It's been the dream of train enthusiasts for decades.
But a Melbourne-based think tank has crushed the idea of building a high-speed train in Australia, saying it would be too costly for a small population and would not have the promised environmental benefits.
In an analysis by the Grattan Institute, it also questions the Morrison government's more modest upgrades to existing services including from Newcastle to Sydney at a time when the full fallout from COVID-19 pandemic is not yet known and what people's future travel and work plans will look like.
Federal Labor has a plan for a bullet train linking Melbourne, Canberra, Newcastle, Sydney and Brisbane.
Data in the report shows Newcastle is second only to Canberra in the longest rail journey to the nearest state capital, a status unlikely to change if proposed two-hour journeys through renovation of the existing rail infrastructure was to become a reality.
A detailed study into speeding up existing train services, as opposed to a bullet train, won government support earlier this month in what the Hunter Business Chamber dubbed a "stepping stone".
The Grattan Institute report recommends upgrades like a faster link between the Hunter and Sydney be subject to rigorous cost-benefit analysis and abandoning the the bullet train concept altogether.
It argues that strong demand in both directions and clustered population, like those in Europe and Asia, are necessary to justify high-speed rail.
Co-author Marion Terrill said regions were unlikely to reap the benefits associated with the concept.
"Very few city residents would move to the regions; regional cities may actually lose out if their residents can get to the capital more quickly; and many regions have more pressing infrastructure needs than faster trains, including better schools, hospitals, and internet and mobile connections," she wrote.
The institute says while a bullet train may be a "captivating idea", it says Australia's population is small and spread over vast distances, and notes similar countries like the US and Canada don't have one either.
"Even at the best of times, it's a big ask for every taxpayer in the land to stump up $10,000 primarily for the benefit of business travellers between the east-coast capitals," it says.
Nor would a bullet train be the climate saver people believe.
"Yes, once it is up and running it would emit far less than today's planes," it says.
"But construction would take nearly 50 years and be enormously emissions intensive, hindering rather than helping efforts to reach net zero emissions by 2050."
The analysis found that while the government's proposal for rail renovations and upgrades to existing regional lines may make more sense, they are unlikely to fulfil the "overblown claims" that they would take pressure off crowded capital cities and boost struggling regions.
"When the French TGV sped up connections between Paris and Lyon, it was Paris that benefited most," the report says.
"Australia's regional towns have more pressing infrastructure needs than faster rail, including better internet and mobile connectivity and freight links."
While it is argued that with unemployment rising this is an ideal time to create jobs by building rail infrastructure, the institute says any money should be spent for the future the nation now faces rather than the one imagined before the crisis.
"When we simply don't know whether the population will be growing or what future travel and work patterns will be like, it's smart to keep our spending options open." it says.
"Every proposed rail renovation project in Australia should be reviewed in the light of the COVID crisis. The costs and benefit of each one should be rigorously assessed, and those that don't stack up should be abandoned.".
While you're with us, did you know the Newcastle Herald offers breaking news alerts, daily email newsletters and more? Keep up to date with all the local news - sign up here
IN THE NEWS: