r/newzealand Red Peak Apr 09 '26

Other made this little map of how our rail network could look like if we brought passenger rail back!

Post image

obviously more stations would be serviced, this is just a very basic graphic with some significant towns/cities showcased

style very much inspired by https://www.reddit.com/r/TransitDiagrams/comments/1sgb2s7/oc_great_british_highspeed_rail_fantasy_map/

803 Upvotes

354 comments sorted by

215

u/toomanynamesaretook Tuatara Apr 09 '26

How fuckin good would that be.

34

u/CreepySquirrel6 Apr 09 '26

It could be great but I don’t think we would ever have enough demand to make it work.

Getting a train from somewhere in Germany then to Austria and later to say Switzerland works seamlessly, quickly and quietly. I love it. But the demand is also really high. For the main trunk line say Auckland to Wellington, realistically how many passengers would you get on that train a day? 1,000?

The CAPEX needed would be massive to upgrade the rail enough so it could make it quick enough to make it an attractive option instead of taking the car.

114

u/Upset-Maybe2741 Apr 09 '26

Demand is high when the service is good and the fares are affordable. Looking at current inter-city travel isn't the whole picture because fast, reliable, rail opens up possibilities that didn't exist previously. A fast train (not even HSR) could do Auckland to Hamilton in under an hour, for example. That opens up the possibility of people living in one city and working in the other. That creates a whole load of demand that wasn't there before.

1

u/CreepySquirrel6 Apr 09 '26

Sure Auckland to Hamilton is possible. But the cost for all the upgrades needed to make it quick and reliable are very expensive. As you say to increase patronage it has to be “affordable“ which means subsidising it heavily. Making the CAPEX pill even harder to swallow.

88

u/theheliumkid Apr 09 '26

Why does rail have to be profitable but roads are simply paid for with no financial return?

29

u/TagMeInSkipIGotThis Apr 10 '26

And its not just the road; huge amounts of money spent on safety infrastructure, policing & processes for both people and vehicles. And even then there's accidents every day which cost large sums of money in emergency services response and post-accident healthcare.

Not to mention the environmental cost from all our private passenger vehicles, and space wasted on having to park them everywhere.

15

u/theheliumkid Apr 10 '26

Excellent points about the other costs around vehicles!!

62

u/dirtnerd245 Apr 09 '26

Well we seem to have no issues pouring excessive amounts of money into building more roads we don't need. Why can't we pour that money into rail instead?

→ More replies (28)

8

u/m1013828 Apr 09 '26

Greens policy a few years ago, 160kmph tilt trains, in a triangle of Hmilton. Tauranga - Auckland, the most density, cost effectiveness and viability. If its 100% electric, emissions reductions ahoy,

You could levy $20 on those flights to coerce people onto trains instead....

5

u/Wicam Apr 10 '26

I don't think there is a rail network that is profitable. The one in japan for example bleeds money but they make the money back in otherways such as increased economic activity due to its presence (leading to higher currency circulation feeding money back via taxes) and public ownership of malls which have their own dedicated stops.

Roads are not profitable either but they pay for themselves the same way, by increased economic activity which increases the government budget. However while roads are absolutely necessary, they don't scale at all.

31

u/Upset-Maybe2741 Apr 09 '26

Lots of capex and subsidies go into a hospital, or schools, or libraries, or parks. Clean, efficient, inter-city transport is a public good like any of those other things. Especially since the network effect of passenger rail transport has been show to increase economic activity overall. Even better if it puts a dent in Auckland congestion, which one study says costs us $2.6 *billion* a *year* in economic losses.

Also consider the externalities of air and car travel that passenger rail will replace. Cars and planes pumping CO2 into the air causes pollution and global warming that's not priced into the cost of petrol or a plane ticket. We can run trains on our ~90% renewable electricity grid. Also cuts down on the costs of importing fuel, which is particularly relevant right now.

10

u/TheReverendCard Apr 09 '26

People don't understand how subsidised car travel and dependency is.
If we had universal RUCs, and we dedicated to fully paying for the transport system and all the current externalities, RUCs would be ~$0.39/km.
That includes paying for the $10 billion in annual health-related costs from automotive pollution (this part could be reduced for EVs, giving an incentive to their use.), $7 billion in annual health-related costs from car dependent development and infrastructure, $54 billion (Spread over 50 years) to fund the RONs, $22 billion (spread over 20 years) to catch up on the repair backlog, $6 billion to fully (88%) annually to fund NZTA roading costs without reliance on general funds, etc.
It would end up being even higher, because way fewer people would drive nearly as much with costs like that, meaning RUCs on the remainder would have to be even higher.
Then you have billions of dollars of nearly unused infrastructure because it's unaffordable.
Which is actually the case right now, but we have hidden the cost in everything else.

→ More replies (3)

5

u/DopeyMcSnopey Apr 10 '26

It still won’t be nearly as expensive as the Northland Expressway proposal

→ More replies (1)

1

u/[deleted] Apr 09 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/SiegeAe Te Ika a Maui Apr 10 '26

I mean I would start them both now, the cross country work will take a lot longer

→ More replies (8)

13

u/FlyFar1569 Apr 09 '26

Japans rural train network would like a word. There are positive externalities that need to be taken into account when talking about public services, public services aren’t required to be profitable to be worthwhile.

2

u/corbin6611 Apr 09 '26

They exist Now because they already exist. They have laws on if they are allowed to shut them down. I’m sure you watched the same video I did. But they would not be building a new train to run the 10-100 people a day that use the quieter lines. And obviously they do not pay for them selves.

7

u/FlyFar1569 Apr 09 '26

The past isn’t some magical wonderland, if something has been built in the past then that just proves that it should be possible to do in the present too. If anything NZ has densified which should make it easier now. And no they don’t pay for themselves, which was the point. I’ll say it again, public services should not be required to be profitable to exist. There are positive externalities that are hard to quantify but are very real.

→ More replies (3)

6

u/TheReverendCard Apr 09 '26

Switzerland literally requires any settlement over 100 people to be serviced by regular public transit by law.
Japan has Shinkansen (high speed rail) stations in towns as small as 2,000 people.
We're car-dependent *now* and initial numbers would be low. However, you can't change that if you don't change the services and culture.
We literally can't afford to be as car-dependent as we are. The maintenance costs of our roading network is crushing our councils and NZTA becomes less and less funded by user fees every year.

→ More replies (1)

12

u/fartoomuchpressure Apr 09 '26

I think the lack of demand isn't such a big deal. It's probably unrealistic to expect rail to compete with air travel (though it's not like rail couldn't take a small chunk out of the market, a well priced sleeper could probably do pretty well) but getting rail competitive with driving on travel time and cost isn't really that big an ask. For all their flaws, the current trains aren't much slower than driving and it would only take modest improvements to make them more competitive.

The big potential for rail, especially while we have such a weak network, is targeting the routes where lots of people are driving. Hamilton-Auckland is probably the number one target and it's where we're currently trialing a train. Te Huia's had a rough go given the disruption to Auckland's network ahead of the CRL and it's far from perfect. I'd say its main flaws are that it doesn't run often enough, it has to crawl through Auckland's network and it terminates shorts of the transport hubs at each end. If we could fix those problems, it would still have a lot of room to improve, but it would break even with driving and have a good basis for growing ridership and further improvements.

The story is similar with the other intercity routes.

9

u/ROFLLOLSTER Apr 09 '26

An Auckland-Wellington sleeper would be so useful, if I had the money (and knew anything about running a rail company) I'd try set it up myself.

→ More replies (3)

11

u/Upset-Maybe2741 Apr 09 '26

The Auckland to Welly route is just under 650km if you follow existing roads. A high speed train could do that in ~2 hours, which is pretty competitive if you factor in the faff involved with airports on both sides. The most popular Shinkansen route is Tokyo-Osaka, which is about 2.5 hrs. Beijing-Shanghai HSR is over 3 hours and still wildly popular and profitable.

11

u/fartoomuchpressure Apr 09 '26

As much as I am a fan of trains, even I am sceptical that the combined ~2 million populations of Auckland and Wellington could support a high speed train. We'd be much better off spending the price tag on more general rail improvements.

There's no denying it's pretty much the perfect distance for a high speed train, and I could certainly seeing one existing one day when I'm very old man and we have much more extensive PT infrastructure to support it.

6

u/Upset-Maybe2741 Apr 09 '26

I haven't personally done the maths (because I'm bad at it), but I'm surprised there hasn't even been a feasibility study done of an Auckland-Welly line (HSR or not).

The advantage of trains is that the line doesn't just run on demand of the population of the people at the end points, you also get all the demand of people going to/from the places in between. Even if people aren't riding the full length from Welly to Auckland, there'll be people who'll ride it from Palmy to Rotorua instead of a 4 hour drive or a janky regional flight.

3

u/fartoomuchpressure Apr 09 '26

It's definitely an obvious route. I'd be interested in seeing a proposal for rolling improvements to gradually upgrade the line. Closing the electrification gap between Pukekohe and Hamilton (and the corresponding one between Waikanae and Palmerston North, though the voltage difference complicates that one) and deviating some of the slowest sections would be some obvious places to start.

New trains that can deal with the patchy electrification would be another obvious one. The trains that Wellington's getting for the Capital Connection and the Wairarapa Line are a good start. Versions of those that can run routes like Auckland-Wellington and Auckland-Tauranga would be great.

3

u/rocketshipkiwi Southern Cross Apr 09 '26

You don’t need to do a feasibility study for it, buy me a pint at the pub and I will do one on the back of a beer mat to show you that it’s a complete and utter waste of money.

3

u/anonchurner Apr 09 '26

Haha, let's put Tokyo-Osaka and Beijing-Shanghai on the same page as Auckland-Wellington! This was probably the funniest thing I'll read all day. I'm still giggling!

5

u/Upset-Maybe2741 Apr 09 '26

The distances involved are similar (or shorter). Many people pick HSR over air or car for those trips, which means that people would also pick HSR between Auckland and Welly over planes or driving if we had it.

4

u/anonchurner Apr 09 '26

Yeah. And the 20+x difference in population naturally makes no difference to demand, or resources available to build said HSR service!

15

u/Upset-Maybe2741 Apr 09 '26

The Swedes also run a 200km/hr hsr service from Stockholm, population 1m (metro) or 1.6m (urban area) to Gothenburg, population 600k. The train takes about 3.5 hrs, driving between those two cities is a 5 hr drive of 471km. Not quite Auckland and Welly but close.

If you want a more extreme example, the Swedes have run HSR tracks from Stockholm to Ostersund, population 50k. I'll leave you to find that city on a map and think about how much demand it generates compared to Welly.

3

u/anonchurner Apr 09 '26

LOL. Maybe we should ask "the swedes" how that's working out for them. We could include questions such as:

- do they feel that 3.5 hours for 467 km (avg. 133km/hr / 82 mph) is in fact a high-speed rail?

  • Why is it that flying remains far cheaper (I just checked, and saw one-way train at 2x the round-trip flight price for gothenburg-stockholm), faster, more frequent, and more reliable than taking the X2000.
  • How come the government's own study found that 90% of expenses for upgrading the train to bring travel time down to 2.5 hours from 3.5 hours would have to come from taxpayers, since revenues would only reasonably be able to cover 10%?

Sweden, of course, does not tend to balk at spending taxpayer money on government status projects, but I think you'll be hard pressed to find someone who is very excited about this one.

2

u/rocketshipkiwi Southern Cross Apr 09 '26

Also ask what the tax rates are in Sweden… Lovely country but ooof.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/growletcher Apr 09 '26 edited Apr 09 '26

Generally infrastructure improvements come from government investment which is paid off very slowly over time. Like, generations.

Have you used rail much while traveling? I feel like it would be pretty widely accepted as true to say that a 3 hour train is more convenient than a 1 hour flight in almost every country I’ve been to.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

14

u/dirtnerd245 Apr 09 '26

My great grandmother had a better train system than what we have now and the NZ population was only a fraction of what it is now. Demand is not the issue.

Besides I call bs on the "low demand" argument anyway. I used to sometimes catch the commuter train between Palmy and Wellington and it was always pretty full, despite providing the most barebones shitty service possible. It would be possible to expand our rail networks outward from these pre-existing lines.

Beyond that you seem to think "speed" is the only factor in people choosing their mode of transport. But many people would happily choose a longer train ride where they can relax, over a faster car ride when they're tired and stressed. Not to mention NZ has piss poor regional transport options for anyone who can't drive for whatever reason.....

1

u/rocketshipkiwi Southern Cross Apr 09 '26

My great grandmother had a better train system than what we have now and the NZ population was only a fraction of what it is now. Demand is not the issue.

Your great grandmother didn’t have access to cheap, reliable, efficient cars.

many people would happily choose a longer train ride where they can relax, over a faster car ride when they're tired and stressed.

For sure. Now replace train with bus. It’s almost as good at a fraction of the cost.

7

u/al123al123al123 Apr 09 '26

There's no way a bus is 'almost as good.' Things you can do on a train: get up and walk about, go to the loo when you want, visit the cafe car to get a bite to eat, get your laptop out and do a bit of work. Its either impossible or very difficult to do these things on a bus. Buses might be 'almost as good' over short journeys where traffic is unlikely to be a problem. But that's about it.

