New 80 km/h blanket speed Goulburn to Junee - for everything

 
  M636C Minister for Railways

There is a lot of work on improving ballast in critical areas now.

Across the "third Bredalbane plain" just before the final climb to Cullerin  and part of the way up the hill they have lifted the up main by about 300mm, maybe more. With the down main still in its original location, the contrast is obvious.

This is the same area where the slow lane of the Hume Highway (600 mm of reinforced concrete) has almost completely failed under normal truck traffic, so clearly the soil conditions aren't the best.

The lift will give a lot more rock for the water to run out of before mud forms.

There is a lot of potential in the Cullerin range to return to the original Pre 1915 alignments. These could be worked on without disturbing the current alignment, because that's how they built the deviation in 1915.

You would need to deepen cuttings and raise some bridges to get the grades down from the original 1 in 40 (but there's quite a lot of 1 in 40 left in the down direction anyway...)

M636C

Sponsored advertisement

  WhittonAlignmnt Junior Train Controller

Did someone say 'use the Whitton Alignment'???  Laughing

I think that returning to the original alignment would be a fantastic idea - but of course, I could be biased!
  wurx Lithgovian Ambassador-at-Large

Location: The mystical lost principality of Daptovia
This would not be the only section of line in this state - or almost anywhere else in the world for that matter - that would benefit from returning to an original alignment that while difficult for the steamers of then, would present little or no problems for the locos etc of today.

The South Coast line between Waterfall & Coalcliff comes to mind....
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
...
If the network was that bad then you pronounce it dead and look at starting fresh.

If we take your example of why ARTC did what they did then why didn't they use cheaper wooden sleepers until they could afford to properly drain, reballast and install concrete sleepers.

There was a lot of new/old concrete sleepers on the side of the track on my ride to and from melbourne in the XPT. I doubt that these have lasted 3 times as long as the wooden sleepers they replaced.
"jedimasterc"


Maybe someone should have (SRA/RIC/RAC/RC) - very courageous.  Rolling Eyes

Instead in went some steel sleepers (and that was another story), some low profile concrete ones and the rails got painted white.

There's a report (which I no longer can find) on a derailment at Bathungra 3 months after the ARTC lease was signed which made quite illuminating reading.

ARTC's call to market to obtain millions of full concrete sleepers competatively priced to timber was inspired long term planning and offered whole of life cost savings - something tangible that would get pollies to open their purses a bit.

It's all about $$$ - no government wanted to pay the true price of improving let alone maintaining the DIRN. The states had all but turned their backs on it. ARTC was the last hope but the Feds would only support it as long as it could do so on a commercial and financially sustainable basis.

Anything else they may as well be p*ssin in the wind. Same goes for deviations, maglev and HSR - welcome to the real world.  Wink
  arctic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Zurich

There's a report (which I no longer can find) on a derailment at Bathungra 3 months after the ARTC lease was signed which made quite illuminating reading.
"cootanee"


This one?

http://www.otsi.nsw.gov.au/rail/IR-Bethungra-final.pdf
  BDA Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
I think we can do better than Whittons original single line alignments .
We probably need to look at the old Wentworth Centennial and Hoar plans and can probably improve on those .

Some problems are that parts of the Humes alignment is hardly practical , Catherine Hill , and Whittons route had tight bends in places .
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!

There's a report (which I no longer can find) on a derailment at Bathungra 3 months after the ARTC lease was signed which made quite illuminating reading.
"cootanee"


This one?

http://www.otsi.nsw.gov.au/rail/IR-Bethungra-final.pdf
"arctic"


Thanks - that's the one.

It stated

"The transition of assets, records and systems from RIC to ARTC was problematic and that ARTC did not enjoy good visibility of the condition of the asset at the time of handover of responsibility, or indeed at the time of the derailment."

ARTC would have had to march to a political agenda however unrealistic the expectations. ARTC is expected to do more with less.

If ARTC wasn't prepared to have a go (not that that was an option)eventually you'd end up with the same situation as the privatised Vic NE BG line.   Rolling Eyes
  jedimasterc Chief Commissioner

Location: Banned
...
If the network was that bad then you pronounce it dead and look at starting fresh.

If we take your example of why ARTC did what they did then why didn't they use cheaper wooden sleepers until they could afford to properly drain, reballast and install concrete sleepers.

There was a lot of new/old concrete sleepers on the side of the track on my ride to and from melbourne in the XPT. I doubt that these have lasted 3 times as long as the wooden sleepers they replaced.
"jedimasterc"


Maybe someone should have (SRA/RIC/RAC/RC) - very courageous.  Rolling Eyes

Instead in went some steel sleepers (and that was another story), some low profile concrete ones and the rails got painted white.

