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

 
  balikoy Chief Commissioner

apparently was a cheaper option then victoria's new vlocity rail system.


You should make it clear that you are refering to the new route to Geelong via Tarneit,   and not the previous scheme of upgrading with the new Vlocity trains and routes to Ballarat, Bendigo etc.

"victoria's new vlocity rail system"   is not very clear.

Sponsored advertisement

  balikoy Chief Commissioner

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


Yes interesting about the train.   Not much clarity on the "quote" for the new line.

I somehow wonder whether the Melbourne authorities will be rushing to buy another Siemens train any time soon.  Their service seems to leave a lot to be desired.
  M636C Minister for Railways

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.
"jedimasterc"


From Wikipedia: Transrapid is a German high-speed monorail train using magnetic levitation. Based on a patent from 1934, planning of the Transrapid system started in 1969. The test facility for the system in Emsland, Germany was completed in 1987.

What part of "Twentieth Century" don't you understand?

There weren't any jet engines in 1934....

So Transrapid is a 20th Century idea that never caught on..

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.
"jedimasterc"


So even assuming that you could build the elevated tracks on existing corridors, you could move all the passengers from Melbourne and Brisbane services from Sydney Domestic to Central without building them a terminal with lounges, check-in and facilities?

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.
"jedimasterc"


I note the reference on "New Australia" in the power comparisons to ICE 3 trains not being able to do 400 km/h. On 9 January 2011, a standard ICE3 train in China, CRH380B-6402L reached 487.3 km/h. They took out four trailer cars, reducing it to twelve cars from sixteen. You probably do need concrete slab track to do this, too, to avoid ballast problems. But the Chinese already have this...

When they have built a twelve car Maglev that has run that fast, I'll be happy to do a power comparison..

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.
"jedimasterc"


See above, no problem...

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..
"jedimasterc"


The person who made this comparison didn't understand what he was comparing. Don't believe everything you read on the Internet...

This comparison sounds like the proposal for a tunnel under Melbourne to take V/line trains away from the suburban network. 47km and two stations is nothing to do with the Regional Fast Rail network which was much longer and had many more stations.

I can believe that you could build a short Transrapid system for less than a multi track tunnel under Melboune. But it couldn't take people to Geelong or Bendigo or Ballarat for less money that was spent on RFR.


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


No, the Japanese system is the cheap option. Look at the crossover near the Shanghai station on their Maglev. A flexible beam with all the power magnets that bends to connect one of two tracks. Now think about the junctions you'd need in Sydney for Maglev "trains" to Brisbane and Melboune on say a 30 minute frequency....

There are many good reasons that jet airliners were developed since 1934 and Maglev wasn't, and most of them have dollar signs...
  Speed Minister for Railways

This comparison sounds like the proposal for a tunnel under Melbourne to take V/line trains away from the suburban network.
"M636C"
The RRL and the Eddingtunnel are separate projects.

The former consists of a new line from Lara to Sunshine, known as the Tarneit Line because it goes via Tarneit, and amplification up from Sunshine. It is entirely above ground.

The latter is a tunnel from Footscray to Caulfield, although it might be built in stages. Footscray is up from Sunshine so it would free up capacity between Sunshine and the city.

We're now off the Junee topic so it might be best to follow Jedi Master's suggestion of commenting in his non-New South Wales maglev thread.
  jedimasterc Chief Commissioner

Location: Banned
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.
"jedimasterc"


From Wikipedia: Transrapid is a German high-speed monorail train using magnetic levitation. Based on a patent from 1934, planning of the Transrapid system started in 1969. The test facility for the system in Emsland, Germany was completed in 1987.

What part of "Twentieth Century" don't you understand?

There weren't any jet engines in 1934....

So Transrapid is a 20th Century idea that never caught on..

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.
"jedimasterc"


So even assuming that you could build the elevated tracks on existing corridors, you could move all the passengers from Melbourne and Brisbane services from Sydney Domestic to Central without building them a terminal with lounges, check-in and facilities?

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.
"jedimasterc"


I note the reference on "New Australia" in the power comparisons to ICE 3 trains not being able to do 400 km/h. On 9 January 2011, a standard ICE3 train in China, CRH380B-6402L reached 487.3 km/h. They took out four trailer cars, reducing it to twelve cars from sixteen. You probably do need concrete slab track to do this, too, to avoid ballast problems. But the Chinese already have this...

When they have built a twelve car Maglev that has run that fast, I'll be happy to do a power comparison..

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.
"jedimasterc"


See above, no problem...

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..
"jedimasterc"


The person who made this comparison didn't understand what he was comparing. Don't believe everything you read on the Internet...

This comparison sounds like the proposal for a tunnel under Melbourne to take V/line trains away from the suburban network. 47km and two stations is nothing to do with the Regional Fast Rail network which was much longer and had many more stations.

I can believe that you could build a short Transrapid system for less than a multi track tunnel under Melboune. But it couldn't take people to Geelong or Bendigo or Ballarat for less money that was spent on RFR.


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


No, the Japanese system is the cheap option. Look at the crossover near the Shanghai station on their Maglev. A flexible beam with all the power magnets that bends to connect one of two tracks. Now think about the junctions you'd need in Sydney for Maglev "trains" to Brisbane and Melboune on say a 30 minute frequency....

There are many good reasons that jet airliners were developed since 1934 and Maglev wasn't, and most of them have dollar signs...
"M636C"


1. patent was given in 1934 and development only started in 1969. In 1934 jets are already being developed. The first patent for a jet engine was in 1921. So maglev is a later development then jets.

2. If you had gone to the site I linked to it would show you how they are able to mass produce the unit and how they build the magnets into the track in production. They are clearly capable of being mass produced at an extremely attractive price.

3. The flexible junctions are only needed at the ends of the lines. They make up a fraction of the length and cost of the line. You make it sound that these junctions will be costing a billion dollars on their own.

4. on a 30 minutes run, 6 active maglevs and a 2 hour journey. Would need to handle no more then 2 maglevs at each end of the line.
  M636C Minister for Railways


1. patent was given in 1934 and development only started in 1969. In 1934 jets are already being developed. The first patent for a jet engine was in 1921. So maglev is a later development then jets.

2. If you had gone to the site I linked to it would show you how they are able to mass produce the unit and how they build the magnets into the track in production. They are clearly capable of being mass produced at an extremely attractive price.

3. The flexible junctions are only needed at the ends of the lines. They make up a fraction of the length and cost of the line. You make it sound that these junctions will be costing a billion dollars on their own.

4. on a 30 minutes run, 6 active maglevs and a 2 hour journey. Would need to handle no more then 2 maglevs at each end of the line.
"jedimasterc"


I'm sure Frank Whittle would have been pleased to know more about the jet engines around in 1934... It might have sped up his development work, since neither he nor Von Ohain had their engines in the air until 1942.

If I hadn't gone to the site you mentioned I wouldn't have known that it was wrong about the maximum speed of the ICE 3...

When there is a maglev system running for more than 30 km I'll take it seriously. The Chinese had the opportunity to build maglev rather than HS Rail, as did the Germans. They both chose the option you say is more expensive and slower. In the Chinese case it certainly wasn't cost because they are spending more than anywhere else on longer high speed lines.

My concern about the Maglev junctions is that they are absolutely critical, yet are large, heavy and slow to operate. If one fails, the whole service stops until it is fixed.

The Japanese railed solution avoids this problem.

A Chinese maglev vehicle caught fire and stopped. Then they discovered there was no way to evacuate the passengers from the elevated beam...

M636C
  newts Junior Train Controller

Location: Tamworth
[quote="Murasaki"][quote="Part of what JediMasterC"]¡­you can click here if you want.
[url]http://www.newaustralia.net/transport_fast.html[/url][/quote]
[quote="Having read it, I questioned its legitimacy, however, when I saw that the author"][b]Seymore[/b], Benalla, Wangararatta, [i]Albury - Wodonga[/i], Gundagai, Yass, Goulburn, [b]Bemma[/b], [b]Cambelltown[/b]¡­[/quote]
[quote]Where is "Bemma"? Also, pick either Albury or Wodonga (PROTIP: Wondonga had a station removed from their city centre. [color=#9900ff](¨°¦Ø¨®)[/color])[/quote]

I thought that the only thing removed from WoNdonga was the N,not the whole station!
  M636C Minister for Railways

[quote="newts"][quote="Murasaki"][quote="Part of what JediMasterC"]¡­you can click here if you want.
[url]http://www.newaustralia.net/transport_fast.html[/url][/quote]
[quote="Having read it, I questioned its legitimacy, however, when I saw that the author"][b]Seymore[/b], Benalla, Wangararatta, [i]Albury - Wodonga[/i], Gundagai, Yass, Goulburn, [b]Bemma[/b], [b]Cambelltown[/b]¡­[/quote]
[quote]Where is "Bemma"? Also, pick either Albury or Wodonga (PROTIP: Wondonga had a station removed from their city centre. [color=#9900ff](¨°¦Ø¨®)[/color])[/quote]

I thought that the only thing removed from WoNdonga was the N,not the whole station![/quote]

If you think about it "Bemma" is Berrima...
If you squint "rri" looks like an "m"

That text might have been scanned and put through OCR at some stage.

To get back on subject (I know, I'm to blame) there have been some pretty impressive additions of ballast, with that across the Bredalbane plains being particularly good, raising the up line by more than 300mm and eliminating mudholes.

On the parallel Hume Highway, the replacement pavment sections never quite match, giving a rough ride. On Saturday I saw that they had ground the concrete surface for a couple of kilometres to smooth the running. That must have cost more than rail grinding and the grinder must have been a pretty impressive device...

This thread isn't full of complaints that the RTA built the reinforced concrete road on the cheap because it failed, but the reason it failed was the same reason there were mudholes on the track a couple of kilometres to the north...

M636C
  jedimasterc Chief Commissioner

Location: Banned

1. patent was given in 1934 and development only started in 1969. In 1934 jets are already being developed. The first patent for a jet engine was in 1921. So maglev is a later development then jets.

2. If you had gone to the site I linked to it would show you how they are able to mass produce the unit and how they build the magnets into the track in production. They are clearly capable of being mass produced at an extremely attractive price.

3. The flexible junctions are only needed at the ends of the lines. They make up a fraction of the length and cost of the line. You make it sound that these junctions will be costing a billion dollars on their own.

4. on a 30 minutes run, 6 active maglevs and a 2 hour journey. Would need to handle no more then 2 maglevs at each end of the line.
"jedimasterc"


I'm sure Frank Whittle would have been pleased to know more about the jet engines around in 1934... It might have sped up his development work, since neither he nor Von Ohain had their engines in the air until 1942.

If I hadn't gone to the site you mentioned I wouldn't have known that it was wrong about the maximum speed of the ICE 3...

When there is a maglev system running for more than 30 km I'll take it seriously. The Chinese had the opportunity to build maglev rather than HS Rail, as did the Germans. They both chose the option you say is more expensive and slower. In the Chinese case it certainly wasn't cost because they are spending more than anywhere else on longer high speed lines.

My concern about the Maglev junctions is that they are absolutely critical, yet are large, heavy and slow to operate. If one fails, the whole service stops until it is fixed.

The Japanese railed solution avoids this problem.

A Chinese maglev vehicle caught fire and stopped. Then they discovered there was no way to evacuate the passengers from the elevated beam...

M636C
"M636C"


regardless the engines were still being developed and running in the 1930's.

as for egress from the maglevs in a fire. I don't see why an expandable slide system similar to aircrafts can't be done.

all these little issues such as a fire caused be a faulty battery which caused no injuries. How are they any less safe compared to a train derailing.

How is a supposed reliability issue (has one even happened yet) with a junction, make the maglevs less reliable then a set of points failing or a large percentage of your network failing when a site goes into a blackout.

As for that battery fire, the below link mentions that firefighters safely evacuated everybody.

http://www.travel-in-china.com/news/3536.php
  M636C Minister for Railways

I've moved the maglev discussion to the "other transport" thread....

With all the reballasting activity I assume that this will soon be a non -event since trains will soon be running faster than before....

Get your shots of 4204 while you can. The crews can't be convinced to drive from it and let it lead, sadly but it sounds nice...

M636C
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
...
To get back on subject (I know, I'm to blame)
M636C
"M636C"


Thank heavens for that  Rolling EyesRolling EyesRolling Eyes

...

... there have been some pretty impressive additions of ballast, with that across the Bredalbane plains being particularly good, raising the up line by more than 300mm and eliminating mudholes.

On the parallel Hume Highway, the replacement pavment sections never quite match, giving a rough ride. On Saturday I saw that they had ground the concrete surface for a couple of kilometres to smooth the running. That must have cost more than rail grinding and the grinder must have been a pretty impressive device...

This thread isn't full of complaints that the RTA built the reinforced concrete road on the cheap because it failed, but the reason it failed was the same reason there were mudholes on the track a couple of kilometres to the north...

M636C
"M636C"


Numerous sections of the Hume routinely have chunks of concrete cut out and replaced due to pavement failure. Given the amount of money and concrete that has poured into this piece of road it's surprising how soon this has happened.

I wonder how well placed financially ARTC is to maintain its corridor compared to the RTA  (I expect there is no comparison!)  Question
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
OK - just posted

Sydney to Melbourne Rail Corridor
Performance and Condition Report


http://www.artc.com.au/helium/library/Sydney%20to%20Melbourne%20Rail%20Corridor%20Performance%20and%20Condition%20Report%20updated.pdf

Say what you like - the previous custodians wouldn't have bothered with any attempt to be transparent  Wink
  M636C Minister for Railways

OK - just posted

Sydney to Melbourne Rail Corridor
Performance and Condition Report


http://www.artc.com.au/helium/library/Sydney%20to%20Melbourne%20Rail%20Corridor%20Performance%20and%20Condition%20Report%20updated.pdf

Say what you like - the previous custodians wouldn't have bothered with any attempt to be transparent  Wink
"cootanee"


Having had a quick look at the report, it matches my impressions of the track prior to ARTC taking over...

Still photographs don't show the rail subsiding under loaded trains and spikes bouncing up and down as trains pass...

As I said in the Victorian forum, some aspects of the track scared me as I stood next to passing trains, and there was little pumping because the sleepers were not attached to the rails, the rails just sat above the sleepers in many cases.

The mud holes are in the same places as they were before concrete sleepers were placed.

I think the ARTC should have addressed ballast cleaning to a greater extent than they did in the report (or in the resleepering...)

To revert to the Hume Highway briefly, it seems clear that 600mm of rienforced concrete isn't enough for today's B double trucks where the subgrade is anything but ideal. Anywhere where ALL trucks pass (the entrance to weighbridges, for example) appears to be failing despite good subgrade.

If these costs could be captured and shown to decision makers, we might get a more realistic form of charging for road use by really heavy trucks...

M636C
  crypticone Chief Train Controller

Location: Blue Mtns
Some of the photos aren't correct.

Also the writer of the report is a well respected American track man.

Well done to him in being as honest as he could be.

Regards
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
....

Also the writer of the report is a well respected American track man.

Well done to him in being as honest as he could be.

Regards
"crypticone"


Well done to ARTC who were proactive enough to commission it so quickly.  Clap

Under the previous custodians hell would have frozen over before you saw anything similar (read steel sleeper installation!)  WhipRolling Eyes

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

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