Council joins calls for inland rail extension to Gladstone

 

News article: Council joins calls for inland rail extension to Gladstone

WHEN Glenn Churchill is settling down at a retirement village in Gladstone one day, he wants to be able to see the inland rail from Melbourne travelling into the Port City.

  x31 Chief Commissioner

Location: gallifrey
Is there any merit in considering this project? 

What would the commodities be and why would they be better on an inland route rather than the coastal route which currently exists?

I know we would be better with a single gauge but seriously trains on the SG don't really even use the Port of Brisbane.

I can see some value in that a connection from Northern Queensland to Katherine in the NT making it easier to get goods between the NT and Queensland and even NSW and further south.

Council joins calls for inland rail extension to Gladstone

Sponsored advertisement

  SinickleBird Chief Train Controller

Location: Qantas Club at Mudgee International Airport
Local councils are very adept at proposing ways to spend money on behalf of other levels of government - particularly rail (passenger or freight).

If only that creativity could be channeled into areas that council has responsibility for - like roads, rubbish, swimming pools, playgrounds.
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
Doesnt appear to add anything new.
I would like to know the outcome of the study though.
  Sulla1 Chief Commissioner

The North Queensland economy and population are each four times that of the Northern Territory. There is an almost certain inevitability that North Queensland will need to be connected to the national standard gauge network, but in what manner and at what cost will probably still take decades more to decide. The region's population is predicted to nearly double in the next 13-years, which theoretically means at least a doubling in the 9-million tonnes of contestable freight moved by road and rail in the North Coast Line/Bruce Highway corridor.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The easy answer is for QR to convert their lines to SG and then the problem goes away.
  br30453 Chief Train Controller

The easy answer is for QR to convert their lines to SG and then the problem goes away.
simstrain
Not so easy, almost impossible.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The easy answer is for QR to convert their lines to SG and then the problem goes away.
Not so easy, almost impossible.
br30453

Very easy to do. Feds come in and say we want all of this track in the south west outside of the brisbane cbd that is not being used for passenger rail to convert it to SG for connection to the main SG network.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
The North Queensland economy and population are each four times that of the Northern Territory. There is an almost certain inevitability that North Queensland will need to be connected to the national standard gauge network, but in what manner and at what cost will probably still take decades more to decide. The region's population is predicted to nearly double in the next 13-years, which theoretically means at least a doubling in the 9-million tonnes of contestable freight moved by road and rail in the North Coast Line/Bruce Highway corridor.
Sulla1

Those figures are interesting and if SG was to come up to the North would you expect NG lines around the inland network to be converted?
  Sulla1 Chief Commissioner

The easy answer is for QR to convert their lines to SG and then the problem goes away.
Not so easy, almost impossible.

Very easy to do. Feds come in and say we want all of this track in the south west outside of the brisbane cbd that is not being used for passenger rail to convert it to SG for connection to the main SG network.
simstrain

Are you serious? Have you been following the ongoing standardisation debacles in Victoria? The Federal Government "making" a State Government do something that costs the state a lot of money is akin to herding cats. There's nearly 700km of active track in the South West and another 1000km on the Western Line, if it's included, and combined these lines could easily cost more than $4-billion to standardise. And while standardising the South Western lines may have considerable merit, it represents no part of Queensland north of Brisbane that will remain isolated from the national standard gauge system even when the Inland Rail is built. QR has another 6000km of mostly heavy haul, heavy traffic track north of Brisbane, and then there's Aurizon's 2,200km of mostly electrified, mostly duplicated coal lines.
  Sulla1 Chief Commissioner

The North Queensland economy and population are each four times that of the Northern Territory. There is an almost certain inevitability that North Queensland will need to be connected to the national standard gauge network, but in what manner and at what cost will probably still take decades more to decide. The region's population is predicted to nearly double in the next 13-years, which theoretically means at least a doubling in the 9-million tonnes of contestable freight moved by road and rail in the North Coast Line/Bruce Highway corridor.

Those figures are interesting and if SG was to come up to the North would you expect NG lines around the inland network to be converted?
bevans

1. Standardising the existing North Coast Line under traffic will probably be too expensive and take too many studies to acheive, I'd almost rule that out at the moment.

