Here's my thoughts on possible future long distance V/Locities (and on other peoples ideas as well)....
Good Idea in general, but long distance should be 2x2 seating at max.
V/Locity seating is already 2x2
Rotating seats sounds nice, but lets face it, they would break within a year from people messing with them, in the XPT they only get turned by staffed, and sitting backwards isn't a big deal like some of those here make it out to be.
Victoria never seems to have bothered much with rotating seats outside of First class.
The only Second/Economy class cars with rotating seats that I can think of are the BZ (13 carriages, most of which had the seating replaced with fixed N car seating during the '90's), DRC (4 railmotors, purchased second hand from NSW), and the BCZ cars (ex ACZ cars with seating originally intended for First class, whilst the seating can be rotated, V/Line don't bother to do so).
Was there any other rotating seating used in Victoria (aside from in First)?
Agree with running shepparton with regular VL's, but if you are ordering a whole bunch of new rolling stock, the swan hill, echuca, Ararat and Maryborough services should also be run using the new stock, just with unreserved seating.
In the past year I've travelled on trains in the UK, Netherlands, Sweden, Poland and Hungary. They all had some sort of power outlets available for customers and most had Wifi included in the price of the ticket.
Power outlets would be a good idea. I'm less convinced about Wi-Fi, as most people will have 3G/4G internet (and mobile black spots along many routes is apparently going to be addressed soon/eventually), which alleviates the need for Wi-Fi.
No way to recharge my phone or laptop on either of them, although I did see a power point next to the buffet on the N set with a (probably untrue) label "Not suitable for general use".
Someone in insurance, etc probably thought there may be a one in a million chance that a passenger's device would get fried by a freak surge, and legal panicked that they would get sued...
Seriously though, I've seen heaps of people use the power points in N cars to charge phones or laptops, and I've never heard of anything going wrong because of it.
As SG VLocity's are now a definite going forward...why can't an SG VLocity replace the Overland Question
Why indeed? Once the new SG trains are running on the NE line, then V/Line have a design, and they also (hopefully) have the necessary maintenance facilities to service a SG fleet of DMU's. Once you've got all that, buying a few extra sets to service the western SG (whether that's the Overland, or some successor service) seems like the logical next step.
- 160km/h operation on RFR lines would cut travel times and hopefully reduce delays on congested sections of track (RRL).
As all long distance lines except Shepparton and Albury travel for part of the journey on RFR tracks, 160km/h capability would seem a must for new rolling stock design that may end up been used on the broad gauge network.
- I'd like to see first-class retained, but I wouldn't be too upset if they got rid of it.
- No need for a buffet, a couple of vending machines is enough.
For long distance services, First class and a buffet should be retained. The buffet serves a wider range of food then could be provided by a vending machine. The buffet staff also provides an additional point of contact for any passengers needing assistance at times when the conductor is otherwise busy.
Also, any new long distance rollingstock should also have some sort of curtains/blinds/venetians on the windows, there needs to be some way for passengers to shut out the sun when it is shining directly in their window.
Also some van space (long distance passengers are more likely to travel with a lot of luggage).
What is going to happen with the level crossings on long distance lines that don't have boom barriers?
Will they all be upgraded to have boom gates (best but very expensive option), or would it be possible to engineer a cab with sufficient crashworthiness into a DMU design to allow travelling through crossings at over 80km/h?
Slowing the train to 80km/h at every crossing would surely make the trip take longer then the existing loco hauled service.