Sydney to Canberra high speed train

 
  Junction box Chief Commissioner

Location: newy
Keep putting fresh engines in the current XPT or bring out a new version capable of 200km/h then spend up on curve rationalization and tunnel boring on the existing steam era corridor to lower trip times to be more competitive, a more economical outcome rather than a pie in the sky VFT.
We are not Korea and need to be realistic, as time marches on we cannot afford new corridors, squeeze better times out of the current system if we are to progress on our budget.

Sponsored advertisement

  arctic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Zurich
take care with the terms RTT, "cash flow positive" usually means taking into account only operating expenses and not the interest from construction, by this standard much of the HSR world is not struggling. Just to be clear before everyone jumps on me for being pro HSR (heaven forbid such a thing) I also know the expense of construction must be accounted for. Once built though "cash flow positive" means it can continue to operate without an operating subsidy.

cheers
I meant cash flow positive in that all operating costs are covered. Interest is covered only if money is borrowed, for example much of the Fed money spent on Interstate is funded, not borrowed.

The numbers I have seen on TGV seem to indicate similar level of funding arrangement as per Concord. The billions in technology development was basically gifted as is the track. The train services however are cash flow positive based on what must be low track fees.

The issue for an Australia HSR is I highly doubt it would be cash flow positive even if the whole thing was built by the feds and "gifted" to a 3rd party operator. Certainly not for the fares quoted in the last report which are lower than even the French pay. I suspect they are simply numbers through about to show its competitive with air travel in time and fares, both of which had minimal foundation and I suspect calculated using less technology than my old mobile phone.

regards
Shane
RTT_Rules
Well if you meant cash flow positive and all operating costs are covered then I challenge your statement "so expensive and world wide struggles to be cash flow positive" since most HSRs are cash positive in operational terms.

For the LGV, the track is not "gifted" to TGV (SNCF) they pay this past year 2.1bn Eur in access fees (rising to 3bn Eur in 2020) to the infrastructure owner. That 2.1bn is also included in the P&L of SNCF. That's enough to service a 60bn Eur debt, noting some of the earlier debt is most likely retired.

I also point out the next stage of the German HSR network will also have freight trains on it, so apparently you can have your cake and eat it to.

I don't discuss Australian HSR, a pointless exercise on this board.

cheers
  Jim K Train Controller

Location: Well west of the Great Divide in NSW but not as far as South Australia
Why put billions on the taxpayer when you just get a private company to build an airport and privately owned airlines to transport people.
But you would have no problem with a privately owned and run high speed rail if there was sufficient demand to make it an economical prospect with no pilots,cabin crew, ground crew,airport charges and no possible oil shocks.
eddyb
Of course I have no problem with private HSR. I do have a big problem spending $billions of tax payers money for a certain number of people who could fly there now.
  Jim K Train Controller

Location: Well west of the Great Divide in NSW but not as far as South Australia
Why put billions on the taxpayer when you just get a private company to build an airport and privately owned airlines to transport people.
But you would have no problem with a privately owned and run high speed rail if there was sufficient demand to make it an economical prospect with no pilots,cabin crew, ground crew,airport charges and no possible oil shocks.

Jim,
What I proposed was an overall upgrade of existing track supporting existing and expanded services including all freight to the far west and south of Sydney, commuter rail and regional rail to places other than Canberra.
RTT_Rules
It is a shame the Government (Feds) are not thinking that way...
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
This is true for services starting from the CBD but not so true for a service that starts from Blacktown and uses they ylink to head south.
simstrain
Since when is Blacktown the centre of the Sydney universe?
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

This is true for services starting from the CBD but not so true for a service that starts from Blacktown and uses they ylink to head south.
Since when is Blacktown the centre of the Sydney universe?
RTT_Rules

It isn't but it has an underutilised platform 5 to start a canberra service from. Parramatta isn't a station you can start a service from. Penrith, Blacktown and Liverpool are the only such stations in the west.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

This is true for services starting from the CBD but not so true for a service that starts from Blacktown and uses they ylink to head south.
Since when is Blacktown the centre of the Sydney universe?

It isn't but it has an underutilised platform 5 to start a canberra service from. Parramatta isn't a station you can start a service from. Penrith, Blacktown and Liverpool are the only such stations in the west.
simstrain

If they do "decentralise" (yuk yuk yuk) NSWTrainLink terminal facilities, presumably to build apartments on Eddie Avenue, my betting is on the "underutilised" platforms at Olympic Park.
  eddyb Chief Train Controller

simstrain

People want to build a fast train From Sydney CBD to Parramatta anyway.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Parramatta-to-city-in-11-minutes/2005/03/14/1110649131839.html

But they were thinking it could not be economically viable without government support and they wanted to terminate at Wynyard which Bob Carr thought was a dumb idea.

With newer cheaper TBM tunnels a SD fast train could easily be viable to an underground station below Central in my opinion.

So it would be a lot cheaper to just go a few kilometres more to join up with that and make a sub 90 minute trip overall that would pay for itself as it could compete with planes.
  NR58 Locomotive Fireman

A fast train in Sydney would even be nice, at least then we've got some HST's
  PDCL Chief Train Controller

I feel like far too many people fail to understand the difference between "commuters" in the Sydney Trains/jump in the car/on the bus/walk/ride to get to your place of employment every day sense, and "commuters" as meant by airlines and high speed rail. The first one typically happens twice everyday, the second would for a "regular commuter" occur maybe twice a week.

Horses for courses, just like you wouldn't get a Flight from Sydney Kingsford Smith to Western Sydney Airport, we also wouldn't catch a High Speed Train from Sydney CBD to Parramatta CBD. The main reason is the plain old Newtonian mechanics, you wanna get something going fast, that takes a lot of energy, you wanna slow it down, you need to get rid of a lot of energy. While we have relatively cheap ways of doing that quickly, these typically involve what might be referred to as a gun to accelerate and a concrete wall to slow down. Our fragile human bodies make this impractical as a form of transport. Building something that is survivable for the human body, with any present functioning technology, costs a lot more to build and to run and so a high speed run over short distances are not practical.

If you want to spruik a HSR tunnel between Parramatta and the CBD, then the more sensible path to progress down is to look at an alternative alignment around Sydney where Melbourne and Brisbane trains go to the CBD via Parramatta first. You would only need one really big F-off tunnel out of the city then, Parramatta is probably a better combined "Outer suburban" catchment point than the combination of Hornsby and Glenfield on each separate line, you could also have connections through the new Western Syd Airport at BC including say an airport express service. In doing that though you have longer run out of Sydney and the run north might be more expensive to build so all in all it may not be worth it.

If you want to keep banging on about a HSR service between the City and Parramatta, stop, go back to your shed and come up with a working prototype for something that would actually be viable, then make your millions (Edit: correction - Billions or if you're really good even Trillions). I think Hyperloop is looking at a smaller in-city system, to compliment their proposed inter-city system, so you'll need to be quick and will likely have stiff competition. Good Luck!
  eddyb Chief Train Controller

PDCL
I agree with you completely Canberra to the CBD with Parramatta being the only stop.

The link I put up was no good in my opinion but just to show people were interested.

It could be done for $3b CBD to Parramatta and with 20,000 passengers from there daily it would be viable.

How hard would it be to go that bit further to make it cheaper while still connecting to the CBD
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
On Parramatta, adding it would certainly be consistent with current NSW government policy that is trying to make it a second cbd for Sydney...
  PDCL Chief Train Controller

PDCL
I agree with you completely Canberra to the CBD with Parramatta being the only stop.

The link I put up was no good in my opinion but just to show people were interested.

It could be done for $3b CBD to Parramatta and with 20,000 passengers from there daily it would be viable.

How hard would it be to go that bit further to make it cheaper while still connecting to the CBD
eddyb

I don't think we do, unless I'm massively misreading what you've posted so far.

To be clear, the proposal I suggested above would have 0 passengers travelling between the CBD and Parramatta, even on the airport express line (barring the odd exception where someone forgot a bag or something) and especially not on any of the actual HSR services.
Anyone getting on at the CBD would be a through passenger to either the airport or an intercity location served by the HSR network, none would be people using it as a quick way between the City and Parra.

Also, I was just making a suggestion based on a two second brainstorm of how you could justify a dedicated intercity tunnel between the City and Parramatta, not endorsing it as a solution necessarily (although for various reasons and as part of other schemes I don't mind the look of it, but that's a whole other discussion).
  donttellmywife Chief Commissioner

Location: Antofagasta
If you want to spruik a HSR tunnel between Parramatta and the CBD, then the more sensible path to progress down is to look at an alternative alignment around Sydney where Melbourne and Brisbane trains go to the CBD via Parramatta first. You would only need one really big F-off tunnel out of the city then, Parramatta is probably a better combined "Outer suburban" catchment point than the combination of Hornsby and Glenfield on each separate line, you could also have connections through the new Western Syd Airport at BC including say an airport express service. In doing that though you have longer run out of Sydney and the run north might be more expensive to build so all in all it may not be worth it.
PDCL
Section 7.3.7 of Appendix 3A of the HSR phase two study deals with something similar, though it considers Olympic Park as the secondary station to collect traffic from the west, rather than Parramatta.  (For trains from the north or south that are destined for the Sydney CBD, Parramatta is a considerable detour, particularly when you consider the minimum curvature tolerated for high speed operation, and getting a HSR corridor from the Sydney periphery to Parramatta there would still involve extensive tunnelling, especially from the north.)

