Murray Basin standardisation

 
  Dangersdan707 Chief Commissioner

Location: On a Thing with Internet
The pragmatist in me appreciates that you can remove these in the event that standardisation eventually goes ahead.

Whoever is making these decisions at VLine though is incredibly short sighted.
james.au
There were some BG only concretes in the Mildura line prior to Standardisation. Very Sparse though and where pulled out when the rail moved in.

Pretty sure they were inserted as a patch up job for a washout or something.

Sponsored advertisement

  kuldalai Chief Commissioner

Shortsighted, incompetent or just plain negligent?
Surely this must be government policy for some twisted reason?
The classic case of we could have our cake and eat it too if we were even half smart!Rolling Eyes
And we still wonder how the break of gauge came about 140 years ago.
Nothing has changed since. Where is the Opposition?
Not invented here. Those NSW bastards ......................
We will never know.
YM-Mundrabilla
The trouble is that Government is allowing VLP as an Operator (of pax trains) to dictate track standards and what speeds various types of trains can operate at what speeds on different classes of track.

This should NOT be a VLP role as Operator, the track standards etc should be set by  Victrack as the asset owner, or DoT, or Victorian Directorate of Rail Safety, but NOT the rail operators..

So we come to the freight only lines and Victoria therefore does not use gauge convertible steel or concrete sleepers albeit NSW have used steel sleepers on freight only lines years, and gauge convertible concrete in South Australia for over 30 years.  

So using wood still on freight only lines just locks in a high maintenance cost model, and not using gauge convertible concrete or steel steel sleepers for all country sleepers replacements (Except on the Warrnambool & Bairnsdale lines) just makes future standardization harder and more expensive.

NSW regional freight lines are nearly all steel sleepers with a very low on going track maintenance cost with both higher axle loads and higher operating speeds than Victoria. Why VLP doesnt go North and see how its done beggars belief.

Austrak at Laverton has allegedly done a detailed design for a low profile gauge convertible concrete sleeper that could be mixed in progressively with timber sleepers, but the word is that VLP are not interested and continue to just acquire low profile broasd gauge concrete.

Shortly with the Shepparton Line upgrade to Class - 2M track (to allow for 130kmh Vlocity operation) we are potentially looking at new 50kg rail CWR on concrete sleepers, and as it is inevitable that medium term the Tocumwal line be standardized along with the Toolamba - Echuca - Deniliquin line we should be putting in gauge convertible concrete sleepers of the latest type with the lastest fastenings as used for some years in South Australia, both on mainlines and suburban Adeliade network.
  james.au Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney, NSW
Shortsighted, incompetent or just plain negligent?
Surely this must be government policy for some twisted reason?
The classic case of we could have our cake and eat it too if we were even half smart!Rolling Eyes
And we still wonder how the break of gauge came about 140 years ago.
Nothing has changed since. Where is the Opposition?
Not invented here. Those NSW bastards ......................
We will never know.
YM-Mundrabilla

From your first line, i choose all three.

As an alternative to your third line, id be thinking theyre cutting off their nose to spite their face....

Id like to know what the union thinks about this and the perpetuation of BG.
  james.au Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney, NSW
Shortsighted, incompetent or just plain negligent?
Surely this must be government policy for some twisted reason?
The classic case of we could have our cake and eat it too if we were even half smart!Rolling Eyes
And we still wonder how the break of gauge came about 140 years ago.
Nothing has changed since. Where is the Opposition?
Not invented here. Those NSW bastards ......................
We will never know.
The trouble is that Government is allowing VLP as an Operator (of pax trains) to dictate track standards and what speeds various types of trains can operate at what speeds on different classes of track.

This should NOT be a VLP role as Operator, the track standards etc should be set by  Victrack as the asset owner, or DoT, or Victorian Directorate of Rail Safety, but NOT the rail operators..

So we come to the freight only lines and VLP flatly refuse to use gauge convertible steel or concrete sleepers albeit NSW have used steel sleepers on freight only lines years, and gauge convertible concrete in South Australia for over 30 years.  

So using wood still on freight only lines just locks in a high maintenance cost model, and not using gauge convertible concrete or steel steel sleepers for all country sleepers replacements (Except on the Warrnambool & Bairnsdale lines) just makes future standardization harder and more expensive.

NSW regional freight lines are nearly all steel sleepers with a very low on going track maintenance cost with both higher axle loads and higher operating speeds than Victoria. Why VLP doesnt go North and see how its done beggars belief.

Austrak at Laverton has allegedly done a detailed design for a low profile gauge convertible concrete sleeper that could be mixed in progressively with timber sleepers, but the word is that VLP are not interested.

Shortly with the Shepparton Line upgrade to Class - 2M track (to allow 130kmh Vlocity operation) we are potentially looking at new 50kg rail CWR on concrete sleepers, and as it is inevitable that medium term the Tocumwal line be standardized along with the Toolamba - Echuca - Deniliquin line we should be putting in gauge convertible concrete sleepers of the latest type with the lastest fastenings as used for some years in South Australia, both on mainlines and suburban Adeliade network.
kuldalai
Im ok with VLP setting standards where they are by far and large the dominant operator.  Eg Ballarat.

But where they do not operate at all, they shouldn't be managing the track.  A separate track manager should be in place with a separate budget.

Just get ARTC/UGL/John Holland to do it as they do in NSW.
  BigShunter Chief Commissioner

Location: St Clair. S.A.
It's worth noting that concrete non-convertible BG sleepers are going in between Korong Vale and Lalbert at present (which has been 20-30 km/h for the past year).  Around 60% of existing sleepers replaced in this tie-renewal cycle so it should get back up to a reasonable line speed after it's done.
And thus cementing the future of the Murray Basin project.......
BrentonGolding
Excellent info Carnot and hell 60% is a lot of sleepers, no wonder there was extreme speed restriction's. By the way, Korong Vale to Lalbert is about half way to Manang and just short of Ultima so the hay train should have reasonable speed for the start of their trip.

BG the way this has panned out it would seem to me the practically direct route to the PoM through Bendigo and obviously faster line speed will far out weight any benefit a Standard Gauge train is going to give. Not to mention the meandering scenic tour of the central Gold Fields area to Geelong and head back to Melbourne. So I'm teaming up with DangerousDan on this one and reckon it should stay with the Demon Gauge.

As for grain on this line, GrainCorp at Manang, Emerald at Nulli, can't remember who else, well if they were heading for Geelong it's possibly quicker through Bendigo, should be faster travel time and distance is more than likely similar for both routes, if going to the PoM all the better.

As for reopening through Inglewood I don't think it unreasonable for the user's of this line to put up a fair wod of cash as an enticement for the Gov't to pull their finger out and get cracking with this. Even if they went to the media and said we've put up money and now waiting for the Gov't to act as well as throw the old line in, this going to remove truck's off the road but instead they seem to like just wearing very secondhand treatment.

BigShunter.
  emmastreet Chief Train Controller

Location: Goulburn Valley
In reply to Kuldalai's post I doubt very much that any State Government will see converting the Tocumwal line to sg as inevitable after the debacle that is the Murray Basin standardisation.
  kuldalai Chief Commissioner

Shortsighted, incompetent or just plain negligent?
Surely this must be government policy for some twisted reason?
The classic case of we could have our cake and eat it too if we were even half smart!Rolling Eyes
And we still wonder how the break of gauge came about 140 years ago.
Nothing has changed since. Where is the Opposition?
Not invented here. Those NSW bastards ......................
We will never know.
The trouble is that Government is allowing VLP as an Operator (of pax trains) to dictate track standards and what speeds various types of trains can operate at what speeds on different classes of track.

This should NOT be a VLP role as Operator, the track standards etc should be set by  Victrack as the asset owner, or DoT, or Victorian Directorate of Rail Safety, but NOT the rail operators..

So we come to the freight only lines and VLP flatly refuse to use gauge convertible steel or concrete sleepers albeit NSW have used steel sleepers on freight only lines years, and gauge convertible concrete in South Australia for over 30 years.  

So using wood still on freight only lines just locks in a high maintenance cost model, and not using gauge convertible concrete or steel steel sleepers for all country sleepers replacements (Except on the Warrnambool & Bairnsdale lines) just makes future standardization harder and more expensive.

NSW regional freight lines are nearly all steel sleepers with a very low on going track maintenance cost with both higher axle loads and higher operating speeds than Victoria. Why VLP doesnt go North and see how its done beggars belief.

Austrak at Laverton has allegedly done a detailed design for a low profile gauge convertible concrete sleeper that could be mixed in progressively with timber sleepers, but the word is that VLP are not interested.