2.Tennant Creek to Mt Isa/Mt Isa to Townsville standard gauging option might be the cheapest option, although once again difficult under traffic, this line is still carrying ten or more trains a day. It won't provide much in the way of direct rail routings to the rest of the country and misses the existing and future industrial developments around Gladstone, however it is the only option anyone in politics is currently talking about.

3. A standard gauge option reaching Central and North Queensland with new-build lines originating from the Inland Rail route west of Brisbane that fills in gaps between whatever open access standard or dual gauge coal lines to be built into the Surat and Galilee Basins (a lot of ifs there) - how big those gaps could be between the proposed coal lines will make or break that option. However such a route would roughly parallel the Gregory Highway Corridor, which is fast becoming the primary alternative road route to the Bruce Highway and will probably become the main heavy vehicle corridor between Brisbane and the North in the future - and freight always goes where the market decides it will go.
  M636C Minister for Railways

Were the grain traffic and coal traffic currently running to the Port of Brisbane to be diverted to Gladstone, there might be considerable savings in the construction of the proposed bypass tunnels needed to get the freight traffic away from the suburbs south of the Brisbane River.

Of course, there would have to be standard gauge lines to where that traffic originates.

There might be savings in the empty trains not having to climb the Toowoomba Range, although that would be countered by the longer distance to Gladstone.

But there could be double stack container traffic to and from Gladstone to Melbourne, Parkes and Perth if it suited the shipping companies...

Peter
  simstrain Chief Commissioner


Are you serious? Have you been following the ongoing standardisation debacles in Victoria? The Federal Government "making" a State Government do something that costs the state a lot of money is akin to herding cats. There's nearly 700km of active track in the South West and another 1000km on the Western Line, if it's included, and combined these lines could easily cost more than $4-billion to standardise. And while standardising the South Western lines may have considerable merit, it represents no part of Queensland north of Brisbane that will remain isolated from the national standard gauge system even when the Inland Rail is built. QR has another 6000km of mostly heavy haul, heavy traffic track north of Brisbane, and then there's Aurizon's 2,200km of mostly electrified, mostly duplicated coal lines.
Sulla1

The debacle in Victoria is because of who was doing that conversion and not just because it was being standardised.

As for the south west and western line that would be $4 billion well spent by the federal government.
  Dangersdan707 Chief Commissioner

Location: On a Thing with Internet

Are you serious? Have you been following the ongoing standardisation debacles in Victoria? The Federal Government "making" a State Government do something that costs the state a lot of money is akin to herding cats. There's nearly 700km of active track in the South West and another 1000km on the Western Line, if it's included, and combined these lines could easily cost more than $4-billion to standardise. And while standardising the South Western lines may have considerable merit, it represents no part of Queensland north of Brisbane that will remain isolated from the national standard gauge system even when the Inland Rail is built. QR has another 6000km of mostly heavy haul, heavy traffic track north of Brisbane, and then there's Aurizon's 2,200km of mostly electrified, mostly duplicated coal lines.
The debacle in Victoria is because of who was doing that conversion and not just because it was being standardised.

As for the south west and western line that would be $4 billion well spent by the federal government.
simstrain
Rolling Eyes As good as you Fantasies to convert the Deniliquin line
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
There is no benefit in the next generation or 25y to build Std Gauge to Gladstone. To do so adds nearly 500km to the haulage task over going via Brisbane.

The exception would be a large scale coal mine that would exceed the capacity of POB.

Conversion of the NCL to DG will never happen due to the overhead  You basically have to build a parrallel line and the cost and then there is the complexity to get through Brisbane would be off the charts.
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
There is no benefit in the next generation or 25y to build Std Gauge to Gladstone. To do so adds nearly 500km to the haulage task over going via Brisbane.

The exception would be a large scale coal mine that would exceed the capacity of POB.

Conversion of the NCL to DG will never happen due to the overhead  You basically have to build a parrallel line and the cost and then there is the complexity to get through Brisbane would be off the charts.
RTT_Rules
500km from where?

Agreed coal will be needed to provide volume to justify an economic analysis

Converting to SG surely could be done in somewhat of a staged manner instead of doing parallel construction?

And controversial question - the overhead - given its used by the passenger trains only, is it really needed?
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
Conversion of the NCL to DG will never happen due to the overhead  You basically have to build a parrallel line and the cost and then there is the complexity to get through Brisbane would be off the charts.
RTT_Rules
Is the QR North Coast line overhead too low for existing SG trains that like run from Sydney to Brisbane.

Yes more or less a freight rail bypass would be needed between The Port of Brisbane and Caboolture to clear the complexity and congestion of the suburban system.

A lot of loading gauge Issues would need to be sorted out North of Caboolture (adding SG loading gauge along with dual gauge to an existing tight NG loading gauge corridor, will need a lot of work) "WAGR did It on their Goldfields line, In the mid 60's" (But of course the QR North Coast line Is a very different beast compered to the WAGR Goldfields line)
  justapassenger Chief Commissioner

Very easy to do. Feds come in and say we want all of this track in the south west outside of the brisbane cbd that is not being used for passenger rail to convert it to SG for connection to the main SG network.
simstrain
There's the small matter of the Constitution to consider…
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

There's the small matter of the Constitution to consider…
justapassenger

The feds don’t have the power to force the states to do anything, but they do control the nation’s purse-strings, so they can get what they want most of the time.

It’s virtually impossible for states to fund infrastructure from their own accounts (though the Metro Tunnel in Melbourne is an interesting exception.)
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
With regional rail that is not recovering costs I'm sure the states would hand it to the feds if they absolved them of future liability
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
The Overhead from Cabulture to Gympie is used by interurban services and this will only get busier with time. So an SG up this way will not be DG of tracks used by sparks.

So 170km of stand alone track.

Now north to Bundy, about 200km is used by four services daily RTT and long term this is likely to remain and may even expanded. If you want to use the existing line you have to convince the QLD govt to replace the RTT with diesel and remove OH.


Now next 200km to Gladstone is used by once daily RTT. You could argue this section of OH would be removed and line conveyed to DG as it's mostly realigned and mostly suited to SG.

Yes single stacked containers fit under OH, but DS doesn't.

Now from Brisbane to north you will need 100% stand alone freight line. If you want DS then you need to start from A.R.

So for all this Billion or so, what is the benefit or problem trying to be solved? Without DS may as well gauge change at AR. Cost of introducing DS along coast would be astronomical.

So place the while concept into the pointless bin and focus on real issues.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner


Are you serious? Have you been following the ongoing standardisation debacles in Victoria? The Federal Government "making" a State Government do something that costs the state a lot of money is akin to herding cats. There's nearly 700km of active track in the South West and another 1000km on the Western Line, if it's included, and combined these lines could easily cost more than $4-billion to standardise. And while standardising the South Western lines may have considerable merit, it represents no part of Queensland north of Brisbane that will remain isolated from the national standard gauge system even when the Inland Rail is built. QR has another 6000km of mostly heavy haul, heavy traffic track north of Brisbane, and then there's Aurizon's 2,200km of mostly electrified, mostly duplicated coal lines.
The debacle in Victoria is because of who was doing that conversion and not just because it was being standardised.

As for the south west and western line that would be $4 billion well spent by the federal government.Rolling Eyes As good as you Fantasies to convert the Deniliquin line
Dangersdan707

Your hatred of SG makes it impossible to discuss anything with you in this regard so I'm just going to ignore you.
  cuthbert Train Controller

There is an option for the coal to go from the Surat Basin to Gladstone and almost built before coal prices dropped. Banana to Wandoen - the Missing Link. It would free-up the Western Line through Ipswich for more passenger services and allow the coal to go to the under utilised Gladstone port. The line could eventually be DG ready and with up-grade of the track either side, connect to the IR from "The Woomba".
  62440 Chief Commissioner

There is an option for the coal to go from the Surat Basin to Gladstone and almost built before coal prices dropped. Banana to Wandoen - the Missing Link. It would free-up the Western Line through Ipswich for more passenger services and allow the coal to go to the under utilised Gladstone port. The line could eventually be DG ready and with up-grade of the track either side, connect to the IR from "The Woomba".
cuthbert
We looked at Wandoan Banana 20 years ago, there is a study somewhere. Not an easy corridor to define but some amazing bridges needed. It took coal and mineral trains away from the route through Brisbane. It had enough dual gauge on the western line to allow trains to Quilpie
  cuthbert Train Controller

"Bring it on" I say, can only be a good thing for SEQ general freight and passenger expansion on the existing lines choked by coal trains.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

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