[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Melbourne Double deckers

Subject: Re: Melbourne Double deckers
From: dbromage@fang.omni.com.au (David Bromage)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 02:50:56 GMT
Newsgroups: aus.rail
Organization: Another Optus Customer
References: <381FFDD9.114D5E93@primus.com.au> <7vr8ie$5fa$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <3822932f.6478031@news.ozemail.com.au> <wlAU3.1505$vO2.7843@ozemail.com.au> <3823ca5f$0$21301@motown.iinet.net.au>

Graeme (gvrail@thatsent.com.au) wrote:
> I'm sorry I can't agree with your views on frequencies.  In Perth, THE MOST
> CAR DOMINATED CITY IN AUSTRALIA, getting people onto the trains required
> very frequent services.  Because rail is capital intensive the added labour
> cost on driver only trains to increase frequencies is by comparison small.

Perth should be an example to to Melbourne and Sydney. Brisbane is close,
but hasn't quite grasped the commuter express concept the right way.

The Perth example can be mirrored in all other cities with urban rail
systems. The trains just need to be longer.

Cheers
David

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Melbourne Double deckers
  - From: "Graeme" <gvrail@thatsent.com.au>

References:
- Melbourne Double deckers
  - From: Richard <richard_snook@primus.com.au>
- Re: Melbourne Double deckers
  - From: Vaughan Williams <ender2000@my-deja.com>
- Re: Melbourne Double deckers
  - From: ajwright@spam.ozemail.com.au (Ashley Wright)
- Re: Melbourne Double deckers
  - From: "Daniel Bowen" <dbowen@#DELETE#custard.net.au>
- Re: Melbourne Double deckers
  - From: "Graeme" <gvrail@thatsent.com.au>

Prev by Date: Old SAR curve and gradient diagrams.
Next by Date: Re: Construction Contracts for trains/trams
Prev by thread: Re: Melbourne Double deckers
Next by thread: Re: Melbourne Double deckers
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread