3000 Railcar Historical Relics

 
  justapassenger Minister for Railways

Surely there is a fire risk associated with having an electric train system though a high-bushfire risk zone?
Lt. Commander Data
I don't know if there's any merit to that, but there certainly have been actual bushfires (not just theoretical risks) caused by diesel trains in the Adelaide Hills.

A lower voltage DC electric system would be a bigger problem, as the currents are much higher and they take longer to cut out in the event of a fault.

The whole issue with the Belair Line is that the tunnel under Shepherds Hill Road for the BG purportedly does not have the clearance for 25kV
"nm39"
Two solutions: lower the tunnel floor, or use an EMU with a battery system which would also be useful for mitigating the impact of disruption to the power supply on any line.

The bigger problem is that the Sleeps Hill Tunnel carrying both lines would also need to have the floor lowered, which would require DPTI and ARTC to coordinate a lengthy closure.

Sponsored advertisement

  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Fire risk from a spark? How many electric trains are operating daily on the east coast through national parks PLUS 100t of coal hauled by electric traction?
  62430 Assistant Commissioner

Location: Metro Adelaide
Surely there is a fire risk associated with having an electric train system though a high-bushfire risk zone?

...
Lt. Commander Data
What risk are you thinking of?  The presence of 25 kV overhead in an area which already has the 66 kV transmission line to Blackwood for public electricity supply and 11 kV lines for distribution?  Or the possibility of arcing which I have not noticed occurring on the Seaford line but have seen in the City with the 600 V DC tram supply.

Alex C
  nm39 Chief Commissioner

Location: By a road taking pictures

The whole issue with the Belair Line is that the tunnel under Shepherds Hill Road for the BG purportedly does not have the clearance for 25kV
Two solutions: lower the tunnel floor, or use an EMU with a battery system which would also be useful for mitigating the impact of disruption to the power supply on any line.

The bigger problem is that the Sleeps Hill Tunnel carrying both lines would also need to have the floor lowered, which would require DPTI and ARTC to coordinate a lengthy closure.
justapassenger
As the grade is already quite steep there is not the ability to change grade so that it is not as steep on the city side of the tunnel and therefore lower inside the tunnel, the resulting grade on the Belair side would have to be even steeper and there is already a 1 in 43 grade. The Sleeps Hill Tunnel, on the other hand, has plenty of clearance.
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
Another great urban myth of our time?
Agree. ARTC don't have a problem with double stack trains running alongside a 25kV passenger line in the outer suburbs of Perth and haven't objected to the plans for doing so between Islington and Salisbury.

The only issue with the Belair line is that politicians don't want to pay for it, and they make up excuses rather than owning their decisions either.
justapassenger
If you go back to the start of electrification when Rann released his plan (yes, it was that long ago) there was a disclaimer in the plan that said something along the lines of Belair not being done for the time being until the future of the standard gauge route through the hills had been decided - sorry can't find the reference now. But I would say that even at that time they realised the expense of doing the entire network was something that would have to be staged over many years so yeah... probably just an excuse to keep one of the lowest patronised lines on the back-burner.

There's certainly no reason why they couldn't run parallel to each other as you point out but as later posts attest I am not confident about clearances in the Sleeps Hill tunnel and also perhaps at a few other places along the route - could require major works?
  Pressman Spirit of the Vine

Location: Wherever the Tin Chook or Qantas takes me
Surely there is a fire risk associated with having an electric train system though a high-bushfire risk zone?
I don't know if there's any merit to that, but there certainly have been actual bushfires (not just theoretical risks) caused by diesel trains in the Adelaide Hills.

A lower voltage DC electric system would be a bigger problem, as the currents are much higher and they take longer to cut out in the event of a fault.

The whole issue with the Belair Line is that the tunnel under Shepherds Hill Road for the BG purportedly does not have the clearance for 25kV
Two solutions: lower the tunnel floor, or use an EMU with a battery system which would also be useful for mitigating the impact of disruption to the power supply on any line.

The bigger problem is that the Sleeps Hill Tunnel carrying both lines would also need to have the floor lowered, which would require DPTI and ARTC to coordinate a lengthy closure.
justapassenger
I believe that during Australian National's time they lowered the floors of all the tunnels as much as they could to allow taller containers to be hauled. The east side Shepherds Hill Road tunnel is one of the original hills line tunnels, the west side and the Sleeps Hill Tunnel were built much later, when the line was duplicated, and were designed to allow for electrification (by the standard required at that time)
  bingley hall Minister for Railways

Location: Last train to Skaville
Surely there is a fire risk associated with having an electric train system though a high-bushfire risk zone?

Lt. Commander Data

I see a bright future for you as a Liberal Party MP in the Hills area.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE

The whole issue with the Belair Line is that the tunnel under Shepherds Hill Road for the BG purportedly does not have the clearance for 25kV
Two solutions: lower the tunnel floor, or use an EMU with a battery system which would also be useful for mitigating the impact of disruption to the power supply on any line.

The bigger problem is that the Sleeps Hill Tunnel carrying both lines would also need to have the floor lowered, which would require DPTI and ARTC to coordinate a lengthy closure.As the grade is already quite steep there is not the ability to change grade so that it is not as steep on the city side of the tunnel and therefore lower inside the tunnel, the resulting grade on the Belair side would have to be even steeper and there is already a 1 in 43 grade. The Sleeps Hill Tunnel, on the other hand, has plenty of clearance.
nm39
I think you will find Sydney trains tunnels are in places steeper than that grade and I believe the new Metro will also be steeper.

Certainly wouldn't hurt a modern 25kV single deck spark to have a short section of extra grade to get the clearance.
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
The east side Shepherds Hill Road tunnel is one of the original hills line tunnels, the west side and the Sleeps Hill Tunnel were built much later, when the line was duplicated, and were designed to allow for electrification (by the standard required at that time)
Pressman
I have wondered about the difference between those two tunnels for years, interesting.
  justapassenger Minister for Railways

As the grade is already quite steep there is not the ability to change grade so that it is not as steep on the city side of the tunnel and therefore lower inside the tunnel, the resulting grade on the Belair side would have to be even steeper and there is already a 1 in 43 grade. The Sleeps Hill Tunnel, on the other hand, has plenty of clearance.
nm39
Oh please! This is 2017, not 1917.

If lowering of either tunnel floor ever becomes necessary (only if the hypothetical possibility of double stacking ever heaves its way over the horizon) then the resulting 'steep' grade will still be a walk in the park for a modern Euro-style multiple unit with three phase motors.

Freight trains with even current locos (let alone whatever is state of the art if/when double stacking ever happens) wouldn't have an issue with it either, we're only talking about a stretch of less than one kilometre (i.e. half a train length) being changed from 1:43 to 1:40.

If you go back to the start of electrification when Rann released his plan (yes, it was that long ago) there was a disclaimer in the plan that said something along the lines of Belair not being done for the time being until the future of the standard gauge route through the hills had been decided - sorry can't find the reference now. But I would say that even at that time they realised the expense of doing the entire network was something that would have to be staged over many years so yeah... probably just an excuse to keep one of the lowest patronised lines on the back-burner.
don_dunstan
The big Rann plan was just a stunt for the 2010 state election with the Seaford line the only part actually intended to be built, so I would say the weasel words about the ARTC line were in actual fact just a nod towards the hills NIMBYs.

It didn't stop them returning Iain Evans to bludge on the backbench for a couple of years, but it would have helped with the Legislative Council tally.
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
The ARTC track through Sleeps Hill tunnel has been lowered for years only the Adelaide Metro track stayed the same. So it should not be too hard to simply lower the Adelaide Metro tracks for more clearance if it is needed. There would be some disruption to the ARTC track but I think it might not be that great these days. They should have actually lowered both tracks through the tunnel to begin with!
  steam4ian Chief Commissioner

I don't consider the Belair line justifies being heavy passenger rail. The largest trains are only two cars, hardly justifies being called a train. Development of the feeder areas will never be allowed to become high density such that traffic can increase.

