Talk:Overlander (train)

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Trains: in New Zealand / Passenger trains Low‑importance Trains Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated projects or task forces: /  This article is supported by WikiProject New Zealand Railways (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by the Passenger trains task force. It is requested that an a map be included in this article to improve its quality. Please work with the Maps task force to create and add a map to this article. New Zealand Mid‑importance New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Centennial

The Main trunk was opened in 1908, sad the passenger service didn't survive to the centennial.

Is there anything that Joe Public can do to encourage more paying passengers?

Other strategies:

1. A weekend ski train from Auckland/Wellington, with connecting bus to the slopes?
2. One free annual train ticket to all tax payers?

NevilleDNZ 09:35, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I think the problem is twofold. Firstly, marketing. Rail transport needs to be marketed better in New Zealand. It can be made to appear extremely attractive - none of the fuss of driving, and far more relaxed and comfortable than the airlines' cramped economy class seats (oh, and cheaper tickets would help marketing too!). Secondly, the rolling stock and infrastructure. You can't successfully market and sell a product if it isn't good enough, and frankly, the age was starting to seriously show on the Overlander's rolling stock, and the NIMT needs some upgrades. A quicker schedule would certainly help. It just seems no-one was willing to foot the bill for the Overlander, and no-one in any position to make a difference cared enough to put in the necessary effort to keep the train. I truly don't see why the Silver Ferns couldn't be put on the route; they were built for it! Supposedly the Overlander carries approximately 90 people per trip, which would be a comfortable load on a 96-seater Silver Fern.

I remember that back in 2000, I thought it was terrible that you couldn't catch a train to New Plymouth, Gisborne, Whangarei, Nelson, or Alexandra. The way they've killed off the passenger train in the last five years, you now can't even travel between the two most important cities! This is a national tragedy and a disgrace and not enough people care. I feel that a line of a Porcupine Tree song called The Sound Of Muzak is rather appropriate: "One of the wonders of the world is going down, it's going down, I know/It's one of the blunders of the world that no-one cares, no-one cares enough". Rant over. - Axver 09:47, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

The problem is threefold: First, the "time slot" on the NIMT used by the Overlander is far more valuable to Toll Rail for freight than it is for passengers - that's why they've basically run the service down (Toll, after all, are really a freight company); second the lower cost of faster alternatives - namely air, car and bus - which are all faster and (last time I caught a bus to Auckland) cheaper than the train. If the train did the trip in say, 6 hours (which means increasing the average speed of the trip from around 75kmh to 110kmh - which could be done if you pushed the (elderly) Silver Ferns*) at current prices more passengers could be lured to the mode. The lack of speed and higher prices relegates the train to creaming off a fairly small market of tourists. Thirdly, the general apathy (as noted above) towards rail transport in this country. There's still a large amount of lingering anti-rail feelings in New Zealand, mainly due to the age of the "Railways", which either lost your freight or broke it, and never had clean carriages or comfortable facilities. That's all (almost) changed these days, but the apathy and general dislike of rail transport lingers.

• I would add that the Ferns are under contract for the Pukekohe services - so I doubt Tranz Scenic would be legally able to use them on the NIMT service --Lholden 10:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I think the Ferns aren't under contract for too much longer, though, and aren't they looking at putting some higher capacity trains onto the Pukekohe services due to the fact the Ferns are getting overloaded? So if the Ferns were released from that service and the NIMT upgraded so that the Ferns can run at speed, I'm pretty sure the Overlander's route would become viable again. And really, passenger services shouldn't be necessary to justify upgrading the NIMT to handle 110kmh speeds; that sort of upgrade would also make rail more attractive and competitive for freight. It just seems to me that no-one's really willing to foot the bill for much, not even when it comes to new locomotives and track upgrades for freight. I shouldn't be shocked though, the only profit that matters these days is a monetary one. - Axver 22:06, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Plenty of opportunities for the Preservation Groups to run excursions to coincide with the centennial. J.christianson 11:23, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Is this a case of Erewhon syndrome? 68.44.179.40 02:39, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah, and you forgot one procedural biggie: amending rules segregating passenger trains from freight trains. Why not bring the two types together into the same trains? 68.44.179.40 02:45, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

The big problem now will be that the tracks will degrade further (I heard that even goods transport's future is looking spotty?), and they were BAD already. So in 5-10 years, nothing will reactivate this railway. Sad, sad. At least I got to ride it thrice (with TWO times having to travel part of the treck on buses, natch). MadMaxDog 12:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Madmaxdog - who told you that? They're wrong; freight volumes have been increasing. As I noted above, one of the reasons for the demise of passenger trains is that the time slots, motive power and capital better put to freight than passengers, as freight makes more money. The "degrading" of the tracks isn't true either.

Anon - because you'd have to marshal freight and passenger carriages together, which would take time - something which as I point out above has made the current train unpopular. --Lholden 03:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

So? It would give passengers the opportunity to ride the rails anyway if they really want to, even if it has to be on freight trains. I have no objection to allowing a passenger coach on a freighter.

68.44.179.40 15:05, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

The issue isn't whether people should have the opportunity to "ride the rails" - that could be done by excursions - the issue is that not enough people are using the current service to make it viable. This is what annoys me about the railfan community - there's a presumption that because we all enjoy riding the rails that everyone else automatically does. That's not the case - the very reason passenger services have been geared towards tourists over the last 20 or so years is because management realised that in general the NZ public don't use rail transport. Whether or not you have objections to using mixed freight and passenger trains is irrelevant, Toll simply won't do it - it would be a waste of their time, and frankly probably wouldn't attract enought passengers. --Lholden 22:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in the nineties, didn't they ("they" being whoever the managing body was at the time) try to attach express freight to one South Island passenger service (Coastal Pacific?) and it didn't work out? In any case, I still think New Zealanders would be quite happy to use trains if they were promoted better and had nicer, newer rolling stock. Intercity buses is quite successfully operating services for domestic travellers, so I don't see why rail can't do it. I do think railcars would be the better option due to the lower traffic density, though. - Axver 22:49, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

You're right, the Coastial Pacific did get some (three I think) freight wagons attached, but they were specially modified to run at speed (up to 100 kmh, as the Coastal Pacific could do this speed - I understand most freight wagons can only do up to 90kmh) and were for time-sensitive freight; that is different from attaching passenger carriages to a freight train. I agree on the rolling stock thing, but as I've said before, it comes down to speed - paying more for a 12 hour train trip when you could catch a equally enjoyable bus ride and do it in 9 hours is a no-brainer for the general public; that's why buses are more popular than trains. --Lholden 01:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Overlander Saved

Looks like the Overlander has been saved...with services reduced to three days a week. I'm looking for a good article to use as a citation and willupdate this page soon. Dippit 05:30, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

This is bloody superb news! I just made a brief update to reflect the new status, but I don't have any good sources and some expansion/further re-wording would be fantastic. I don't have any more time to do further work on the article at the moment. - Axver 05:43, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

lol you posted while I was making my edit lol...don't worry I will do as you requested :) Dippit 05:49, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

lol I never noticed that a third person had posted news about the overlander being saved lol! I guess we all posted our bits at the same time. As a result I have combined the best bits of all three postings into one which should suffice until someone wants to expand it. Dippit 14:41, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Citation/Editorial on decline of Overlander

• Last train is a mistake in the making
• Greens launch Overlander campaign
• fucktarded anti rail gov't policy

Image copyright problem with Image:Tranz scenic logo.PNG

The image Image:Tranz scenic logo.PNG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --17:11, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Questing Paragraph

"Alas, confidence in the train's future appears to be misplaced. In January 2009 it was announced that the service was losing millions of dollars a year, and requires substantial investment in upgrading if it were to continue. Accordingly it is planned to end the service on 30 September 2009. Various rail advocacy groups and local bodies are opposing this move, but it is hard to see how the service will continue if it is indeed losing millions of dollars a year."

• Hey all, Ive not heard or read anything that says or hint to the Overlander been killed off this year (2009), can we please have some proof. 30 September 2006 was when the service was going to end, but as we all know Toll did a rethink (yeah right, it was planed in my view). Now that is owned by the government other factors come into the keeping the service other than direct profit, example is Public Good. Palmeriain (talk) 10:55, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

• The tone of the paragraph suggests to me that it is not true, along with the fact that the alleged date of withdrawl in 2009 matches the 2006 date. However, if a proper citation comes forward it should stand as per the WP rules. --Lholden (talk) 21:29, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

• The only link between the date and The Overlander that shows up on Google is the fact that Scenic Rail Pass reservations can only be made up to, and prices for them are only valid until, 30 September 2009. This doesn't appear to be an indication that the service will be terminated on that date, rather I suspect it is the time when Tranz Scenic normally review their pricing for the upcoming summer season. If the future of The Overlander was again threatened, I expect the Green Party, amongst others, would be making some noise about it. – Matthew25187 (talk) 00:17, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The paragraph makes mention of "Various rail advocacy groups and local bodies" opposing the withdrawl. Again, a quick news search turns up nothing from either 2008 or 09 on that account. I suspect the Tranz Scenic pricing barrier is, as you say, just a normal accounting cycle the businesses uses to asses its pricing structure. --Lholden (talk) 02:47, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I've removed this paragraph. No citations were forthcoming. --Lholden (talk) 21:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

current stops

Is the article or the tranz scenic website got the current list of stops - including norhtbound/southbound only ones. 91.109.223.12 (talk) 18:04, 7 May 2011 (UTC)