Right now on this very date it costs more generally to travel inter-city by train than it does by air.
Fast train will likely cost even more than slow train.

In any case, how many people would want to travel inter-city by fast train?
What numbers of people would be needed to keep a fast train viable?

Cost of such waste-of-money 'infrastructure' would be better spent on building newly productive infrastructure, such as to bring northern wet season water southwards to assists farmers and agriculture, while also boosting export agricultural produce and revenue especially.

Electrically powered fast trains use locally available fuel!

When a train stops there's considerable inconvenience. However, when the same thing happens in a plane, diabolical disaster!

Our east coast is the third busiest domestic air route in the world,virtually guaranteeing a profit making alternative service!

And overseas experience demonstrates only price gouging makes train travel more expensive!

Moreover, given construction would deliver you from CBD to CBD! Minus the time spent on gridlocked highways, followed by price gouged parking "EXPENSES"!

Sure fast trains are expensive infrastructure. however, if the wide corridors are resumed now, later urban land sales along the proposed route, would all but repay any outlays?

And given government can raise money for half the cost of private operators, it should be funded off budget by government.

Any and all cost blowouts prevented by a tendering process and contracts that include madatory penalty clauses for exceeding the contractual project time limits!

And given every decade of delay literally doubles construction costs, there's simply no time to waste with this style of endless prevarication or obfuscation.

Neither should one try to discount the huge boost (trillions) to our economy such a project would create and on a par with the impossibly expensive and entirely unaffordable "VISIONARY" fully paid for, income earning Snowy Mountains scheme.

And back then, wasn't there an absolute plethora of experts whose only claim to fame, was to know all the reasons it could be done or wouldn't work!?

If I were planning such a project, it would be a faster than jet planes VLT project; and built in much safer tunnels or shallow covered trenches, even if that meant importing Chinese technology and technical expertise!

Do it right the first time, means not having to do it again just a few decades down the track, when comparable construction costs have trebled! A fibre to the node NBN anyone? Rhrosty.

Fast Public Rail Intercity Transport is a waste of money. The only people who travel on that type of transport are Pensioners & Concession holders or Tourists, but they want a slow train. The Government pays for them. The Government is obligated to provide safe cheap travel for those people.

I worked in Wagon Maintenance for 26 years. As a Slings Man, Crane Driver, Brake Down Gang, Fitter, Turner, Boilermaker, Electrician, Carpenter, Manager. Now retired. :-)

High Speed Rail Freight is cost effective. Each Train would remove approximately 100 Semi-trailers of the Highways. Making road travel safer & less wear & tear on the Roads. Rail Hubs, such as the proposed Stuart near Townsville, & Bromilton near Beaudesert in Queensland are the future of Freight. Trucks do the distribution from there.

Hi there JAYB...

Your last paragraph made a whole lot of commonsense for sure, place most of your heavy freight on rail, and save both our rickety old roads and a few human lives. Still the word commonsense is most uncommon in Canberra!

100 semi trailers at $3,000 each load per day is $300,000.00.
What would be the daily interest payable for a multi billion fast train railway and operation?

Think about the interstate trucking industry and family livelihood that would be lost if rail replaces interstate trucks.

If roads are not improved for CARS and TRUCKS, why not use b-double roll-on roll-off fast super ships that already exist?

High speed rail in a country of such long distances and relatively small population could cause huge loss.

Surely Australia needs newly productive export product and revenue, for example to replace the now defunct "living off the sheep's back" wool industry?

JF, YOU keep making your surely comments that ignore reality, namely the service would be rolled out as an (virtually self funded) alternative to air travel on the domestic air route that is the third busiest in the world, only a moron with an IQ below the Ambient temperature, would persist with this endlessly trotted out verbal garbage.

And those trying to make comparisons to rickety old urban trains, loaded with old age pensioners and concession card holders are comparing the model T ford to a tesla electric sports car.

It just doesn't wash and almost as germane to the article as exorbitant airport parking fees.

Some of those old fogies fly as well, own the bulk of our real estate and bank accounts; and given a very fast capital to capital train service not affected by storm or tempest or gridlocked traffic, nor volcanic ash, would prefer it as the most desirable option.

And as a voting demography have the power to change recalcitrant non compliant government!

Make no mistake, this train will be built and go on to earn it's own keep while paying its way!

Always providing this or that government or local authority doesn't use it as their personal ATM, or try to privatise once operational and profitable!
Rhrosty.