Inland Railway - Construction Phase

 
  james.au Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney, NSW
Look at this stupid series of statements from the Logan mayor http://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/-this-will-burden-our-ratepayers-for-30-years-logan-mayor-threatens-to-sue-inland-rail talking about failed infrastructure from ARTC and also comparing failed projects in Melbourne to the inland rail system.  He says the freight trains will be doomed vis the suburbs. What failed projects is he talking about when it comes to Melbourne ?

I can only think of my north east line and the failed work by ARTC.

The simple fact is the ARTC needs to get on top of this PR war rather than hoping the NIMBYs go away.

The number of trains through Logan City will be restricted by the terminal capacity of Acacia Ridge. The Acacia Ridge yard is entirely built in and cannot be expanded in any meaningful way, so when it reaches capacity then that is that. I doubt it could unload and reload more than a dozen trains per day, perhaps even less. Once Acacia Ridge reaches capacity the only additional trains will be those moving directly to the Port of Brisbane - most of these will be moving bulk products. It now seems unlikely Surat Basin thermal coal will see much in the way of increased tonnages and these tonnages are currently falling. Grain and cotton tonnages aren't likely to grow beyond what additional product that may move north from NSW rather than through the Port of Newcastle.

There is not going to be dozens and dozens of trains using this line per day. The ARTC needs to firmly point this out, rather than talking up the mostly imaginary train numbers it has been throwing around for this project.
Sulla1
The truth is that neither ARTC nor the Department can tell you what the train numbers will or wont be as they have no idea themselves.  The business case is BS and they all know it.

Sponsored advertisement

  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
More noise regarding the delivery of the inland rail project into Brisbane https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/gladstone-usurps-brisbane-as-much-cheaper-inland-rail-destination where the business case for Gladstone is better at a $1.58 than the Brisbane case but that business case is to use trucks all the way from Toowoomba to Brisbane and back.  Not ideal at all.

The current plan has rail delivering into the southern area of Brisbane and access to the Port of Brisbane is still available.

The costs of connecting Toowoomba to Gladstone Port on SG is listed as $3.4b not a huge amount to move SG further north but not a priority at the moment when it comes to other SG work.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

More noise regarding the delivery of the inland rail project into Brisbane https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/gladstone-usurps-brisbane-as-much-cheaper-inland-rail-destination where the business case for Gladstone is better at a $1.58 than the Brisbane case but that business case is to use trucks all the way from Toowoomba to Brisbane and back.  Not ideal at all.

The current plan has rail delivering into the southern area of Brisbane and access to the Port of Brisbane is still available.

The costs of connecting Toowoomba to Gladstone Port on SG is listed as $3.4b not a huge amount to move SG further north but not a priority at the moment when it comes to other SG work.
bevans

Why not do both the line Brisbane and to Gladstone. $3.4billion isn't much to get some more SG in to QLD.
  justapassenger Minister for Railways

The truth is that neither ARTC nor the Department can tell you what the train numbers will or wont be as they have no idea themselves.  The business case is BS and they all know it.
james.au
And there's also the problem that the 'Cancel Inland Rail' press release is already written and waiting in a glass case to be smashed in case of electoral difficulties.
  Carnot Minister for Railways

Now the Nimbys (who also happen to be in bed with One Nation) have totally lost the plot. Muppets:

  freightgate Minister for Railways

Location: Albury, New South Wales
Is the number of trains quoted in the article correct at 40 per day ?

Those muppets as you say is their preference to have 3000 trucks per day going through there instead of a train ?
  Carnot Minister for Railways

Is the number of trains quoted in the article correct at 40 per day ?

Those muppets as you say is their preference to have 3000 trucks per day going through there instead of a train ?
freightgate
Yes.

If you read the Facebook comments on such articles, it doesn't take long to realize how many braincells are missing among the whingers...
  nswtrains Chief Commissioner

Is the number of trains quoted in the article correct at 40 per day ?

Those muppets as you say is their preference to have 3000 trucks per day going through there instead of a train ?
Yes.

If you read the Facebook comments on such articles, it doesn't take long to realize how many braincells are missing among the whingers...
Carnot
Well that's all Queenslander's.
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
I would finish Inland Rail up to the Bananaland Border set up a transfer terminal there and contract Lindsay Fox et al to road haul the containers to their destinations from there. That would not only set fire to some tail feathers but would clearly demonstrate who was holding the show to ransom.

In other words 'wheel it up and leave it on the bastard's doorstep'.

For totally different reasons CR/AN set up a similar operation at Kulgera during construction of the Tarcoola - Alice Springs Railway but this was to provide a better service to Alice and the Territory whilst reducing costs, delays and maintenance associated with the crumbling NG Central Australia Railway. It was an efficiency and economic move rather than petty politics.
  Carnot Minister for Railways
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
Looks like ARTC Is willing to change their plans for clearance enlargements through Euroa, Benalla and Glenrowan.

Euroa locals want the Anderson/Scott Street road overpass demolished and replaced with a sunken road under the railway station precinct. (ARTC wanted to rise the height of the overpass)

Benalla locals want the original NESG track (East line) removed from between the railway station and Mackellae Street and re-routed through the yard (a bit of swap b do here and a new West line platform, more or less where a Island platform once existed)
ARTC wanted to rise the railway station access road overpass.

Glenrowan locals want Beaconsfield Parade road overpass demolished (to protect the Ned Kelly historic precinct) and replaced by a new road overpass link via Thomas Street (to the East)  

Wangaratta locals are unhappy with a proposed pedestrian underpass to replace their 2 historic overpasses.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: