XPT versus Suburban trains in Brisbane

 
  Graham4405 Minister for Railways

Location: Dalby Qld
You also need to realise that NSW trainlink is a NSW run operation and not a QLD operation. If the NSW Government wants to reduce the stress on the XPT loco's to extend their life a bit then they will cull it back to Casino.

Someone needs to realise that passenger services exist to transport passengers. State borders should not be a consideration.

There are other things called buses and planes that do a similar job for a lot less money.
simstrain
Yes, but we are talking about a train here...

Sponsored advertisement

  petan Chief Commissioner

Location: Waiting to see a zebra using a zebra crossing!
Simstrain wrote; There are other things called buses and planes that do a similar job for a lot less money.


My reply; Lismore based New England Motor Company has been singing that song since at least 1927. Other coach companies now operate that route  http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/190190604

The airline portion of that same Lismore based mob have been singing that song for a similar time http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/194129916
  petan Chief Commissioner

Location: Waiting to see a zebra using a zebra crossing!
Money does make a difference when a state government is funding the service. If QLD or the feds want the service then start forking out some money and making it easier for the service to exist. The fact that NSW is in surplus shouldn't be used by other states as a reason why we should continue to do it. Especially when you consider how little GST NSW gets versus all the other states per capita.
simstrain
Simstrain, suggest you start doing your own indepth research on which governments already contribute substantial money for the interstate rail services, both passenger and freight. I mean more than just the rollingstock as that is only part of the total cost. The answer to that question is extremely complex and involves history going back many decades, not just the XPT era. Hint; many answers are online at Trove.
  james.au Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney, NSW
@petan, perhaps a few links might help our research start??
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Yes we are talking about a train. The XPT which is a passenger train service that is near the end of it's life and in need of lots of maintenance just to keep it running. This thread is about the XPT and not about freight and the train line.

I have done some research and I have found nothing about QLD paying towards the XPT. So as James has asked, maybe someone can point out an article which shows QLD funding the XPT aside from this discussion on google. The only other thing i found when searching for qld funding the xpt was articles on moving the border, extending the gold coast line and bus services.

I have found plenty of info on Victoria helping the funding of the XPT and we have all heard about Victoria owning an xpt set from persons on this forum. It makes sense that Victoria help fund the Melbourne XPT because there are 5 stops in Victoria.

QLD maybe funding SG rail in upgrades like the level crossing removal at acacia ridge but that doesn't count towards the XPT service. If they want to keep the XPT service going they need to build a dedicated SG into Roma street which could be used for HSR in the future if that project ever gets started.

Otherwise don't be surprised when the NSW Government cut the Brisbane XPT back to Casino.
  petan Chief Commissioner

Location: Waiting to see a zebra using a zebra crossing!
I notice this thread, based on how to provide customer friendly interstate rail passenger transportation, is fast becoming somewhat tribal (one state against another state) while failing to notice we are a single nation so it is about time we put aside destructive tribal factions of the past and provide solutions. Short sighted self-serving state tribal factions have generally only resulted in less railway transportation and instead more trucks and buses on the highways! As I noted in an earlier post, bus companies realised the state authorities were blinded by the state borders so the bus and trucking companies have been attempting to fill the vacuum since the 1920s. Instead of providing a reasonable rail service themselves, the state governments response was sometimes to use the law against the truck and bus companies. Google will give details.  

Many are aware I have done my own detailed research on the history and operation of rail transportation around the NSW QLD border region. My Railpage published research has provided extensive material on rail operations on several gauges, including general freight, passenger, sugar, quarry and timber. I have noted on Railpage how these rail operations assisted the local community develop their local areas, often at the substantial financial cost to the local communities.
  james.au Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney, NSW
I don't think it is getting partisan, I think the conversation is recognising that given this is a state subsidised service, all states that benefit should be pitching in to subsidise it.  If there are benefits to be obtained say by reducing congestion in Brisbane, perhaps Queensland should be funding this?  NSW has no benefit in doing so.  

Really, I would be interested to see NSW Trains through their Business Development arms, making the case to other states for such services, and doing the evaluation of congestion reduction, essential service provision etc.  It could become the dominant rail service provider on the east coast.  Id think there could be a significant opportunity to reduce cost and enhance service by doing this.  If the states could look past their own interest and be pragmatic about such a service, the benefits of scale may be made available.
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

Kyogle isn't important and if it was then why do the other 2 northern x's stop at Grafton and Casino and not continue on to Kyogle. Kyogle is only a town of 2500 people and the only reason it is a stop is because the train line runs through the town.

As intimated the coach services are sold out but unless there is a way to separate the SG from the NG then you can't get the XPT into Brisbane at the appropriate times any more. If the QLD government was truly interested in keeping the XPT going it would build the appropriate infrastructure to separate SG from NG. But it doesn't care and so it won't build the infrastructure and so expect the cut back to Casino.

You also need to realise that NSW trainlink is a NSW run operation and not a QLD operation. If the NSW Government wants to reduce the stress on the XPT loco's to extend their life a bit then they will cull it back to Casino.
simstrain
The only reason casino is a terminating location is because the murwillumbah branch closed.  The train that currently terminates there previously went all the way to murwillumbah.   Grafton is a terminating location for three reasons, historical due to train availability.   It has stabling facilities for the XPT, and its at a location in which can conveniently serve the mid north coast with good arrival times both on the coast and arrival in sydney.  

Trains also cannot terminate at kyogle due to the platform (it also only about 5 cars long) being on a single track section.  The loops are to the north and south of the station.  BTW kyogle actually gets very good patronage considering its size.  of the 6 times i've used the XPT, (5 of them were te overnighters) only once did it not stop at kyogle.  The day service had around 15 people during daylight savings time as well.

I still believe the best option is to rebuild the murwillumbah branch (not along the exact same route but in that general area) to a minimum 130km/h alignment and run it to Tweed heads and have it meet the QLD gold coast line.  Hopefully if the QLD govt have their heads in the right place they would gauge convert the GC line, mainly so it can run at 160km/h or possibly higher.  the narrow gauge is the only thing stopping that.
  Sulla1 Chief Commissioner

Kyogle isn't important and if it was then why do the other 2 northern x's stop at Grafton and Casino and not continue on to Kyogle. Kyogle is only a town of 2500 people and the only reason it is a stop is because the train line runs through the town.

As intimated the coach services are sold out but unless there is a way to separate the SG from the NG then you can't get the XPT into Brisbane at the appropriate times any more. If the QLD government was truly interested in keeping the XPT going it would build the appropriate infrastructure to separate SG from NG. But it doesn't care and so it won't build the infrastructure and so expect the cut back to Casino.

You also need to realise that NSW trainlink is a NSW run operation and not a QLD operation. If the NSW Government wants to reduce the stress on the XPT loco's to extend their life a bit then they will cull it back to Casino.
The only reason casino is a terminating location is because the murwillumbah branch closed.  The train that currently terminates there previously went all the way to murwillumbah.   Grafton is a terminating location for three reasons, historical due to train availability.   It has stabling facilities for the XPT, and its at a location in which can conveniently serve the mid north coast with good arrival times both on the coast and arrival in sydney.  

Trains also cannot terminate at kyogle due to the platform (it also only about 5 cars long) being on a single track section.  The loops are to the north and south of the station.  BTW kyogle actually gets very good patronage considering its size.  of the 6 times i've used the XPT, (5 of them were te overnighters) only once did it not stop at kyogle.  The day service had around 15 people during daylight savings time as well.

I still believe the best option is to rebuild the murwillumbah branch (not along the exact same route but in that general area) to a minimum 130km/h alignment and run it to Tweed heads and have it meet the QLD gold coast line.  Hopefully if the QLD govt have their heads in the right place they would gauge convert the GC line, mainly so it can run at 160km/h or possibly higher.  the narrow gauge is the only thing stopping that.
tazzer96
I think it would be safe to say that with it carrying eight trains an hour (and more north of Beenleigh), dual gauging the Gold Coast Line is now completely out of the question. Based on the traffic figures at the Tweed Heads border, almost all commuter traffic generated on the Gold Coast Line is north of the border, and I doubt the Queensland Government will choose to disrupt that very large commuter flow so perhaps somewhere less than 15% commuters don't have to change mode or gauge at the border. It is far more likely it will be the standard gauge GLink light rail system that will cross the border and enter the Tweed, and it will be interfacing with the narrow gauge Gold Coast Line at Helensvale by 2018.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Simstrain, you will need to go back to when the Mull'bah XPT was canned and there was talk of trying to get this XPT to Brisbane but at the same time the NSW govt was talking cutting the Brisbane XPT to 4 days a week due to falling numbers. Peter Beatie stood there on TV and said, "Qld pays for 7 trains a week and this will remain". Hinting not interested in funding more and if you cut the existing you fund it all.