The additional capital cost of an additional Olympic Park station was found to exceed any additional benefits, whether considering the station in addition to the north and south periphery stations, or as a replacement for the north and south periphery stations.

Given the geography, the only way I could see HSR visiting Parramatta is if it were on a north-south through line that completely bypassed the Sydney CBD.  Given the enormous prominence of the Sydney CBD in the potential passenger demand for an east coast HSR system (or isolated Canberra-Sydney system) I think such a north-south bypass line would not even be considered until long after the rest of the east coast HSR had been constructed.

Note that the phase two HSR study considered locating the primary Sydney station at Parramatta and determined that option reduced user benefits by $45 billion dollars.

If there was some sort of local fast train running between Parramatta and the Sydney CBD, then I think all arguments for HSR going anywhere near Parramatta (or having a station near Olympic Park) evaporate.  Intending passengers could just catch that fast train into Central and then change to the HSR services.

Eddy's understanding of what the word "viable" means is rather different from mine.  I think we also have quite different views about basic physics and geometry.
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
Now this is interesting - SQ to start SIN-CBR-WEL-CBR-SIN flights.  IF the rumours are true, it will be interesting to see how many seats on QF and VA flights are used for connecting pax (i.e. pax travelling CBR SYD elsewhere) and how significant the reduction in passengers on the route and number of flights are.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/aviation/singapore-airlines-to-operate-flights-international-flights-from-canberra-report-20160111-gm3rm1.html
  thadocta Chief Commissioner

Location: Katoomba
Now this is interesting - SQ to start SIN-CBR-WEL-CBR-SIN flights.  IF the rumours are true, it will be interesting to see how many seats on QF and VA flights are used for connecting pax (i.e. pax travelling CBR SYD elsewhere) and how significant the reduction in passengers on the route and number of flights are.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/aviation/singapore-airlines-to-operate-flights-international-flights-from-canberra-report-20160111-gm3rm1.html
james.au
Good point - SYD is a PITA for DOM-INT (and vv) transfers, MEL on the other hand is a breeze. Could easily see pax from the Riverina/South Coast choosing to drive to CBR, then using SQ to fly to SIN and then onwards on any number of carriers. Might see what they are saying about this in the SQ forum on FlyerTalk

Dave
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Syd - Sing had 113,000 pa in 2013. Sing Air is not about to drop the Sydney - Singapore route (I'm guessing, unlike Wantas) which is also ironically the busiest corridor from Sydney International.

Also of interest only 23,000 people flew Syd to Wellington, so assume Sing Air has looked at the users from Sydney and said that many come from Canberra assume many diplomats to Asia or alt access to EU.

On another note, you don't spend billions of dollars on HSR and then use a god foresaken station in far western Sydney because it has a spare platform. Why not use Rosehill, its closer! When spending 10's billions of dollars the last thing you worry about is the actual terminating platform construction, its the where that matters.

And on HSR Paramatta to Sydney, Wwe have been down this path before. A train simply cannot exceed acceleration of braking of 1ms-2 without injuring people. The current sparks could accelerate faster and but are limited by their design and need to not kill people. Acknowledging this, HSR purely for Paramatta to Sydney is a waste of money, A V-set allowed to run to 130km/hr at 1ms-2 acceleration and hold 130 to braking just prior to Central at 1ms-2 is only a few minutes off the mark compared to a billion dollar HSR with a top end speed of 350km/hr which they would not even reach before hitting the brakes.

No HSR in the history of the universe has ever made money and normal modern commuter rail is not far behind.
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
Syd - Sing had 113,000 pa in 2013. Sing Air is not about to drop the Sydney - Singapore route (I'm guessing, unlike Wantas) which is also ironically the busiest corridor from Sydney International.
RTT_Rules
I wasn't thinking SYD-SIN would be impacted by reductions in flights by SQ, but that SYD-CBR would be by QF/VA.  (As an aside, QF is not about to drop SYD-SIN either).
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

simstrain

People want to build a fast train From Sydney CBD to Parramatta anyway.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Parramatta-to-city-in-11-minutes/2005/03/14/1110649131839.html

But they were thinking it could not be economically viable without government support and they wanted to terminate at Wynyard which Bob Carr thought was a dumb idea.

With newer cheaper TBM tunnels a SD fast train could easily be viable to an underground station below Central in my opinion.

