Re: Speedrail

[mauried@commslab.gov.au (Maurie Daly)]

In article <7m1sjn$qkm$1@the-fly.zip.com.au> rodh@zip.com.au (Rod Hibberd) writes:
>From: rodh@zip.com.au (Rod Hibberd)
>Subject: Re: Speedrail
>Date: 8 Jul 1999 09:56:07 GMT

>jgnestor (86367@one.net.au) wrote:
>: When are Speedrail going to come back to planet Earth?  "3 mins Sydney =
>: Terminal to Domestic"- do they plan to run through underground stations =
>: at Green Square & Mascot at 300km/hr?
>: 
>: Since their train will"run at the speed of existing trains =
>: Sydney-Campbelltown" and makes 2 stops, how can it possibly do this =
>: section in under 30 mins.  Try 40 mins+
>: 
>: Other times are also on the looney side of optimistic.
>: 
>: The idea of getting any significant % of car users on the train is =
>: fanciful:  The time saving house to house would be marginal, and unless =
>: you are planning business or holiday exclusively at the Canberra =
>: station, you are immobile on arrival.
>: 
>: I believe their are viable high speed rail possibilities in Australia; =
>: why mudy the waters with nonsense like Speedrail are peddling.

>The whole thing is completely looney, in my view, the numbers on costs and
>revenue are right off by a large factor. Any politician or administrator
>who has not seen through this is demonstrating that he or she is
>completely unfit for office. Given that the Minister for Finance claims to
>believe in it, it is all a bit of a worry!

>The interest in this project is all to do with marketing in other
>countries where it may make sense. Nobody expects it to be done here. The
>people at GE-Alsthome know perfectly well this is a non-starter.

> -- 

>  -RodH-
>rodh@zip.com.au  vox +61-2-955-00-395  fax +61-2-956-00-356
>                 Rod Hibberd at Leichhardt Australia


There are a couple of interestings asides to this whole project which even 
further muddy the waters in relation to whether the VFT will succeed or not.
One is the apparent decision of the federal Govt to proceed now with a 2nd 
Airport at Badgerys Creek, (the EIS is summarised on the DOTs Web Site.)
Apart from the fact that this project will cost up to $5.8 billion (well above 
the cost of any VFT) and the fact that all this money will come out of the 
Taxpayers pocket ,ie there is no economic debate about whether the Airport is 
financially viable (if it was we would get the private sector to fund it.) 
there are some disturbing assertions made about the traffic projections which 
are justifying this project in the first place.
One is that even if a VFT was built between Sydney - Canberra and eventually 
to Melb it would have little or  no bearing at all on the passenger 
projections,ie we are being asked to beleive that a VFT isnt going to in any 
way reduce the number of airline movements at Mascot. (This is either total 
crap or the feds know that a VFT isnt going to get up or more likely simply 
want to build this airport no matter what.)

Another incredible statement is that building a 2nd Airport for Sydney further 
out say at Goulburn or Wilton or anywhere else and linking it in Sydney by a
VFT wouldnt work either.(No reasons are given other than no one else does 
this.)
It seems to me what we are seeing here is the classic lack of any sort of 
Transport Policy , ie we have two potential major transport projects which 
will vitally effect the economic viability of each other ,but both are being 
considered in total isolation , ie both as standalone projects.

This isnt just happening in Sydney either.

We also now seem to have a bidder for Alice Springs to Darwin and also bidders 
who want to build a line from Melb to Darwin.
You dont need to be an economic genius to realise that both of these projects 
together are totally unviable as they are competing for each others freight.
Its fairly likely that not even any one of them is viable , but the problem is 
the same , there is no overall plan of where transport in this country is 
going , we just seem to want more and more , one off private projects which 
sound grandiose.

Sadly the end result will most likely be that none of these schemes get up 
,simply because there is no total picture of what is trying to be achieved.

MD