Shortly with the Shepparton Line upgrade to Class - 2M track (to allow 130kmh Vlocity operation) we are potentially looking at new 50kg rail CWR on concrete sleepers, and as it is inevitable that medium term the Tocumwal line be standardized along with the Toolamba - Echuca - Deniliquin line we should be putting in gauge convertible concrete sleepers of the latest type with the lastest fastenings as used for some years in South Australia, both on mainlines and suburban Adeliade network.
Im ok with VLP setting standards where they are by far and large the dominant operator.  Eg Ballarat.

But where they do not operate at all, they shouldn't be managing the track.  A separate track manager should be in place with a separate budget.

Just get ARTC/UGL/John Holland to do it as they do in NSW.
james.au
The trouble with the current situation where the rail operators in VLP and MTM dictate line speeds , track standards etc is that VLP and MTM impose different sets of rules. for the same type of freight wagon.  Plus the recent situation where the Ultima Inter modal train was stopped mid trip because it was raelized that a wagon type that VLP had summarily decreed could not operate on particular track class types was detected doing so, albeit these same wagons had been operating quite happily without incident on Class 3 & 4 tracks for years.  
VLP reviews the situation presumambly at the request of their new proprietor (DoT) and hey presto the offending waggons are all OK to run on Class 3 & 4 tracks.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

In reply to Kuldalai's post I doubt very much that any State Government will see converting the Tocumwal line to sg as inevitable after the debacle that is the Murray Basin standardisation.
emmastreet

Maybe they should have started with the Tocumwal line first and that could have meant the BG north of craigieburn could have been converted to SG. The Toolamba to Echuca line could have then been converted as well as the line across the border to Deniliquin and Moulamein. Maybe there could have been a re opening of the NSW line to Tocumwal from Narrandera.
  jakar Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
A separate track manager should be in place with a separate budget.

Just get ARTC/UGL/John Holland to do it as they do in NSW.
james.au
In reality would anything actually change? Most current issues stem from the inadequate funding V/Line is provided by government, bringing in a private manager is not going to automatically change anything unless they have a substantially larger budget than V/Line currently does.

these same wagons had been operating quite happily without incident on Class 3 & 4 tracks for years.
kuldalai
V/lines biggest failure here was not detecting and stopping the wagons use earlier. If there was an incident, particularly after they were known not to be accredited for that track, V/Line (and any other organization in the same situation) would have been hauled over the coals by the relevant investigating authority. Saying 'its been fine for years' doesn't cut it in the real world. I still haven't seen one gunzel question why Qube were running these wagons on tracks they shouldn't have been on in the first place.....?
  Djebel Junior Train Controller

A separate track manager should be in place with a separate budget.

Just get ARTC/UGL/John Holland to do it as they do in NSW.
In reality would anything actually change? Most current issues stem from the inadequate funding V/Line is provided by government, bringing in a private manager is not going to automatically change anything unless they have a substantially larger budget than V/Line currently does.
jakar
Not initially, but another rail maintainer might end the bloody minded refusal to consider anything other than BG only concrete sleepers.




V/lines biggest failure here was not detecting and stopping the wagons use earlier. If there was an incident, particularly after they were known not to be accredited for that track, V/Line (and any other organization in the same situation) would have been hauled over the coals by the relevant investigating authority. Saying 'its been fine for years' doesn't cut it in the real world. I still haven't seen one gunzel question why Qube were running these wagons on tracks they shouldn't have been on in the first place.....?
jakar
Wasn't that answered on here fairly quickly?  They were being used (correctly) on a set for elsewhere, and at some point got swapped onto this run without anybody noticing.
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
A separate track manager should be in place with a separate budget.

Just get ARTC/UGL/John Holland to do it as they do in NSW.
In reality would anything actually change? Most current issues stem from the inadequate funding V/Line is provided by government, bringing in a private manager is not going to automatically change anything unless they have a substantially larger budget than V/Line currently does.

these same wagons had been operating quite happily without incident on Class 3 & 4 tracks for years.
V/lines biggest failure here was not detecting and stopping the wagons use earlier. If there was an incident, particularly after they were known not to be accredited for that track, V/Line (and any other organization in the same situation) would have been hauled over the coals by the relevant investigating authority. Saying 'its been fine for years' doesn't cut it in the real world. I still haven't seen one gunzel question why Qube were running these wagons on tracks they shouldn't have been on in the first place.....?
jakar
To my mind the real questions are:
  1. Was QUBE's original accreditation applicate complete, comprehensive and accurate in the first place?
  2. If 1 (above) was the case did Vline actually refuse accreditation or, simply not approve it because it was not requested?
  3. Regardless of the foregoing why did no one wake up to the problem 'for years'.
  4. When Vline did wake up the wagons were accredited almost immediately. Why so quickly fixed if there was a technical problem from the outset?
  5. Was the whole issue fixed with the stroke of a pen?
The entire saga seems not to apply to the wagons actual ability to run safely but rather to an administrative stuff up of which Sir Humphrey would be proud?
  james.au Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney, NSW
A separate track manager should be in place with a separate budget.

Just get ARTC/UGL/John Holland to do it as they do in NSW.
In reality would anything actually change? Most current issues stem from the inadequate funding V/Line is provided by government, bringing in a private manager is not going to automatically change anything unless they have a substantially larger budget than V/Line currently does.
jakar
I believe yes.

Currently the money that should be spent on the freight only lines is able to be fudged around the whole V/Line budget to fill holes elsewhere and also to pay money in brown bags to cleaning firms.

If there was a separated funding arrangement with a different organisation responsible, no reallocation of the funds would be possible and there would be a clearer line of sight of where the money was spent.  The access fees from that track would also be allocated to that entity instead of subsumed into VLine general revenue.
  Carnot Minister for Railways
  8502 Chief Train Controller

This might show next steps for the project



Showing:

  • Fueling facilities being added at Ouyen
  • Signalling upgrades at Maryborough wasn't this already done a couple of years ago?
  • New siding at Donald seems to say they are putting one back in?
  Galron Chief Commissioner

Location: Werribee, Vic
This might show next steps for the project

Showing:

  • Fueling facilities being added at Ouyen
  • Signalling upgrades at Maryborough wasn't this already done a couple of years ago?
  • New siding at Donald seems to say they are putting one back in?
8502
and the silly thing will be that fuel point at Ouyen will be supplied by road. While i think the Corio refinery still has connectivity to the network, there's probably not been a train loaded with fuel there in 20 years, never mind the fact there's probably no serviceable rail fuel wagons in this part of the country. 4-6 wagons a week just for rail services would surely be justifiable. Agriculture would probably burn through at least that again in the peak season.

re-instating the fuel point at Marybough would likely be better than Ouyen i think however.

And i know, this all makes sense, however it would seem not so much to those that call the shots

given the length of the track there needs to be a siding every 100km or so big enough to put away a full length train. anything up to 50 cars.
  8502 Chief Train Controller

Is there a fuel point at Ballarat?
  justarider Chief Commissioner

Location: Released again, maybe for the last time??
This might show next steps for the project

Showing:

  • Fueling facilities being added at Ouyen
  • Signalling upgrades at Maryborough wasn't this already done a couple of years ago?
  • New siding at Donald seems to say they are putting one back in?
and the silly thing will be that fuel point at Ouyen will be supplied by road. While i think the Corio refinery still has connectivity to the network, there's probably not been a train loaded with fuel there in 20 years, never mind the fact there's probably no serviceable rail fuel wagons in this part of the country. 4-6 wagons a week just for rail services would surely be justifiable. Agriculture would probably burn through at least that again in the peak season.

re-instating the fuel point at Marybough would likely be better than Ouyen i think however.

And i know, this all makes sense, however it would seem not so much to those that call the shots

given the length of the track there needs to be a siding every 100km or so big enough to put away a full length train. anything up to 50 cars.
Galron
I know this is a silly question, but

For long distance trains, why not just hook up your own fuel wagon?

cheers
John
  Galron Chief Commissioner

Location: Werribee, Vic
This might show next steps for the project

Showing:

  • Fueling facilities being added at Ouyen
  • Signalling upgrades at Maryborough wasn't this already done a couple of years ago?
  • New siding at Donald seems to say they are putting one back in?
and the silly thing will be that fuel point at Ouyen will be supplied by road. While i think the Corio refinery still has connectivity to the network, there's probably not been a train loaded with fuel there in 20 years, never mind the fact there's probably no serviceable rail fuel wagons in this part of the country. 4-6 wagons a week just for rail services would surely be justifiable. Agriculture would probably burn through at least that again in the peak season.

re-instating the fuel point at Marybough would likely be better than Ouyen i think however.