There's a report (which I no longer can find) on a derailment at Bathungra 3 months after the ARTC lease was signed which made quite illuminating reading.

ARTC's call to market to obtain millions of full concrete sleepers competatively priced to timber was inspired long term planning and offered whole of life cost savings - something tangible that would get pollies to open their purses a bit.

It's all about $$$ - no government wanted to pay the true price of improving let alone maintaining the DIRN. The states had all but turned their backs on it. ARTC was the last hope but the Feds would only support it as long as it could do so on a commercial and financially sustainable basis.

Anything else they may as well be p*ssin in the wind. Same goes for deviations, maglev and HSR - welcome to the real world.  Wink
"cootanee"


I think maglev is affordable because all air traffic between sydney and melbourne could be moved onto maglev. According to statistics there are about 780,932 seats in a month between sydney and melbourne. which divided by 30 is about 26,000 a day.

Let's say a maglev could handle 1000 passengers a trip like a cityrail train could. This would mean only 26 trips by maglev would be needed to replace 135 planes a day that operate between sydney and melbourne.

This would have the added benefit of reducing the need for a second sydney airport and also reduce carbon emissions by planes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_busiest_passenger_air_routes#Australia

now also add in the sydney and melbourne to canberra routes as well from this link.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_busiest_air_routes_in_Australia_by_passenger_traffic#Domestic

edit: i'm copying this post to my new maglev thread.
  BDA Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
I'm not even sure why Maglev gets a mention here , the line between Melbourne and Sydney is predominantly for the movement of freight which ordinarily has two land modes with road having the bulk of it .
Maglev on this rail corridor is about as relevant as Maglev for busses on the Hume Freeway/Highway and thats really the better place to have it because its more direct and the distance shorter .

By todays standards Whittons original railway alignment is a far cry from what a true dedicated intercapital rail route could/should be . We have to be fair because he did not have the benefit of Google Maps or the surveying gear available today .
From what I read the main southern line was not exactly intended to be an intercapital route .
  balikoy Chief Commissioner

I'm not even sure why Maglev gets a mention here , the line between Melbourne and Sydney is predominantly for the movement of freight which ordinarily has two land modes with road having the bulk of it .


So all the proposals for the last 40 years and currently for high-speed rail between Sydney and Melbourne , are for freight, are they ?
  5814 Chief Train Controller

all the worthwhile proposals are predominantly about freight, yes: with pax a minor side benefit. One more time: Syd - Mel is too far with still not enough traffic to justify high speed rail for pax alone. It's not London - Paris, kids.
  BDA Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
Yep 40 years of hot air , and CO2 , have netted the Missing links XPTs and thats about it .
In fact if all the freight operators gave up tomorrow theres no way the two states and the federal govt would keep the line open for four XTP services a day . Notice how the curtains fell one the Casino branch when the remaining freight services went belly up ?
I really can't be bothered "reigniting" the political debate ATM however the story is still the same . Freight on rail has far greater importance on this corridor than passenger services . It means economic survival along with road freight where pass rail is more of a CSO and vote puller .

I'm going to start another thread about alternative alignments between Sydney and Albury to see what others think would make for better interstate rail transport into the future . It is aimed at rail freight and lets hope it can stay on track ....
  jedimasterc Chief Commissioner

Location: Banned
all the worthwhile proposals are predominantly about freight, yes: with pax a minor side benefit. One more time: Syd - Mel is too far with still not enough traffic to justify high speed rail for pax alone. It's not London - Paris, kids.
"5814"


So the 4th busiest air route in the world is not a viable route for a HSR or MAGLEV.

so I'll start a thread up about maglev between syd and mel and it's viability.
  arctic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Zurich
all the worthwhile proposals are predominantly about freight, yes: with pax a minor side benefit. One more time: Syd - Mel is too far with still not enough traffic to justify high speed rail for pax alone. It's not London - Paris, kids.
"5814"


An view of the respective markets shows Sydney-Melbourne in the similar market size as London - Paris:

City-Pair....................PAX (millions)....Year .........Source
Melbourne - Sydney.........6.99...............07/08.........BITRE
Brisbane - Sydney............4.25...............07/08.........BITRE
Brisbane - Melbourne.......2.70...............07/08.........BITRE
Paris- London air..............1.97...............06..............Eurostat
Paris- London rail.............5.63...............06..............calc based on rail 65% share (latest data shows rail >70% share)
Paris-London total............7.60...............06

from thread: http://www.railpage.com.au/f-p1172393.htm

Eurostar is probably much higher now though? Have to check

cheers
  jedimasterc Chief Commissioner

Location: Banned
Yep 40 years of hot air , and CO2 , have netted the Missing links XPTs and thats about it .
In fact if all the freight operators gave up tomorrow theres no way the two states and the federal govt would keep the line open for four XTP services a day . Notice how the curtains fell one the Casino branch when the remaining freight services went belly up ?
I really can't be bothered "reigniting" the political debate ATM however the story is still the same . Freight on rail has far greater importance on this corridor than passenger services . It means economic survival along with road freight where pass rail is more of a CSO and vote puller .

I'm going to start another thread about alternative alignments between Sydney and Albury to see what others think would make for better interstate rail transport into the future . It is aimed at rail freight and lets hope it can stay on track ....
"BDA"


Yes freight is important and keeps the lines open.

The south line still needs straightening, reballasting and smoothing even for freight.

Let's talk about maglev and it's relevance on this new thread.

http://www.railpage.com.au/f-p1543360.htm#1543360
  5814 Chief Train Controller

arctic, my point about London-Paris v Syd-Mel is the comparative distances ...
  arctic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Zurich
arctic, my point about London-Paris v Syd-Mel is the comparative distances ...
"5814"


OK fair enough.

London Paris is 495km and about 2hr.25m (avg 204km/h) (source: Eurostar Website)
VFT Sydney Melbourne might be about 850km and was proposed to be about 3 hrs (avg 283km/h) (CSIRO VFT proposal)

However I do note in the case of London-Paris that before HS1 was open and the time was more like 3hrs, Eurostar were still the market leaders.
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
arctic, my point about London-Paris v Syd-Mel is the comparative distances ...
"5814"


OK fair enough.

London Paris is 495km and about 2hr.25m (avg 204km/h) (source: Eurostar Website)
VFT Sydney Melbourne might be about 850km and was proposed to be about 3 hrs (avg 283km/h) (CSIRO VFT proposal)

However I do note in the case of London-Paris that before HS1 was open and the time was more like 3hrs, Eurostar were still the market leaders.
"arctic"


Virgin Australia HSR - if only Richard should live so long.  Wink
  jedimasterc Chief Commissioner

Location: Banned
arctic, my point about London-Paris v Syd-Mel is the comparative distances ...
"5814"


OK fair enough.

London Paris is 495km and about 2hr.25m (avg 204km/h) (source: Eurostar Website)
VFT Sydney Melbourne might be about 850km and was proposed to be about 3 hrs (avg 283km/h) (CSIRO VFT proposal)

However I do note in the case of London-Paris that before HS1 was open and the time was more like 3hrs, Eurostar were still the market leaders.
"arctic"


the only reason it averages 200km/h is because of the tunnel. The only reason csiro said 283 km/h average at the time was because that is what the trains where doing at the time. most VHST trains are now capable of averaging 350km/h.

Transrapid maglev on the other hand can average 500km/h and apparently was a cheaper option then victoria's new vlocity rail system. So all these issues about costs with transrapid maglev have been blown away.

Also waht certain people don't realize is that maglev is not only a rail replacement. It is also an airline replacement. It can travel at the same speeds as a passenger jet.
  M636C Minister for Railways

Maglev, like monorails, is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

There are no long distance Maglev systems. The only operating system in existence serves Shanghai airport. In both Germany and China, proposals for trunk routes served by Maglev were abandoned in favour of High Speed Rail.

The speed advantage of Maglev is not clear. Certainly high speed trains have reached 500 km/h in test runs.

The disadvantage of Maglev is that the track is effectively an electric motor the full length of the route, and power is required to both support and propel the vehicle. It seems logical that more power will be required to both support and propel than to just propel so the CO2 emissions will be higher.

Even the simplest junctions are very expensive and complicated, at least in the german "monorail" system.  the Japanese "trench" system may be much more complex. I understand that one option is to use conventional rail wheels and tracks in stations.

If you have to use rail wheels in stations, why not use them for the whole trip?

Since no long distance Maglev exists, I doubt that one could have been built to serve all the RFR areas for less than many times what was spent on the Victorian Regional Fast Rail project (which was really just catching up on years of deferred maintenance).

Remember that new Maglev tracks into central Melbourne and a new station would have been required. The cost of acquiring land in central Melbourne for the routes through the CBD would exceed the cost of a major high speed rail system, say to Sydney, which could use existing tracks in the CBD...

M636C
  jedimasterc Chief Commissioner

Location: Banned
Maglev, like monorails, is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

There are no long distance Maglev systems. The only operating system in existence serves Shanghai airport. In both Germany and China, proposals for trunk routes served by Maglev were abandoned in favour of High Speed Rail.

The speed advantage of Maglev is not clear. Certainly high speed trains have reached 500 km/h in test runs.

The disadvantage of Maglev is that the track is effectively an electric motor the full length of the route, and power is required to both support and propel the vehicle. It seems logical that more power will be required to both support and propel than to just propel so the CO2 emissions will be higher.

Even the simplest junctions are very expensive and complicated, at least in the german "monorail" system.  the Japanese "trench" system may be much more complex. I understand that one option is to use conventional rail wheels and tracks in stations.

If you have to use rail wheels in stations, why not use them for the whole trip?

Since no long distance Maglev exists, I doubt that one could have been built to serve all the RFR areas for less than many times what was spent on the Victorian Regional Fast Rail project (which was really just catching up on years of deferred maintenance).

Remember that new Maglev tracks into central Melbourne and a new station would have been required. The cost of acquiring land in central Melbourne for the routes through the CBD would exceed the cost of a major high speed rail system, say to Sydney, which could use existing tracks in the CBD...

M636C
"M636C"


1. the reason there aren't any major MAGLEV projects is because it is brand new 21st century technology, unlike planes which are 20th century and trains which are 19th century.

2. it is a solution to the second sydney airport. with maglev between sydney, canberra and melbourne there is no need for a second sydney airport ever. maglev would replace most air and rail transport between these 3 cities.

3. Why would you need to acquire land when there is plenty of space along or on top of existing road and rail corridors. maglev's could be run over or under existing bridges and rail lines or in the median areas of motorways.

4. yes the system requires electricity the whole route, however it is not required for power to be on at all times and only when the train is nearby. Significantly reducing power use and carbon emissions.

5. Yes, VHST's have reached 500km/h but could not possibly sustain that speed on a constant basis. If you have watched videos of those high speed records of the TGV you will notice it kicks a lot of ballast around at those speeds.

6. It is now as cheap to build a transrapid system as it is a normal rail network. The regional rail link upgrading victoria's train lines only allows speeds upto 160km/h and was quoted as more expensive then the transrapid system of the same length.

7. Only the japanese system uses rail wheels and is one of the reasons why it is so more expensive.

For more comparison work read these articles and links
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transrapid#Energy_requirements
http://www.newaustralia.net/MaglevAlternative.pdf
  billybaxter Chief Commissioner

Location: Bosnia Park, Fairfield

An view of the respective markets shows Sydney-Melbourne in the similar market size as London - Paris:

City-Pair....................PAX (millions)....Year .........Source
Melbourne - Sydney.........6.99...............07/08.........BITRE
Brisbane - Sydney............4.25...............07/08.........BITRE
Brisbane - Melbourne.......2.70...............07/08.........BITRE
Paris- London air..............1.97...............06..............Eurostat
Paris- London rail.............5.63...............06..............calc based on rail 65% share (latest data shows rail >70% share)
Paris-London total............7.60...............06

"arctic"


Don't forget that the London - Paris line is also used for services from London and Paris to Brussels and Amsterdam. They are significant markets as well. Lille and suburbs also has a population in excess of 1 million. The  London - Paris and Lille - Amsterdam HST lines (which are comparable to Sydney - Melbourne in length) serve a region with at least double the entire population of Australia. But back to topic; there's no way a HST line would be used for freight, so major improvements to the current alignment with the idea of permitting reliable overnight freight services from Sydney to Melbourne are the way to go. Forwarders need to kow they can send something off at the end of the working day and it will be delivered at the other end for the opening of business the next day.
  balikoy Chief Commissioner

Transrapid maglev on the other hand can average 500km/h and apparently was a cheaper option then victoria's new vlocity rail system.


Do you have any legitmate basis for the second part of this assertion ?
  jedimasterc Chief Commissioner

Location: Banned
Transrapid maglev on the other hand can average 500km/h and apparently was a cheaper option then victoria's new vlocity rail system.


Do you have any legitmate basis for the second part of this assertion ?
"balikoy"


Did you not click on the link I provided. The second one should have the information.

But you can click here if you want.
http://www.newaustralia.net/transport_fast.html
  Murasaki Chief Train Controller

Location: Going sideways... in carriage DET-9216 (>ω<)
…you can click here if you want.
http://www.newaustralia.net/transport_fast.html
"Part of what JediMasterC"

Seymore, Benalla, Wangararatta, Albury - Wodonga, Gundagai, Yass, Goulburn, Bemma, Cambelltown
"Having read it, I questioned its legitimacy, however, when I saw that the author"

Where is "Bemma"? Also, pick either Albury or Wodonga (PROTIP: Wondonga had a station removed from their city centre. (òωó))

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

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