There will certainly some funding arrangement from Qld or the train would have been asked years ago and no way would the high cost DG into Roma Street remain.

Anyway, the NSW govt will not be cutting the Brisbane XPT to Casino anytime soon.

If money wasn't a reasonable issue for the future XPT replacement my preferred options would be

1) 2 x Brisbane XPT's day

2) Return to Lismore for the Casino XPT

3) Rebuild the line and run all the way to the GC airport and nothing short. 100-160km/hr running. The replacement XPT's would split at Casino twice per day and head off to Brisbane and The GC airport. (you need at least two trains a day to justify the line costs)
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

The gold coast line will probably have 1 station after the airport, somewhere just south of the border.  The regauging of the gold coast line wouldn't be solely to accommodate interstate traffic. That's just a happy bonus.  The 6 tph's in peak (should be 8 if it wasn't for other limitations) is part of the whole point of conversion.   Narrow gauge can only safely support 160km/h with high quality and designed trains. (eg, the tilts, ICE)  Standard gauge can safely support 160+ km/h.  Added bonus would also be slightly wider trains, but it would probably go along with train and platform lengthening.  The GC line is already mostly capable of well over 160km/h and much of the line would be speed limited through factors like bridges and the track bed, not curves.  


Short of permanent losing XPT's through accidents, I don't see the Brisbane XPT being culled.  The grafton one is much more likely to go given it has far less passengers, and it has less efficient use of the power cars. They just need to get their head out of the sand and realise that they run the best service along that route, it may lose money but they could at least lose money while providing a public service.  Coaches are only cheaper due to huge compromises they have.

Public transport will always lose money.   No one calls for local bus services to be replaced by private cab companies because they lose money.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The gold coast line will probably have 1 station after the airport, somewhere just south of the border.  The regauging of the gold coast line wouldn't be solely to accommodate interstate traffic. That's just a happy bonus.  The 6 tph's in peak (should be 8 if it wasn't for other limitations) is part of the whole point of conversion.   Narrow gauge can only safely support 160km/h with high quality and designed trains. (eg, the tilts, ICE)  Standard gauge can safely support 160+ km/h.  Added bonus would also be slightly wider trains, but it would probably go along with train and platform lengthening.  The GC line is already mostly capable of well over 160km/h and much of the line would be speed limited through factors like bridges and the track bed, not curves.  


Short of permanent losing XPT's through accidents, I don't see the Brisbane XPT being culled.  The grafton one is much more likely to go given it has far less passengers, and it has less efficient use of the power cars. They just need to get their head out of the sand and realise that they run the best service along that route, it may lose money but they could at least lose money while providing a public service.  Coaches are only cheaper due to huge compromises they have.

Public transport will always lose money.   No one calls for local bus services to be replaced by private cab companies because they lose money.
tazzer96
The GC track spacing is going no where, it will remain NG and not be adding a third. There is simply no money in doing so for anything.

I wouldn't pick on the skinny gauge railway too quickly. They are running trains now since 1995 at 130-140km/hr, has Sydney exceeded 115km/h?

If the Qld govt allocated $1 to HSR, it would be a waste of tax payers money.
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

The gold coast line will probably have 1 station after the airport, somewhere just south of the border.  The regauging of the gold coast line wouldn't be solely to accommodate interstate traffic. That's just a happy bonus.  The 6 tph's in peak (should be 8 if it wasn't for other limitations) is part of the whole point of conversion.   Narrow gauge can only safely support 160km/h with high quality and designed trains. (eg, the tilts, ICE)  Standard gauge can safely support 160+ km/h.  Added bonus would also be slightly wider trains, but it would probably go along with train and platform lengthening.  The GC line is already mostly capable of well over 160km/h and much of the line would be speed limited through factors like bridges and the track bed, not curves.  


Short of permanent losing XPT's through accidents, I don't see the Brisbane XPT being culled.  The grafton one is much more likely to go given it has far less passengers, and it has less efficient use of the power cars. They just need to get their head out of the sand and realise that they run the best service along that route, it may lose money but they could at least lose money while providing a public service.  Coaches are only cheaper due to huge compromises they have.

Public transport will always lose money.   No one calls for local bus services to be replaced by private cab companies because they lose money.
The GC track spacing is going no where, it will remain NG and not be adding a third. There is simply no money in doing so for anything.

I wouldn't pick on the skinny gauge railway too quickly. They are running trains now since 1995 at 130-140km/hr, has Sydney exceeded 115km/h?

If the Qld govt allocated $1 to HSR, it would be a waste of tax payers money.
RTT_Rules
I'm not sure what you're on about.   The track centre spacing won't change, just moving the outer rail about 400mm.  Since Ormeau is the only station with side platforms, that could be easily fixed, it might one day get entirely bypassed and become the terminus of the NG line from Beenleigh.
That extra 400mm can be directly added to the train's width.  While it would add a bit of extra comfort, it allows for better utilisation of space.   It wouldn't be HSR, it would be a proper intercity MSR railway.

Sydney not exceeding 115 is merely a bureaucratic thing.   there is around 100km of track within the Sydney suburban area that is capable of more than 115, even for the double deckers.  Outside sydney suburban area there is plenty of track with speed boards higher than 115.  Up to 160.  The OSCARs are allowed to run up to 130km/h.  

Some Country branch lines in NSW have speeds up to 160km/h.   there is a 90km stretch on the NSW main south that has a speed rating of 160km/h.

Also, if you meant $1 billion on a GC HSR being a waste of money.   How much money do you think they have pumped into, and are wanting to pump into the pacific motorway.   Why does a billion dollars on a rail upgrade seem absurd while a billion dollars for a few extra lanes for a few km of motorway seem reasonable.
  The Vinelander Minister for Railways

Location: Ballan, Victoria on the Ballarat RFR Line
Yes we are talking about a train. The XPT which is a passenger train service that is near the end of it's life and in need of lots of maintenance just to keep it running. This thread is about the XPT and not about freight and the train line.

I have done some research and I have found nothing about QLD paying towards the XPT. So as James has asked, maybe someone can point out an article which shows QLD funding the XPT aside from this discussion on google. The only other thing i found when searching for qld funding the xpt was articles on moving the border, extending the gold coast line and bus services.

I have found plenty of info on Victoria helping the funding of the XPT and we have all heard about Victoria owning an xpt set from persons on this forum. It makes sense that Victoria help fund the Melbourne XPT because there are 5 stops in Victoria.
simstrain

Moreover, since the opening of the SG in 1962, Victoria has operated its own train right through to Sydney in the Spirit of Progress. The purchase of an XPT set after the demise of the Sex/MeX simply fulfilled the obligation Victoria had of providing an interstate train to Sydney.

Mike.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

I notice this thread, based on how to provide customer friendly interstate rail passenger transportation, is fast becoming somewhat tribal (one state against another state) while failing to notice we are a single nation so it is about time we put aside destructive tribal factions of the past and provide solutions. Short sighted self-serving state tribal factions have generally only resulted in less railway transportation and instead more trucks and buses on the highways! As I noted in an earlier post, bus companies realised the state authorities were blinded by the state borders so the bus and trucking companies have been attempting to fill the vacuum since the 1920s. Instead of providing a reasonable rail service themselves, the state governments response was sometimes to use the law against the truck and bus companies. Google will give details.  

Many are aware I have done my own detailed research on the history and operation of rail transportation around the NSW QLD border region. My Railpage published research has provided extensive material on rail operations on several gauges, including general freight, passenger, sugar, quarry and timber. I have noted on Railpage how these rail operations assisted the local community develop their local areas, often at the substantial financial cost to the local communities.
petan

It's not becoming tribal. It is reality. Yes there are more buses and trucks on the roads but the highways are now dual carriageway motorways and the travel time is significantly shorter by road. Over the last 30 years or so the travel time by road to Brisbane from Sydney has shortened from 24 hours or more to 11 hours according to google earth. This has probably been helped by the new motorways opened recently near Kempsey and near the border near Ballina and more are currently under construction.

The XPT service is run by the NSW Government and the trains are run at a significant loss and now the trains are coming to the end of their life. The NSW government is rightly wondering why they should spend so much money to move so few people when bus and coach services can easily provide a more appropriate local public transport option.

The QLD government in their right have restricted the times the XPT is allowed into Roma street because rightly they need more capacity during peak hour for QR passenger services. The NSW government also has a right to cull services it deems unnecessary if it can't make it in at the appropriate time. If the federal or QLD government wants to see the NSW government continue XPT services into Roma street at better times then they must fund a SG portal into Roma street that is separate from the NG network.

As for the NG going south of the border. I believe the NSW government has given permission to do so to get to the airport. So an extension slightly further south shouldn't really be an issue.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
I'm not sure what you're on about.   The track centre spacing won't change, just moving the outer rail about 400mm.  Since Ormeau is the only station with side platforms, that could be easily fixed, it might one day get entirely bypassed and become the terminus of the NG line from Beenleigh.
That extra 400mm can be directly added to the train's width.  While it would add a bit of extra comfort, it allows for better utilisation of space.   It wouldn't be HSR, it would be a proper intercity MSR railway.

Sydney not exceeding 115 is merely a bureaucratic thing.   there is around 100km of track within the Sydney suburban area that is capable of more than 115, even for the double deckers.  Outside sydney suburban area there is plenty of track with speed boards higher than 115.  Up to 160.  The OSCARs are allowed to run up to 130km/h.  

Some Country branch lines in NSW have speeds up to 160km/h.   there is a 90km stretch on the NSW main south that has a speed rating of 160km/h.

Also, if you meant $1 billion on a GC HSR being a waste of money.   How much money do you think they have pumped into, and are wanting to pump into the pacific motorway.   Why does a billion dollars on a rail upgrade seem absurd while a billion dollars for a few extra lanes for a few km of motorway seem reasonable.
tazzer96
I meant rail spacing

The loading gauge is not that related to track gauge. Containers on freight trains clear the platforms not alot different in Qld than NSW, but yes the NSW passenger rollingstock in Sydney is wider than Brisbane suburban and the XPT is wider than regional QR passenger stock.

The QR IMU's etc do a suitable job servicing the GC and this could include as far as Mull'bah/Byron if required as they run up to Gympie and the ICe units previously as far as Rockhmapton. While the commonsense approach to build greenfield railways to SG and upgrade NG to SG where practical. We are not going to see the GC line replaced, DG'ed or parrellelled with another track as the cost to do so would be far in excess of the value, especially the closer you get to Brisbane you have increasing number of points making track costs even more expensive.

There are numerous issues with the BL that slow up the GC trains and fixing this will add far greater value than chasing 160km/hr or greater and at the same time fix the Beenleigh line.

I didn't say $1B, I said $1, just $1 is $1 too many on HSR.

The Pacific Motorway has a purpose and that is to provide a reasonable carriage way for traffic from Brisbane to the border. There are no other roads that can handle the traffic and little of this would convert to HSR if it appeared overnight for free.  

I never said rail doesn't deserve more money. For my money
- the GC line needs to be extended to the GC Airport ASAP, VL is the middle of no where.
- It needs to have four tracks between Salibury and Kuraby built now (currently 3) to enable 8 trains per hour on both GC and 4t/h BL and 4 t/h Kuraby services.
- it needs to have three tracks built properly to Bethania, ie middle track is the passing track over next 5 years.
- its needs alot of money thrown at removing the excessive curvature unfortunately that is mostly where the track was widened to 3 tracks with space for 4. However there is still opportunity south of Kuraby for some major speed improvements.
- It needs the CRR to be built to handle the extra traffic.