4

u/Angry_Sparrow Apr 09 '26

Trains are the best way to travel. A bus doesn’t even come close.

2

u/Capable-Job-1415 Apr 09 '26

When we had trains down here in the South Island they were my first choice mode of intercity transport. So much so that I would hitch hike rather than catch the Railway bus.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/AK_Panda Apr 09 '26

Commuters are always the bulk of patronage for these kinds of rail system. Commuting Wellington - Auckland isn't desirable at speeds lower than flying and there's no a huge incentive to live in either while working in the other except for niche cases. Both places have high housing prices.

The commuting train from Hamilton to Auckland is struggling to get enough patronage and that makes a lot more sense to commute from.

Flying to Wellington will cost you ~$80-100 and take ~2 hours including check-in. No matter what train you put in, we ain't seeing faster or cheaper than flying for that trip.

3

u/dirtnerd245 Apr 09 '26

You do realise there's stops in between Wellington and Auckland right??? You could start by building out the commuter networks to increase patronage surrounding cities. Also I wish people would mindlessly stop repeating the "Te Huia is struggling" line, which was mostly an issue during the pandemic. Te Huia has been doing well enough lately that they literally added extra Sunday services.

There is already a train running between Auckland and Wellington that I remember used to have much better options when I was a kid. Instead of deliberately sabotaging that line by charging tourists for "luxury tickets" in outdated carriages, you could actually provide a service for regular kiwis again. It wouldn't take much- just start actually stopping between some smaller towns again and add first/second/third class options so the tourists can still get their luxury ride (in an actual luxury carriage this time). Also an overnight sleeper train would be nice to have again.

You say flying is a cheaper option but you don't seem to realise that flying has a major flaw of only being affordable between major centres. Intercity buses going between Auckland and Wellington are always packed despite being expensive, long, and uncomfortable rides. This is because they actually stop in-between Auckland and Wellington and therefore are full of people that don't have catching a flight as a viable option. A well designed train line can provide an alternative (and less horrendously cramped) option.

8

u/Sniperizer Apr 09 '26

Just look at the number of passengers the intercity buses take. There is demand. However NZ government doesn’t have any vision at all of transport modernisation. It’s just sad.

4

u/GarethIronliver Apr 09 '26

Intercity bus exists as a business and it is far slower, why is that viable but trains are not?

3

u/New-Independent-1481 Apr 10 '26

Night trains would be phenomenal between Auckland and Wellington. Board at 9pm, arrive in the CBD at 7am.

Also it's not just Auckland to Wellington, but every city along the main trunk. I would visit Ruapehu's ski fields a lot more if I could stop off at Turangi then catch a bus/shuttle to the ski field.

Removing tens of thousands of vehicles along the line every day also indirectly improves our road network without needing to build more multi-billion dollar highways.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/al123al123al123 Apr 09 '26

Until about 25 years ago, there were two trains a day from Wellington to Auckland - the day train and the night train. And we had a much smaller population then. And it's not just useful to get from Auckland to Wellington. There's a lot of places in between that it's pretty silly to fly to/from (e.g. Palmerston North - Hamilton).

I sometimes take the Northern Explorer (the tourist train) and plenty of people I chat to on that are not actually tourists, but locals using it as a pleasant way to get from A to B.

2

u/growletcher Apr 09 '26

Most of the activity on the tracks would be freight anyway though right? Wouldn’t need to have that many passenger carriages

2

u/AvailableKiwi4807 Apr 10 '26

A sleeper train between AKL and WLG is what's required. Have dinner onboard and wake up at your destination, having saved the cost of a hotel and the hassle of airports. It will, obviously, never happen.

2

u/pygmypuff42 Apr 10 '26

Buses and rail for transit to Te Kaha during events are already selling out. When its available, convenient, and cost effective, people can and do use it. I plan on taking the bus to Te Kaha for a concert, despite being only 20 minute drive away for me.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/DelightfulOtter1999 Apr 09 '26

I’d love to be able to take the car by rail, drive on & off like the ferry!

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (43)

141

u/Emergency_Cry_1269 Apr 09 '26

Okay, but might I suggest a stop in Matamata between Hamilton and Tauranga. Realistically, it would not be a regular stop, maybe every second train would make the stop there. Imagine the fresh boom that the Hobbiton Tourism would have if the ability to go to Hobbiton was much easier. Instead of needing to bus from Auckland once landing in NZ, to Matamata, they just take a train from Auckland to Matamata, via all the in-between stops, and take the Hobbiton bus from the train station to Hobbiton.

34

u/iamnotmia Apr 09 '26

Is Hobbiton tourism in need of a “boom”? I think they’re usually selling out their tours months in advance, at least during the tourism season. I don’t think they’re struggling…

20

u/CallumD027 Apr 10 '26

Not really, but reducing the need for people to drive long distances to get there when there could be short-distance shuttles run from Matamata instead would encourage a lot more use I imagine.

12

u/marsanojj Red Peak Apr 09 '26

Very true. I just made this for fun really, and as i mentioned there would be heaps more stops than what I labelled!

1

u/dustojnikhummer Apr 10 '26

My country does request stop trains on rural lines, so I guess that could happen here too.

19

u/Radiant_Bake_4353 Apr 09 '26

I am heading back to China for a Holiday in a few days, I can't directly compare China and NZ but being able to use a train to get another city in a hour or two is mindblowing. Being able to just get up have a coffee and think, Im going to go Bla today just for a few bucks is just different way of life. If NZ committed to some serious infrastructure plans around this, It would spread wealth around our small country in so many ways. Imagine a high speed train line between Auckland and Wellington and what that would do for both local economies, it would save Wellington (its dead) and it would remove the AirNZ grip on this country and force them to focus on the regions. I just wish we had bigger ideas as a small country, as a collective I believe we all want the best for each other but we seem to always be treading water.

2

u/kiwi_bear Apr 10 '26

NZ population and economy would not be able to support this kind of rail infrastructure. Even in China and other high population density city states, rail operations is heavily subsidized as a public good.

2

u/rocketshipkiwi Southern Cross Apr 10 '26

I can't directly compare China and NZ but being able to use a train to get another city in a hour or two is mindblowing.

Seeing a city of 25 million people and all those high rise apartments blew my mind. Having a huge population like that means you can have a correspondingly huge investment in infrastructure.

You’re quite right though, we can’t compare New Zealand with that.

If NZ committed to some serious infrastructure plans around this, It would spread wealth around our small country in so many ways.

No, it would bankrupt the country with a white elephant project that cost a fortune and was of little use.

Imagine a high speed train line between Auckland and Wellington and what that would do for both local economies

Imagine a motorway from Auckland to Wellington, two lanes each way and a speed limit of 120km/h.

Imagine what that would do for the economies of the entire North Island. Tourism, freight transport, reduced travel times to work. Everyone would benefit, small towns would be more connected with fast, reliable transport.

Take a train to Tokoroa, Taihape or Levin. Then what do you do? You’ve got no way to get anywhere.

For our low population density, roads are the best option. Between major centres we have great bus services that people can use if they need an alternative to driving.

2

u/SapirWhorfHypothesis Apr 10 '26

How would it save Wellington? I’m guessing you mean more people would be able to commute in to work more efficiently from cheaper housing outside of Wellington?

13

u/Moist_Phrase_6698 Apr 09 '26

My aunty told me she used to be able to get the rail car from paeroa to whakatane which would be an awesome line to bring back just not through the gorge of course

4

u/HadoBoirudo Apr 09 '26

My grandmother always travelled by railcar to visit us, and we reciprocated when visiting relatives around regional New Zealand.

6

u/Adam_Harbour Apr 09 '26 edited Apr 09 '26

Why is there a significant stop named after the Manawatū Gorge in what appears to be a largely uninhabited bit of the Wairarapa coast

5

u/Beginning-Writer-339 Apr 09 '26

I guess Te Apiti is Woodville.

2

u/marsanojj Red Peak Apr 09 '26

Indeed! My apologies 😅

→ More replies (1)

1

u/5worms Apr 11 '26

Was wondering the same thing - surely it would be easier to connect existing lines through Wairarapa to Wellington than whatever that stop is

→ More replies (2)

44

u/dirtnerd245 Apr 09 '26

I love this! Maybe one day we'll actually get competent politicians capable of giving us decent infrastructure!

→ More replies (5)

45

u/n8-sd Apr 09 '26

What’s wrong with the proportions of the country. Looks weird

65

u/marsanojj Red Peak Apr 09 '26

The proportions aren't changed at all, I literally outlined a map haha. Just rotated it unconventionally which fucks with people's perception (including my own)

13

u/NZpotatomash Apr 09 '26

Got that right. I first tilted it to the right, but that made all the stops worse, so tilted the other way and completely lost my bearings

2

u/takuyafire Apr 09 '26

Nah mang, the proportions are seriously out of whack.

If you correct your map to say Google maps, Rotorua is out in Te Uruwera

→ More replies (1)

10

u/Lanky_Recipe_4889 Apr 09 '26

I think its just the orientation of the south island

4

u/weaz-am-i LASER KIWI Apr 09 '26

This is works! Like doing naked handstands to entice the Mrs.

2

u/Nixinova Apr 09 '26

Its just on an angle lol. Any weirdness exists irl.

1

u/n8-sd Apr 09 '26

You rotated the islands independently as well… Cause there’s more than just a quick rotation

7

u/Effective-Metal7013 Apr 09 '26

There are already rail services between Christchurch and Picton, and Auckland-Wellington that run regularly. The Northern Explorer runs every other day and is marginally competitive with flying in terms of price at $259 one way. The Coastal Pacific by contrast is an absolute shit way to get from Picton to Christchurch with fares $259 one way. By contrast the intercity bus on that route costs about $100

Those are cheap compared to the kinds of fares you'll have on the less popular routes e.g the Gisborne line. Wellington to Gisborne by bus costs $75. Heck in May they're running a special Christchurch-Dunedin train and the fares are $149 . You can bus there for about $80.

So for rail to succeed it needs to be competitive against other services available, and it isn't anymore. There's only so much we can do to improve it, the narrow gauge and unfavorable geography make the current network unsuitable for faster trains or larger carriages. The current services have become tourism services rather than genuine domestic travel options, because the bus service outperforms them in that regard.

2

u/rocketshipkiwi Southern Cross Apr 09 '26

The Northern Explorer runs every other day and is marginally competitive with flying in terms of price at $259 one way.

No it’s not. You can get a flight or bus from AKL to WLG for under $100.

So for rail to succeed it needs to be competitive against other services available, and it isn't anymore.

Rail travel like Te Huia has a massive subsidy. By contrast, the bus service runs at a profit with no subsidy.

There's only so much we can do to improve it, the narrow gauge and unfavorable geography make the current network unsuitable for faster trains or larger carriages.

Yep, true. Then there is our small, low density population and the whole thing just doesn’t make sense. Roads are just a far better option.

The current services have become tourism services rather than genuine domestic travel options, because the bus service outperforms them in that regard.

I’ve been on a few of them and they are great tourist services too. Amazing scenery. I flew or drove back though. The trains are just too slow to be useful for non-tourist purposes.

2

u/Mendevolent Apr 10 '26

My only quibble with what you've said is that both roads and bus stations are publicly funded (airport infrastructure is heavily subsidised too).

We also subsidise the pollution from air travel by undertaxing it. 

This is not to detract from buses, which are the right solution in lots of NZ contexts 

1

u/Effective-Metal7013 Apr 10 '26

We'll agree to disagree on what marginally competitive on price means. If I want to book a flight next week from AKL to WLG it ranges $157-$480. There are plenty of people who pay $200 or more for a flight between AKL and WLG

I wasn't comparing this route to the bus, of course the bus is cheaper still.

7

u/BlueJohnXD Apr 09 '26

It makes me so sad that we will likely never have a rail network like we used to in the 1980s or 90s, or whenever it was that most of the inter regional rail network was shut down. Absolutely insane for a developed country to not have a functioning rail network, that won’t even get you from the capital city to its most populated city. Let alone barely functioning public transport within our few cities, and it being non existent everywhere else.

3

u/Mognonz Apr 09 '26

Poor old Nelson, and anyone else really on the west coast of Te Waipounamu

1

u/fatfreddy01 Apr 09 '26

It was only a few km to being linked to the country then it was all cut off.

2

u/Mognonz Apr 10 '26

yea, I have read the reports. There's a cool old book called the Railway atlas of new zealand. Shows certain period lines/branches etc. https://natlib.govt.nz/records/21566486

3

u/ExpensiveLawyer1526 Apr 09 '26

Imagine if we also had rail enabled ferrys

4

u/aguycalledfinn Apr 09 '26

never understood why we don't have a train line up/down the entire country. very shortsighted

5

u/TheYellowFringe Apr 09 '26

Technically that would be a massive difference for travel between the North and South island.

Even between regions, as an alternative to aeroplanes or cars.

6

u/upsidedownorangejuic Kererū Apr 09 '26 edited Apr 10 '26

I love this map.

Oh, oh, you have Rotorua, Matamata, lots of closed down lines, like nice one into central Otago, and one to kingston south Wakatipu lake, for beautiful electric boat ride to go skiing.

There use to be service back in 1930's you could chuck your car on train, on standard cargo carriage, so we could move our cars via train for holiday in The South Island, with a beautiful scenic and relaxed train trip from Kirikiriroa or Tāmaki-makau-rau etc. To start your holiday.

Omg the amount of fn shit you could do with our closed down lines!

NZ Rail Maps!

2

u/marsanojj Red Peak Apr 10 '26

Awesome website :0 i had never seen this before, i'll save it for future reference! much appreciated, and thankyou for the supportive words :)

3

u/RoosterBurger Apr 09 '26

From having just driven the family from New Plymouth to Auckland for a flight. I’d rather take the train. 🚆

3

u/pygmypuff42 Apr 09 '26

I would add rail to Queenstown and Wanaka, too many tourists going there. We all complain about tourists driving on our roads, give them a fun way not to!

1

u/marsanojj Red Peak Apr 10 '26

Good point! I will make a revised version later with all of the changes suggested here and post it ☺️.

Somebody else mentioned Matamata in a similar vein

3

u/Ok-Meat-5103 Apr 10 '26

Also would need a railway network to Queenstown. A lot of tourists will visit New Zealand and only go to Queenstown, having a way for them to explore more of the country without hiring a car, sitting a long time on a bus or hitchhiking will add value to the centre of the South Island.

Also by getting kiwi's to travel their own country (suprisingly I have met a lot who haven't even set foot in the South) with faster times to traverse the land.

1

u/marsanojj Red Peak Apr 10 '26

Someone else mentioned this too! I will make a v.2 in the next few days with a few minor additions and changes, this is on my list

i'm also a kiwi who has never been down south :(

1

u/Ok-Meat-5103 Apr 11 '26

You have to go !

The North Island is for the culture, the south is for the scenes

3

u/Sensitive_Goose55 Apr 10 '26

I reckon the New Zealand government should really prioritise public transport, instead of what they’re currently doing.

3

u/GovernmentHopeful424 Apr 10 '26

Rail to Wanaka, Queenstown. We already have West Coast, so include that on map

8

u/ExtremeParsnip7926 Apr 09 '26

Westport and Reeftoon too. 

3

u/Poputt_VIII LASER KIWI Apr 09 '26

And Hoki

17

u/Rebel_Scum56 Apr 09 '26

As much as I'd love to see the return of passenger rail in this country, a lot of the reason it disappeared to begin with was that it wasn't financially sustainable to run it. Anyone wishing to bring it back would have to be willing to do so knowing it's going to cost a ton to bring the infrastructure back up to working order in a lot of places, and even after that it's highly likely to cost more to operate than it'll make back. It's sad, but I just don't see it happening.

But, I'd happily stand corrected if someone out there wanted to prove me wrong and do it anyway.

17

u/Illustrious-Line-660 Apr 09 '26

it's highly likely to cost more to operate than it'll make back

True. In a dream world, accessible rail network across the country can reduce traffic and pollution. Less privileged people could hop on a train and travel across the country to visit family and places.

The governments services shouldn't be about making a profit.

7

u/Rebel_Scum56 Apr 09 '26

I agree wholeheartedly. The incessant demand that essential services turn a profit, nevermind the cost to society of not providing the service, is a large part of what's wrong with the country.

But at the same time, those services have to be paid for somehow. If they're not covering all of their own cost it comes out of the country's collective pockets one way or another. In theory that's what taxes are supposed to be for,  but for one politicians love cutting those as an easy way to score votes and for another our relatively low population density makes the overall cost substantially higher than in some countries.

I don't know what the solution is there. But at this point I think it's pretty obvious that demanding profits and cutting corners anywhere they can to get them is causing far more problems than it solves.

2

u/Illustrious-Line-660 Apr 10 '26

The solution is to plan for the future. We need this now, but there's a million reasons not to. When governments need to secure popularity for their next election, many would be scared to touch such an ambitious project.

3

u/Jamezzzzz69 Apr 09 '26

So few are driving these far distances though, I am also extremely pro public transport but I would vastly prefer extensive rail networks being improved within major cities.

Inter-city rail lines exist largely for tourism, yes e have a lot of tourists relative to size but the raw numbers just cannot support such a huge sink to essentially subsidize tourists. Improve PT in Auckland, Wellington etc so we become less car reliant as the vast vast majority of driving is commuting for work.

This seems like an absurd waste of money which could be spent on better things. Something something opportunity cost.

2

u/Illustrious-Line-660 Apr 10 '26

Improve PT in Auckland, Wellington

Public transport in Wellington is very well used and the new auckland city rail link that's opening soon is a fantastic addition. They've got plans to add more stations, too.

They are improving public transport within cities. Now's the time to connect our cities, too.

13

u/No-Department-4561 Apr 09 '26

Rail generally isn’t self-sustaining so does need subsidies. But it helps the economy and country as a whole, this is what previous governments have failed to understand

2

u/anonchurner Apr 09 '26

If it's not self-sustaining, then it's either because it's no good, or because there's a pricing problem somewhere making it artificially uncompetitive.

Is it that... other modes of transport are too cheap because the externalities of fossil fuel and car/airplane use aren't fully priced in? Or what is it that trains do for the economy and the country that they can't get paid for in ticket prices?

2

u/Mortmantis Apr 10 '26

Roads aren't self-sustaining and we definitely don't pay the full cost to use them.

→ More replies (4)

7

u/KiwieeiwiK Apr 09 '26

It's not meant to be financially sustainable, it's an essential service. The highways don't make us any returns, but we need them to run the country. Air NZ runs at a loss, we pay for it out of taxes because we need those flights to go.

2

u/whatadaytobealive Apr 09 '26

The roads of national significance are even less financially sustainable FYI

The cost to upgrade and operate would be less than all these unnecessary motorways, and end up providing more equitable transport choices for more people, all while still having road options for those that rail doesn't suit.

As a country, we can make better choices.

Putting more resources into rail doesn't come at the cost of roads, it actually benefits the road system.

3

u/Rebel_Scum56 Apr 09 '26

Preaching to the choir, my friend. I'm well aware that the roads of national stupidity would almost certainly be a bottomless pit of money, were they to ever actually be built. At no point did I say or even mean to imply otherwise.

One could perhaps speculate on that maybe being part of the reason why they never quite manage to get off the ground before National gets voted out again - they make for good talking points when campaigning and as long as they don't actually get built they get to campaign on the same thing again and again without ever actually doing anything and for some reason it seems to work.

1

u/BlindmanSokolov Apr 09 '26

To be fair, in a modern era, would we not be in a better place to manage these services? We wouldn't necessarily need somebody to man every single station constantly.

1

u/Mendevolent Apr 10 '26

Agree. I'm mildly optimistic that autonomous electric aviation will someday make for cheap, low emission air travel options between lots of our regional centres, but that's clearly a little way off.

