TasRail welcomes Launceston development

 
Topic moved from News by dthead on 04 Sep 2017 20:52
  x31 Chief Commissioner

Location: gallifrey
Good news for TasRail but does this replace any intermodal yard already in the city?

I have read elsewhere the decision to cut the rail network from Hobart has placed 100 B-Doubles per day on the road between the rail yard near Hobart and Hobart docks where the rail line was previously used.

TasRail welcomes Launceston development

Sponsored advertisement

  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
Maybe they are building a new yard to replace the current yard which is better located away from suburbia

The old rail yard in Hobart was not suited to a modern railway and poorly located being jammed between CBD and waterfront. It had to go. Did it have to go as far as Brighton? My view no but then there was the bridge issue.
  Harrison150s Beginner

Location: (The Once) Hobart Northern Suburbs Railway
I have read elsewhere the decision to cut the rail network from Hobart has placed 100 B-Doubles per day on the road between the rail yard near Hobart and Hobart docks where the rail line was previously used.
X31


By the way, what was the reasoning for cutting the line to Brighton? Where their angry residents from the noise or was it a government push?
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
I have read elsewhere the decision to cut the rail network from Hobart has placed 100 B-Doubles per day on the road between the rail yard near Hobart and Hobart docks where the rail line was previously used.


By the way, what was the reasoning for cutting the line to Brighton? Where their angry residents from the noise or was it a government push?
Harrison150s
My understanding a combination of issues

The yard in the city had to go. Outdated, too short, poorly located, land wanted for other things, in between city and foreshore, no actual traffic to that area any more. Yard was meant for passenger trains and short freight trains of old.

Why wasn't it simply moved to say the Zinc smelter location at Derwent Park or somewhere further north. Likely many places you would struggle to get 1000m of straight flat land without large opposition from locals economically. Remember the railway is mostly on the shore line.

Other issue was Derwent bridge, to retain usage by rail it needed alot of work.

All this for 1 x train (maybe sometimes 2) a day 6 days a week. Not worth it.

Brighton is a junction for the papermill traffic, note that the Boyer branch see's way more traffic when coal and logs are running. Brighton itself is an occasionally used lo siding, so made sense, sort of, to build the new yard 20km further north.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Does not make sense when you compare the response 100 b-doubles per day on roads when the containers were being lifted onto rail on Hobart.  Road damage and safety would cost more than maintaining a bridge and some track to the port.
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
Does not make sense when you compare the response 100 b-doubles per day on roads when the containers were being lifted onto rail on Hobart.  Road damage and safety would cost more than maintaining a bridge and some track to the port.
bevans
A 100 B-double a day? No

100 B-doubles is 3 x 20 foot containers = 300*20= 6000 feet or 1.8km of train + couplers. Tasrail could only dream to have the equivalent of a Transcontinental super freighter a day travelling across the state. The current traffic combined isn't this much.

Even if the B-doubles are just carrying two boxes for weight purposes (each direction), thats still equal or more than all Hobart rail traffic including Boyer.

The main source of freight for Tasrail in Hobart excluding Boyer is Zinc works and fruit plus some general traffic (unless things have changed).

The Port is basically dead for container freight and often goes years with nothing. I think now it still has the odd boat but most of this traffic would be local. Boyer switching from Hobart to Burnie is basically what was last straw. Tasmania for years had the ridiculous 4 general container ports, but I think now the govt merged them there has been alot of rationalisation. Certainly Hobart was the loser in this as most of the freight to/from the state leaves via the North. I very much doubt and open to correction that Tasrail enjoys any traffic from the Hobart port shipping.

The bridge is complex. I don't know the details but there was talk to build a new bridge for road and leave rail on the old and let them pay for it. The new road bridge as yet to be built.
  12CSVT Chief Commissioner

Location: Drowning in accreditation red tape!
Not sure exactly how many B Double zinc trucks there are a day, but during daylight there is at least one return every 30 mins or so? They aren't containers though, instead bulk de-consolidated zinc loading that is then stowed into boxes at Brighton Hub.

Agreed Hobart is no longer viable as a freight distribution terminal, but it was short-sighted to close Derwent Park yard and the Risdon Branch, considering most loading originates from Nyrstar and the freight depots in Derwent Park.

To ease the pressure on the Brooker Highway and save wasted funds on a totally superfluous bridge (basically a Govt & public service vanity project), the East Derwent Highway should be upgraded to Tasman Highway / Brighton Bypass standards and Brighton bound freight routed over the barely used Bowen Bridge.
  BP4417 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Launceston, Tasmania
Not sure exactly how many B Double zinc trucks there are a day, but during daylight there is at least one return every 30 mins or so? They aren't containers though, instead bulk de-consolidated zinc loading that is then stowed into boxes at Brighton Hub.
12CSVT
I seem to remember the brain washing of the public with the statement that there would be less heavy vehicle traffic on the Brooker when the Brighton Freight Hub opened.
Since the opening of the Brighton Freight Hub I have noticed an increase in heavy vehicle traffic, this could suggest that heavy vehicles are bye passing the freight hub a fear that was raised with the Government of the day.
  Dangersdan707 Junior Train Controller

Location: On a Thing with Internet
last time I was there earlier this year (Hobart) I heard that the guy who owns Mona wanted to turn it the Hobart line into a rail trail, I wound how the museum in Glenorchy feels about that !Confused
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
last time I was there earlier this year (Hobart) I heard that the guy who owns Mona wanted to turn it the Hobart line into a rail trail, I wound how the museum in Glenorchy feels about that !Confused
Dangersdan707
I Doubt they care too much at all. They will never run a train past their fence line again and haven't done so for years and once the freight traffic ceased any hope of ever crossing the fence went with it. What ever happens to the corridor, it will never permit the use of narrow gauge heritage railway operations again.
  Brodied Beginner

last time I was there earlier this year (Hobart) I heard that the guy who owns Mona wanted to turn it the Hobart line into a rail trail, I wound how the museum in Glenorchy feels about that !Confused
I Doubt they care too much at all. They will never run a train past their fence line again and haven't done so for years and once the freight traffic ceased any hope of ever crossing the fence went with it. What ever happens to the corridor, it will never permit the use of narrow gauge heritage railway operations again.

RTT_Rules
There's already a perfectly underused bike path that runs from the CBD past Mona.

I'm not sure why you think there will never be heritage railway operations again on that line.
  12CSVT Chief Commissioner

Location: Drowning in accreditation red tape!
last time I was there earlier this year (Hobart) I heard that the guy who owns Mona wanted to turn it the Hobart line into a rail trail, I wound how the museum in Glenorchy feels about that !Confused
Dangersdan707
Whoever told you that was lying.

David Walsh of MONA is a big supporter of establishing a Light Rail service on the Hobart line to connect MONA at Berriedale with Macquarie Point. Recently, Walshy's right-hand man, Leigh Carmichael put on a major presentation at the TTMS on MONA's plans to redevelop Macquarie Point and a key feature of that was Light Rail connectivity between Elizabeth St, Mac Point, MONA and Brighton. Leigh, speaking on behalf of David Walsh was adamant that MONA's plans for Macquarie Point would never reach their potential without Light rail connectivity.
  12CSVT Chief Commissioner

Location: Drowning in accreditation red tape!
last time I was there earlier this year (Hobart) I heard that the guy who owns Mona wanted to turn it the Hobart line into a rail trail, I wound how the museum in Glenorchy feels about that !Confused
I Doubt they care too much at all. They will never run a train past their fence line again and haven't done so for years and once the freight traffic ceased any hope of ever crossing the fence went with it. What ever happens to the corridor, it will never permit the use of narrow gauge heritage railway operations again.
RTT_Rules
Wrong! wrong! wrong! Besides the original claim being bulls%$t, TTMS have worked hard on developing a business plan to run heritage services, initially between Glenorchy and Chigwell / Claremont (to connect with MONA at Berriedale). The proposal is currently before the State Govt and being assessed.

Meanwhile Hobart Tram Restoration Society have a proposal before the State Govt to run the Hobart Councils restored trams between Mac Point and Botanical Gardens. Again this is being assessed by the State Govt.

Both proposals have the backing of the Glenorchy City administrator and Hobart City Council respectively.

Subsequent to these plans, the Hobart Northern Suburbs Railway proposal always included capacity for T&HR access to cruise ships at Hobart Port. This is a long term part of DVR's Business Plan. The HNSR proposal continues to build steam in conjunction with the "Hobart City Deal" application before the Fed Govt which includes the relocation of the Uni of Tas STEM Dept to the Hobart CBD, and with such further relocation of Uni of Tas facilities to the CBD, further justifies the HNSR as an intrinsic part of the whole Hobart City Deal application.
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
last time I was there earlier this year (Hobart) I heard that the guy who owns Mona wanted to turn it the Hobart line into a rail trail, I wound how the museum in Glenorchy feels about that !Confused
I Doubt they care too much at all. They will never run a train past their fence line again and haven't done so for years and once the freight traffic ceased any hope of ever crossing the fence went with it. What ever happens to the corridor, it will never permit the use of narrow gauge heritage railway operations again.
Wrong! wrong! wrong! Besides the original claim being bulls%$t, TTMS have worked hard on developing a business plan to run heritage services, initially between Glenorchy and Chigwell / Claremont (to connect with MONA at Berriedale). The proposal is currently before the State Govt and being assessed.

Meanwhile Hobart Tram Restoration Society have a proposal before the State Govt to run the Hobart Councils restored trams between Mac Point and Botanical Gardens. Again this is being assessed by the State Govt.

Both proposals have the backing of the Glenorchy City administrator and Hobart City Council respectively.

Subsequent to these plans, the Hobart Northern Suburbs Railway proposal always included capacity for T&HR access to cruise ships at Hobart Port. This is a long term part of DVR's Business Plan. The HNSR proposal continues to build steam in conjunction with the "Hobart City Deal" application before the Fed Govt which includes the relocation of the Uni of Tas STEM Dept to the Hobart CBD, and with such further relocation of Uni of Tas facilities to the CBD, further justifies the HNSR as an intrinsic part of the whole Hobart City Deal application.
12CSVT
Hardly Steve

You have already explained that successive Tas state govt has little interest in support Heritage Rail so there is a difference between wishful thinking and reality. How many years has DVR being trying to get back the DV Branch? Closure of the Hobart branch by Tasrail has meant if TTMS want access, they must incur all costs of upkeep, a challenge easier said than done.

Has there ever been a local council that has opposed a Heritage Rail project, probably yes but they support verbally and anything they can do to help but not where it counts most, ie funding apart from token donations.

There will be no Northern Suburbs Railway for cruise ships. I know in the past DV have been chartered but is a dozen or so ships in the past enough? DVR could not support both the Hobart branch and the Derwent Valley Branch. Way too much track for too few riders.

Meanwhile yo have indicated there are other vested groups trying to get the NE Line and maybe up to Wynyard. How much do we think the state can actually support? Surely the govt must also be asking the same questions. The Hobart branch is ironically likely to be the most attractive to users as its "in their face" so to speak and could be used as a means of transport to connect some of the key tourist locations, if services were frequent enough, another issue.

The tram around the botanical gardens and through the port area to Salamanica (if that far) is probably the most likely to be successful. Trams are lower cost to run than a train and its in the middle of the main Hobart tourist area, but not too long in route km to be high cost. Not sure on the current status of the Frankin Wharf rails, been many years since I was last there but if not changed too much I suspect most is still intact. Main issue is the construction of the power supply wire, but a genset is a stop gap and done elsewhere.

The of course there is the Hobart LR project, while extremely unlikely but if it was to go ahead non of the above mentioned proposals would be possible.

If TTMS can get hold of a few km of track, probably the lowest cost startup option one most likely to get up, good for them, but the question is when??? (If we wind the clock back before PN Tasrail screw up, I thought TTMS had the potential to be the most successful as they are in the heart of a large population and tourist centre and perhaps the dinner/lunch train along the Hobart Branch was something that may have worked?)

Personal opinion is I hope someone is able to do something viable with the former ROW using a train or tram.
  Dangersdan707 Junior Train Controller

Location: On a Thing with Internet
sorry I saw it on a board during dark Mofo about the redevelopment of the port thank you for correcting me:D
  Dangersdan707 Junior Train Controller

Location: On a Thing with Internet
the rails around the wharf I believe are the Tasmanian 3,6 (duh) and they are still visible though the are filled with ash felt
The tram around the botanical gardens and through the port area to Salamanica (if that far) is probably the most likely to be successful. Trams are lower cost to run than a train and its in the middle of the main Hobart tourist area, but not too long in route km to be high cost. Not sure on the current status of the Frankin Wharf rails, been many years since I was last there but if not changed too much I suspect most is still intact. Main issue is the construction of the power supply wire, but a genset is a stop gap and done elsewhere.
RTT_Rules
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
the rails around the wharf I believe are the Tasmanian 3,6 (duh) and they are still visible though the are filled with ash felt
The tram around the botanical gardens and through the port area to Salamanica (if that far) is probably the most likely to be successful. Trams are lower cost to run than a train and its in the middle of the main Hobart tourist area, but not too long in route km to be high cost. Not sure on the current status of the Frankin Wharf rails, been many years since I was last there but if not changed too much I suspect most is still intact. Main issue is the construction of the power supply wire, but a genset is a stop gap and done elsewhere.
Dangersdan707
If I recall the rails have been "preserved" for potential use by the Hobart Tram group for many years as there has been a number of proposals to run a tram along the old branch to the Market.

Fortunately Tassie tram network was 3'6" which is a tad rare in the tram world as most tram networks for standardised than the railway networks.
  12CSVT Chief Commissioner

Location: Drowning in accreditation red tape!
Wrong! wrong! wrong! Besides the original claim being bulls%$t, TTMS have worked hard on developing a business plan to run heritage services, initially between Glenorchy and Chigwell / Claremont (to connect with MONA at Berriedale). The proposal is currently before the State Govt and being assessed.

Meanwhile Hobart Tram Restoration Society have a proposal before the State Govt to run the Hobart Councils restored trams between Mac Point and Botanical Gardens. Again this is being assessed by the State Govt.

Both proposals have the backing of the Glenorchy City administrator and Hobart City Council respectively.

Subsequent to these plans, the Hobart Northern Suburbs Railway proposal always included capacity for T&HR access to cruise ships at Hobart Port. This is a long term part of DVR's Business Plan. The HNSR proposal continues to build steam in conjunction with the "Hobart City Deal" application before the Fed Govt which includes the relocation of the Uni of Tas STEM Dept to the Hobart CBD, and with such further relocation of Uni of Tas facilities to the CBD, further justifies the HNSR as an intrinsic part of the whole Hobart City Deal application.
Hardly Steve

You have already explained that successive Tas state govt has little interest in support Heritage Rail so there is a difference between wishful thinking and reality. How many years has DVR being trying to get back the DV Branch? Closure of the Hobart branch by Tasrail has meant if TTMS want access, they must incur all costs of upkeep, a challenge easier said than done.

Has there ever been a local council that has opposed a Heritage Rail project, probably yes but they support verbally and anything they can do to help but not where it counts most, ie funding apart from token donations.

There will be no Northern Suburbs Railway for cruise ships. I know in the past DV have been chartered but is a dozen or so ships in the past enough? DVR could not support both the Hobart branch and the Derwent Valley Branch. Way too much track for too few riders.

