And remember, none of the buses to points beyond Maryborough connect with the train, so much of the potential train patronage is denied to it.

That's because there's nothing beyond Maryborough.

Not only that, on some days there is a bus that runs from Ballarat to Maryborough and return only 35 minutes after the train - practically duplicating it.

Ie. the Donald bus - which should run straight to Avoca and have nothing to do with Marybugger.

This would cut the St Arnaud travel time to 1hr40min from Ballarat, rather than the current 2h20min.

1)  It's not a business it's a service

It's regional pork barreling.

....

It's regional pork barreling.

There's a rapid contraction of state revenues occurring at the moment so if it is pork-barrelling then I wouldn't expect it to go on much longer.  Next year's state budget will be very interesting - declining GST receipts, declining stamp duty - even speed camera revenues are down (time to put pokies into kindergartens!).  It will be hard to cut during an election year but I think Napthine will have no other choice.

Problem is that most of the cost is in the initial capital works to reinstate the service. Once it's running, you may as well leave it.

Problem is that most of the cost is in the initial capital works to reinstate the service. Once it's running, you may as well leave it.

Good point.  You could even say that having made the investment, you should squeeze as much value out of it as possible.  Ie use the line by running a couple of trains a day as a trunk route.  It would require no new capital investment for track or rolling stock and you could save a bit of operating cost by rationalising bus contracts as above (depending how badly locked in we are to long term bus contracts).

It's far faster for anything from the north to come down through Avoca to Ballarat than it is to make the dog leg to Maryborough.

It's far faster for anything from the north to come down through Avoca to Ballarat than it is to make the dog leg to Maryborough.

I know when I go to Melbourne, I would rather drive through to Ballarat rather than stop at Maryborough.   More services, less chance of problem if I happen to miss the return train, or a time that doesn't suit - car at Maryborough, me at Ballarat.   Same reason why I don't use Wendouree.   Still a two hour drive when I get off the train anyway.

You could save a bit of operating cost by rationalising bus contracts as above (depending how badly locked in we are to long term bus contracts).

A 40 odd seat road coach Is much cheaper to run then a 210 odd seat 3 unit Volcity train set, so how could there be any cost savings by rationalising road coach services ?

A 40 odd seat road coach Is much cheaper to run then a 210 odd seat 3 unit Volcity train set, so how could there be any cost savings by rationalising road coach services ?

By not running them in parallel with the train.  

No doubt running a convoy of 2 buses is cheaper than running a single train.  But if you if you're going to run a train (for all the reasons you run a train), then don't ALSO run a convoy of buses at basically the same time as the train.

Ballarat is only an extra 45km from Avoca than Maryborough.

It's much quicker for customers, and makes more business sense running buses from Ballarat than Maryborough.

Ballarat is only an extra 45km from Avoca than Maryborough.

It's much quicker for customers, and makes more business sense running buses from Ballarat than Maryborough.

No so sure about that.  No doubt for Avocanians it would be a quicker journey to Melbourne if there was a direct bus to Ballarat compared to a bus to Maryborough connecting to a train.  But this isn't currently a Vline option - Avoca gets just about the most rubbish Vline service of any town its size in the State (One bus each way each day in the small hours of the morning).   The Donald buses go through Maryborough and Dunolly - not via Avoca.  The road distance from Donald to Ballarat via Maryborough and Dunolly is 193km.  Whereas from Donald to Ballarat via Avoca and Lexton is 176km.  So unless you choose to bypass Maryborough (the biggest place on the route - so not a good service option) then you would travel the 193km just as the current Vline buses do, OR you would travel 198km to visit both Avoca and Maryborough and miss out on Dunolly just as the overnight Mildura buses do now.

There's nothing major out there besides Maryborough - the whole northwest coach network needs rationalisation.

Really, within the Western Hwy and Mildura via Swan Hill trunks I'd limit it to:


*Dunolly/Maryborough to Ballarat (really should be a bus)
*Mildura to Horsham (Ouyen, Warracknabeal)
*Donald to Ballarat (St Arnaud, Avoca)
*Sea Lake/Birchip to Bendigo (Charlton, Inglewood)
*Horsham to Bendigo


That hits all the towns worth serving in the northwest.  

Justifications:  The Mildura to Ballarat bus is a relic of the Vinelander, and running via Horsham is only marginally longer, yet far more efficient.  Dunolly can just be run as an extended Maryborough town bus run if all Maryborough buses are upgraded to rail.  St Arnaud is not much further from Bendigo than Maryborough, so lack of access to Maryborough isn't really an issue.  From Birchip it is faster to access Melbourne through Bendigo than Ballarat.

With the money saved through rationalisation one could run each route at least twice a day, with standardised running times Monday-Sunday, a far more useful proposition.

And just to confuse things, the current Wednesday Donald bus goes to Bendigo instead of Ballarat.

Personally I think that route and timetable rationalization together with an increased frequency will help drive patronage on all V/Line coach services. This in turn will help drive town population growth which could result in further patronage increases. This will increase the income produced from these services, perhaps to a point where the income will exceed the operating costs.

Donald's post about his trips to Melbourne is evidence that this could work.

I certainly agree that simplified and rationalised bus routes providing higher frequency services (twice daily) would be both more efficient and most likely to generate higher patronage.

Trunk routes with decent end to end times will be more attractive to the majority of passengers than travelling via goat tracks serving every bark hut.

Of course there will always be some who would be disadvantaged - eg those who live at small towns thus bypassed.  That they are constituents of politicians is where it gets difficult.

We are travelling on a Melbourne Cup mystery weekend which saw my little group on Friday arvo's 16:01 down Maryborough.
After Ballarat,...

11 off at Creswick.
11 off at Clunes
10 off at Talbot, including my group of three
And the conductor advised there were still 33 on when the train arrived at Maryborough.

An excellent result and further proof if any were needed of the success of that lone daily service.

Mike

We are travelling on a Melbourne Cup mystery weekend which saw my little group on Friday arvo's 16:01 down Maryborough.
After Ballarat,...

11 off at Creswick.
11 off at Clunes
10 off at Talbot, including my group of three
And the conductor advised there were still 33 on when the train arrived at Maryborough.

An excellent result and further proof if any were needed of the success of that lone daily service.

Mike

Assuming these are typical numbers 7 days a week I think most would agree.

So one of the busiest days of the year could still be catered for by a coach plus a town bus to Creswick?

So one of the busiest days of the year could still be catered for by a coach plus a town bus to Creswick?

VLP operate this service all wrong as they do the same between Bendigo & Echuca.  

Both routes should be run as  Sprinters (not tying up 3 car VL sets that are better used elsewhere.)  Further both routes should be running as 3 - 4 shuttle trips each way  Ballarat - Maryborough and  Bendigo - Echuca  connecting at Ballarat and Bendigo with mainline VL services to/from Melbourne.

Much better use of rollingstock, lower operating cost, offers increased travel choices and generates more revenue, = better cost recovery.

VLP operate this service all wrong as they do the same between Bendigo & Echuca.

Both routes should be run as Sprinters (not tying up 3 car VL sets that are better used elsewhere.) Further both routes should be running as 3 - 4 shuttle trips each way Ballarat - Maryborough and Bendigo - Echuca connecting at Ballarat and Bendigo with mainline VL services to/from Melbourne.

Much better use of rollingstock, lower operating cost, offers increased travel choices and generates more revenue, = better cost recovery.

Why not just use a 2car vlocity instead of 2car sprinter. Then the train can join up and continues to melbourne

VLP operate this service all wrong as they do the same between Bendigo & Echuca.

Both routes should be run as Sprinters (not tying up 3 car VL sets that are better used elsewhere.) Further both routes should be running as 3 - 4 shuttle trips each way Ballarat - Maryborough and Bendigo - Echuca connecting at Ballarat and Bendigo with mainline VL services to/from Melbourne.

Much better use of rollingstock, lower operating cost, offers increased travel choices and generates more revenue, = better cost recovery.

I completely agree. This is what the sprinter units should be doing. Shuttle trips are what should be happening with far more frequency. Vline seem to have the idea that you must run a through service, This is not what needs to happen everywhere.

Shuttle services between Ballarat and Ararat and Ballarat and Maryborough and then perhaps Ballarat and Geelong (using a Vlocity).

That said the passenger numbers provided look a lot better than others and Vline would have us believe. They are good numbers. I wonder if we could expect these numbers on the new Epsom services in 12 months? I think it is entirely possible. Why you ask?

I have not read or seen any cline rail service which has NOT been gaining patronage over the last 10 years. There are many improvements which can still be made.

There is scope for a passenger rail service between Castlemaine and Maryborough. There is scope for further passenger rail services between Castlemaine and Bendigo. Not every service has to run into and out of Melbourne and we need to start thinking about breaking that trend.

And just to confuse things, the current Wednesday Donald bus goes to Bendigo instead of Ballarat.

That is because there is a very strong demand from Donald for a weekly day return trip to Bendigo for shopping and medical visits.

Why not just use a 2car vlocity instead of 2car sprinter. Then the train can join up and continues to melbourne

Agree. BUT VLP with their MET train mentality are converting all the two car VL sets to 3 car sets . So this ends up in running 3 car sets on late night and early morning trips and beyond Ballarat to Ararat and Maryborough whereaa  2 car sets would suffice . This MET train mentality also locks VLP into 3 or 6 car sets, so all the Geelong OP on 20 minute from 04/15 are going to be running with 6 cars when 4 cars would be adequate . Typical VLP inflexible , will add up to a lot of extra running and maintenance costs over a year, and the word is that the CEO is looking to save $ 20m . I could save that for them in operational inefficiencies alone .

Aren't they required to do that?

Don't be surprised if some of those Geelong trains are only 3 car sets when that 20 minute off peak frequency kicks in.

As for Maryborough, I really think it is time the gov't (which ever party that is after the election) got serious about adding an extra daily service. One train each way per day is pretty poor. Same goes for Echuca.

They should reopen the Geelong-Ballarat-Bendigo train line. If people want to travel between Victorias three largest regional centers it does not make sense they should have to go via Melbourne each time you are correct.

Geelong to Bendigo via train, Is always going to be quicker via Sunshine (many possible connections to are available)

There are road coach services between these Cities ! (that some people seam blind to seeing)