IMHO the route should be converted to light rail branching off the Glenelg line at Goodwood. Property costs would be limited to a few houses around Devon Street.
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
I don't consider the Belair line justifies being heavy passenger rail. The largest trains are only two cars, hardly justifies being called a train. Development of the feeder areas will never be allowed to become high density such that traffic can increase.

IMHO the route should be converted to light rail branching off the Glenelg line at Goodwood. Property costs would be limited to a few houses around Devon Street.
steam4ian
There are some big estates being built around Blackwood at the moment despite the general hills development ban; also it's always possible that heavy rail could go further into the hills again one day - perhaps as far as Mt Barker.

Although in my opinion the development at Mt Barker is completely stupid - half acre blocks all around the fringes.
  justapassenger Minister for Railways

I don't consider the Belair line justifies being heavy passenger rail. The largest trains are only two cars, hardly justifies being called a train. Development of the feeder areas will never be allowed to become high density such that traffic can increase.

IMHO the route should be converted to light rail branching off the Glenelg line at Goodwood. Property costs would be limited to a few houses around Devon Street.
steam4ian
I agree that it wouldn't be built if it din't already exist.

But the converse is already true - now the service is there and in operation, it may as well stay there rather than giving one of Jay's mates in the construction sector (and future employer in 12 months time maybe?) a bajillion dollars to shut an otherwise perfectly good route for a couple of years and make the service worse like the idea he's flirting with doing to Port Adelaide. If that sort of money is floating around then it should be spent on a new route which we don't already have rather than an expensive downgrade of one that is already in operation - trams to Adelaide Airport (and Henley Beach with the increased number of parking fines they have there) would be a winner.

But there will come a tipping point when further life extension work on the DEMU fleet is no longer an option and a tough decision will need to be made about the future of the Belair line.

I think suggestions of going beyond Belair are ridiculous, I'm not such a blind enthusiast that I'm unaware there is stuff that rail simply can't do properly.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The youngest 3000/3001 class units are ex 1996, so currently the fleet age range is 21 to 30 years old now. This pretty much means the SA govt can sit on their hands for at least 10 years and up to 19 years (2036) before at 40 years old they would be considered old. Further extension of the O/H to the Gawler line and later the Outer Harbour and Co branches will enable traffic growth to be met with new sparks and any aging DMU's that are beyond economic repair to be written off.  

So by around 2030, we can assume the Gawler line has been sparked and more than likely the Outer Harbour and Grange lines are sparked (and/or converted to LR) and the decision time will be for the Belair line. There is no physical reason the O/H cannot be extended to Belair, certainly the rumour about the ARTC objection is likely a complete furphy and the tunnel issue resolved by various methods and likely lower the floor being the most logical. Sparking a single line has been done elsewhere in the country as part of a city wide electrification so there is little chance in hell the Belair line DMU's will be replaced with more DMU's. Yes the last few stops may not justify a rail line, but realistically the cost of sparking is probably worth less than the voter implications of closing the outer part of the line.
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
The youngest 3000/3001 class units are ex 1996, so currently the fleet age range is 21 to 30 years old now. This pretty much means the SA govt can sit on their hands for at least 10 years and up to 19 years (2036) before at 40 years old they would be considered old. Further extension of the O/H to the Gawler line and later the Outer Harbour and Co branches will enable traffic growth to be met with new sparks and any aging DMU's that are beyond economic repair to be written off.
RTT_Rules
They're still quite serivce-able at the moment having undergone a major refurb, and if the shells are still okay they could try the hurdle of making them more fuel efficient hybrids instead. Could be possible to extend their lives even further would be inter-operation with short segments of electric network enabling quick recharges similar to what they're building in Sydney presently with light rail down George St? Just an idea.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The youngest 3000/3001 class units are ex 1996, so currently the fleet age range is 21 to 30 years old now. This pretty much means the SA govt can sit on their hands for at least 10 years and up to 19 years (2036) before at 40 years old they would be considered old. Further extension of the O/H to the Gawler line and later the Outer Harbour and Co branches will enable traffic growth to be met with new sparks and any aging DMU's that are beyond economic repair to be written off.
They're still quite serivce-able at the moment having undergone a major refurb, and if the shells are still okay they could try the hurdle of making them more fuel efficient hybrids instead. Could be possible to extend their lives even further would be inter-operation with short segments of electric network enabling quick recharges similar to what they're building in Sydney presently with light rail down George St? Just an idea.
don_dunstan
Could happen?

Perhaps a few sparks fitted with 2020's technology batteries is enough to deal with that and maybe avoid needing a wire to the end?

I always thought the mass conversion for them to sparks was a w__k and never going to happen. However as more of the network does get sparked and prices rise, perhaps you could put a pano on the few remaining units to Belair and simply drop the pano and start the engine at Goodwood?

Regardless I don't think anything will be done too fancy, just string up the wires and be done with it. One standard for the entire network!
  mclaren2007 Assistant Commissioner

Location: recharging my myki
Electrify the whole network and buy some Xtrap's from Melbourne
  justapassenger Minister for Railways

Electrify the whole network and buy some Xtrap's from Melbourne
mclaren2007
Judging by this post, it sounds like recreational use of marijuana was recently legalised in Melbourne.

I'm not so sure about buying them, but I'm sure that someone in SA would be happy to assist you in disposing of them in return for being paid a reasonable fee for the service provided.
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
Electrify the whole network and buy some Xtrap's from Melbourne
mclaren2007
While the electrify the whole network is a good idea the Xtraps from Melbourne would not last 30 seconds. The voltage here is 25Kva not 1500 volts as in Melbourne. That would fry anything like that in an instant! Laughing
  jonasboi Station Staff

Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Just like to throw my 2 cents in for whatever it' worth. double stack freight trains can not travel to the eastern states due to low tunnel clearances. but there is no issue with freight lines running along side electric lines.

the Outer Harbor and Grange lines are likely to be converted to light rail. how ever knowing our government it won't be in our life time. surprise me if it is.

If I recall from when the plans for an electrified train network was announced, by 2020 the entire network would be electrified with the exception of the Belair line. safe to say that by 2020 we may not even have two (or three if you count Tonsley) electrified.

Belair wasn't planned due to the cost of upgrading stations and the expense of making tunnels bigger, can't lower the line due to flood risk.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Just like to throw my 2 cents in for whatever it' worth. double stack freight trains can not travel to the eastern states due to low tunnel clearances. but there is no issue with freight lines running along side electric lines.

the Outer Harbor and Grange lines are likely to be converted to light rail. how ever knowing our government it won't be in our life time. surprise me if it is.

If I recall from when the plans for an electrified train network was announced, by 2020 the entire network would be electrified with the exception of the Belair line. safe to say that by 2020 we may not even have two (or three if you count Tonsley) electrified.

Belair wasn't planned due to the cost of upgrading stations and the expense of making tunnels bigger, can't lower the line due to flood risk.
jonasboi
The original electrification project was ambitious to say the least and mostly based on the mining boom and federal govt money. I'm sure we call make plans for what will happen when we win lotto. Something had to happen as with rising oil prices the thirsty 2000 class needed retirement in the coming years, passenger growth and extension of the Seaford line all meant more trains. Decision was either commit to more DMU's or start the migration to sparks. The later commonsense decision took place.

The Belair line feel into the too hard basket so leaving the existing DMU fleet in place also made sense. The 3000 class had a good 15-20 years service life so leave the problem to the next generation.

So they did what they needed to do to cover all the above and when the money supply was cut off, the stopped short of further expansion of the wires and the conversion of the 3000 class to spark.  

Right now its unlikely to NEED to do anything for a decade and this includes conversion of the Grange and OH lines to LR, IF that ever happens which I see as unlikely as what is the benefit? Right now oil is reliable and cheap, in SA you cannot say the same for electricity.

When the 3000 class approaches retirement, D-day will again come to the halls or SA govt and they will extend the overhead to the north, the western twins and the Belair line with what ever capital works is required to do so and likely to be done one line at a time over a period of 5 years or so as there is no rush due to the road range of age in the 3000 class. Again SA will most likely need fed funding to complete the task.
  cabidass Chief Train Controller

Apologies for a Victorian jumping into the convo....

It seems the original plan for the 3000s was to electrify them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3000_class_railcar

That was 2008/9.

With the orders of the 4000s from Vic, I can't see any reason why Adelaide wouldn't continue in that fashion. Ordering more as more lines get lecky. Especially as the electrification is set to be staged, and seems to be severely delayed in it's rollout presently.

Thus, slowly scrapping the 3000s.

The only hiccup I can see in this, is if Bombardier is unable to meet the requested delivery capacity because of other existing build commitments (see below).

With regards to using these in Victoria, I see this as extremely unlikely. We already have Sprinters for intercity services. And have had significant orders for Vlocity trains for regional lines from Bombardier.

From what I can see the Vlocitys may eventually replace the Sprinters in Vic at some future point, depending on specific demand. But they are only a reasonably young train.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V/Line_Sprinter

There would be a case to use the 3000 for inter-regional travel. Say Bairnsdale to Warragul on the Gippsland line. But the sprinters could be used for this too should such a business case ever be presented.

From what we now know, the Vic state government wants to unify it's rolling stock. They have just indicated that they intend to build 'long haul' Vlocitys. These will run alongside the N Class loco and carriages for the seeable future. So at some stage, Loco hauled passenger trains in Vic may come to an end. But that's too far in the future to say for certain.

http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/labor-governments-regional-rail-revival-continues/

So I don't see it as likely for the Vic government to purchase any 3000s, especially given their age. They unlikely share much underpinnings with their Vic Comeng electric counterparts anyway.

The only way I see this happening, if the inter-regional runs get the go-ahead, and the Vic governments want to use them as a temporary solutions while other Rail Motors are on order. Or if the use of Sprinters on same become stretched...
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
The original electrification project was ambitious to say the least and mostly based on the mining boom and federal govt money. I'm sure we call make plans for what will happen when we win lotto. Something had to happen as with rising oil prices the thirsty 2000 class needed retirement in the coming years, passenger growth and extension of the Seaford line all meant more trains. Decision was either commit to more DMU's or start the migration to sparks. The later commonsense decision took place.
RTT_Rules
Ultimately the line will end up somewhere like Sellick's Beach with the Aussie habit of spreading the urban centres along the coast; it's neither a good nor a bad thing but at least we're better prepared for it now with the prospect of urban rail connecting the coastal sprawl to the city.
The Belair line feel into the too hard basket so leaving the existing DMU fleet in place also made sense. The 3000 class had a good 15-20 years service life so leave the problem to the next generation. So they did what they needed to do to cover all the above and when the money supply was cut off, the stopped short of further expansion of the wires and the conversion of the 3000 class to spark. Right now its unlikely to NEED to do anything for a decade and this includes conversion of the Grange and OH lines to LR, IF that ever happens which I see as unlikely as what is the benefit? Right now oil is reliable and cheap, in SA you cannot say the same for electricity. When the 3000 class approaches retirement, D-day will again come to the halls or SA govt and they will extend the overhead to the north, the western twins and the Belair line with what ever capital works is required to do so and likely to be done one line at a time over a period of 5 years or so as there is no rush due to the road range of age in the 3000 class. Again SA will most likely need fed funding to complete the task.
RTT_Rules
At the moment the idea is that electrification is going to extend to Salisbury soon (there is another SA thread where this has been discussed) in which case we can avoid the situation where electric trains have to be towed to the Dry Creek works for periodic maintenance while also increasing capacity somewhat. As I understand it this is the most that the dead broke South Australian government can afford for the time being; for whatever reason Malcolm Turnbull's dizzying largesse in the last budget didn't come our way for that project despite being promised since Gillard. Maybe Malcolm will eventually change his mind and the entire length will be done, who knows.

If this segment goes ahead by itself it should allow for increased capacity with more regular (perhaps 15 or 20 minute clockface) services during the day and even more frequently at peaks; they will order some more 4000's from Bombardier and they will stop all stations to and terminate at Salisbury while the 3000's will run express to Salisbury and then stop all stations thereafter to Gawler... I believe that's the plan in the interim anyway.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: Pressman, rhino, RTT_Rules

Display from:   

Quick Reply

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