Inland railway Melbourne - Brisbane

 
  Jack Le Lievre Chief Train Controller

Location: Moolap Station, Vic
The ARTC Inland Rail Team have released an Artist's Impression of the Ilabo to Stockinbingal (I2S) Alignment Fly-Through.



https://youtu.be/B1DN9KjnUnA

Sponsored advertisement

  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
Wow designs have progressed quite a bit now.  Some interesting grade separations and road realignments there too - the Burley Griffin Way will change quite a bit.

Lets see what the landowners think now and how much stink they start throwing up.
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
Didnt take long for them to remove that video....
  ngarner Train Controller

Location: Seville
I've scanned this thread quickly but haven't found anything related to this question: Why is ARTC bothering to modify from Tottenham to Somerton when there is effectively nothing at Tottenham where a double stack SG train can be 1/ stabled and 2/ the top row of containers removed?
To go to that expense seems typical government bureaucracy, especially when you end up so close to the port of Melbourne with only the Bunbury St tunnel and the Maribyrnong River bridge being the only remaining limits on taking a double stack all the way into the port.
If they intend the double stack trains to terminate at Somerton, which makes more sense, especially if Andrews can, finally, get his Port Rail system operating, why spend the extra on Somerton to Tottenham?
As Inland rail is being promoted as Brisbane to Melbourne, not Brisbane to Adelaide or Perth via Melbourne, the likelihood of sending double stack trains via Brooklyn to head west seems low when Parkes seems more likely to become a hub for west bound traffic.
Any comments?

Neil
  lkernan Assistant Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
Didnt take long for them to remove that video....
james.au
It's back again.
  justapassenger Chief Commissioner

I've scanned this thread quickly but haven't found anything related to this question: Why is ARTC bothering to modify from Tottenham to Somerton when there is effectively nothing at Tottenham where a double stack SG train can be 1/ stabled and 2/ the top row of containers removed?
To go to that expense seems typical government bureaucracy, especially when you end up so close to the port of Melbourne with only the Bunbury St tunnel and the Maribyrnong River bridge being the only remaining limits on taking a double stack all the way into the port.
If they intend the double stack trains to terminate at Somerton, which makes more sense, especially if Andrews can, finally, get his Port Rail system operating, why spend the extra on Somerton to Tottenham?
As Inland rail is being promoted as Brisbane to Melbourne, not Brisbane to Adelaide or Perth via Melbourne, the likelihood of sending double stack trains via Brooklyn to head west seems low when Parkes seems more likely to become a hub for west bound traffic.
Any comments?

Neil
ngarner
Don't you think it would be a good idea to make the corridor directly accessible from the major industrial areas in the west of Melbourne instead of restricting service to a white elephant out on the northern side of town?

The aim should be to make rail a more attractive option than it is currently, not to add an extra couple of rounds of handling that would only serve as additional incentive for customers to say "stuff it, I'll get a truck."

That it's only to Tottenham at this point says to me that the decision has not yet been made as to whether the last section to be included from there will be towards Melbourne or towards Laverton.
  ngarner Train Controller

Location: Seville
Sure, Tottenham is a great location for connection to the industrial west but, again, there's nothing at Tottenham for SG trains to stable or unload currently. If it was BG then the existing yard is well placed. Getting a double stack to Tottenham is pointless if you want do anything with it currently without either taking over some or more of the existing BG yard or building a new one, neither of which appear to be on ATRC's agenda. That's extra money to be found to pay for.
Going the extra distance to the port would make perfect sense and, from memory, there aren't many height limits between Tottenham and Newport and beyond, two or three bridges. This raises another question: does ARTC own or lease the SG line through Bunbury St to North Dynon and the Port, or is that still in VLine's hands and so the Vic Government's responsibility? If in the hands of the State then that would explain the project starting/finishing at Tottenham.
I agree that encouraging more use of rail freight is a great aim and should be encouraged.

Neil

In answer to my own question, the ARTC web site shows that they have leased the SG lines from Sth Dynon / Dynon (which I take to mean Nth Dynon) to Tottenham, so any changes to Bunbury St & the Maribyrnong bridge would require at least a partial contribution from them. The BG component of the line might mean the State has to share some of the cost. ARTC Lease p117 has a list of KPIs on their lease by section of line
  trainbrain Deputy Commissioner

https://www.railexpress.com.au/inland-rail-study-to-be-expanded?fbclid=IwAR1jFeRqqVZFONPeB2uwKuHVTlWeWLhsMuOqR9Ewj3aBreVQMoDyNvOi8l8

What the heck is the CSIRO going to achieve with this study. The ARTC doesn't control that track and the track north of seymour is BG and not SG.
When did ARTC reconvert SG back to BG north of Seymour? Are we in 2008?

I am sure Dangersdan707 will be partying tonight in celebration!
Damm it, my plan has been found out! They Did it on my orders, Next is the Murray Basin to sneakily reconvert followed by Adelaide and Portland.

I'm Holding a Reconversion Party at Seymour tomorrow with a charter with H220 to celebrate this momentous occasion. You are all invited! XD
Dangersdan707
u must be smoking the funny weed again.
  Lockspike Deputy Commissioner

Wow designs have progressed quite a bit now.  Some interesting grade separations and road realignments there too - the Burley Griffin Way will change quite a bit.
james.au
In the future it would be simple to add a curve to the Eastern end of the Stockinbingal junction to create an alternative for Mel - Syd traffic to avoid the Bethungra spiral and the Frampton deviation

Lets see what the landowners think now and how much stink they start throwing up.
james.au


Yes, Google Maps shows a farm house and sheds right about where the Burley Griffen Way overpass is. Might be alright if the missus wants a new house
  Dangersdan707 Chief Commissioner

Location: On a Thing with Internet
https://www.railexpress.com.au/inland-rail-study-to-be-expanded?fbclid=IwAR1jFeRqqVZFONPeB2uwKuHVTlWeWLhsMuOqR9Ewj3aBreVQMoDyNvOi8l8

What the heck is the CSIRO going to achieve with this study. The ARTC doesn't control that track and the track north of seymour is BG and not SG.
When did ARTC reconvert SG back to BG north of Seymour? Are we in 2008?

I am sure Dangersdan707 will be partying tonight in celebration!
Damm it, my plan has been found out! They Did it on my orders, Next is the Murray Basin to sneakily reconvert followed by Adelaide and Portland.

I'm Holding a Reconversion Party at Seymour tomorrow with a charter with H220 to celebrate this momentous occasion. You are all invited! XD
u must be smoking the funny weed again.
trainbrain
Maybe I'm naturally like that...
  Jack Le Lievre Chief Train Controller

Location: Moolap Station, Vic
I've scanned this thread quickly but haven't found anything related to this question: Why is ARTC bothering to modify from Tottenham to Somerton when there is effectively nothing at Tottenham where a double stack SG train can be 1/ stabled and 2/ the top row of containers removed?
To go to that expense seems typical government bureaucracy, especially when you end up so close to the port of Melbourne with only the Bunbury St tunnel and the Maribyrnong River bridge being the only remaining limits on taking a double stack all the way into the port.
If they intend the double stack trains to terminate at Somerton, which makes more sense, especially if Andrews can, finally, get his Port Rail system operating, why spend the extra on Somerton to Tottenham?
As Inland rail is being promoted as Brisbane to Melbourne, not Brisbane to Adelaide or Perth via Melbourne, the likelihood of sending double stack trains via Brooklyn to head west seems low when Parkes seems more likely to become a hub for west bound traffic.
Any comments?

Neil
ngarner
Three words, Specialized Container Transport.
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
I've scanned this thread quickly but haven't found anything related to this question: Why is ARTC bothering to modify from Tottenham to Somerton when there is effectively nothing at Tottenham where a double stack SG train can be 1/ stabled and 2/ the top row of containers removed?
To go to that expense seems typical government bureaucracy, especially when you end up so close to the port of Melbourne with only the Bunbury St tunnel and the Maribyrnong River bridge being the only remaining limits on taking a double stack all the way into the port.
If they intend the double stack trains to terminate at Somerton, which makes more sense, especially if Andrews can, finally, get his Port Rail system operating, why spend the extra on Somerton to Tottenham?
As Inland rail is being promoted as Brisbane to Melbourne, not Brisbane to Adelaide or Perth via Melbourne, the likelihood of sending double stack trains via Brooklyn to head west seems low when Parkes seems more likely to become a hub for west bound traffic.
Any comments?

Neil
Three words, Specialized Container Transport.
Jack Le Lievre
Correct.  Tottenham turn left is the port (which is not what the inland is about), Tottenham turn right is Geelong (incl SCT at Altona)....
  ngarner Train Controller

Location: Seville
Who do SCT have the dirt on to get so much money spent to support their operations? Shocked

Neil
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
Who do SCT have the dirt on to get so much money spent to support their operations? Shocked

Neil
ngarner
This isn't just an SCT benefit, it benefits anyone operating on the DIRN.

Side question - how much of the Western line from Tottenham to Adelaide is dual stack?  (Is there a need for it)
  justapassenger Chief Commissioner

Side question - how much of the Western line from Tottenham to Adelaide is dual stack?
james.au
None of it is cleared for double stack trains.

New structures (road overpasses etc) are mostly being built high enough to allow for future double stacking, and the federal government has been helping to pay for that as an investment in future-proofing the railway.

However, there are still way too many older structures which would need to be removed/replaced to switch over.

(Is there a need for it)
james.au
Some would say no, others would say yes.

My opinion is that rail will be able to play a bigger part on the Adelaide-Melbourne sector if it becomes a European style freight route with electric-hauled fast freight cruising along at 140 km/h, with swap bodies introduced for domestic freight and rolling highway services. The future of electric trucks would be an opportunity for rail rather than a threat if we had European freight ops on this sort of corridor - how good would it be if Australia could have the first rolling highway trains in the world where the trucks would be plugged in to be charged up while they are on the train!

Others think that the future of Adelaide-Melbourne is Americanised operations optimised for Melbourne-Perth traffic.

Building in passive provision for increased vertical clearance is a good each way bet, as it can be used for either carrying double stacked containers or stringing up 25kV wires.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
  bingley hall Minister for Railways

Location: Last train to Skaville
bevans

Fake News.

I have been told many times that the Inland Rail project will never get off the ground.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
It certainly looks like new track and the project is already building rail.  I don't understand.
  Jack Le Lievre Chief Train Controller

Location: Moolap Station, Vic
bevans
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
This is just the left turn track from the Broken Hill line instead of straight into Parkes right?  So not really a wild crazy leap forward yeah?
  lkernan Assistant Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
This is just the left turn track from the Broken Hill line instead of straight into Parkes right?  So not really a wild crazy leap forward yeah?
james.au

It's also PN's new yard from memory?
  bingley hall Minister for Railways

Location: Last train to Skaville
This is just the left turn track from the Broken Hill line instead of straight into Parkes right?  So not really a wild crazy leap forward yeah?
james.au

Never been a triangle there before so it's reasonable step forward and part of the bigger plan. Wont be much use until the Parkes-Narromine section is re-opened. How much use it gets once everything is in place remains to be seen.

All those drought relief trains from South Australia to the north west will be saved a lot of faffing around at Parkes Razz
  freightgate Minister for Railways

Location: Albury, New South Wales
Not your fault bevans.

The government is trying to pass off works which could have gone ahead anyhow as inland major works.

What about the section via peak hill ?
  simstrain Chief Commissioner


Why the heck did they build a level crossing in to a new piece of rail?
  lkernan Assistant Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
Why the heck did they build a level crossing in to a new piece of rail?
simstrain
Because they did a cost and risk analysis and decided it wasn't worth doing anything else?

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: