)... when the buyers toured
the system, did they do it on a train? or were they driven around?
> A new
>operator is more likely to spend money on improving the reliability of
>current rollingstock (a far cheaper option than new rollingstock) so that
we
>don't have 1/3 of the trains on the system requiring repair and therefore
>better utilisation to enable new services to be run.
Definitely need to do something about the reliability... how many times have
they
cancelled trains "due to defective trains at Flinders Street"?
> Other options for
>spending money will be improving infrastructure. I would hope to see rail
>line extensions and duplication before new trains as this is where the need
>really is.
That won't come without any help from the government, and it doesn't look
like that will occur with the current government. Although Minister Cooper
(from his press release) said that the private operators would "Train and
tram service levels will be maintained and expanded. " Doesn't say how,
when, and who will do the work though...
cheers
Johann