Murray Basin standardisation

 
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
@Pressman, did they have a choice of rail operators though, or was it GWA or road?

Sponsored advertisement

  Pressman Spirit of the Vine

Location: Wherever the Tin Chook or Qantas takes me
@Pressman, did they have a choice of rail operators though, or was it GWA or road?
james.au
Good question, but also bare in mind that G&WA are used by Viterra on the ARTC lines in SA.
No idea if any other rail company has tendered for Grain cartage on the ARTC lines, let alone on the branch lines.
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
There may not be enough volume to warrant another operator setting up to compete with GWA, as the current network landscape stands anyway.
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
Here is the source for my earlier comments regarding handing the line back early:

http://www.rdamr.org.au/fileadmin/user_upload/Riverland/documents/Mallee_Freight_Study__FINAL.pdf

Refer to section 7.1.6 of the report. Page 8.

Also in this report, I really don't get how it would cost $700m to do up these two lines.
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
( @bevans, perhaps the discussion in this thread about the Ouyen/Pinaroo lines should be split out into its own thread for cleanliness?)
  Trainplanner Chief Commissioner

Location: Along the Line
Normally you would creare another post for such an article but given the extensive discussion we have had on increased axleloads for the upgrade this article is particular relevant as it actually quantifies the productivity improvement for running increased axleload.

NSW grain farmers to benefit from ARTC trial
Grain. Photo: Shutterstock

Photo: Shutterstock


Oliver Probert


Oliver Probert - Sydney
oliver.probert@informa.com.au
@oliverprobert
More by Oliver Probert

May 31, 2016  


A six-month Australian Rail Track Corporation trial will see longer, heavier trains used along the 100-kilometre railway line between Moree and Narrabri.

ARTC executive general manager for the Hunter Valley Jonathan Vandervoort said the trial will bring big productivity improvements for farmers in NSW’s north-west.

“Producers have been saying for years in order to become more competitive they want improvements in the supply chain and that rail is the most cost-effective and efficient way to do it,” Vandervoort said.

“Well, north-west farmers looking to shift the last of the 2015/16 grain harvest and summer sorghum crops have the opportunity today to realise significant transport savings by using rail.”

ARTC has increased track weight tonnages by 15% along the stretch of track, and is also increasing the maximum train length from 850 metres to 1,000.

Vandervoort believes the changes can help farmers realise roughly $2-3 per tonne in savings from the increase to axle loads alone.

“Add in an increase in length and the savings are multiplied,” he said.

“And it is a progressive improvement, giving more back to the farmer with no hard infrastructure cost.

“In only two years we have moved from 19 tonne axle load, 40 wagon trains; to now 70 wagon trains at 1000m in length and 23 tonne axle loadings.

“That delivers an extra 11 tonnes of freight per wagon, straight payload,” he stated.

An added benefit of an improved pricing differential, he said, was that it could enlarge the geographic catchment for rail to attract more freight.

“The introduction of this size of train is also a bonus for our other customers as it improves network capacity by reducing the overall number of interactions between trains, decreasing the variations in freight cycle time and passenger train performance,” he continued.

“We are determined to continue pushing the envelope and finding smart ways of delivering more to our customers for less.”

The ARTC will monitor and review the performance of larger, heavier, loaded trains, operating at 50 km/h, over the next six months.

The ARTC’s review and risk assessment process so far has already included running a 1.25-kilometre grain train to the Port of Newcastle in December.
  x31 Chief Commissioner

Location: gallifrey
IIRC the Geelong to Ballarat is a double track formation so a separate SG track could be added.

Then convert the Maryborough to SG linking to Geelong with trains to Geelong and Melbourne via Corio as needed. The only BG remaining would be the passenger service to Ballarat and Ararat. Apart from providing better linkage, I am not convinced that converting Ararat to Ballarat to SG would be of benefit though it would allow the Overdue to return to its old route via Ballarat. BG/SG DG is limited to 80 km/h so you would avoid using it.
62440

Geelong to Ballarat was double track until the 1940's. Changing to SG between Ballarat and Ararat would make the proposed intermodal terminal near ballarat more likely as SG is the national gauge.

Plus the advantage is Overland back via Ballarat.

Ballarat then becomes a very important interchange once again with trains coming and going on all 4 lines.  The only negaitive would be Sg to maryborough goodbye line to Castlemaine and return of passenger services?
  LancedDendrite Chief Commissioner

Location: North Haverbrook; where the monorail is king!
Ballarat then becomes a very important interchange once again with trains coming and going on all 4 lines.  The only negative would be SG to Maryborough goodbye line to Castlemaine and return of passenger services?
x31
Ballarat already has trains coming and going on all 4 lines. DG is currently slated as Geelong-Ballarat-Maryborough so there's no obstructions to a Geelong-Ballarat-Castlemaine-Bendigo besides the obvious ones (a rubbish cost-benefit ratio and a lack of trains to run the service).
  trainbrain Chief Commissioner

Ballarat then becomes a very important interchange once again with trains coming and going on all 4 lines.  The only negative would be SG to Maryborough goodbye line to Castlemaine and return of passenger services?
Ballarat already has trains coming and going on all 4 lines. DG is currently slated as Geelong-Ballarat-Maryborough so there's no obstructions to a Geelong-Ballarat-Castlemaine-Bendigo besides the obvious ones (a rubbish cost-benefit ratio and a lack of trains to run the service).
LancedDendrite
and a lack of bums on seats
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
Just looking through the business case again, in particular at the mineral sands supply chain.  Its mentioned that Iluka takes some of the sands and ships them across to Bunbury or Geraldton for processing.  First question is, is this what is happening in practice, and then second question is, what are the economics of rail vs shipping?  Aside from the NG/SG issue in WA (for both Bunbury and Geraldton), how would training the product over compare to shipping it?
  freightgate Minister for Railways

Location: Albury, New South Wales
Help required.

Does the project include dual or standard gauge between Maryborough and Ballarat ?
  Beta4Me Locomotive Driver

Help required.

Does the project include dual or standard gauge between Maryborough and Ballarat ?
freightgate
Yes, dual gauge. It's the final stage of the project.
  Donald Chief Commissioner

Location: Donald. Duck country.
Sleeper replacement works were at Woomelang over the weekend.   Heading south.
  freightgate Minister for Railways

Location: Albury, New South Wales
How will the crossing loops work with dual gauge ?
  Greensleeves Chief Commissioner

Location: If it isn't obvious by now, it should be.
How will the crossing loops work with dual gauge ?
freightgate

The same way normal dual gauge points work
  freightgate Minister for Railways

Location: Albury, New South Wales
Never seen any.
  Pressman Spirit of the Vine

Location: Wherever the Tin Chook or Qantas takes me
How will the crossing loops work with dual gauge ?
freightgate
It's not like dual gauge is anything new, Places like Adelaide's APT passenger terminal was opened being nearly completely Dual Gauge, AFT at Islington was partly DG, Perth, Fremantle, Port Pirie, to name a few place.
Even Southern Cross Station has DG on three roads!
Even had Triple Gauge once at Port Pirie, Peterborough, Gladstone, in SA's mid north.
  Z VAN Locomotive Driver

AS Pressman has said: Dual gauge is not new.
Unfortunately true in Australia but let us DWELL on the future and not the past.

Within reason you do not have to build two separate gauge crossing loops as such. For example the 4'81/2" can through fixed frogs divert to the by-pass line/loop and similarly come back to the dual gauge section via fixed frogs. If the broad gauge is the less used of the two tracks the gauge can be left straight and the 5'3" into the loop. The arrangement to Me would be similar to gauntlet track arrangements where double track is reduced to single track to cross a bridge and once across back to double. The arrangements can be varied with suitable signal protection rather then create double crossing loops at each crossing point increasing the project cost for a low return on investment. Another alternative is allow crosses at existing station yards and save the expense of building separate crossing loops in remote areas. Let us hope traffic develops and crossing loops become the big problem.

The aim of the game is to show gauge conversion is cheap in infrastructure dollar terms so the Goulburn Valley Group of lines can be next. Then the Swan Hill line will be the only long distance line left that will require a mind set change from V/line as the Engineering is simple. Gippsland is another subject altogether so I shall leave that alone at present.


The whole Murray Basin project is absolutely great and to think finally a part of the gauge puzzle will be removed.
  woodford Chief Commissioner



The aim of the game is to show gauge conversion is cheap in infrastructure dollar terms so the Goulburn Valley Group of lines can be next. Then the Swan Hill line will be the only long distance line left that will require a mind set change from V/line as the Engineering is simple. Gippsland is another subject altogether so I shall leave that alone at present.
Z VAN

Remember the 135 kilometres of the Oaklands line was gauge converted AND had a 1 in 3-4 sleeper cycle done on it for $19 million.

I would not hold my breath waiting for the Goulburn Valley line to be regauged, the SG network in Melbourne particularly around Sourthern Cross will first need a drastic reworking, not to mention a major apparent attitude change by VLine to SG passenger trains.

woodford
  x42 Junior Train Controller

Location: NSW
Tenders are now being called for the project.
One must imagine work will begin on the Ararat to Maryborough section ?
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
@x42 - do you have some links that you can post so we can see what is being tendered for?
  x42 Junior Train Controller
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
Ok, so we don't yet have tender docs out there through the Vic govt tender mechanism.  But yes, id suspect Maryborough-Ararat would be next given its part of Stage 2.
  Z VAN Locomotive Driver

Yes you are correct Woodford I will not hold my breath regards standardising the Goulburn Valley group of lines.
But as little as two years ago the Murray Basin Project would have been in the same category. Something that was always going to happen one day.
Well Today is the day as we see above, Tenders for the next stage have been called.
All good.
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
Regarding crossing loops between Gheringhap and Maryborough, currently the only crossing loops on this section are, Gheringhap, Meredith, Lal Lal, Warrenheip and Ballarat itself (although not really a loop, this location is occasionally used for goods trains to cross, mostly grain trains). Of these, I believe Meredith and Lal Lal have been booked out for some time.

There are currently no crossing locations between Ballarat and Maryborough. Are there any plans to add a new crossing point along this section during the conversion? Also, are the loops at Meredith and Lal Lal likely to be brought back into use?

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: