I'll just leave this here... http://www.dtpli.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/242558/Derailment-of-Tourist-and-Heritage-Train-Victorian-Goldfields-Railway-Near-Maldon-4-March-2012.PDF

12-Monthly track inspection
The most recent VGR consultant’s inspection of track and associated infrastructure was conducted concurrently with the 6-monthly inspection.

The report deemed the track to be suitable for the current operation of passenger services. For the Maldon-to-Muckleford section, the report noted:

The generally poor condition of sleepers and the need for a major sleeper renewal
program within two years.

That the alignment of the track and the sleeper condition were reasonable with no
apparent deterioration in the last 12 months.
That the number of broken sleepers was minimal but that broken sleepers should
be replaced as necessary.
The report did not identify a specific requirement for the replacement of sleepers in the
vicinity of the derailment.

---------------------------------

This could happen on any railway.  This report does suggest any track issues were recorded and there was a plan to have any issues re mediated.  Looks like the rainfall and other environmental s were input to the incident.

The report does not suggest a necessary maintenance cycle was not in place at the time.  There is no suggestion the organisation was not maintaining the track to passenger standard.

The Muckleford to Maldon section is the oldest on the railway.

I'll just leave this here... http://www.dtpli.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/242558/Derailment-of-Tourist-and-Heritage-Train-Victorian-Goldfields-Railway-Near-Maldon-4-March-2012.PDF

12-Monthly track inspection
The most recent VGR consultant’s inspection of track and associated infrastructure was conducted concurrently with the 6-monthly inspection.

The report deemed the track to be suitable for the current operation of passenger services. For the Maldon-to-Muckleford section, the report noted:

The generally poor condition of sleepers and the need for a major sleeper renewal
program within two years.

That the alignment of the track and the sleeper condition were reasonable with no
apparent deterioration in the last 12 months.
That the number of broken sleepers was minimal but that broken sleepers should
be replaced as necessary.
The report did not identify a specific requirement for the replacement of sleepers in the
vicinity of the derailment.

---------------------------------

This could happen on any railway.  This report does suggest any track issues were recorded and there was a plan to have any issues re mediated.  Looks like the rainfall and other environmental s were input to the incident.

The report does not suggest a necessary maintenance cycle was not in place at the time.  There is no suggestion the organisation was not maintaining the track to passenger standard.

The Muckleford to Maldon section is the oldest on the railway.

Page 7:

The investigation found that the track had not been adequately maintained and that the degraded condition of sleepers had compromised its structural integrity.

That would seem to support LD's post.

If Daylesford struggle to maintain 9kms of track and right of way I am wondering how Maldon seem to maintain 3 yards and a lot more track?

I never said the DSCR was struggling with 9.5km of track. What I have said is that the current section is a significant amount of work to maintain and is enough for the current volunteer numbers.

Doubling the length doubles what must be maintained while increasing journey times and ticket prices. This is not a good combination for sustainability.

Page 7:



That would seem to support LD's post.

The report states the consultant who is an external consultant found the track to be fit for passenger train running.  It is very easy to say it was not when their is a derailment.  The question is whether Maldon was operating without due diligence of the track condition.

Clearly Maldon had a report which supported running and a maintenance cycle which was already underway.

Poor sleepers and excessive rain may have caused the derailment according to another 3rd party.  The report does not state Maldon was not diligent and not undertaking requisite track maintenance.

A good discussion no less.

A good discussion no less.

And slightly out of place in a thread about Daylesford-Trentham.

Interesting thread... If there was some kind of major attraction at Trentham or if it was a small town with lots of buildings of historical significance (like Clunes) then it might be worth the extra nine kilometres but otherwise doubling the track length will do little to enhance the existing - seemingly popular - operation.

Does anyone know the track actually still in situ between Trentham and Bullarto or has it all been lifted from Woodend onwards?

Bullarto - Trentham track lifted

Land sold (probably ?)

Also interested in the Bullarto - Trentham  section in terms  - is it still possible or has the land been sold... ie  does the right of way even exist. No i am not adviocating the extension, I respect why it is not a option, just  interrested in the line itself.....

Regards,
David Head

Newsrail October 1986 (edited): "Central Highlands Tourist Railway.  Following extended negotiations between the CHTR and the Ministry of Transport, approval in principle has been given for a tourist railway operation between Daylesford and Bullarto. The CHTR had requested the section Daylesford to Trentham but the Ministry of Transport decided that this would be too long for a volunteer group to operate particularly as bridge repairs in the Trentham area require an estimated $1 million.
A group called the Trentham Agricultural and Railway Museum wishes to take over the Trentham station and hopes to run gangers' trolleys and horse trams between Kyneton Road and the Shire boundary at the West Coliban River."

Also interested in the Bullarto - Trentham  section in terms  - is it still possible or has the land been sold... ie  does the right of way even exist. No i am not adviocating the extension, I respect why it is not a option, just  interrested in the line itself.....

Regards,
David Head

They don't usually sell the Crown land an abandoned railway is sitting on unless there's a compelling reason (ie property development), but I'm unsure if the law of adverse possession applies in the case of railway land? A lot of abandoned railway land has been occupied by neighbouring farmers: For example, there have been numerous proposals to turn the Horsham - Hamilton via Balmoral line into a Rail Trail but the main stumbling block is that adjacent landholders have fenced off the right of way for their own use and have been fighting tooth and nail to avoid having to give the land back.

Adverse possession may not apply in the case of Crown land - someone with more knowledge than us might inform.

Personally I think they should build as many Rail Trails as possible throughout regional Victoria - they're a big hit with cyclists and horse-riders and they seem to draw tourists from everywhere.

Newsrail October 1986 (edited): "Central Highlands Tourist Railway.  Following extended negotiations between the CHTR and the Ministry of Transport, approval in principle has been given for a tourist railway operation between Daylesford and Bullarto. The CHTR had requested the section Daylesford to Trentham but the Ministry of Transport decided that this would be too long for a volunteer group to operate particularly as bridge repairs in the Trentham area require an estimated $1 million.
A group called the Trentham Agricultural and Railway Museum wishes to take over the Trentham station and hopes to run gangers' trolleys and horse trams between Kyneton Road and the Shire boundary at the West Coliban River."

The section Bullarto-Trentham is probably still Crown land but almost certainly has been lifted.

I don't think they got around to running ganger's trolleys but Trentham station has been turned into a local tourist information centre, much like those former stations on the Mansfield line.

The track has been lifted over the majority of the section Bullarto - Trentham, although some is still is in place for a short distance at the Trentham end. Private landowners have made use of the ROW is a few places, most notably at Lyonville, where the station is occupied and on the other side of the South Lyonville Road crossing, but the ROW is still owned by the Crown and could be resumed at any time.

The section from Trentham to Lyonville is now the Domino Rail Trail: https://www.railtrails.org.au/trail?view=trail&id=166

Thanks for that very informative post -

There's some pictures on the internet of Lyonville station in from the State Library collection around the turn of the century and again in 1990 looking in bad shape.  I can't find any references to current condition or use. It looked liked a substantial structure for such a small town.

Do you know anything about current uses of the corridor back towards Carlsruhe?

Google Maps is a good way to look at the line. The track has been lifted for the whole distance, with some rails across bitumen roads still in existence. For a good portion of the route the ROW is fenced off, but there are many examples of roads being cut across it by landowners. I suspect many may be leasing the ROW in their vicinity. It is pretty boring countrywide, so probably has little appeal as a Rail Trail.

The station at Lyonville has a home on the platform area, but if I recall correctly, is not the original station building, but the occupiers appear to have a taste for things to do with railways. The platform is clearly visible from the road.

You can't make out a lot of detail from Google Maps - there is certainly a dwelling and carriages there from the satellite image but they didn't bother taking the Street View car off the Daylesford-Trentham Road so you can't get closer than that. I did find a few more of the station apparently taken in the last ten years that appears to show the original station building (somewhat restored) and platform face together with a couple of items of vintage rolling stock, so that supports your theory about it being occupied by railway enthusiasts.

The line crosses the Loddon River just outside of Lyonville so this might be the bridge that Valvegear's 1986 NewsRail article was referring to - the one that would have required over a million dollars in repairs to get operational again.

Perhaps I should drive up there one weekend and have a look myself instead of relying solely on the internet !

If you have not been, it is certainly worth the trip. I have been up there a lot in the last 6 months. And I need to go back again soon, for various reasons, among them to photograph the remains of that bridge for my web site page on old bridges.

I think you mean the line crosses the Coliban River, just East of Lyonville, not the Loddon. The deck of the bridge is completely shot, you would not be wise to even walk on it.

The station at Lyonville has a home on the platform area, but if I recall correctly, is not the original station building, but the occupiers appear to have a taste for things to do with railways. The platform is clearly visible from the road.

The station building at Lyonville is still the original one. Its a similar design to Bullarto, Boort, Wycheproof, Pyramid Hill, etc....

The station building at Lyonville is still the original one. Its a similar design to Bullarto, Boort, Wycheproof, Pyramid Hill, etc....

OK, my mistake. My recollection was of something bigger, but then that applies to other things these days as well....

If you have not been, it is certainly worth the trip. I have been up there a lot in the last 6 months. And I need to go back again soon, for various reasons, among them to photograph the remains of that bridge for my web site page on old bridges.

I think you mean the line crosses the Coliban River, just East of Lyonville, not the Loddon. The deck of the bridge is completely shot, you would not be wise to even walk on it.

Yeah sorry I meant the Coliban, not the Loddon. There used to be a good website devoted to Australian trestles but I haven't been able to find it recently - is that your website or someone elses? There were some really good trestles around Daylesford that have completely disappeared on the east line towards Creswick, especially the one over Jubilee lake (though part of the structure still forms a walking trail bridge).

My favourite accessible (and safe) trestle is Nimon's bridge near Scarsdale on the former Skipton line; not particularly long but affords a great view down the Woady Yaloak valley.

I am guessing you are referring to the bridge over the Woady Yaloak River near the end of Galatea Road? That looks like one that warrants investigation.

My effort is a little different, I am not concentrating on purely trestle bridges, just things that are old. But I am trying to document any bridges that have been abandoned and still remain in some form. I already have a photo of one of the bridges on the Newlyn - Daylesford line that has now gone, near Wombat Station.


This is the site: http://www.hollywoodfoundry.com/Abandoned%20Photos.html

The station building at Lyonville is still the original one. Its a similar design to Bullarto, Boort, Wycheproof, Pyramid Hill, etc....

Two questions from me.

1. Is the railway easement still available between Trentham and Bullarto?
2. How many trestle bridges exist in this section?

As per Blacksmith's earlier post, the section Lyonville-Trentham is now a rail-trail. According to the website there's a detour around a trestle bridge over the Coliban near Lyonville and a brick-arch culvert under the trail about halfway. Presumably that trestle is not safe - someone (perhaps a local) may know if there are plans to restore/improve structures along the trail in the future.

It's only 4-5km of railway easement between Lyonville and the present terminus at Bullarto - it looks as though there is another crossing of the Coliban river on that stretch but I'm not 100% sure.

Couple of points
1) From  www.dtpli.vic.gov.au/property-and-land-titles/land-titles/dealing-with-titles/adverse-possession "Adverse possession is a legal principle that enables the occupier of a piece of land to obtain ownership if uninterrupted and exclusive possession of the land for at least 15 years can be proven. Adverse possession claims are complex to prepare and cannot be made against the Crown, council-owned land and land owned by other authorities or bodies."
2) All railway land from Carlsruhe to Daylesford remains available, but the majority of it is leased.


Rick

It's only 4-5km of railway easement between Lyonville and the present terminus at Bullarto - it looks as though there is another crossing of the Coliban river on that stretch but I'm not 100% sure.

Thanks Don.  Are you able to provide (or is someone else) a google maps or bing maps pin for the river and the trestle bridge(s) having trouble locating them on maps.

The station building at Lyonville is still the original one. Its a similar design to Bullarto, Boort, Wycheproof, Pyramid Hill, etc....

Do you think a 4-5km extension to Lyonville - a destination complete with a pub, small town, mineral springs and (presumably?) an intact, original station - be a better proposition for DSCR than Trentham?

X31: No, sorry, I don't have knowledge of the area any more than Google shows us - I have been there a few times but not for many years.