[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Two Melbourne accidents
- Subject: Re: Two Melbourne accidents
- From: Jennifer Richmond <richmond@melbpc.org.au>
- Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 16:17:07 +1100
- Newsgroups: aus.rail
- Organization: Melbourne PC User Group Inc, Australia
- References: <78p901$16e$1@news.mel.aone.net.au> <36B15121.43BA1C27@vantsys.com.au> <78rl7k$akt$2@news.mel.aone.net.au> <78s9h1$etc$1@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <78u2jp$44p$1@news1.mpx.com.au> <36B29AEF.DE1E17A5@melbpc.org.au> <78uj6j$97b$1@eplet.mira.net.au> <36B56A2D.DF134509@melbpc.org.au> <796olr$1iu$1@eplet.mira.net.au>
Reuben Farrelly wrote:
> And then...after it has arrived at the railway station, it will be
> transported by _____ to a factory/industrial area where it is destined?
> (you fill in the gaps...and "bicycle" isn't a real answer!)
Yes, I acknowledge that many customers would require road transport for the
final part of the journey, but how often would it need to cross railway lines?
> Personally I think the days of very short haul rail transport for freight
> are long gone.
Pessimist! :-)
> Rail can only reasonably compete with road on the basis that
> it can haul cargo and huge quantities of goods for a long way at very low
> cost. (Rail being a very low friction means of movement is mainly why it
> can do this). For short distances, the cost of handling goods for unloading
> and loading must far outweigh any savings made by energy efficiency.
But if the goods have come a long way by rail, they will need to be shipped to
the truck anyway, why not do this further out, closer to the customer?