XPT Replacement Discussion

 
  a6et Minister for Railways

Watching the patonage today (including those smoking on platforms... is prohibited... fines apply etc) you could hand the lot over to DOCS and be done with it. They probably have most of the passengers on its books anyway Wink

Seriously, does anyone really believe NSW will find the money to replace the XPTs. The guvmnt would be better off doing a Sydney Ferries deal (should be something left to shoot at). That might get you some new equipment. Idea
"cootanee"


I agree. I don't think the problem is the trains at the moment it is the alignment and the fact the xpt spends most of it's time not doing the 160km/h it should be.

Dubbo should be an xplorer service with a broken hill split at orange 1 or 2 times a week.

All endeavours should be converted to xplorers and more hunter rail cars built to replace the services the endeavours currently run and the possible future bathurst run.

But the main issue is that the lines need to be fixed. That is what is holding back the xpt and xplorer.
"jedimasterc"

Which is what I have been saying & reality is its not just a matter of replacing existing, that would be wasting money, to do the job properly it needs to be in conjunction with grade & curve realingments.

Sponsored advertisement

  a6et Minister for Railways

Watching the patonage today (including those smoking on platforms... is prohibited... fines apply etc) you could hand the lot over to DOCS and be done with it. They probably have most of the passengers on its books anyway Wink

Seriously, does anyone really believe NSW will find the money to replace the XPTs. The guvmnt would be better off doing a Sydney Ferries deal (should be something left to shoot at). That might get you some new equipment. Idea
"cootanee"


I agree. I don't think the problem is the trains at the moment it is the alignment and the fact the xpt spends most of it's time not doing the 160km/h it should be.
...
But the main issue is that the lines need to be fixed. That is what is holding back the xpt and xplorer.
"jedimasterc"


The lines in NSW took 30 years to get to the state where they needed to be flick passed to ARTC (and c/link reliability wasn't great anyway!).

ARTC the great white hope, but it was only brought into being:

1. for interstate freight
2.because the libs and state freight operators didn't want NRC owning the track
3. to cost less than AN, Vline, RIC/RAC

Not so much for XPTs and Xplorers!

It will take them at least another 5 years at current budget to fix the drainage / ballast issues (allowing for El Nino).

In the meantime we now have millions of sleepers capable of holding two rails together, Wagga bridge (and other bridges) replaced, a stack of extended/new passing loops and CTC at the border.

So lets be positive, 30 years to run the lot down, ARTC have had 8 years - give 'em another 22 to bring it back.
You may also have your XPT replacement just in time Wink

"cootanee"


Cootanee, one appreciates your loyalty towards ARTC etc. but the thing is that you put down the condition of the previous setup & yes it left a lot to be desired as it was, just like ARTC hamstrung by succesive government financial restraints. Certainly how it was prior to the heavier trains was meeting & coping with how things were, also El & La Nino's have been part & parcel of the Australian landscape for probably as long as the land has been out of water.

I mentioned throughout my posts the need for the track being fixed, & I believe like many others do, that do spend money just fixing the goat track that is there now without taking into consideration the real needs for the future which means curve & grade easing is just a waste of money.

What needs to happen is that those in charge of fixing the track need to make that abundantly clear to those who provide the money for it. After all they are the ones coping the flack & time they took the front foot in doing something about it by telling the powers that, yes we can fix what is there now over time, but the best long term return for money will be had in new track & alingments for the future.

That in all will benefit all users of the track, not just explorers, Xpt's but all the freight forwarders as well.
  fixitguy Chief Train Controller

Location: In Carriage 4 on a Tangara
Watching the patonage today (including those smoking on platforms... is prohibited... fines apply etc) you could hand the lot over to DOCS and be done with it. They probably have most of the passengers on its books anyway Wink

Seriously, does anyone really believe NSW will find the money to replace the XPTs. The guvmnt would be better off doing a Sydney Ferries deal (should be something left to shoot at). That might get you some new equipment. Idea
"cootanee"


I agree. I don't think the problem is the trains at the moment it is the alignment and the fact the xpt spends most of it's time not doing the 160km/h it should be.

Dubbo should be an xplorer service with a broken hill split at orange 1 or 2 times a week.

All endeavours should be converted to xplorers and more hunter rail cars built to replace the services the endeavours currently run and the possible future bathurst run.

But the main issue is that the lines need to be fixed. That is what is holding back the xpt and xplorer.
"jedimasterc"

Which is what I have been saying & reality is its not just a matter of replacing existing, that would be wasting money, to do the job properly it needs to be in conjunction with grade & curve realingments.
"a6et"


thats a good start. the nsw govt should buy the track back or build new tracks (can they) for our fastinterstate trains can semi rocket to bris and melb as a precurser to HSR.
the message from barry to julia "take that Julia"
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
br />
thats a good start. the nsw govt should buy the track back or build new tracks (can they) for our fastinterstate trains can semi rocket to bris and melb as a precurser to HSR.
the message from barry to julia "take that Julia"
"fixitguy"


WTF? NSW had its chance to do something, fail! And how many billions is NSW going to spend to build a completely new track to Broadmeadow to AR and Mcarthur to Melbourne and they will need to build a 2nd SSFL

The ARTC was sperated and formed to enable the interstate to be opened up to private operators using a 3rd party access agreement from a single shop front track owner with single standards and eliminate the state borders in the railways. Or something like that. Out of the entire 1990's rail privatisation, keeping the interstate govt ownered with private above rail operators has had the most sucessful outcome.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Not sure why you posted this exact reply in both threads, but I'll reply to this one only.

Ok, all the fancy streamline power cars are designed for long trains travelling at speed. Hence they need lots of grunt and aerodynamics. None of which is required here. NSW needs a flexible go anywhere fleet that can get to 160 and accelerate from 40-60 range to 120-140 quickly to make up for corners.
"RTT_Rules"


Quite so. This is precisely why I'm working towards as few variations as possible. This is actually why we came up with a hypothetical DEMU with two power cars but all axles motored (electric). The whole reason why I'm avoiding underfloor diesels is because I don't want to have people forking over good money to travel a premium class and have a restless journey because of several hundred horsepower roaring under their bed.

Like much of regional Europe away from HSR, this is the home of the DMU. Trains that can change with the traffic volumes and onboard requirements quickly and easily. Both XPT and XPL should be replaced with a single fleet of DMU's that collectively sleeper, buff, first class and 2nd class seaters, baggage.
"RTT_Rules"


I don't disagree with you on what cars should be in the consist, but unless a way can be found to mitigate the considerable noise and vibration experienced with underfloor diesels, I still believe a push-pull train is superior, just like how many people believe the InterCity 125 is superior in this regard to the DMUs that initially replaced them (initially, because they didn't work out and had 125's replace them).

I'm not closed to DMUs, but I need better justification as to why they are superior to a top-and-tail train in terms of serving passengers.

The only choice is are they are all 1 car sets that are joined together and have full walk through capability, or are they permanently coupled 2, 3 and 4 car sets added together as required. ie - 4 car sets has say baggage, Buff, sleeper, 1st and 2nd class seaters. Buffet car may also contain a small lounge section.- 3 car sets have same minus sleeper- 2 car sets have small buff, baggage and 2nd class seaters, maybe a small section (1-2 rows) of 1st class seats as per many European DMU's and regional commuter trains.
"RTT_Rules"


Errrr. I'd say fixed sets are too inflexible for country operation. They're great for suburban use, but not country.

Full walk-through is mandatory - that I don't dispute. Combinations of single cars is how the Xplorer fleet works, anyway. I am not, however, too keen on a fleet that is effectively an Xplorer kitted out as an XPT.

All seats and cabins have full In seat Entertainment and WIFI. No justification for more than 2 classes of seats
"RTT_Rules"


I would make it where only premium classes having at-seat entertainment, but WiFi for all. Also, there are only two seat classes and one sleeper class.

So for example the - BRisbane/Melbourne service maybe a 4 car set + 2, 3 or 4 car depending on demand- Grafton 3 car + what ever else demand requires- NW, 2+2 or 2+3 or 3+3- Dubbo, 3, 2+2, 2+3- Griffith, etc- Canberra, etc
"RTT_Rules"


Man, that's sparse.

Tilting to get a bit more speed on bends would be a bonus
"RTT_Rules"


For all?

Forget the fancy looking and completely unsuitable, expensive and infelxible nose trains. We have DMU in Aus now capable of 160-200. I have riden a fairly basic 2 car DMU in Sweden that had 2 classes of seating, toilets + four vending machines and room to store bikes, luggage etc in centre. They save space by only have a single mid car double door. So no real vestible. In same entrance is the vending machines and dubby and storage area.
"RTT_Rules"


I wouldn't call them unsuitable; and the nose is for aerodynamics. There'll be end cars and middle cars, and so the ends of the end cars can have a nice front.
"Watson374"


I posted in both because the OT was the same and my comment applied to both.

Underfloor Diesels are only as bad as they are designed. I would have thought the DEL types should provide smoother operation as the genset can be effectively mounted of vibration/noise free housing. They work in Europe and I don't see whey cannot be made to work here.

The push-pull XPT style is too inflexible for such a small operation like Countrylink and using two different forms of rollingstock just makes this even worse. All too often this comes to light with services basically haveing very very limited capacity to grow with peak periods or special events. The most flexible form of rolling stock for CL relatively small trains is DMU's or loco hauled. Loco hauled has its own problems. DMU's ahev proven their flexiblility in CL with trains merging, spiltting growing and shrinking. Walk through obviously has its benefits and should be maintained.

The examples given on train sizes was just to replace whats there now. If for example services grew, then for example 2 and 3 car sets could be made longer to accommadate.

Streamlining is a waste of space on these short trains. You loose more than you gain and potentially need to add another car to make up for lost space, so more fuel spent than saved. For speeds sub 100 is a complete waste of time and sub 200, marginal at best and really only works for longer trains. As most trains in NSW average sub 80km/hr, best not to waste time with this and leave it to the HSR.

If I can get ISE on EC flights that are shorter than what CL has tro offer, then CL needs to match. Also remember a flight normally only has one departure and arrival so its easy to put on a movie for say a 3hr flight and everyone doesn't miss out. But a train stops and starts so each pax has a different depature, arrival and duration.

The comment of fixed seating was basically two classes, not fixed. QR's concept seems to work well in that trains must be turned ands enables seats to be simpler and cheaper, especially on RTT where the entertainment system is overhead TV's.  However I understand the issue with NSW and not be able to turn trains so seats to be uni directional.

regards
Shane
  Watson374 Chief Commissioner

Location: Fully reclined at the pointy end.
I'll say it again, we have to (somehow) do it like QR - fix the track to allow both improved freight running as well as fast passenger running, and fund it as a project to improve freight rail with passenger rail benefits as a side plus. Sold as that, the freight corporations could be asked to chip in...

I posted in both because the OT was the same and my comment applied to both.
"RTT_Rules"


I would have posted in one and linked in the other, but Railpage isn't as strict with multiple-posting (both parallel and series).

Underfloor Diesels are only as bad as they are designed. I would have thought the DEL types should provide smoother operation as the genset can be effectively mounted of vibration/noise free housing. They work in Europe and I don't see whey cannot be made to work here.
"RTT_Rules"


Diesels are never "vibration/noise free". It's about how much insulation you install. Yes, the ideal is a DEMU, but of the older setup where we can have fewer diesels (say, two cars out of seven) and the other motors spread across the train (say, four cars - two with diesel, two slaved) and then the trailers. Even better would be just one power-supplying car at the Economy end, to keep it quiet for the premium classes. Laughing


The push-pull XPT style is too inflexible for such a small operation like Countrylink and using two different forms of rollingstock just makes this even worse.
"RTT_Rules"


Justify your claim about it being "inflexible" (note: if anyone thinks any of my claims/arguments is insufficiently justified, call me out on it and I'll patch it). The floating hive idea at the moment is to run the two long intercapital services with dedicated consists that won't be changed between runs. It doesn't need to be flexible, not if it only rests for an hour, twice a day.

All too often this comes to light with services basically haveing very very limited capacity to grow with peak periods or special events. The most flexible form of rolling stock for CL relatively small trains is DMU's or loco hauled. Loco hauled has its own problems. DMU's ahev proven their flexiblility in CL with trains merging, spiltting growing and shrinking. Walk through obviously has its benefits and should be maintained.
"RTT_Rules"


I've reached a similar conclusion. The ability to split Armidale/Moree and Canberra/Griffith is certainly advantageous. However, with some creativity, locomotive-hauled services can be made to work.

One method that I've heard suggested is to recycle the XPT trailers as they're in much better condition than the power cars (a similar problem to the InterCity 125). Their new use would most likely be as loco-hauled stock, pulled by diesels from someone else (one of the freight companies, in all probability) on a hook-and-pull contract basis.

It would likely work quite well for runs with more cars, such as the Dubbo or Grafton trains, but for short trains it might not work nearly as well, as it's a bit silly to haul three cars with 3,300hp of brute traction.




The examples given on train sizes was just to replace whats there now. If for example services grew, then for example 2 and 3 car sets could be made longer to accommadate. Streamlining is a waste of space on these short trains. You loose more than you gain and potentially need to add another car to make up for lost space, so more fuel spent than saved. For speeds sub 100 is a complete waste of time and sub 200, marginal at best and really only works for longer trains. As most trains in NSW average sub 80km/hr, best not to waste time with this and leave it to the HSR.
"RTT_Rules"


See my comments in the Xplorer replacement thread regarding limited streamlining. I'll post some images for your viewing pleasure.



This is what I want - nothing too extreme.


Not this.

If I can get ISE on EC flights that are shorter than what CL has tro offer, then CL needs to match. Also remember a flight normally only has one departure and arrival so its easy to put on a movie for say a 3hr flight and everyone doesn't miss out. But a train stops and starts so each pax has a different depature, arrival and duration.
"RTT_Rules"


O-kayy. I'll admit I've flown a lot. My last long-haul flight was Qantas, from Singapore to Sydney. It was a fairly long flight, at just under eight hours. Despite the fact that everyone gets on in Singapore and gets off in Sydney, everyone (even in Economy) gets a full entertainment library where they can choose their very own entertainment. (Apart from a very fun chat with two German students and an American businessman in the back area with the fridges, I used it to drown myself in Avril Lavigne and Taylor Swift.)

I intend for our premium classes to enjoy something similar, so they can tailor their entertainment to their own requirements. Free WiFi is another one, with a plugpoint for every seat for the premium classes, and charging stations for Economy.

The comment of fixed seating was basically two classes, not fixed. QR's concept seems to work well in that trains must be turned ands enables seats to be simpler and cheaper, especially on RTT where the entertainment system is overhead TV's. However I understand the issue with NSW and not be able to turn trains so seats to be uni directional.
"RTT_Rules"


And what are your two classes?

There is the alternative, BR solution, which was to have half face one way and half face the other - think of a Tangara, but facing inwards, not outwards. However, for the current floating hive idea, seats are only really a problem for Economy, since First consists of twinette cabins and Business consists of 2+1 forwards-backwards flatbeds; Economy seats can probably be made to rotate as per current installations.

I was analysing the idea of providing roomette accommodation to cater to the business traveller travelling alone. However, it gave even less capacity than my original forwards-backwards cabin, and I decided that it was more practical to retain that, but improve the inter-passenger shielding, and provide earplugs and nightshades.

