What case for high speed rail?

[Inspector Blake aka Blakey]

So how many times has this been proposed? Getting tired of it and no Govt.
will splash out the money to build it.

[Kevin Martin]

On 19/09/2010 07:58, Inspector Blake aka Blakey wrote:
> So how many times has this been proposed? Getting tired of it and no Govt.
> will splash out the money to build it.
>
>
Correct, unless the attitude changes about going into debt for major
infrastructure development. Waiting to be able to pay for it without
public money going into the project, means it won't happen.

By its nature it is a project that needs construction started at various
points along the line simultaneously, not piecemeal sections of a few
10s of km at a time that can be done with freeway construction.

So this will cost serious money, just to get trains running between 2
points, with ongoing extensions. The whole point of a VFT is exactly
about high speed, putting in stations "all along" the route undermines
the project. Especially so that there isn't too many large population
centres along the way.

Many in France didn't think their TGV project wasn't worth the money,
but once the trains started running, that was the end of that argument,
such was and is the success.

The British HS1 project took many years to finalise, with high speed
trains utilising standard tracks until it was finally open.

As far as running slower (stopping) trains on the main lines, that
significantly reduces the capacity of the lines, as it takes time for
these to slow down, go into platform loops & to restart and build up to
speed again. You simply can't get "something for nothing".

With a service to perhaps Melbourne Airport (or Sydney), it would
possibly be worthwhile creating a 4 track line with a large reverse
loop, since there would be a much larger demand for these busy short
haul sections, than for the rest. Not sure about the 5 minutes quoted
for Melbourne Airport.

Kevin Martin

[terryc]

On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 09:21:50 +0000, johnsuth wrote:


> A 10 minute trip to Campbelltown sounds great, but no high speed train
> has the capacity to carry all the passengers who ride Cityrail to
> Campbelltown, so that statement is just spin.

Physically impossible.

[johnsuth]

In <4c954e9b$0$3035$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>, Kevin Martin <kevinrailway@notreqdoptusnet.com.au> writes:
>On 19/09/2010 07:58, Inspector Blake aka Blakey wrote:
it would
>possibly be worthwhile creating a 4 track line with a large reverse
>loop, since there would be a much larger demand for these busy short
>haul sections, than for the rest. Not sure about the 5 minutes quoted
>for Melbourne Airport.

I don't understand this concept. Perhaps you can elaborate.

[terryc]

On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 20:03:38 +0000, johnsuth wrote:


> You are making general assumptions about where journeys commence,

Gee, that is the same as current air travel.

> what security will be mandated, and

> how airlines will respond to competition.

In Europe, they are buying into the train services
>

> Are you suggesting that the fast train will be cheaper than road coach?
> Get real!

Nope, that it will be FASTER. This is the whole point and people will pay
more to get there faster. This is what they do with air travel.
>
>
>
>
>>> The claims of overseas success rely on readers not being aware of the
>>> true situation overseas. Low cost airlines have flourished in Europe
>>> in spite of high speed rail there.
>>
>>The trains take a very high proportion of the total passengers.
>
>
> Over short distances.

Which is where the trains run.
Why do they run over short distances? It is called crossing borders.
Something that is NOT a problem in Australia.
>
>
>>All you do is display your constant prejudice and you have to resort to
>>ridiculous arguments to do so.
>
>
> I am here because I am interested in rail. Rail is not served by money
> wasting proposals. Any available taxpayers funds should go to freight
> rail studies.

Why waste more money on studies? Stop subsidizxing road freight and see
what happens.

[terryc]

On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 01:07:00 +0930, Aidan Stanger wrote:

> A 10 minute trip to Campbelltown sounds overly ambitious! Are you sure
> that's the figure they gave?

Yes, that is when I stopped reading it. Articles like that are why I no
longer pay for the printed version.

[terryc]

On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:29:44 +0930, Aidan Stanger wrote:


> Have you forgotten 911? It proved that security screening is necessary
> for aircraft.

Err, it did? Do you have any evidence that it would have prevented any of
those flights?