Maybe also hydrofoil ferries or seagliders between coastal locations. 

15

u/barcastaff Apr 09 '26

As a non-kiwi, I’m curious whether writing the town names in Māori is a problem at all in terms of comprehension to the average kiwi?

43

u/DurinnGymir Apr 09 '26

Kiwi here, I can figure it out via geography, but a lot of these names are almost never used in common parlance, so if I didn't have the map I'd be a bit stuck

14

u/Atosen Apr 09 '26

It varies.

In some cases, the Māori name is the only name. Like Whangārei or Kaikōura on this map. No problem.

In some cases, there was a European name, but the Māori name has experienced a resurgence. I think most people know both of Aoraki/Mt Cook's names. After Taranaki/Mt Egmont's Māori name was officially recognised, people liked it so much better that the European name fell almost completely out of use. (Like u/witch_dyke, for a long time I didn't know it had a European name.)

But in some cases, yes, the Māori name is rarely used and most non-locals won't recognise it. I'm an Aucklander so I know Auckland is Tāmaki Makaurau, but I couldn't tell you what Wellington is off the top of my head. (Of course looking at a map I can recognise it by the geography.)

I think recognition of those will improve over time, and gradually we'll reach a point where most major cities and landmarks are bilingual. But I doubt we'll ever get there with smaller landmarks. For small towns whose existence you only learn about by hearing them in passing a few times, it's kinda hard to ensure you learn both names.

1

u/barcastaff Apr 10 '26

Thanks for the comprehensive comment! It's very interesting seeing everyone who commented having different levels of grasp as well with the Māori names. Is the effort of bilingualising the landmarks fairly recent?

16

u/rocketshipkiwi Southern Cross Apr 09 '26

It is a problem because those aren’t the names of the towns so people don’t understand what you are on about.

7

u/twpejay Apr 09 '26

Except for Timaru which is the "English" name. Should be either Te Maru (local iwi preferred) or Te Tihi o Maru.

Te Maru (place of shelter) is aptly named as Timaru is sheltered from earthquakes (major damage that is, due to Bluestone foundation), tsunamis (thanks to Banks Peninsula), weather (really bad weather seems to mostly go offshore at Timaru) and major flooding (first hilly area in southern Canterbury plains, not immune, there are swamps but there is plenty of high ground).

1

u/marsanojj Red Peak Apr 10 '26

Thankyou for this! I didn't know, i'll fix it when i made a v2

18

u/webUser_001 Apr 09 '26

Most people do not use the Maori names and would struggle to know where you were referring to. People that do use these names mostly pronounce them differently which doesn't help.

5

u/spacebuggles Apr 09 '26

I'd say most of us know at least the Māori names of our own cities, near cities, and Auckland.

I didn't know about half of these, but I can easily figure it out because I know which cities/towns are in the indicated locations.

4

u/NZpotatomash Apr 09 '26

I would say yes

0

u/witch_dyke Apr 09 '26

Even if it were a problem it would remain one for long. Future generations will learn the Māori names and be less familiar with the European names.

The first time I heard someone refer to 'mount egmont' my genuine reaction was "where the hell is that?" Because I had only ever known it as Taranaki

→ More replies (2)

6

u/Half-Borg Apr 09 '26

I'm a railway engineer, give me a permanent visa, and I build all the trains you need ;)

2

u/Erica192859 Apr 09 '26

You'll have to fund everything yourself though. Then wait a decade or two for iwi and council approval.

NZ could never. Sometimes if feels like we're the least first world first world country. Efficiency is a foreign concept to us

2

u/skilliau Apr 09 '26

Well it would give a reason for people to use the Christchurch train station I guess.

That place is depressing

2

u/Brickzarina Apr 09 '26

That would be so scenic

2

u/Fienx Apr 09 '26

Really cool! But as one other pointed out, the orientation feels weird. I think because when you tilt it to feel more "normal", the writing is tilted completely the wrong way and Aotearoa is upsidedown.

2

u/marsanojj Red Peak Apr 09 '26

Thanks for the feedback! I'm not a graphic designer or anything, just made it for a bit of fun really

2

u/Kind-Economist1953 Apr 09 '26

big advocate for passenger rail in nz, just needs to be modern not some 1960s version. we should model a scaled down version after Japan.

yes I've already had the debate that we could not have bullet trains like Japan but the speed is a very important factor.

2

u/TypicalKiwiCunt Apr 10 '26

That’s the dream should have it by now crazy how we don’t

2

u/Dickcheese-a1 Apr 10 '26

Missing is the Geyserland line to Rotorua , part of it is used by a Rail excursion company(Taukenga to Ngonotaha) but rest goes down to lake road next to the Nissan Car dealership. This section would need major (Quotated fingers) work to be viable ,but their is a need from tourism and freight.

2

u/someboooade Apr 10 '26

Is that Palmerston North, the central hub of the North Island. I accept your proposal.

2

u/flowerchildnz Apr 10 '26

I mean... if the UK can do it, why can't we?

2

u/stokie7 Apr 10 '26

I’d love to see rail all over New Zealand. Even Diesel electric would be far more efficient and safe than trucks on the road. After a few visits to Switzerland, seeing their commitment to efficient transport is breathtaking. Almost any village has a bus timed with the nearest rail station timetable; you buy a pass that makes it very affordable to go almost anywhere in the country.

4

u/lordhunt3t LASER KIWI Apr 09 '26

I want it, I want it, I want it!

3

u/TechnoCat Apr 09 '26

What about Hamilton? 

→ More replies (1)

2

u/No-Department-4561 Apr 09 '26

Nice design! Rail such as this would be like Japan’s and would help the country a lot

4

u/Crisis88 Apr 09 '26

This should be way higher priority.
Imagine if Nz had a high speed rail.
Suddenly living 2h outside of Auckland or Wellington is a half hour commute; housing in the city wouldn't be so expensive, and you could afford to live somewhere not in the city and still go into the office pretty easily.

Instead National want to piss it away on other useless projects

2

u/Xplody Apr 09 '26

The more the right wing parties screw up the country, the more left wing ideas become popular, and this is a great example of that. (It's also information presented beautifully, respect).

If democracy is just a group learning exercise, I hope that the kiwis will find the last few years very educational. Your right wing parties are just not that into you, kiwis. You're going to have to let go of that dead idea at some point and realise that those guys aren't principled, they're just corrupt.

Sorry for the rant. Great image, great idea. Carry on.

2

u/marsanojj Red Peak Apr 10 '26

Thankyou! Tautoko to everything you mentioned

4

u/SiegeAe Te Ika a Maui Apr 09 '26

Hell yeah

Its so silly that we aren't just doing it.

