Hey there, CountryLink, where did all the deep pocket PAX's

drwaddles · Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 5:48 pm

Definitely agree with the need to modify coach interiors - needs more bloody leg room!

People who talk out their asre usually have bad breath.

tbohlsennswssrg · Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:10 am

CS2905 · Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:03 pm

fcic0rscvgs0 · Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 12:40 am

I've heard from a reliable source (someone who worked for NSWGR for the better part of his life and now enjoys free train travel anywhere in NSW) that Countrylink has barely enough rolling stock to run its existing services, let alone introduce new ones. It's for this reason that the former Murwillumbah service cannot be extended to Brisbane.

What Countrylink needs is some serious investment. The NSW Government needs to pour in some funding to revive Countrylink. Infrastructure needs to be improved - this includes track alignments, double track Junee-Albury, etc. Repair the track to Bourke, Wallangarra and Tocumwal. This can serve as provisions for a long-term view of alternative routes to Brisbane and Melbourne, and possibly an alightment for a Melbourne-Brisbane inland railway.

On-time running should also be improved, so that passengers will be able to compliment Countrylink after hearing, "We will be shortly arriving in Sydney Terminal, this service is running on time, thank you for travelling with Countrylink and we look forward to seeing you again," rather than their snivelling apologies due to major delays. Scheduled trackwork is understandable, like if the Melbourne service ends up being an hour late due to a diversion through Robertson and Wollongong, but late running should be the exception rather than the norm.

Next up, more rolling stock will be needed. Perhaps the service can be overhauled with XPTs servicing Melbourne, Broken Hill, Brisbane (and possibly Murwillumbah) and XPLs servicing Canberra, Griffith, Dubbo/Bourke, Armidale, Moree and Grafton. This will give it more of a tiered kind of service, like V/Line Intercity vs Interurban. More rolling stock will enable the current Casino service to be extended to Brisbane or the former Murwillumbah service to be reinstated. More rolling stock will also allow for more regular servicing and back-ups in the event of (God forbid) a write-off, or more simply a set being trapped elsewhere (like during the steel train derailment in Benalla). Perhaps new XPT/XPL sets can be introduced with enhanced furnishings, better buffet food, etc. and the existing ones can be refurbished.

With additional rolling stock, more services can also be introduced, so we can have say a twice daily service to Moree/Tenterfield instead of the current once daily Armidale/Moree service. We would also need a more frequent service to Broken Hill. But more important would be a twice daily Brisbane service, so that people living in the North Coast wouldn't have to wake up at stupid o clock to catch a train to Brisbane (I've heard that the current Brisbane-bound XPT passes through the North Coast at like 2 or 3 am). This way we can have both a daylight and overnight service to/from Brisbane.

These improvements I've listed above would make Countrylink much more formidable than it currently is. That way the NSW Government will have something to show for country rail services, something to be proud of, and certainly something that will make people want to vote for them in the next election. Their mission - if they choose to accept it.

Somebody in the WWW · Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 12:49 am

I wouldn't be holding my breath waiting for a train to Tenterfield, or a train to any destination that is not already serviced by CountryLink's welfare trains.

Transport Textbook: Public transport analysis & discussion.

fcic0rscvgs0 · Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 2:17 am

Well I actually meant for the XPL to go on to Wallangarra, and Queensland to reinstate a regular service there as well. Then maybe in the future the SG can be extended on from Wallangarra to Brisbane and form an alternative route, whether for freights or for passengers. On the south side, something similar can be done with Narranderra-Tocumwal as an alternative route to Melbourne. These points can be eventually linked as an inland route Melbourne-Brisbane, freeing up space in Suburban Sydney.

This is all theory of course, a gunzel's dream. But basically what I was trying to say in my post was that the NSW Government and Countrylink need to get their act together.

Blaze · Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 2:39 am

NSW Government, get it's act together/fund countrylink....good luck with both of those Wink

Oldfart · Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 6:51 am

cootanee · Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 7:27 am

Bwana · Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 12:20 pm

(not personally directed at cootanee)
A common claim. Is there actually any data to back it up, or is it pure speculation that only those on some form of pension use countrylink services? For a start I stuff up that theory because I use countrylink, but also have a full time job, pay tax and don't get a red cent off the government.

At the very least, a decent proportion are people who HAVE paid tax in their working life, in the belief that things like country passenger rail were and would continue to be provided. These customers, at least, have already paid for the service.

(directed at cootanee)
Care to explain how any form of assistance to the unemployed or retired is even close to being within the scope of DOCS? Care to explain why a federal agency like Centrelink should provide a state service, like countrylink?

Unless we can get some facts straight, how about we just stick to answering the question in the thread title...

I am SO moving to Victoria Street!!

Check out my pics at http://bwana.fotopic.net

seb2351 · Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 12:49 pm

cootanee · Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 2:03 pm

fcic0rscvgs0 · Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 2:07 pm

seb2351 · Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 2:09 pm

Please don't take offense at what I wrote, I was just replying as a devils advocate. If the government had more people who thought alog the same lines as you do, the railways wouldn't be in the position it is today

alltrainzfan · Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 2:13 pm

The Federal Government has just put into proposal the next Sydney airport, saying that it will go ahead.

So perhaps this means fast rail will never become reality?

If Countrylink was improved dramatically, airlines can decrease the Sydney-Melbourne/Brissy services, letting some international flights dock at the domestic airport instead. Creating so many more paths for flights, the land, the sounds and other environmental issues need not happen if the governments would for one moment consider the improvement of Countrylink.

Perhaps we need to start pegging letters to Nathan Rees. He promised change to NSW - why not regional rail?

Countrylink needs more rollingstock in order to increase its services. More importantly, it also needs to have the resources to run on. That means improvement to rail, instead of the old steam-era allignments.

The rollingstock of Countrylink is old and slow as well as stretched very thin, so perhaps new deviations first, then get the tilt trains rolled out for 200km/h running?