Once the above is done, I would recommend NSW govt fork out to extend a single NG track from the GC airport Mull'bah and potentially Byron Bay and later Ballina and pay Qld to run a 1hrly service. By the time Qld has the money to do the above, there will be enough people on the NSW NCL to justify this.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Running trains to Ballina is a bit of an issue. Everytime the NSW government tried to do so the rail line got washed away by floods. In any case the train line doesn't need to go to Byron or Ballina but just to Kingscliff should be fine.
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

The problem with the pacific motorway way is peak hour, the horrendously designed gateway merge and the excessive truck movements, mainly from sydney.
peak hour commuters would convert to HSR if its cheaper and/or faster. You're not going to get any faster using a road, no matter how many upgrades and price of oil is just going to keep increasing.  SEQ is slowly expanding into one mega city.   A good rail connection from brisbane to the GC airport would also make the GC airport a second brisbane airport, and would be a realistic alternative to brisbane airport.

If the GC line is going to be built further south of the border, it must go through to byron.  Otherwise its just shortening the bus trip.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The problem with the pacific motorway way is peak hour, the horrendously designed gateway merge and the excessive truck movements, mainly from sydney.
peak hour commuters would convert to HSR if its cheaper and/or faster. You're not going to get any faster using a road, no matter how many upgrades and price of oil is just going to keep increasing.  SEQ is slowly expanding into one mega city.   A good rail connection from brisbane to the GC airport would also make the GC airport a second brisbane airport, and would be a realistic alternative to brisbane airport.

If the GC line is going to be built further south of the border, it must go through to byron.  Otherwise its just shortening the bus trip.
tazzer96

For starters the highway is going to get faster and unless something is done to make freight rail competitive then the highways will continue to get clogged with traffic. We don't need a hsr. We need a better freight rail network. The people of Byron do not want to be connected to the gold coast because it is a threat to the peaceful and undeveloped area that is the Byron bay shire.

Your comment about the price of oil is pointless because cars are getting more efficient and in 10-20 years will most likely be electric and so cars will survive beyond oil and will be more environmentally friendly then a hsr which will likely need a coal power station to provide enough power for it's 25kv ac. Electric cars on the other hand can get solar energy from panels on the car itself, roofs on peoples homes or petrol stations which would become power stations with large solar arrays.
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

Highway is already pretty much as fast as it will ever get.  I went from brisbane to coffs arbour in just under 4 hours only two days after the st helena tunnel bypass was opened.   Only way for it to get faster is billions in upgrades and to increase it to a maximum speed of 130km/h, which is unlikely to happen.   Even if it was 130km/h, then it doesn't matter how a car is powered, it will run out of juice quickly.

Pure solar powered cars will never happen as there is simply not enough energy hitting the roof for it to be powered, it would have to be supplemented by other electrical inputs like an engine or charged up beforehand.    Just look at the solar powered plane that just flew around the world, look at the specs for that and that will show that solar powered cars aren't possible.

I see your point of the people of byron bay shire, but they're not the people who would be using it, it would be all the tourists and travellers.  They hate that their little quiet retirement area is getting ruined by music festivals.

It will still be a long time before all cars are electric, and even longer before long haul trucks become 100% electric.  

That whole last paragraph is just full of physics flaws, inaccuracies and contradicts itself.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Highway is already pretty much as fast as it will ever get.  I went from brisbane to coffs arbour in just over 4 hours only two days after the st helena tunnel bypass was opened.   Only way for it to get faster is billions in upgrades and to increase it to a maximum speed of 130km/h, which is unlikely to happen.   Even if it was 130km/h, then it doesn't matter how a car is powered, it will run out of juice quickly.

Pure solar powered cars will never happen as there is simply not enough energy hitting the roof for it to be powered, it would have to be supplemented by other electrical inputs like an engine or charged up beforehand.    Just look at the solar powered plane that just flew around the world, look at the specs for that and that will show that solar powered cars aren't possible.

I see your point of the people of byron bay shire, but they're not the people who would be using it, it would be all the tourists and travellers.  They hate that their little quiet retirement area is getting ruined by music festivals.

It will still be a long time before all cars are electric, and even longer before long haul trucks become 100% electric.  

That whole last paragraph is just full of physics flaws, inaccuracies and contradicts itself.
tazzer96

The pacific highway between Coffs and Brisbane will over the next 10 years have another 1 hour cut from it's travel time once the highway is upgraded between Woolgoolga and Ballina. So yes it can get a lot faster.

I never said anything about trucks being electric or solar powered and I also didn't say anything about pure solar cars either. I said that you could charge them with solar panels in the roof or from a service station fitted with solar panels or from solar panels in your own home. Power is also likely to come from the grid but at least there is a solar option.