I think it's fairly obvious from the kitting out that I'm thinking in terms of air travel ;P
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
...
Cootanee, one appreciates your loyalty towards ARTC etc. but the thing is that you put down the condition of the previous setup & yes it left a lot to be desired as it was, just like ARTC hamstrung by succesive government financial restraints. Certainly how it was prior to the heavier trains was meeting & coping with how things were, also El & La Nino's have been part & parcel of the Australian landscape for probably as long as the land has been out of water.

I mentioned throughout my posts the need for the track being fixed, & I believe like many others do, that do spend money just fixing the goat track that is there now without taking into consideration the real needs for the future which means curve & grade easing is just a waste of money.

....
"a6et"


1. I have no loyalty to ARTC. However I saw how NRC had uphill battles trying to get NSW to move on any rail projects.
2. A decade later the Feds trying get NSW moving on the NSFC works (only took 7 years)!!!
3. Recognise that the demise of rail infrastructure under state government stewardship isn't going to be turned around overnight but at least the new lot is having a go.
4. The extremety of the rain event is well documented. Unfortunate timing for ARTC.

5. I don't see the point stating the bleeding obvious about what should be done whilst conveniently ignoring commercial reality. Rolling Eyes

So knowing what I knew in 2004 I would have done the same as ARTC - spend what money I could get to fix the goat track as best I could - roll the dice and do it. Just like buying a slab of shares three weeks before Lehmann went bust.

P.S. Happy for JHR to take it over (as for handing it back to NSW - LaughingLaughingLaughing).
  a6et Minister for Railways

I would say that loco hauled trains provide a vast degree of flexibility in regard to loadings, which has been shown in the past.

The biggest issue with them is that to provide the flexibility is that they need sufficient spare carriages to enable them to be built up as needed, but that is the exact same issue with the XPT & DMU sets anyway.  As has been said the XPT's were originally set as a 7 car + 2 power cars, then built up to 8 with the introduction of the day/nighter cars on the interstate & MBWH services, which really is the limit of their potential, even with the upgraded donks.

Loco hauled trains, can be split in any combo needed, but the problem is that with Air Conditioning seen as essential & rightly so, an airconditioning unit is required for each train, thus a train that divides needs on for each section on division. However I do not think that is a hindrance at all. 

Currently there are no spare carriages or car sets to provide additional seats at peak & holiday times, no extra trains are run, as no other type of passenger train is available, nor are there any spare carriages that could be used behind loco's except of course what the heritage mobs own & operate.

It is possible to build diesels that are suited to fast train schedules that are just as at home on freight services, by doing that a not too large a fleet of such loco's could readilly work such services, & fresh engines available at each end of the run, & as I said they do not need to stay around for 12 hours for a return as they can work fast freight services as well, in order to have them positioned at each end of the service.

When the XPT first ran to Armidale the Moree service was bus, but then a DEB set was provided for connection being serviced & allocated to WCK.  If a loco hauled train was provided, the same arrangement can be made there & in other locations also, just as in the old loco hauled days, & today the northern end is on the lead but, with the loco hauled sets, the train stopped short of the station divided & the northern service ran forward to the Station, then the Moree engine & any vehicle came out coupled up & drew forward to the station. All up 13 minutes was allowed.

While a full air conditioned van is needed to the dividing point, a smaller unit, similar to that which was on the HUB sets, & capable of servicing 8 carriages is all that is needed on the divided sections, thus an additional car with the air conditioner in one end can be set on the train to operate at the point of division.  It could be started up using jumper coupling from the loco.

Its cheaper to order carriages then DMU & XPT's & having several spare carriages also allowed for them to be not just to build up existing services but also provide extra services, at a lesser cost than the dedicated trains.
  a6et Minister for Railways

...
Cootanee, one appreciates your loyalty towards ARTC etc. but the thing is that you put down the condition of the previous setup & yes it left a lot to be desired as it was, just like ARTC hamstrung by succesive government financial restraints. Certainly how it was prior to the heavier trains was meeting & coping with how things were, also El & La Nino's have been part & parcel of the Australian landscape for probably as long as the land has been out of water.

I mentioned throughout my posts the need for the track being fixed, & I believe like many others do, that do spend money just fixing the goat track that is there now without taking into consideration the real needs for the future which means curve & grade easing is just a waste of money.

....
"a6et"


1. I have no loyalty to ARTC. However I saw how NRC had uphill battles trying to get NSW to move on any rail projects.
2. A decade later the Feds trying get NSW moving on the NSFC works (only took 7 years)!!!
3. Recognise that the demise of rail infrastructure under state government stewardship isn't going to be turned around overnight but at least the new lot is having a go.
4. The extremety of the rain event is well documented. Unfortunate timing for ARTC.

5. I don't see the point stating the bleeding obvious about what should be done whilst conveniently ignoring commercial reality. Rolling Eyes

So knowing what I knew in 2004 I would have done the same as ARTC - spend what money I could get to fix the goat track as best I could - roll the dice and do it. Just like buying a slab of shares three weeks before Lehmann went bust.

P.S. Happy for JHR to take it over (as for handing it back to NSW - LaughingLaughingLaughing).
"cootanee"


1:  It seems that your posts have constantly lauded ARTC, in what they were/are doing.  I don't disagree that NSW has lagged but working when Askin through Shirley decimated the system to such an extent that succesive governments of all persuasions had an uphill battle, even after tragedy of Granville which turned things around for a while.  When Governments are run by Treasury it fails.
2:  No one denies it, & its what is causing angst among all sides.
3:  Not denying that at all, just the basis of pointing out obvious needs, & so were many hundreds of other workers in the past had a go despite what they had to contend with.
4:  The rain event & to use it as an excuse is a cop out, nothing more nor less, as such things have been part & parcel of the rail system since it started as I & many others have said who lived through & worked through many of them, as well as severe droughts which were primarilly broken with floods.
5:  Who is ignoring the bleeding obvious of commercial reality?  Its as bad if not worse by avoiding the obvious need as well.

So knowing what I knew in the years prior to 2004 & especially in the years that I worked on the system, I see that much of what is needed today should have been in the planing back then, with people experienced in the working of railways in charge & allowed to do their jobs instead of being dictated to by university slide rule graduates who were in it for the money, & not necessarily with rail in their interests.

Matters little what tag is on the peope delegated to do the work, what matters is getting it done.
  Watson374 Chief Commissioner

Location: Fully reclined at the pointy end.
...
Cootanee, one appreciates your loyalty towards ARTC etc. but the thing is that you put down the condition of the previous setup & yes it left a lot to be desired as it was, just like ARTC hamstrung by succesive government financial restraints. Certainly how it was prior to the heavier trains was meeting & coping with how things were, also El & La Nino's have been part & parcel of the Australian landscape for probably as long as the land has been out of water.

I mentioned throughout my posts the need for the track being fixed, & I believe like many others do, that do spend money just fixing the goat track that is there now without taking into consideration the real needs for the future which means curve & grade easing is just a waste of money.

....
"a6et"


1. I have no loyalty to ARTC. However I saw how NRC had uphill battles trying to get NSW to move on any rail projects.
2. A decade later the Feds trying get NSW moving on the NSFC works (only took 7 years)!!!
3. Recognise that the demise of rail infrastructure under state government stewardship isn't going to be turned around overnight but at least the new lot is having a go.
4. The extremety of the rain event is well documented. Unfortunate timing for ARTC.

5. I don't see the point stating the bleeding obvious about what should be done whilst conveniently ignoring commercial reality. Rolling Eyes

So knowing what I knew in 2004 I would have done the same as ARTC - spend what money I could get to fix the goat track as best I could - roll the dice and do it. Just like buying a slab of shares three weeks before Lehmann went bust.

P.S. Happy for JHR to take it over (as for handing it back to NSW - LaughingLaughingLaughing).
"cootanee"


1:  It seems that your posts have constantly lauded ARTC, in what they were/are doing.  I don't disagree that NSW has lagged but working when Askin through Shirley decimated the system to such an extent that succesive governments of all persuasions had an uphill battle, even after tragedy of Granville which turned things around for a while.  When Governments are run by Treasury it fails.
2:  No one denies it, & its what is causing angst among all sides.
3:  Not denying that at all, just the basis of pointing out obvious needs, & so were many hundreds of other workers in the past had a go despite what they had to contend with.
4:  The rain event & to use it as an excuse is a cop out, nothing more nor less, as such things have been part & parcel of the rail system since it started as I & many others have said who lived through & worked through many of them, as well as severe droughts which were primarilly broken with floods.
5:  Who is ignoring the bleeding obvious of commercial reality?  Its as bad if not worse by avoiding the obvious need as well.

So knowing what I knew in the years prior to 2004 & especially in the years that I worked on the system, I see that much of what is needed today should have been in the planing back then, with people experienced in the working of railways in charge & allowed to do their jobs instead of being dictated to by university slide rule graduates who were in it for the money, & not necessarily with rail in their interests.

Matters little what tag is on the peope delegated to do the work, what matters is getting it done.
"a6et"


The state of the track could make for a nice, long debate...
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
I was think more something like this,

http://www.google.com.au/imgres?um=1&hl=en&sa=N&biw=1366&bih=599&tbm=isch&tbnid=8cTN0Cn9raS5TM:&imgrefurl=http://trainweb.org/ultradomes/dmu/compliance.html&docid=ZdirCHTb3ltlUM&imgurl=http://trainweb.org/ultradomes/dmu/talent1.jpg&w=600&h=448&ei=ikDKT4nKBovOrQej1_25Dg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=296&vpy=142&dur=1471&hovh=194&hovw=260&tx=123&ty=110&sig=116685357369464294249&page=1&tbnh=124&tbnw=173&start=0&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0,i:73

But in Australia, you could also use the Velocities and RTT as an example where the front of the train has a slight profile, but drivers cab is still forward of the front bogies. The German option above has the benefit of not wasting space and only having one set of doors.

- Loco hauled carriages have their advantages, but really suit large fleets on good track where a standard loco can be used and achieves similar times as a special XPT style loco. Obviously the advantages are limited as new rolling stock anywhere rarely follows this trend with push-pull or DMU being more favoured. Just look around Australia, are all four diesel pax operators with equipment made in last 20 years wrong? The Germans loco hauled on larger regional, but these trains are effectively a push or pull with the engine at one end and staying there and a cab built into last car.

Aux power can be handled on Loco hauled by having gensets under the pax wagons feeding a common bus which provides capacity for demand and redundency. Not all gensets need to be operating at any one time. If HEP is available then this could be the primary feed.

But overall the trains in NSW are too short to justify loco hauled trains, reason they are gone.

- Flexibility, currently NSw runs two non interchangable services and fleets. Only the Dubbo train is serviced by either XPL or XPT,normally later. So even if a XPL was available for a Mel service where the set is not available, it cannot be used. Spare cars from XPT fleet cannot be given to XPL services and vice versa. Push-Push trains are too big for the bulk of current XPL services, including most NW which can be close to a XPT in size, yes the train could spilt at WC if an XPT, with the rear end swapped and turned, then at Moree and Armidale you would need turning facililities. Likewise for short trains Grafton, Casino and Brisbane. If only one loco available the service is cancelled because they cannot turn. DMU's would still run.

NSW has been very fortunate that it has not a loss of rollingstock in over 25 years, I think the Moree rollover was only minor damage. If one XPT did a CTT, the service would be in chaos because the tight schedules and not interchangability of XPL and XPT. No route in NSW can be considered suitable for captive sets and hence different models to rest. The Casino and Brisbane services are too long to make capitive sets pratical.

NSW only needs one fleet of rolling stock. DMU is the most suitable

- Classes of seats, EC and FC, what else do you need. I am refraining from using the words Buisness Class because in NSW on current timetables this is fancyfull. EC, basic seats designed for 6-12hr use, ISE, fold down table or have seats facing a common table in sets of four. Maybe a mix of both. WIFI limited availability for free, ie speed and download. But can pay for more.

FC would have larger seats, fully reclinable for a good sleep, large fold down table, charging station, larger ISE screen, closer to buffet, perhaps limited in seat service for say coffee/tea/drinks/beer etc. Perhaps use of lounge seats on trains that have them. Full WIFI access included in fare.

Sleeper would be similar to XPT and FC above, but with two screens of ISE and wireless head phones.

Private cabins apart from sleeper no.

On all seaters I would have a mid way partian in seats for noise control. Bit like older cars in suburban area, but no door (this can piss people off no end, open, close, open, close....)

I'll need to ride a DMU again to see if I notice the noise/vibration. In NSW the track is usually a bigger issue
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
...
Cootanee, one appreciates your loyalty towards ARTC etc. ...
I mentioned throughout my posts the need for the track being fixed, & I believe like many others do, that do spend money just fixing the goat track that is there now without taking into consideration the real needs for the future which means curve & grade easing is just a waste of money.
....
"a6et"

...
5. I don't see the point stating the bleeding obvious about what should be done whilst conveniently ignoring commercial reality. Rolling Eyes

So knowing what I knew in 2004 I would have done the same as ARTC - spend what money I could get to fix the goat track as best I could - roll the dice and do it. Just like buying a slab of shares three weeks before Lehmann went bust.

P.S. Happy for JHR to take it over (as for handing it back to NSW - LaughingLaughingLaughing).
"cootanee"


1:  It seems that your posts have constantly lauded ARTC, ...
So knowing what I knew in the years prior to 2004 & especially in the years that I worked on the system, I see that much of what is needed today should have been in the planing back then, with people experienced in the working of railways in charge & allowed to do their jobs instead of being dictated to by university slide rule graduates who were in it for the money, & not necessarily with rail in their interests.

Matters little what tag is on the peope delegated to do the work, what matters is getting it done.
"a6et"


The state of the track could make for a nice, long debate...
"Watson374"


Rolling Eyes Don't care who took over in 2004. They would have faced the same situation and had to work under the same funding 'model'.

Banging on about what should be done (the bleeding obvious) when you don't have the luxury of knowing what funding you may or may not get in any given year - it's just a pointless bit of self gratification (all too easy) !

So ARTC (who just happened to 'win' this bobby prize) went into it with plans which included a raft of realignments and deviations. And had to park it Sad .

I do question the level of due diligence which I suspect got overtaken by political expedience Shocked

http://www.otsi.nsw.gov.au/rail/IR-SteelSleeper-final.pdf
http://www.otsi.nsw.gov.au/rail/IR-Bethungra-final.pdf
http://www.otsi.nsw.gov.au/rail/IR-YassJunction-final-1.pdf


Yep its hard to drain the swamp when your fighting off the crocodiles Exclamation



  a6et Minister for Railways

I was think more something like this, http://www.google.com.au/imgres?um=1&hl=en&sa=N&biw=1366&bih=599&tbm=isch&tbnid=8cTN0Cn9raS5TM:&imgrefurl=http://trainweb.org/ultradomes/dmu/compliance.html&docid=ZdirCHTb3ltlUM&imgurl=http://trainweb.org/ultradomes/dmu/talent1.jpg&w=600&h=448&ei=ikDKT4nKBovOrQej1_25Dg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=296&vpy=142&dur=1471&hovh=194&hovw=260&tx=123&ty=110&sig=116685357369464294249&page=1&tbnh=124&tbnw=173&start=0&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0,i:73 But in Australia, you could also use the Velocities and RTT as an example where the front of the train has a slight profile, but drivers cab is still forward of the front bogies. The German option above has the benefit of not wasting space and only having one set of doors. - Loco hauled carriages have their advantages, but really suit large fleets on good track where a standard loco can be used and achieves similar times as a special XPT style loco. Obviously the advantages are limited as new rolling stock anywhere rarely follows this trend with push-pull or DMU being more favoured. Just look around Australia, are all four diesel pax operators with equipment made in last 20 years wrong? The Germans loco hauled on larger regional, but these trains are effectively a push or pull with the engine at one end and staying there and a cab built into last car. Aux power can be handled on Loco hauled by having gensets under the pax wagons feeding a common bus which provides capacity for demand and redundency. Not all gensets need to be operating at any one time. If HEP is available then this could be the primary feed. But overall the trains in NSW are too short to justify loco hauled trains, reason they are gone. - Flexibility, currently NSw runs two non interchangable services and fleets. Only the Dubbo train is serviced by either XPL or XPT,normally later. So even if a XPL was available for a Mel service where the set is not available, it cannot be used. Spare cars from XPT fleet cannot be given to XPL services and vice versa. Push-Push trains are too big for the bulk of current XPL services, including most NW which can be close to a XPT in size, yes the train could spilt at WC if an XPT, with the rear end swapped and turned, then at Moree and Armidale you would need turning facililities. Likewise for short trains Grafton, Casino and Brisbane. If only one loco available the service is cancelled because they cannot turn. DMU's would still run. NSW has been very fortunate that it has not a loss of rollingstock in over 25 years, I think the Moree rollover was only minor damage. If one XPT did a CTT, the service would be in chaos because the tight schedules and not interchangability of XPL and XPT. No route in NSW can be considered suitable for captive sets and hence different models to rest. The Casino and Brisbane services are too long to make capitive sets pratical. NSW only needs one fleet of rolling stock. DMU is the most suitable - Classes of seats, EC and FC, what else do you need. I am refraining from using the words Buisness Class because in NSW on current timetables this is fancyfull. EC, basic seats designed for 6-12hr use, ISE, fold down table or have seats facing a common table in sets of four. Maybe a mix of both. WIFI limited availability for free, ie speed and download. But can pay for more. FC would have larger seats, fully reclinable for a good sleep, large fold down table, charging station, larger ISE screen, closer to buffet, perhaps limited in seat service for say coffee/tea/drinks/beer etc. Perhaps use of lounge seats on trains that have them. Full WIFI access included in fare. Sleeper would be similar to XPT and FC above, but with two screens of ISE and wireless head phones. Private cabins apart from sleeper no. On all seaters I would have a mid way partian in seats for noise control. Bit like older cars in suburban area, but no door (this can piss people off no end, open, close, open, close....) I'll need to ride a DMU again to see if I notice the noise/vibration. In NSW the track is usually a bigger issue
"RTT_Rules"


The issue with removing passenger carriages/loco hauled trains in NSW was one of a couple of areas that saw them doomed.  Manning Levels, was the big one, when the SRA won their court case that the loco's were not loco's but power units & knocked the observor off them, for trains running up to 160Km/h, as per the British HST set up, then two fully qualified drivers, a rush was to use the XPT & any other single driver optioned trains on all services. The 81cl hauled Broken Hill/Griffith services were a step back for them.

What remained of the old fleet, & when considered the last new loco hauled carriages introduced in NSW was those for the IP in 1970, & some replacement cars for the Aurora when others were written off after Violet Town collision. Thus the previous Aurora cars of 1962 vintage were the newest in the system. Only exception was the heavilly rebuilt BAM cars for the Wallangarra night service. Thus we have to basically go back to the RUB/HUB sets of the late 40's & 900cl, Budd & Tulloch disaster cars for anything other than very old non A/C stock.

The U.S is still building loco hauled carriages which are quite superior in many ways to even what we have here in the XPT & Explorer, & much better suited for long distance travel. I read something on them around 3 years ago, when a similar thread to this was on the go, & published links to it, now I have no idea where the link is.

Using the German unit & train as an example, I would still consider it but with a dual cab, owing to the fact that most Turntables are now gone & thinking of Moree as an example with no tt anymore, at least from what I understand, but its only a 60ft anyway, so any form of locomotive power needs dual cabs, which really is not that much of an issue, unless two back to back single cab units are used.

When looking at several of the NSW trains, at least that I am aware of, there is a full train sitting in the sidings overnight, which I believe is wasted money, & a waste of resources. Of those the problem is that the Grafton XPT to return to Sydney after arrival really is a wasted train also, as there is currently 3 NCL services available, unless a full long all stations type service was introduced at what platforms are left, & allowing the other two long distance services to have some stations cut off the stopping pattern.

The use of a locomotive is a benefit if it can be available for other services if the carriages are O/night stabled. What is strange is that an Explorer set can sit o/night at Armidale & Moree, where there are no maintenance facilities, & the same with the XPT at Grafton, yet its a reason why a reverse of the Dubbo XPT service is always canned by the powers, as it means a train has to stable O/night, of course they also don't have enough sets to do that as they have to provide a day return service, & they would hate to put a fitter back there.

I mentioned that original A/C train the old Silver City Comet had a full double ended power car on it, & simply ran round at BH, & Parkes but there were more than one set & spare PC's. Thus I do see a similar option as being viable & worthy of consideration but, instead of the SCC service & power car, the PC should be more versatile & multi purpose.. It also does not have to restricted in length considerations as a loco can sit off platform without any worries.
  jedimasterc Chief Commissioner

Location: Banned
Watching the patonage today (including those smoking on platforms... is prohibited... fines apply etc) you could hand the lot over to DOCS and be done with it. They probably have most of the passengers on its books anyway Wink

Seriously, does anyone really believe NSW will find the money to replace the XPTs. The guvmnt would be better off doing a Sydney Ferries deal (should be something left to shoot at). That might get you some new equipment. Idea
"cootanee"


I agree. I don't think the problem is the trains at the moment it is the alignment and the fact the xpt spends most of it's time not doing the 160km/h it should be.
...
But the main issue is that the lines need to be fixed. That is what is holding back the xpt and xplorer.
"jedimasterc"


The lines in NSW took 30 years to get to the state where they needed to be flick passed to ARTC (and c/link reliability wasn't great anyway!).

ARTC the great white hope, but it was only brought into being:

1. for interstate freight
2.because the libs and state freight operators didn't want NRC owning the track
3. to cost less than AN, Vline, RIC/RAC

Not so much for XPTs and Xplorers!

It will take them at least another 5 years at current budget to fix the drainage / ballast issues (allowing for El Nino).

In the meantime we now have millions of sleepers capable of holding two rails together, Wagga bridge (and other bridges) replaced, a stack of extended/new passing loops and CTC at the border.

So lets be positive, 30 years to run the lot down, ARTC have had 8 years - give 'em another 22 to bring it back.
You may also have your XPT replacement just in time Wink

"cootanee"


Cootanee, one appreciates your loyalty towards ARTC etc. but the thing is that you put down the condition of the previous setup & yes it left a lot to be desired as it was, just like ARTC hamstrung by succesive government financial restraints. Certainly how it was prior to the heavier trains was meeting & coping with how things were, also El & La Nino's have been part & parcel of the Australian landscape for probably as long as the land has been out of water.

I mentioned throughout my posts the need for the track being fixed, & I believe like many others do, that do spend money just fixing the goat track that is there now without taking into consideration the real needs for the future which means curve & grade easing is just a waste of money.

What needs to happen is that those in charge of fixing the track need to make that abundantly clear to those who provide the money for it. After all they are the ones coping the flack & time they took the front foot in doing something about it by telling the powers that, yes we can fix what is there now over time, but the best long term return for money will be had in new track & alingments for the future.