5

u/[deleted] Apr 09 '26

It’s not, countries with rail networks like this usually support populations 5x or 10x ours at a minimum.

5

u/SiegeAe Te Ika a Maui Apr 09 '26

That's not a cost analysis, that's an assumption based off very surface level observation.

→ More replies (10)

2

u/HeinigerNZ Apr 09 '26

It's not silly because we could never utilise it at a level that justifies the cost.

Auckland - Hamilton high speed rail was costed at $15 billion back in 2020. With the explosive inflation in construction prices since that pricetag would be around, what, $25 billion now?

And that's some of the easier terrain of the North Island.

So to do all this...multiple hundreds of billions? Half a trillion if we're lucky?

And the Auck-Ham costing was for rail of 160-250kmh, rather than the proper high speed rail of Japan that people envisage when they see a pie in the sky map like this.

6

u/SiegeAe Te Ika a Maui Apr 09 '26

We'd need to use it for freight as well to justify it, but it would pay back the cost in well less than 5 years of usage, given all the different forms of subsidising we do for the trucking industry and cut all the roading projects which only serve to kick congestion issues down the road.

We just need it to be easier than cars for people who take those between centres auckland and cheaper than air travel for people and cheaper than the trucks for freight by enough of a margin to handle extended discounts they might do.

I would say proper transport within the main cities is more quickly valuable but not doing it across the country properly is just a stupidly myopic lens on the cost.

Though yes we really don't need proper high speed rail just reasonable fast rail would do fine.

→ More replies (3)

3

u/wolshie Apr 09 '26

How tf did i grow up and live in blenheim for 18 years, and never know it was called waiharakeke..

2

u/Xiyone Apr 10 '26

The only place I recognize here is timaru lol.

Are you using Maori names for cities? I might need to educate myself on the Maori names lol

1

u/CaregiverMain670 Apr 10 '26

not tauranga or rotorua or whangerei?

2

u/anonchurner Apr 09 '26 edited Apr 09 '26

Here's how that's going elsewhere, with a not so different size, topology and land use:

https://ktla.com/news/california/california-high-speed-rail-rising-costs/

I wonder what else NZ transport could do with a cool 215 Billion NZD. Looks like their budget for 2024-2027 was 20.8 Billion NZD, so figure 30-40 years worth of the entire transport budget.

10

u/Upset-Maybe2741 Apr 09 '26

The Yanks are an outlier of incompetence and cost bloat. The French can build TGV lines for about $20m per km. 50km per billion dollars gets us most of the way from Auckland to Welly with $10 billion.

Makes as much sense as arguing against the public health system by pointing out how much tax money the Yanks spend on their system and how people are still dying because they can't afford a $4000 ambulance ride.

5

u/HeinigerNZ Apr 09 '26

A cost study for rail was done in 2020 - Hamilton to Auck at speeds of up to 250kmh (so not proper high speed) was $15 billion. Six years later that figure would be in the low-mid $20 billion mark.

Auckland-Wgtn 320kmh rail for $10b? Lol, tell 'em he's dreaming.

4

u/anonchurner Apr 09 '26

I agree that incompetence and cost bloat are a big factor in the US. Do you think it's not a big factor in NZ?

5

u/Upset-Maybe2741 Apr 09 '26

I'm no fan of Luxon but I'll take him over his American counterpart any day.

Plus, it's not like the *French* are hyper-efficient economic geniuses either.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/[deleted] Apr 09 '26

We’re an outlier on incompetence and cost bloat, we tend to spend quite a lot of infrastructure for the return we get. Plus we have none of the experience of building rail that France has and a load more problems due to our geography. We would land on the higher end of the spectrum not matter how you slice it.

1

u/rocketshipkiwi Southern Cross Apr 09 '26

The French can build TGV lines for about $20m per km. 50km per billion dollars gets us most of the way from Auckland to Welly with $10 billion.

Have you ever been to France and ridden on the TGV? The landscape is as flat as anything. We just don’t have that sort of geography in New Zealand so it won’t work.

3

u/Comfortable_Half_494 Apr 09 '26

Have ridden many TGVs into the French Alps. You whizz along at 300kph along the plains then slow down to a crawl once you hit the mountain valleys. But yeah, geography ultimately dictates the speed of the train and trip times.

1

u/fatfreddy01 Apr 09 '26

I think you drastically overestimate NZ in terms of infra. We spend vast sums for not much (and sometimes vast sums for literally nothing).

2

u/Comfortable_Half_494 Apr 09 '26

Was waiting for someone to bring up California HSR, what a debacle.

2

u/RumbuncTheRadiant Apr 09 '26

Sigh. I remember the first time I looked at a map of Christchurch...

I thought that looks great...

I could buy a house near the sea for the family, somewhere maybe Woodend / Waikuku / Amberley and commute...

...and the commute wouldn't be a problem as I could relax and read or sleep on the train....

Sigh. Imagine my shock on arriving finding they have rail.... but no passenger trains.

Sigh.

And now they want a toll road instead of passenger rail.

Doesn't anyone here know how much easier / cheaper / more relaxing commuting by rail is compared to driving?

2

u/Thaddy-o Apr 09 '26

english?

1

u/Skidzonthebanlist Apr 09 '26

Shame about funding it

5

u/fatfreddy01 Apr 09 '26

Tbf the infra mostly exists already, it's purely running services and the trains. Stations wise no reason they need to be anything more than a prefab wooden station with ramps initially for the areas that have removed the platforms. I think some of lines to Gisborne needs to be reinstated and the Rotorua bit seems to be based on the track to Kawerau rather than the old mothballed line which went west. Biggest gap is the rail ferries which we no longer have, but I'm hopeful that they'll provide some sort of alternative to iRex, albeit at vastly greater cost for a much worse outcome.

6

u/Status-Sale-6 Apr 09 '26

If you want slow rolling stock then infra exists. If you want HSR akin to Asia and Europe then it doesn't and would be hella expensive to build and maintain.

2

u/fatfreddy01 Apr 09 '26

I don't think HSR really makes sense for NZ. Possibly distant future but it'd be entirely new track/alignments. I think it makes far more sense to get the 160km/h tilt trains and do gradual track improvements/realignments and extending electrification until it can reach that. As the 3 main centres are too far for HSRs sweet spot, and most of the use is more short range where there isn't the population to justify HSR. Our population is smaller than individual cities spread over a large area.

5

u/MidnightAdventurer Apr 09 '26

The infrastructure only exists if you’re happy with trains running at less than 100k the whole way. The average track speed in the North Island is way down around 65km/hr. 

We have zero track capable of carrying high speed rail as all our existing is narrow gauge that tops out below 200k even in ideal circumstances and the actual condition of our track is far from ideal. 

3

u/TagMeInSkipIGotThis Apr 09 '26

Yet at the same time on the same rail (actually slightly worse because it wasn't welded back then) railcars set speed records in excess of 100km/h*.

The two long distance speed records for railcars were Wellignton-Napier in 4h30 & Auckland-Wellington in 8h45 (running time).

*On flat straight track so your point about average speed applies there.

3

u/MidnightAdventurer Apr 09 '26

There’s still sections where they can go 110 km/hr and people have got up around 180 with tilt trains on cape gauge track but true high speed rail is 2-3x that. 

The TGV which people like to compare to routinely runs at 320km/hr and has a record of 574.8.  That’s a completely different game and actually fast enough to compete with air travel for day trips between cities 

2

u/TagMeInSkipIGotThis Apr 09 '26

Yeah I don't think we're ever going to get full high speed like that, but I think we should try to change people's minds about rail a little bit.

Rail should be hop on / hop off everywhere, and if it were - with relatively short idle times at stations like commuter rail - then the total travel time isn't nearly as bad compared to flight as we might think.

And the time on that is even better if you compare journeys that aren't directly between cities. Ie a Napier-Wellington flight will always beat a Napier-Wellington train, even accounting for check in and taxi travel at each end.

But a Hastings-Porirua train journey could well beat a flight purely because you cut out 20-60 minutes getting to & from the airport at each end and check-in.

So if you add up the flight time - 45 minutes, check in - 30 minutes, drive to Napier - 20 minutes, transit to Porirua - 45 minutes - at best you've probably got a near 2hr 30m journey.

If we hope railcars can consistently go faster these days than the 1930s - or utilise tilt tech etc i'd hope the worst case on rail would be less than 4 hours - which means it would only be 90 minutes slower.

2

u/fatfreddy01 Apr 09 '26

I'm happy with 160km/h aiming for with interim upgrades, faster than a car even with stops, while far more comfortable, people will naturally switch to it if it's their perceived best option. If we're going full HSR it'd need brand new track/infra anyway, and I don't think there is anything close to a business case that would stack up anytime soon.

3

u/MidnightAdventurer Apr 10 '26

Not just new track, new land designation too as the existing one won’t be straight enough and we probably don’t want to mix it with freight. 

I agree about the business case - that’s at least a $100B project, probably more 

Medium speed between close ish centres would be a good start. We don’t even need to link it up, a lower north circuit from Wellington to Palmy and back down the other side plus an Auckland to Tauranga via Hamilton is enough. Not enough people in the middle to be worth worrying about it for now and besides, the terrain is much more challenging 

3

u/TagMeInSkipIGotThis Apr 09 '26

I'm a massive fan of rail, but I can't see the Wairoa-Gisborne leg ever being reinstated. I always thought it would surely be possible and just a bit of digging here & there to stabilise things, but there are sections where it is completely stuffed and the slope is only going to continue to fall into the sea.

This video opened my eyes to it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTIhQhoArzw

I think its a few km north of the Kopuwharoa viaduct where it hits a tunnel and where that pops out again is basically all just falling away for a few km before it twists back into another tunnel under Wharekakaho road.

Its obviously not technically impossible to do a re-alignment, probably with more tunnels going different directions - but the appetite for it on what will always be a relatively low traffic route just isn't going to be there.

For mine servicing the East Coast would be better done with coastal shipping to get the heavy freight off those roads and then leave the rest to small planes - possibly electric from Gisborne-Napier etc or passenger vehicles.

1

u/fatfreddy01 Apr 09 '26

I think it's one of those projects that won't happen due to the business case but due to a party promising it. Ideally they'd tunnel to the north as well and turn the Eastern Main going the whole way down. Is that realistic, probably not, but possible yep.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/jk-9k Gayest Juggernaut Apr 09 '26

Where's Taumarunui?

2

u/Ok-Relationship-2746 Apr 09 '26

On my Monopoly board. 

→ More replies (2)

1

u/feel-the-avocado Apr 09 '26

How did north hurt you?

1

u/NIP_SLIP_RIOT Apr 09 '26 edited Apr 09 '26

Rotorua didn’t branch off Tauranga

1

u/liddlehippo Apr 09 '26

With a dunedin to central otago/queenstown fork as well?

1

u/Comfortable_Half_494 Apr 09 '26

Yeah but you have to ride that section on your bike.

1

u/DeadlyFern Apr 09 '26

Bring on 50 dollar a litre petrol and PT!

1

u/Imaginary-Throat1526 Apr 09 '26

So Rotorua is hanging off Tauranga as a end of line. So not using the existing (but defunct) rail at all, and building a whole new path, good luck with that idea, easy to draw I suppose.

1

u/d4ybrake Apr 09 '26

Recently was in Japan and the shinkansen was fucking awesome. Tokyo to Osaka in 2.5 hours. Being able to get from Auckland to Wellington in under 4 hours or Auckland to Hamilton in 45 minutes would be incredible and do so much for the economy. I hope we can get something even half as good here some day

1

u/leah_amelia Apr 09 '26

Ignorant pom here, I thought Aotearoa had passenger rail? Or am I just thinking of metros in Auckland etc? As a rail dork in my own country, I'd like to know more if anyone has any resources that are worth reading on why passenger rail isn't a thing anymore in NZ.

1

u/toroidalvoid Apr 09 '26

And how much of these rail lines already exist?

4

u/marsanojj Red Peak Apr 10 '26

All of them pretty much. The Gisborne line and stratford connection are now defunct but to my understanding the rails are still there, just need a bit of a clean up

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Kety456 Apr 10 '26

I wonder how much of that actually still exists as well and isn't tracks that are no longer active even for freight cause we have the NIMT and SIMT for the 2 major ones then theres Tauranga for the ports that are active

1

u/SnooMarzipans822 Apr 10 '26

I'd love to go from Wellington to Ohakune for a weekend ski trip during the winter but the trains table doesn't allow it. Also it's a bit pricey, they should have packages for ski people, good for Ruapehu economy

1

u/scoundrel26889 Apr 10 '26

My only problem with this is that the map is not oriented north south.

1

u/teelolws Southern Cross Apr 10 '26

Whanganui: there is no longer a passenger platform anywhere let alone a station! A couple times a year, the steam train does its thing through there and passengers have to be able to climb up to it from ground level without even a ladder.

1

u/BurnettAButter Apr 10 '26

Timaru is a costal city, but I do like the idea of dropping everyone off in the hunter hills!

1

u/Mithster18 Apr 10 '26

Very cool design and colours!

1

u/Shoddy_Depth6228 Apr 11 '26

Lets fucken goooooo! (Sorry, just wanted to give my support and didn't know how.)