RAILWAYS REFORM.

Otago Witness, Issue 2869, 10 March 1909, Page 15

RAILWAYS REFORM.

>O WHAT MR MILLAR CAN DO. By A. G. Stephens. (Specially written for the Otago Daily j Times.) j VI.—ROLLING STOCK. ! New Zealaxd Eaii/ways. I a i £ £££ tea teatX 1894-5 .. 3,221,620 .. 269 .. .834 ] 1907-S .. 7.051,271 . 410 .SSI J JDeer-e&se in 1907-8 of number of locomotives per 10,000 train miles .253 | Bub this decrease signifies chiefly a change ; ;of method. Since 1895 larger and more ' powerful locomotives have come into use 1' capable of drawing heavier loads, as shown hereunder: — J ' New Zealand Railways. j > r* §g -« ItH Jh te&K - BBc-1894-5 . 3,221,620 .. 1,756,178 5,451 1907-8 .. 7,051,274 . 4,516,250 . 6,404 Increase in 1907-8 of total tractive power of locomotives per 10,000 train miles run ." 9531b The comparison is in favour of the present day. In proportion to total train mileage, to-days locomotives can do more work than tbeir predecessors. A check is supplied by comparison with Australia. New Zealand and Australian Kailways. C "3 °r3 o.S; o.S o S j „ M a -I as M S3s ass 3 ,•=? te&K tea tea S.S N.Z. Railways, 1907-8 7,051,274 410 .581 Aus. Railways, 1906-7 38,638,437 2235 .578 Excess of New Zealand locomotives per 10,00 train miles . . .003 The excess is insignificant, amounting to about two locomotives on the total of New Zealand train mileage. So far, therefore, as New Zealand conditions and locomotives correspond with Australian, it can be said, that the New Zealand equipment bears a just proportion to the locomotive work. Next we may consider the equipment of passenger ears :—: — New Zealand Railways. v;v ;— * Om O o £» I Mi -I* lilt 1894-5 „ 3,221,620 . 498 .. 1.54 1907-8 . 7,051,274 . 1002 .. 1.42 Decrease in ,1907-8 of number of passenger cars per 10,000 train Tniles run . .12 Here we have to take note of an increaee in the seating accommodation of the cars; as shown below :—: — New Zealand Rail y/ays. . S i hi ill !l§! $ £M £l§ slsa 1894-5 .. .. 3,221,620 .. 17,455 .. 59 1907-8 .. .. 7,051,274 .. 42,861 .. 60 Increase in 1907-8 of seating accommodation of passenger cars per 10,000 train miles run ... 1 seat. Thus, as compared with 1894-5. we have now a total excess of 705 seats in proportion to train mileage, and a, total decrease of 84 cars; so that pa.ssengers were somewhat better provided for m 1894-5 than they aie at present. The Australian comparison follows :—: — New Zealasd and Australian Railways. 2 §'« *-: o■_ *c 3 a) a, o ■-' *78, £tc wop; a-gd as |7J X.Z. Railways 1907-8 7,051,274 1,002 1.42 Aust Railways, 1906-7 38,638,437 3,231 .83 Excess of New Zealand passenger cars per 10.000 train mile.^ 11m . . .59 The excels of New Zealand cars, numbering 416 in ratio to the total New Zealand tram mileage, is rem.u kable. If New Zealand made provision for pa.'-sengeis in the same ratio as Australia. 41 per cent, fewer cais would be leouir^d —sB6 instead of 1002. The greater suburban traffic in Australia, probably eupph".- one icvi^on for the difference, and anothei may be found , in a diffeience in tho.awiaife seating ac- j commodation of the cars. Nevertheless, at ■ is astonishing to see that N<?w Zealand le- j quires 238 more pa^enger cars to c.irry | 31,656,368 fewer passengers thau New- ' South Wales, for example. The matter ie ! certainly one for Mr Millar's inquiry. By the following table it is increasingly suggested that the ex-cess of New Zealand pa&senger cars in comparison with AustraUan lias some practical meaning :—: — New Zealand akd Australian Kailways. <n d VOO o O •1 br_: n fee <+ US br. jsg! Ig^ Igo 1 _ £tn£ »ii ji S"I1. " I New Zealand, 1907-8 9.756,716 i,002 10 2 I Australia, 1906-7 146,268,200 3,231 2 2 | Excess number of pas-senger cars, 1 New Zealand over Austiaha. per 100,000 passengers carried .. 8.2 The point for Mr Millar is whether, taking into consideration the average seating accommodation of the cars, and taking into consideration, further, the fact that the

huge suburban traffic of eoms Australian cities enables the railways to carry many more passengers with the same number of cars, there yet remains in New Zealand a, balance of cars which the management does not utilise to tLeir best capacity. The similar inference seemed fair in the matter of goods waggons. Is such an inference to any extant -warranted in the case of passenger cars? The difference is indeed striking. If New Zealand passengers last year had been carried with the same ratio of cars as in Australia, the Railways Department would have required only 214 cars, instead of the 1002 it used. In other words, every Australian car all the year round carries on the average nearly five times as many passengers as a New Zealand car. The provision of passenger cars for passengers 15 nearly five times as great in New Zealand as in Australia. Is the difference wholly accounted for by the considerations urged above by the proportion of long-distance as compared with shortdistance traffic ? Or is thiere, as in the ca.«e of the waggons, an additional reason for the remarkable New Zealand excess in the manner in which the cars are distributed and handled? The answer is left to Mr Millar. There remain the brake va.is. New Zealand Railways. •S '3 # £&& fctS temp.'M 1894-5 .. 3,221,620 .. 204 .. .63 1907-8 .. 7,051,274 ..333 . .46 Decrease in 1907-8 of number of brake vans per 10,000 train miles run . . . . 17 New Zealand and Australian Railways. I H "I "1^ Hi it II ii N.Z. Railways. 1907-8 7,051,274 333 .46 Ausi. Eailways, 1906-7 38,638,437 1810 .46 Number of brake vans per 10,000 train miles approximately, equal. It appears from these tables that the Railway Department is now making shift with fewer brake vans than were used in the commissioners' time, and has reached exactly the Australian ratio in relation to traffic. The conclusion, if any, is favourable to thVEailway Department. (To be concluded.)