That in all will benefit all users of the track, not just explorers, Xpt's but all the freight forwarders as well.
"a6et"


Exactly it is time someone at the ARTC grew a set and told the prime minister what really needs to be done to get freight on rail and to allow better passenger services as well. It's all very well complaining you are only getting so much money.

Put it to the government that you need to replace the base, get proper track laying equipment, new viaducts, new bypasses and stop wasting money on replacing broken concrete sleepers that were installed correctly.

I blame the ARTC for the current state of the track because they chose the cheap method of sleeper replacement and also someone didn't think that maybe a base that was layed for timber sleepers might need to be replaced for concrete sleepers.
  a6et Minister for Railways

...
Cootanee, one appreciates your loyalty towards ARTC etc. ...
I mentioned throughout my posts the need for the track being fixed, & I believe like many others do, that do spend money just fixing the goat track that is there now without taking into consideration the real needs for the future which means curve & grade easing is just a waste of money.
....
"a6et"

...
5. I don't see the point stating the bleeding obvious about what should be done whilst conveniently ignoring commercial reality. Rolling Eyes

So knowing what I knew in 2004 I would have done the same as ARTC - spend what money I could get to fix the goat track as best I could - roll the dice and do it. Just like buying a slab of shares three weeks before Lehmann went bust.

P.S. Happy for JHR to take it over (as for handing it back to NSW - LaughingLaughingLaughing).
"cootanee"


1:  It seems that your posts have constantly lauded ARTC, ...
So knowing what I knew in the years prior to 2004 & especially in the years that I worked on the system, I see that much of what is needed today should have been in the planing back then, with people experienced in the working of railways in charge & allowed to do their jobs instead of being dictated to by university slide rule graduates who were in it for the money, & not necessarily with rail in their interests.

Matters little what tag is on the peope delegated to do the work, what matters is getting it done.
"a6et"


The state of the track could make for a nice, long debate...
"Watson374"


Rolling Eyes Don't care who took over in 2004. They would have faced the same situation and had to work under the same funding 'model'.

Banging on about what should be done (the bleeding obvious) when you don't have the luxury of knowing what funding you may or may not get in any given year - it's just a pointless bit of self gratification (all too easy) !

So ARTC (who just happened to 'win' this bobby prize) went into it with plans which included a raft of realignments and deviations. And had to park it Sad .

I do question the level of due diligence which I suspect got overtaken by political expedience Shocked

http://www.otsi.nsw.gov.au/rail/IR-SteelSleeper-final.pdf
http://www.otsi.nsw.gov.au/rail/IR-Bethungra-final.pdf
http://www.otsi.nsw.gov.au/rail/IR-YassJunction-final-1.pdf


Yep its hard to drain the swamp when your fighting off the crocodiles Exclamation


"cootanee"


It IS possible to drain a swamp with the crocodiles in it, if there is a will.   

What is so stupid about this, & that is a point that apparently you also seem to agree with, in your ""Bleeding obvious"" statements is what needs to be done, & that is the contention that NEEDS to be also pushed by those entrusted with the responsibilities what they are doing.

Its one thing to say that if you bash your head against brick walls you get callouses on the forehead, but often hard heads can break a wall also , just as a swamt can be cleard of crocodiles, all it takes is a will.  Its pointless in many ways to stop at the first instance of pain in this whole sorry saga, that is at the bottom line aspect wasting valuable tax payers money.  If the rail contractors were to include in their submissions each time, the very same fact of need, eventually it will sink in.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Exactly it is time someone at the ARTC grew a set and told the prime minister what really needs to be done to get freight on rail and to allow better passenger services as well. It's all very well complaining you are only getting so much money.

Put it to the government that you need to replace the base, get proper track laying equipment, new viaducts, new bypasses and stop wasting money on replacing broken concrete sleepers that were installed correctly.

I blame the ARTC for the current state of the track because they chose the cheap method of sleeper replacement and also someone didn't think that maybe a base that was layed for timber sleepers might need to be replaced for concrete sleepers.
"jedimasterc"



How do you know ARTC hasn't told govt whats needed?

If the boss gives you $10 to do a $20 job, you can explain, tell, abuse as much as you want, but end of day you still go out with your $10 to do the $20 job.

ARTC can be held accoutable for somethings, but the budget and directive that goes with that budget is probably not one of them. Noting that prior to ARTC even less occuried, so who do you blame them, V/Line?
  Watson374 Chief Commissioner

Location: Fully reclined at the pointy end.
But in Australia, you could also use the Velocities and RTT as an example where the front of the train has a slight profile, but drivers cab is still forward of the front bogies. The German option above has the benefit of not wasting space and only having one set of doors.
"RTT_Rules"


Driving cabs in front of the leading bogie is fairly common...

Loco hauled carriages have their advantages, but really suit large fleets on good track where a standard loco can be used and achieves similar times as a special XPT style loco. Obviously the advantages are limited as new rolling stock anywhere rarely follows this trend with push-pull or DMU being more favoured.
"RTT_Rules"


I'd say loco-hauling is best when you have a long train, like the old 17-car trains running down to Melbourne; the advantage is pretty much diminished by the time you get to the short trains we have now. Still, they can be used to haul pretty much anything.

Just look around Australia, are all four diesel pax operators with equipment made in last 20 years wrong? The Germans loco hauled on larger regional, but these trains are effectively a push or pull with the engine at one end and staying there and a cab built into last car. Aux power can be handled on Loco hauled by having gensets under the pax wagons feeding a common bus which provides capacity for demand and redundency. Not all gensets need to be operating at any one time. If HEP is available then this could be the primary feed.
"RTT_Rules"


That is what push-pull means.

But overall the trains in NSW are too short to justify loco hauled trains, reason they are gone. - Flexibility, currently NSw runs two non interchangable services and fleets. Only the Dubbo train is serviced by either XPL or XPT,normally later. So even if a XPL was available for a Mel service where the set is not available, it cannot be used. Spare cars from XPT fleet cannot be given to XPL services and vice versa. Push-Push trains are too big for the bulk of current XPL services, including most NW which can be close to a XPT in size, yes the train could spilt at WC if an XPT, with the rear end swapped and turned, then at Moree and Armidale you would need turning facililities. Likewise for short trains Grafton, Casino and Brisbane. If only one loco available the service is cancelled because they cannot turn. DMU's would still run.
"RTT_Rules"


I'm sure it can be used, physically. I'm probably going to move back to a DMU replacement for the XPL replacement, but for XPT replacement, I'm sticking to the double-ended layout.

NSW has been very fortunate that it has not a loss of rollingstock in over 25 years, I think the Moree rollover was only minor damage. If one XPT did a CTT, the service would be in chaos because the tight schedules and not interchangability of XPL and XPT. No route in NSW can be considered suitable for captive sets and hence different models to rest. The Casino and Brisbane services are too long to make capitive sets pratical. NSW only needs one fleet of rolling stock. DMU is the most suitable - Classes of seats, EC and FC, what else do you need.
"RTT_Rules"


What about Melbourne? It's suitable for what you call 'captive' sets, as it's an 11-hour run. With a turnaround of one hour, it can be made to run back and forth with two trains; the night down train forming the morning up train and vice versa.

I am refraining from using the words Buisness Class because in NSW on current timetables this is fancyfull. EC, basic seats designed for 6-12hr use, ISE, fold down table or have seats facing a common table in sets of four. Maybe a mix of both. WIFI limited availability for free, ie speed and download. But can pay for more.
"RTT_Rules"


Basically, Economy Class like any major airline.

FC would have larger seats, fully reclinable for a good sleep, large fold down table, charging station, larger ISE screen, closer to buffet, perhaps limited in seat service for say coffee/tea/drinks/beer etc. Perhaps use of lounge seats on trains that have them. Full WIFI access included in fare.
"RTT_Rules"


...that's my Business Class, which is functionally First Class, with shielded flatbeds in the BA-style forwards-backwards layout.

Sleeper would be similar to XPT and FC above, but with two screens of ISE and wireless head phones. Private cabins apart from sleeper no.
"RTT_Rules"


In twinettes, yes? (And yes, I've ditched the roomette idea.)

On all seaters I would have a mid way partian in seats for noise control. Bit like older cars in suburban area, but no door (this can piss people off no end, open, close, open, close....) I'll need to ride a DMU again to see if I notice the noise/vibration. In NSW the track is usually a bigger issue
"RTT_Rules"


Maybe to divide Economy into half-cars, yes, but Business will have partitions shielding every seat from every other seat, and First is obviously shielded by cabin walls...

What remained of the old fleet, & when considered the last new loco hauled carriages introduced in NSW was those for the IP in 1970, & some replacement cars for the Aurora when others were written off after Violet Town collision. Thus the previous Aurora cars of 1962 vintage were the newest in the system. Only exception was the heavilly rebuilt BAM cars for the Wallangarra night service. Thus we have to basically go back to the RUB/HUB sets of the late 40's & 900cl, Budd & Tulloch disaster cars for anything other than very old non A/C stock.

The U.S is still building loco hauled carriages which are quite superior in many ways to even what we have here in the XPT & Explorer, & much better suited for long distance travel. I read something on them around 3 years ago, when a similar thread to this was on the go, & published links to it, now I have no idea where the link is.
"a6et"


Strictly speaking, it's the Canadians and Japanese in the US, but yes, they have very good builds.

Using the German unit & train as an example, I would still consider it but with a dual cab, owing to the fact that most Turntables are now gone & thinking of Moree as an example with no tt anymore, at least from what I understand, but its only a 60ft anyway, so any form of locomotive power needs dual cabs, which really is not that much of an issue, unless two back to back single cab units are used.
"a6et"


Or, if we're using a hood unit, we can install dual controls so it can run both short hood forward and long hood forward.

When looking at several of the NSW trains, at least that I am aware of, there is a full train sitting in the sidings overnight, which I believe is wasted money, & a waste of resources. Of those the problem is that the Grafton XPT to return to Sydney after arrival really is a wasted train also, as there is currently 3 NCL services available, unless a full long all stations type service was introduced at what platforms are left, & allowing the other two long distance services to have some stations cut off the stopping pattern.
"a6et"


Absolutely, it is an appalling waste of resources. That's why the idea is to run the services, or the intercapital services at least, on a constant loop so they spend the minimum time needed sitting around.

The use of a locomotive is a benefit if it can be available for other services if the carriages are O/night stabled. What is strange is that an Explorer set can sit o/night at Armidale & Moree, where there are no maintenance facilities, & the same with the XPT at Grafton, yet its a reason why a reverse of the Dubbo XPT service is always canned by the powers, as it means a train has to stable O/night, of course they also don't have enough sets to do that as they have to provide a day return service, & they would hate to put a fitter back there.
"a6et"


I still don't get why the Dubbo run is an XPT in the first place...

I mentioned that original A/C train the old Silver City Comet had a full double ended power car on it, & simply ran round at BH, & Parkes but there were more than one set & spare PC's. Thus I do see a similar option as being viable & worthy of consideration but, instead of the SCC service & power car, the PC should be more versatile & multi purpose.. It also does not have to restricted in length considerations as a loco can sit off platform without any worries.
"a6et"


How about a hood unit, since with adaptation it can have one bi-directional cab as opposed to two separate cabs? Locomotives can be used for basically anything...
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
Exactly it is time someone at the ARTC grew a set and told the prime minister what really needs to be done to get freight on rail and to allow better passenger services as well. It's all very well complaining you are only getting so much money.

Put it to the government that you need to replace the base, get proper track laying equipment, new viaducts, new bypasses and stop wasting money on replacing broken concrete sleepers that were installed correctly.

I blame the ARTC for the current state of the track because they chose the cheap method of sleeper replacement and also someone didn't think that maybe a base that was layed for timber sleepers might need to be replaced for concrete sleepers.
"jedimasterc"
How do you know ARTC hasn't told govt whats needed? If the boss gives you $10 to do a $20 job, you can explain, tell, abuse as much as you want, but end of day you still go out with your $10 to do the $20 job. ARTC can be held accoutable for somethings, but the budget and directive that goes with that budget is probably not one of them. Noting that prior to ARTC even less occuried, so who do you blame them, V/Line?
"RTT_Rules"


THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

At least someone appreciates how the real world works.

So if I'm the CEO of ARTC and keep saying no to my political masters (first the Libs then Labor).

1. how long do you think I get to keep my job?
2. that they won't find someone else willing to work with what they get?
3. what chance anyone else will give me one?

Struth Rolling Eyes
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
...
Exactly it is time someone at the ARTC grew a set and told the prime minister what really needs to be done to get freight on rail and to allow better passenger services as well. It's all very well complaining you are only getting so much money.

Put it to the government that you need to replace the base, get proper track laying equipment, new viaducts, new bypasses and stop wasting money on replacing broken concrete sleepers that were installed correctly.

I blame the ARTC for the current state of the track because they chose the cheap method of sleeper replacement and also someone didn't think that maybe a base that was layed for timber sleepers might need to be replaced for concrete sleepers.
"jedimasterc"


Yep Marchant, Fullerton and the non female ARTC management since 1997 simply lack any.

I'm sure your set will impress the Red Queen and put Rabbot's to shame.

Gladly recommend you as CEO of ARTC on double the salary - lets start a petition.

Good luck...
  fixitguy Chief Train Controller

Location: In Carriage 4 on a Tangara
...
Exactly it is time someone at the ARTC grew a set and told the prime minister what really needs to be done to get freight on rail and to allow better passenger services as well. It's all very well complaining you are only getting so much money.

Put it to the government that you need to replace the base, get proper track laying equipment, new viaducts, new bypasses and stop wasting money on replacing broken concrete sleepers that were installed correctly.

I blame the ARTC for the current state of the track because they chose the cheap method of sleeper replacement and also someone didn't think that maybe a base that was layed for timber sleepers might need to be replaced for concrete sleepers.
"jedimasterc"


Yep Marchant, Fullerton and the non female ARTC management since 1997 simply lack any.

I'm sure your set will impress the Red Queen and put Rabbot's to shame.

Gladly recommend you as CEO of ARTC on double the salary - lets start a petition.

Good luck...
"cootanee"


hear hear
  a6et Minister for Railways

[quote="Watson374"]


What about Melbourne? It's suitable for what you call 'captive' sets, as it's an 11-hour run. With a turnaround of one hour, it can be made to run back and forth with two trains; the night down train forming the morning up train and vice versa.

[quote]

That is not possible!  Where do they get any time for general servicing & repairs?  A reason why there are the amount of sets there are now is to allow general servicing at Meeks before taking up the next part of the diagram assigned to them.

[quote="Watson374"]
How about a hood unit, since with adaptation it can have one bi-directional cab as opposed to two separate cabs? Locomotives can be used for basically anything...

[quote=]


You would really have to be kiding wouldn't you?  To think that in this day & age that it would be satisfactory to run a locomotive long end leading from Melbourne/Brisbane - Sydney or the other way defies any logic. If you had worked on any of the hood units for a fraction of that distance you would understand where I am coming from. Even if the cabs were air conditioned as they are today, there is no escaping the fumes in the cab from even modern diesels, & to think that a crew would be inflicted with that for the distance they have to run would kill them in short time.
  a6et Minister for Railways

Exactly it is time someone at the ARTC grew a set and told the prime minister what really needs to be done to get freight on rail and to allow better passenger services as well. It's all very well complaining you are only getting so much money.

Put it to the government that you need to replace the base, get proper track laying equipment, new viaducts, new bypasses and stop wasting money on replacing broken concrete sleepers that were installed correctly.

I blame the ARTC for the current state of the track because they chose the cheap method of sleeper replacement and also someone didn't think that maybe a base that was layed for timber sleepers might need to be replaced for concrete sleepers.
"jedimasterc"
How do you know ARTC hasn't told govt whats needed? If the boss gives you $10 to do a $20 job, you can explain, tell, abuse as much as you want, but end of day you still go out with your $10 to do the $20 job. ARTC can be held accoutable for somethings, but the budget and directive that goes with that budget is probably not one of them. Noting that prior to ARTC even less occuried, so who do you blame them, V/Line?
"RTT_Rules"


THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

At least someone appreciates how the real world works.

So if I'm the CEO of ARTC and keep saying no to my political masters (first the Libs then Labor).

1. how long do you think I get to keep my job?
2. that they won't find someone else willing to work with what they get?
3. what chance anyone else will give me one?

Struth Rolling Eyes
"cootanee"


The aspect of this at least from my perspective is that I have only been advocating the basic same thing that you have been stating in being "Bleeding Obvious".

Having to accept a lesser thing such as track upgrades, I have never said should not happen, only that the alternative is the best option & less a waste of money.

The way I see it is that the line will never be fixed to the point where there will not be any speed restrictions, & the current track & alingments will just keep going the way they are.  That is the exact same situation as painting the Sydney harbour bridge, it never ends, as soon as they get to the other side they have to start again. But there is no alternative to that for the bridge.

I have said there needs to be a will, & suggested that Artc or whoever could or should reccomend other alternatives to the financiers of the track work, & have never said that they had never done that, but said persistance may work.

At the same time I have also said that I doubt if it would ever happen anyway.
  jedimasterc Chief Commissioner

Location: Banned
Exactly it is time someone at the ARTC grew a set and told the prime minister what really needs to be done to get freight on rail and to allow better passenger services as well. It's all very well complaining you are only getting so much money.

Put it to the government that you need to replace the base, get proper track laying equipment, new viaducts, new bypasses and stop wasting money on replacing broken concrete sleepers that were installed correctly.

I blame the ARTC for the current state of the track because they chose the cheap method of sleeper replacement and also someone didn't think that maybe a base that was layed for timber sleepers might need to be replaced for concrete sleepers.
"jedimasterc"
How do you know ARTC hasn't told govt whats needed? If the boss gives you $10 to do a $20 job, you can explain, tell, abuse as much as you want, but end of day you still go out with your $10 to do the $20 job. ARTC can be held accoutable for somethings, but the budget and directive that goes with that budget is probably not one of them. Noting that prior to ARTC even less occuried, so who do you blame them, V/Line?
"RTT_Rules"


THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

At least someone appreciates how the real world works.

So if I'm the CEO of ARTC and keep saying no to my political masters (first the Libs then Labor).

1. how long do you think I get to keep my job?
2. that they won't find someone else willing to work with what they get?
3. what chance anyone else will give me one?

Struth Rolling Eyes
"cootanee"


The aspect of this at least from my perspective is that I have only been advocating the basic same thing that you have been stating in being "Bleeding Obvious".

Having to accept a lesser thing such as track upgrades, I have never said should not happen, only that the alternative is the best option & less a waste of money.

The way I see it is that the line will never be fixed to the point where there will not be any speed restrictions, & the current track & alingments will just keep going the way they are.  That is the exact same situation as painting the Sydney harbour bridge, it never ends, as soon as they get to the other side they have to start again. But there is no alternative to that for the bridge.

I have said there needs to be a will, & suggested that Artc or whoever could or should reccomend other alternatives to the financiers of the track work, & have never said that they had never done that, but said persistance may work.

At the same time I have also said that I doubt if it would ever happen anyway.
"a6et"


Actually if you go up to the se pylon of the harbour bridge, not only will you see great views of Sydney. You will learn that it is not true that they start again once they have finished. This is a myth.
  a6et Minister for Railways

Exactly it is time someone at the ARTC grew a set and told the prime minister what really needs to be done to get freight on rail and to allow better passenger services as well. It's all very well complaining you are only getting so much money.

Put it to the government that you need to replace the base, get proper track laying equipment, new viaducts, new bypasses and stop wasting money on replacing broken concrete sleepers that were installed correctly.

I blame the ARTC for the current state of the track because they chose the cheap method of sleeper replacement and also someone didn't think that maybe a base that was layed for timber sleepers might need to be replaced for concrete sleepers.
"jedimasterc"
How do you know ARTC hasn't told govt whats needed? If the boss gives you $10 to do a $20 job, you can explain, tell, abuse as much as you want, but end of day you still go out with your $10 to do the $20 job. ARTC can be held accoutable for somethings, but the budget and directive that goes with that budget is probably not one of them. Noting that prior to ARTC even less occuried, so who do you blame them, V/Line?
"RTT_Rules"


THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

At least someone appreciates how the real world works.

So if I'm the CEO of ARTC and keep saying no to my political masters (first the Libs then Labor).

1. how long do you think I get to keep my job?
2. that they won't find someone else willing to work with what they get?
3. what chance anyone else will give me one?

Struth Rolling Eyes
"cootanee"


The aspect of this at least from my perspective is that I have only been advocating the basic same thing that you have been stating in being "Bleeding Obvious".

Having to accept a lesser thing such as track upgrades, I have never said should not happen, only that the alternative is the best option & less a waste of money.

The way I see it is that the line will never be fixed to the point where there will not be any speed restrictions, & the current track & alingments will just keep going the way they are.  That is the exact same situation as painting the Sydney harbour bridge, it never ends, as soon as they get to the other side they have to start again. But there is no alternative to that for the bridge.

I have said there needs to be a will, & suggested that Artc or whoever could or should reccomend other alternatives to the financiers of the track work, & have never said that they had never done that, but said persistance may work.

At the same time I have also said that I doubt if it would ever happen anyway.
"a6et"


Actually if you go up to the se pylon of the harbour bridge, not only will you see great views of Sydney. You will learn that it is not true that they start again once they have finished. This is a myth.
"jedimasterc"


The painting today may not be continual, but it was in years gone by, & is probably a good analogy to the discussion we are having.

The paints used today are certainly better than they used to be, as it took less than 12 months to start showing the rust around the rivet heads. In those days, & I talk of around 30+ plus years when lead was still being used, the painters had full time jobs & worked the whole bridge on a sytematic rotation scrapping & cleaning the old off & priming then painting it afresh.
  jedimasterc Chief Commissioner

Location: Banned
...
Exactly it is time someone at the ARTC grew a set and told the prime minister what really needs to be done to get freight on rail and to allow better passenger services as well. It's all very well complaining you are only getting so much money.

Put it to the government that you need to replace the base, get proper track laying equipment, new viaducts, new bypasses and stop wasting money on replacing broken concrete sleepers that were installed correctly.

I blame the ARTC for the current state of the track because they chose the cheap method of sleeper replacement and also someone didn't think that maybe a base that was layed for timber sleepers might need to be replaced for concrete sleepers.
"jedimasterc"


Yep Marchant, Fullerton and the non female ARTC management since 1997 simply lack any.

I'm sure your set will impress the Red Queen and put Rabbot's to shame.

Gladly recommend you as CEO of ARTC on double the salary - lets start a petition.

Good luck...
"cootanee"


Gladly, I would take this job to get proper organisation into a hopelessy unorganised organisation. I don't need double the salary but I will be firing all the current management for gross negligence.

Oh and sarcasm noted.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

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