A 25kv hsr train system sucks down way to much juice to run on solar power. It will need to be fed by coal as nuclear is not a clean alternative or a viable option for the waste it produces. I'm not that against black coal in any case and the ones we have here in NSW are clean and have filters that trap carbon. They are also talking about carbon capture which will also make it much less polluting.

Byron bay doesn't really want the type of tourism that is the gold coast and neither does the NSW government. The people of Byron do hate those music festivals that turn up and the NSW Government is actively trying to stop development in that area of NSW. I believe the council with it's pledge of 100% solar is committed to not growing the area.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The problem with the pacific motorway way is peak hour, the horrendously designed gateway merge and the excessive truck movements, mainly from sydney.
peak hour commuters would convert to HSR if its cheaper and/or faster. You're not going to get any faster using a road, no matter how many upgrades and price of oil is just going to keep increasing.  SEQ is slowly expanding into one mega city.   A good rail connection from brisbane to the GC airport would also make the GC airport a second brisbane airport, and would be a realistic alternative to brisbane airport.

If the GC line is going to be built further south of the border, it must go through to byron.  Otherwise its just shortening the bus trip.
tazzer96

Peak house switch to HSR if its cheaper or faster?

To travel 50-100km is hard to be faster for many if the stations are 10-20km apart, if they are 4km apart like now it won't be faster or only a few minutes.

For cheaper, QR commuter rail services currently operate with a subsidy around 75-80% on average and thats just operational cost and no allocation for capital return. How much more do we propose to subsidise HSR and leave billions of dollars of rail infrastructure sitting idle in the process?
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Running trains to Ballina is a bit of an issue. Everytime the NSW government tried to do so the rail line got washed away by floods. In any case the train line doesn't need to go to Byron or Ballina but just to Kingscliff should be fine.
simstrain
You would hope this could be resolved by today!

Agree on Kingscliff, just looking further forward.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE

It's not becoming tribal. It is reality. Yes there are more buses and trucks on the roads but the highways are now dual carriageway motorways and the travel time is significantly shorter by road. Over the last 30 years or so the travel time by road to Brisbane from Sydney has shortened from 24 hours or more to 11 hours according to google earth. This has probably been helped by the new motorways opened recently near Kempsey and near the border near Ballina and more are currently under construction.
simstrain
30 years ago I was still travelling with my parents in the family Valiant or later Ford Falcon shagging wagon from Nth Beaches of Sydney or later Gosford to my relatives on the GC for the annual Rel/xmas bit. We always left after dark and arrived by mid morning at the very latest, but usually earlier. So its was not 24hr. Yes my dad was probably speeding somewhat on the old road with four lanes stopping by Newcastle.

It took usually 2 maybe 3 petrol stops to get to Qld and only once would involve a meal at Golden Fleece, the rest are pee faster than the car be refueled.

In contrast two years ago I drove a VS commodore hire car from Brisbane airport leaving after 7pm sometime, arriving at my parents house at Gosford at 5am on the same tank of juice and included a 1hr stop for meal at Grafton at midnight with one more brief pee stop.

An Audi A4 diesel can do Brisbane A/P to Sydney A/P easily on a tank of juice.

I doubt very much rising petrol prices will not be an issue for future populations as I have been hearing that crap since I was in primary school about the world drying up, petrol prices to skyrocket etc etc. Meanwhile we have the growth of the electric/hybrids. Its all come to naught so we need to stop using this excuse.
  petan Chief Commissioner

Location: Waiting to see a zebra using a zebra crossing!
Simstrain, you will need to go back to when the Mull'bah XPT was canned and there was talk of trying to get this XPT to Brisbane but at the same time the NSW govt was talking cutting the Brisbane XPT to 4 days a week due to falling numbers. Peter Beattie stood there on TV and said, "Qld pays for 7 trains a week and this will remain". Hinting not interested in funding more and if you cut the existing you fund it all.
RTT_Rules

Maybe not everyone in other parts of Australia would be aware RTT_Rules has referenced Peter Douglas Beattie, AC, who was the Premier of Queensland. Thus proving the funding!

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: james.au, Nightfire, RTT_Rules

Display from:   

Quick Reply

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