And i know, this all makes sense, however it would seem not so much to those that call the shots

given the length of the track there needs to be a siding every 100km or so big enough to put away a full length train. anything up to 50 cars.
I know this is a silly question, but

For long distance trains, why not just hook up your own fuel wagon?

cheers
John
justarider
Not a silly question. Inline fueling requires loco's that support it, and most if not all of what is used in Vic does not. There's probably some union rules that drivers cant connect/disconnect inline fueling equipment. Swapping it from one end of the train to another would also be problematic, given there's no ballon loops or triangles at the end of most lines to facilitate the direction change.
  justarider Chief Commissioner

Location: Released again, maybe for the last time??
I know this is a silly question, but

For long distance trains, why not just hook up your own fuel wagon?

cheers
John
Not a silly question. Inline fueling requires loco's that support it, and most if not all of what is used in Vic does not. There's probably some union rules that drivers cant connect/disconnect inline fueling equipment. Swapping it from one end of the train to another would also be problematic, given there's no ballon loops or triangles at the end of most lines to facilitate the direction change.
Galron
Thanks for that. I wasn't thinking of anything so complex.

Just that when the loco is doing it's run around, it comes alongside the tanker.
Out with hose by suitably qualified servo assistant and job done.

Could even leave the tanker behind in siding for the next train in need. That probably needs higher security.

cheers
John
  james.au Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney, NSW
Ouyen seems to be a less than logical location for refuelling compared to Marybourugh or Mildura.  It is a remote area, and is in the middle of a journey. Perhaps I am missing something.  What makes it more logical than not?
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
An 81 class carries less fuel than a B class. That's progress!
On road fuel is carried in 'tankers' and on rail it is/would be carried in 'tank wagons'.
  Galron Chief Commissioner

Location: Werribee, Vic
I know this is a silly question, but

For long distance trains, why not just hook up your own fuel wagon?

cheers
John
Not a silly question. Inline fueling requires loco's that support it, and most if not all of what is used in Vic does not. There's probably some union rules that drivers cant connect/disconnect inline fueling equipment. Swapping it from one end of the train to another would also be problematic, given there's no ballon loops or triangles at the end of most lines to facilitate the direction change.
Thanks for that. I wasn't thinking of anything so complex.

Just that when the loco is doing it's run around, it comes alongside the tanker.
Out with hose by suitably qualified servo assistant and job done.

Could even leave the tanker behind in siding for the next train in need. That probably needs higher security.

cheers
John
justarider
Road tankers are prohibited from fueling from their own carried storage. I suspect the same rules apply to trains.
  Djebel Junior Train Controller

I know this is a silly question, but

For long distance trains, why not just hook up your own fuel wagon?

cheers
John
Not a silly question. Inline fueling requires loco's that support it, and most if not all of what is used in Vic does not. There's probably some union rules that drivers cant connect/disconnect inline fueling equipment. Swapping it from one end of the train to another would also be problematic, given there's no ballon loops or triangles at the end of most lines to facilitate the direction change.
Thanks for that. I wasn't thinking of anything so complex.

Just that when the loco is doing it's run around, it comes alongside the tanker.
Out with hose by suitably qualified servo assistant and job done.

Could even leave the tanker behind in siding for the next train in need. That probably needs higher security.

cheers
John
Road tankers are prohibited from fueling from their own carried storage. I suspect the same rules apply to trains.
Galron
Presumably that restriction doesn't apply to the cattle road trains that carry fuel on the trailers and top up the truck tanks when stopped.
  james.au Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney, NSW

Road tankers are prohibited from fueling from their own carried storage. I suspect the same rules apply to trains.Presumably that restriction doesn't apply to the cattle road trains that carry fuel on the trailers and top up the truck tanks when stopped.
Djebel
Probably different rules in Qld cv Victoria?
  Tony M. Locomotive Driver

While i think the Corio refinery still has connectivity to the network, there's probably not been a train loaded with fuel there in 20 years, never mind the fact there's probably no serviceable rail fuel wagons in this part of the country.
Galron
The Corio refinery hasn't been connected to the network since (I think) around 2005 and the RFR upgrade. The fuel loading point was demolished a few years back - all that's left now is a bit of disconnected track leading into the refinery.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: