No we don't want to make them TOO attractive do we.

The NIFs fully use the available loading gauge (being medium width electric profile), so unless major civil works were carried out, there is no space for them to tilt on existing lines. Eg think existing tunnels, bridges, inside face of curved platforms etc.. The mistake was not ordering tilt trains for the regional fleet replacement. These trains are narrow width and with post-1920 civil NSW rail structures built to wide electric loading gauge the tilting clearance modification works are considerably reduced (eg trial tilt train service to Canberra in 1995).

@@The_Last_Ninja I think the X2000 was ABB, while Qld bought a Hitachi design from Japan?

State Rail produced a whole collection of Tilt Train souvenirs that were sold on-board when the train was test operated on the Canberra service, between 23rd April and 18th June 1995, hauled by two XPT power cars. Eg Rulers, Mugs Phonecards (for onboard phone), Leaning Towards The Future videos (not the one here) etc.

@ I would love it if somebody actually had a small collection That way we could see the smorgasbord of what they had on board

I'm sorry rhe XPT is a political shunt and a joke, the only benefit was air conditioning. No speed gains whatsoever. Based upon the British HST 125 that consistently travel at 200 kph the xpt is as slow as a were weekend with the mother in law. Let's hope one day Sydney to Melbourne is a 3 hour journey.

To be factually accurate, tilt trains do increase average train speeds (and cut journey times) on curved railway lines because curves are taken faster and the uncomfortable centrifugal forces produced are cancelled by tilting the car bodies (to give artificial rail superelevation on the curves).

The X2000 are excellent trains but at the time the video was made the XPTs and Xplorers were just too new to replace with more advanced tilt trains and additionally the X2000s would have needed capital investment for full electrification of the routes on which they would be used.

It creaks, squeaks and smells are a lot less than a steam locomotive hauled train!

It was a big improvement over the 600/700/800/900 class railcars it replaced. It also replaced some short loco-hauled trains that used old coaches.

It's also a "dirty" source of fuel.

No, Coal is a dirty word because it was seen as a natural monopoly for rail in preparation for corporatisation/privatisation it was seen by the eceonomic hard heads at the time that retreating exclusively into coal transport was an easy solution to profitability. We see this today 20 years after privatisation rails % of the land transport task is as low as it has ever been and only going to get lower. The upgrades to the highway network is not for holiday motorists, its for road transport. The rail industry in Australia bet the house on coal and now we are moving into the 2nd quarter of the 21st century we are seeing coals importance as an energy source collapse and by 2050 it will become a bit player in world electricity production. That is why V/Line, Westrail and AN were seen as financially weak compared to the SRA and QR who were not coal carriers back in the 80's

I don't understand why we don't try to capture the public imagination anymore with our railways

@@poino11 Because the politicians have now been bought by the road transport lobby.

better than privatization

But at least they can spell. It's metres, not meters.

@@JoelDavies-cl6nr They can, you cannot. It's both meters and metres. I can give you links to thousand science and engineering books where it is spelled as meters. As both spellings are correct.

@test143000 water meter, parking meter, gas meter. For the purposes of distance in Australia, we use metre. And i had this clarification from an English teacher from The Sydney Grammar School.

@@JoelDavies-cl6nr In Australia, there is a preference for "meters" over "metres" (55 to 45 for each 100 citations). Go back to school, maaaate.

@@JoelDavies-cl6nr In Australia, there is a preference for "meters" over "metres" (55 to 45 for every 100 citations).

The electric powered Locomotives were withdrawn from service due to the state government charging pacific national to use the electricity and also because they weren't powerful enough for freight.

Imagine an alt timeline where they electrified the mainlines fully like the Main north to brisbane and electric freight still existing today like the QR coal lines

@@QUBE80CLASS-n3z well i remember a promise of extending the western line elec to Orange but of course it never happened

Why it stopped at Bowenfels when it was supposed to go a bit further

@@QUBE80CLASS-n3z I think as a turning point

Private operators found them too expensive to operate and too inconvenient because they had to be swapped out at the ends of the electrified area.

This is what happened to the L Class electrics on the Gippsland

@@leonkernan Then why not introduce bi-mode locomotives for both electric and diesel lines?

Like what the NSW Trainlink are with the CAF units

Because they weren't powerful enough for freight. And the state government charged them to use the electricity. That's why pacific national went back to using diesel.