Meanwhile yo have indicated there are other vested groups trying to get the NE Line and maybe up to Wynyard. How much do we think the state can actually support? Surely the govt must also be asking the same questions. The Hobart branch is ironically likely to be the most attractive to users as its "in their face" so to speak and could be used as a means of transport to connect some of the key tourist locations, if services were frequent enough, another issue.

The tram around the botanical gardens and through the port area to Salamanica (if that far) is probably the most likely to be successful. Trams are lower cost to run than a train and its in the middle of the main Hobart tourist area, but not too long in route km to be high cost. Not sure on the current status of the Frankin Wharf rails, been many years since I was last there but if not changed too much I suspect most is still intact. Main issue is the construction of the power supply wire, but a genset is a stop gap and done elsewhere.

The of course there is the Hobart LR project, while extremely unlikely but if it was to go ahead non of the above mentioned proposals would be possible.

If TTMS can get hold of a few km of track, probably the lowest cost startup option one most likely to get up, good for them, but the question is when??? (If we wind the clock back before PN Tasrail screw up, I thought TTMS had the potential to be the most successful as they are in the heart of a large population and tourist centre and perhaps the dinner/lunch train along the Hobart Branch was something that may have worked?)

Personal opinion is I hope someone is able to do something viable with the former ROW using a train or tram.
RTT_Rules
It's easy to say at present, these proposals will "never happen", however I concede it is just as easy to say they "will happen". In the end, it will be a matter of wait and see.

Yes, T&HR developments in Tas have been stagnant for well over a decade now and the impression is that will continue, but public and political pressure is growing and the established T&HR groups have made major progress in getting their proposals professionally costed and presented.

As I stated previously and you re-iterated, the current State Govt is generally hostile to rail, but when it comes to survival, its amazing the (perceived by them) smelly dog-cr#p politicians will eat if they think it could advantage their ambitions!

Can Tas support multiple T&HR operations around the state? Well tourism numbers are breaking all-time records and as long as T&HR operations are well spaced around the state in strategic locations and offer different products, there is no reason the current T&HR proposals cant all prosper (with the WCWR and IBR potentially the flies in the ointment due to their remote locations).

When the Three Capes bushwalking trails were being developed, there were constant cries that they would never be viable or diminish the existing Overland and South Cape tracks. Guess what? Three Capes is doing brilliantly whilst Overland and South Cape have seen no declines as a result. Thus, the analogy with the T&HR proposals suggests, right place, right product, no problem!
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
It's easy to say at present, these proposals will "never happen", however I concede it is just as easy to say they "will happen". In the end, it will be a matter of wait and see.

Yes, T&HR developments in Tas have been stagnant for well over a decade now and the impression is that will continue, but public and political pressure is growing and the established T&HR groups have made major progress in getting their proposals professionally costed and presented.

As I stated previously and you re-iterated, the current State Govt is generally hostile to rail, but when it comes to survival, its amazing the (perceived by them) smelly dog-cr#p politicians will eat if they think it could advantage their ambitions!

Can Tas support multiple T&HR operations around the state? Well tourism numbers are breaking all-time records and as long as T&HR operations are well spaced around the state in strategic locations and offer different products, there is no reason the current T&HR proposals cant all prosper (with the WCWR and IBR potentially the flies in the ointment due to their remote locations).

When the Three Capes bushwalking trails were being developed, there were constant cries that they would never be viable or diminish the existing Overland and South Cape tracks. Guess what? Three Capes is doing brilliantly whilst Overland and South Cape have seen no declines as a result. Thus, the analogy with the T&HR proposals suggests, right place, right product, no problem!
12CSVT
Hi Steve,
I'm no against any of the proposals, however I do believe for some there are better options for the former ROW and in-particular the NE line for which we have previously discussed and for others the idea of running trains, especially steam trains is I think too extravagant for too small a market and focus should be still be rail based but scaled back to something much smaller for which you explained was the case in some circumstances.

Apart from that I wish good luck to them, although I doubt I will booking a trip any time soon.

Regards
Shane

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: Harrison150s, RTT_Rules

Display from: