Transtopic, you know I was being sarcastic. I might have considered a career in politics, but I don't like whiteboards and political parties only pander to city dwellers.

Why not?  It seems to me to be a pretty pathetic attitude to only build a main interstate rail route to a sub-standard level just to accommodate freight.  Is the Inland Rail project being built to these same standards because it won't be catering for passenger services?  I would have thought that freight warranted a higher standard because of the heavier loads and the ability to run at higher speeds.  ARTC must have a different attitude with the Hunter Valley coal lines.

Why not?  It seems to me to be a pretty pathetic attitude to only build a main interstate rail route to a sub-standard level just to accommodate freight.  Is the Inland Rail project being built to these same standards because it won't be catering for passenger services?  I would have thought that freight warranted a higher standard because of the heavier loads and the ability to run at higher speeds.  ARTC must have a different attitude with the Hunter Valley coal lines.

As per https://inlandrail.artc.com.au/program the Inland is being built to a standard which will allow freight trains to run at 115km/h with 21 TLA. I am not sure what this will translate to for pax services if applicable but possible 130km/h. This is the standard that the NE line is currently at (130 allowed for "super premium" freight the last time I checked)

This project is budgeted* to cost $9.3 Billion *remember this is a government funded project so who knows where the budget will actually end up

Any move to increase the standard to 160km/h or beyond for higher speed pax services would result in large cost increases to the project. Remember it is not just track standards but signalling etc etc. Running higher speed pax services on the Inland would also result in conflicts between train movements which would inevitably delay freights - the exact problem that the Inland seeks to solve.

The Melbourne to Albury section is the exception as it already has passenger services running on it. Decades of poor management and lack of maintenance got it to it's current point. The ARTC was not interested in fixing the line for a small number of passenger services, the line was and is (almost) fine for it's freight customers. The NE line upgrade for higher speed pax running is a political project, no more, no less. If governments want to throw a whack of taxpayer $$$ at it to appease an electorate or two then so be it but don't expect everyone else including IA to stand aside and form a cheer squad.

What a joke 21 TAL. Should be 30 TAL and built to full US standards.

Why not?  It seems to me to be a pretty pathetic attitude to only build a main interstate rail route to a sub-standard level just to accommodate freight.  Is the Inland Rail project being built to these same standards because it won't be catering for passenger services?  I would have thought that freight warranted a higher standard because of the heavier loads and the ability to run at higher speeds.  ARTC must have a different attitude with the Hunter Valley coal lines.

As per https://inlandrail.artc.com.au/program the Inland is being built to a standard which will allow freight trains to run at 115km/h with 21 TLA. I am not sure what this will translate to for pax services if applicable but possible 130km/h. This is the standard that the NE line is currently at (130 allowed for "super premium" freight the last time I checked)

This project is budgeted* to cost $9.3 Billion *remember this is a government funded project so who knows where the budget will actually end up

Any move to increase the standard to 160km/h or beyond for higher speed pax services would result in large cost increases to the project. Remember it is not just track standards but signalling etc etc. Running higher speed pax services on the Inland would also result in conflicts between train movements which would inevitably delay freights - the exact problem that the Inland seeks to solve.

The Melbourne to Albury section is the exception as it already has passenger services running on it. Decades of poor management and lack of maintenance got it to it's current point. The ARTC was not interested in fixing the line for a small number of passenger services, the line was and is (almost) fine for it's freight customers. The NE line upgrade for higher speed pax running is a political project, no more, no less. If governments want to throw a whack of taxpayer $$$ at it to appease an electorate or two then so be it but don't expect everyone else including IA to stand aside and form a cheer squad.

What a joke 21 TAL. Should be 30 TAL and built to full US standards.

The Inland on the other hand is IMO a project of national significance and should be built even if the cost-benefit doesn't stack up as it will (hopefully) end up having many more benefits that first thought especially environmental.Is not the NE line part of the Inland Rail project?Yes but does it need the upgrade for freight?

Decades of poor management and lack of maintenance got it to it's current point.

The Inland on the other hand is IMO a project of national significance and should be built even if the cost-benefit doesn't stack up as it will (hopefully) end up having many more benefits that first thought especially environmental.Is not the NE line part of the Inland Rail project?Yes but does it need the upgrade for freight?Depends on what the upgrade provides. Higher speed is not necessary for freight, but a stronger track is cheaper and easier to maintain. ARTC would/((should?) look to use the funding to build as strong a track as the budget allows.

Decades of poor management and lack of maintenance got it to it's current point.All the work that has been done since it was fobbed off to ARTC has been catchup work for a track that was just about a basket case. There is still a lot of work required to bring it up to a standard that'll cope with only a 'reasonable' amount of maintenance, work that is beyond ARTC's ability to fund internally.

Decades of poor management and lack of maintenance got it to it's current point.The NE std gauge has never been a high quality track, even from day one. It was not wanted by the Victorian government but imposed in a political deal. IIRC, I've read that the Commonwealth's budget was £5m which Victoria would not supplement. The result (built by the VR) was a formation constructed with dubious material, shallow ballast, short light rails, and absolutely minimal maintenance (with no upgrades at all) the whole time it was in the care of the VR. All the work that has been done since it was fobbed off to ARTC has been catchup work for a track that was just about a basket case. There is still a lot of work required to bring it up to a standard that'll cope with only a 'reasonable' amount of maintenance, work that is beyond ARTC's ability to fund internally.

What a joke 21 TAL. Should be 30 TAL and built to full US standards.

The Inland on the other hand is IMO a project of national significance and should be built even if the cost-benefit doesn't stack up as it will (hopefully) end up having many more benefits that first thought especially environmental.Is not the NE line part of the Inland Rail project?Yes but does it need the upgrade for freight?Depends on what the upgrade provides. Higher speed is not necessary for freight, but a stronger track is cheaper and easier to maintain. ARTC would/((should?) look to use the funding to build as strong a track as the budget allows.

It Is not ARTCs decision on what standard the track is built too, its the federal governments decision and for them to fund.
Artc hands nearly all its profits back and then asks for handouts/permission for upgrades or major repairs.

removing the XPTs from the equation the current track is no where near capacity apart from a few junction points where some investment would allow quicker movements through with less conflict. ie moss vale junee SSFL
even including the XPTs the network is only congested at times from mccarthur to Mossvale.

What speeds for 23 and 25 tonne axleloads, please?