So it would be a lot cheaper to just go a few kilometres more to join up with that and make a sub 90 minute trip overall that would pay for itself as it could compete with planes.
eddyb
You already have a fast train on the western line. Living at Liverpool, I wish we had a 26 minute service into the Sydney CBD that Parramatta has. Adding an extra track pair between Strathfield and Granville would only make it faster. Lets also look at the 49 minute service that Penrith also gets even though it is twice as far from Central as Liverpool is who currently has a 55-60 minute service.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Syd - Sing had 113,000 pa in 2013. Sing Air is not about to drop the Sydney - Singapore route (I'm guessing, unlike Wantas) which is also ironically the busiest corridor from Sydney International.

Also of interest only 23,000 people flew Syd to Wellington, so assume Sing Air has looked at the users from Sydney and said that many come from Canberra assume many diplomats to Asia or alt access to EU.

On another note, you don't spend billions of dollars on HSR and then use a god foresaken station in far western Sydney because it has a spare platform. Why not use Rosehill, its closer! When spending 10's billions of dollars the last thing you worry about is the actual terminating platform construction, its the where that matters.

And on HSR Paramatta to Sydney, Wwe have been down this path before. A train simply cannot exceed acceleration of braking of 1ms-2 without injuring people. The current sparks could accelerate faster and but are limited by their design and need to not kill people. Acknowledging this, HSR purely for Paramatta to Sydney is a waste of money, A V-set allowed to run to 130km/hr at 1ms-2 acceleration and hold 130 to braking just prior to Central at 1ms-2 is only a few minutes off the mark compared to a billion dollar HSR with a top end speed of 350km/hr which they would not even reach before hitting the brakes.

No HSR in the history of the universe has ever made money and normal modern commuter rail is not far behind.
RTT_Rules
I'm not talking about building a hsr. I'm talking about building a new main south alignment between macarthur and goulburn and using the existing Sydney system for passengers. Rosehill doesn't connect to the main south and once the light rail is built it may end up being a race day only proposition. I'm not suggesting to replace any current Canberra service from Central but to provide a service to/from western Sydney using existing infrastructure available. This is possible out of Blacktown and Liverpool. A HSR is not financially viable between Parramatta and Sydney, especially when you already have a decently fast service between the 2 currently. How much more faster then 24-30 minutes do you need it to be?
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

PDCL
I agree with you completely Canberra to the CBD with Parramatta being the only stop.

The link I put up was no good in my opinion but just to show people were interested.

It could be done for $3b CBD to Parramatta and with 20,000 passengers from there daily it would be viable.

How hard would it be to go that bit further to make it cheaper while still connecting to the CBD
eddyb
Except it isn't good value because it would just be duplicating what is already there. Why do heck do you need to waste money on a parramatta fast rail when it already has a fast rail service. Why do you continue to advocate for something that is already there?
  fernhill Chief Train Controller

That's what they are doing with the Bankstown line just duplicating what's there and making everyone stand
  viaprojects Train Controller

That's what they are doing with the Bankstown line just duplicating what's there and making everyone stand
fernhill
no.. it's being converted just like the Epping to Chatswood section of rail line
  PDCL Chief Train Controller

PDCL
I agree with you completely Canberra to the CBD with Parramatta being the only stop.

The link I put up was no good in my opinion but just to show people were interested.

It could be done for $3b CBD to Parramatta and with 20,000 passengers from there daily it would be viable.

How hard would it be to go that bit further to make it cheaper while still connecting to the CBD
Except it isn't good value because it would just be duplicating what is already there. Why do heck do you need to waste money on a parramatta fast rail when it already has a fast rail service. Why do you continue to advocate for something that is already there?
simstrain
Yeah, pretty well what I was getting at.

@DTMW: I thought there was some analysis of this in the P2 report, but it's been a couple of years since I read it and I was too lazy to look up where again, so thanks. From memory it caused a significant enough delay getting out of Sydney to have a major impact on the end to end demand modelling, hence the $45billion in lost user benefits.

I always had a bit of a problem with their demand model in that it seemed to significantly under price fares relative to the airline industry and, from international examples, seemed to substantially underestimate the mode shift with comparable transit times...but that is a very different discussion.

Back to the current discussion though, you might find that taking a single tunnel out west is able to achieve substantial savings if it's developed as part of the M9 corridor and a plan for a decent MSR network operating essentially over the current intercity network area. But that takes in a huge number of other projects, such as: finishing Maldon to Dombarton, straightening the main south to at least Goulburn, the Newcastle freight bypass, just to name a few. There would be a whole host of other small to large projects (mostly curve easing and tunnel replacements) all over the place you'd need to work on to really make it worth while though.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
That's what they are doing with the Bankstown line just duplicating what's there and making everyone stand
fernhill
Maybe look up the current capacity and loadings then look up the proposed capacity under the Metro plan.

As a starter, according to the Sydney trains survey, trains currently on Bankstown run at 150% of capacity.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.