New XPT details

 
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

An even simpler solution is for TfNSW to work with V/Line on the Long Distance Vlocity project, effectively doubling the order size to get the economies of scale up. But that involves too much common sense and even worse, working with those wretched communist Mexicans.
How would it double the order size when the only SG train south of the border is to Albury.
May I suggest that you think a little harder before posting? The VLocity is already on BG and is gauge convertible.
LancedDendrite
There in lies my point. Victoria is already building vlocity's and will only need to build a small amount of SG Vlocity's and not in any way will it be able to double the order of what NSW needs. Vline doesn't need a long distance vlocity project because they don't do long distance. As I said before, Swan hill is the longest distance service and if the line was upgraded to allow the vlocity to hit 160km/h then the trip would come down from 4 and a half hours to at least 3 and a half hours.

Who knows what we will be ordering but the interior will be of a significantly higher comfort level like that of the prospector then the intercity seats of a vlocity.

Sponsored advertisement

  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The xplorer and endeavours are not end of life. The issues with cancellations are normally to do with a lack of spare carriages or replacing the XPT on the dubbo service and not reliability. Heck they are barely 20 years old.
If the train doesn't turn up for duty on time because another one or it is broken down, its called poor reliability, regardless of the reason!
RTT_Rules

Poor reliability doesn't mean it is end of life. It could also be because of a graffiti incident. If enough spare carriages were available then a replacement could be used and a service not cancelled.
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

The xplorer and endeavours are not end of life. The issues with cancellations are normally to do with a lack of spare carriages or replacing the XPT on the dubbo service and not reliability. Heck they are barely 20 years old.

Poor reliability doesn't mean it is end of life. It could also be because of a graffiti incident. If enough spare carriages were available then a replacement could be used and a service not cancelled.
simstrain
On that, XPT's still have fairly decent reliability as most of the time the WT service is replaced by a WP it's due to scheduled maintenance.   Many of the delays the XPT's experiences aren't mechanical in nature, its things like police incidents, getting stuck behind a broken down freight.   And you will find that many of the mechancial based delays are due to things like striking large tree branches.  I've been on a XPT which terminated early due to a severe storm rolling in, knocking that many branches onto the track, it terminated early as a precaution because of some minor damage to a brake pipe. A freight train would have just gone slower, or stopped entirely.
  georges Junior Train Controller

On that, XPT's still have fairly decent reliability as most of the time the WT service is replaced by a WP it's due to scheduled maintenance.   Many of the delays the XPT's experiences aren't mechanical in nature, its things like police incidents, getting stuck behind a broken down freight.   And you will find that many of the mechancial based delays are due to things like striking large tree branches.  I've been on a XPT which terminated early due to a severe storm rolling in, knocking that many branches onto the track, it terminated early as a precaution because of some minor damage to a brake pipe. A freight train would have just gone slower, or stopped entirely.
It was a dark and stormy night in the early 1990s. The XPL on which I was travelling  to Canberra pulled up north of Moss Vale for the best part of an hour. The cause was a fallen tree. Eventually we wrong-roaded around the obstruction and pulled up behind a south-bound Goulburn END that was stopped at Moss Vale. Within a few minutes the XPL had coupled up with the END. We proceeded as a single train, observing all the advertised stopping stations of the END. The XPL gained its freedom again at Goulburn.

A good example of lateral thinking enabled by interchangeable rolling stock.
  LancedDendrite Chief Commissioner

Location: Trapped in a meeting with Rhonda and Karsten
There in lies my point. Victoria is already building VLocitys and will only need to build a small amount of SG VLocitys and not in any way will it be able to double the order of what NSW needs. V/Line doesn't need a long distance VLocity project because they don't do long distance. As I said before, Swan Hill is the longest distance service and if the line was upgraded to allow the VLocity to hit 160km/h then the trip would come down from 4 and a half hours to at least 3 and a half hours.

Who knows what we will be ordering but the interior will be of a significantly higher comfort level like that of the prospector then the intercity seats of a VLocity.
simstrain
Your point is ridiculous. It requires minimal effort on the part of the manufacturer to produce SG or BG versions of what will be the Long Distance Vlocity sets and both can be made simultaneously on the same production line.

Victoria is already funding (in the 2017-18 state budget) preliminary design works for the Long Distance Vlocity to replace the N type carriages used on the longer distance V/Line services. Seeing as you continue to display zero knowledge of anything below the Murray River I'll have to spell it out for you: the N sets have long distance features: separate first class & economy seating and a buffet car. Oh, and checked luggage. The Long Distance Vlocity is likely to retain those features from the N sets (which existing VLocity sets do not have) and will likely have improved seating more suitable to long distance travel, whatever your hair-splitting definition of that is. There is going to be significant overlap between what V/Line and TfNSW want. Virtually the only change for TfNSW's requirements would possibly be railbeds for overnight services (if they are to be retained).

Just 'speeding up' the long distance V/Line services and dumping more existing-model VLocitys on them isn't happening. The only line where it's likely that that will happen is the Shepparton line, where the travel time is already shorter than the VLocity-served Bendigo line anyway.

Depending on how flexible TfNSW are on their insistence around having as much in-state assembly as possible, Long Distance VLocitys without interiors could be built by Bombardier in Dandenong and the final TfNSW-specific interior fitout could be done somewhere 'in-state' like Albury. They could even do all of the major servicing for the V/Line SG set up in Dubbo as TfNSW as declared where they will do all of their servicing. An improved version of the VLocity platform has a lot to offer for TfNSW, particularly if they bother to do some interstate cooperation.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

Victoria is already funding (in the 2017-18 state budget) preliminary design works for the Long Distance Vlocity to replace the N type carriages used on the longer distance V/Line services. Seeing as you continue to display zero knowledge of anything below the Murray River I'll have to spell it out for you: the N sets have long distance features: separate first class & economy seating and a buffet car. Oh, and checked luggage.
LancedDendrite

Including .... 2+3 seating !!!  (Sorry, I couldn't help myself there)
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

My point LanceD is that vline is building there own fleet of long distance trains and NSW is building it's own fleet of trains. NSW isn't going to add on to a Victorian order and whatever SG rollingstock vline needs can easily be added on to whatever vlocity order is being built for your BG "long distance" trains. In no way would there be enough volume for vline SG rolling stock to double the NSW order.
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
My point LanceD is that vline is building there own fleet of long distance trains and NSW is building it's own fleet of trains. NSW isn't going to add on to a Victorian order and whatever SG rollingstock vline needs can easily be added on to whatever vlocity order is being built for your BG "long distance" trains. In no way would there be enough volume for vline SG rolling stock to double the NSW order.
simstrain
In an ideal world, like most countries all the various state services would be under one federal umbrella and yes would be the same platform. ie Prospector, Hunter/ V/locity/ Sprinter/ XLP/ END/ Adelaide 2000 and 3000 class and likewise the spark fleets would be three different platforms only.

However its worth noting that most of the stock is related to some degree or just the next generation.

ie
- Australind is related to XPL and XPT
- XPL/END -> V/locity
- Prospector  -> Hunter

And Srpinter fits in somewhere I'm sure

Or something like that.
  TrainLover222 Junior Train Controller

Location: On the Canberra Xplorer
Victoria is already funding (in the 2017-18 state budget) preliminary design works for the Long Distance Vlocity to replace the N type carriages used on the longer distance V/Line services. Seeing as you continue to display zero knowledge of anything below the Murray River I'll have to spell it out for you: the N sets have long distance features: separate first class & economy seating and a buffet car. Oh, and checked luggage.

Including .... 2+3 seating !!!  (Sorry, I couldn't help myself there)
djf01
Another issue to watch out for is electrification. The line to Canberra appears to be the biggest possibility for this, but I don't see terribly many issues with running these lines with diesel electrics. Electric trains, I think, work better on more populated routes. I am referring to those such as the Newcastle & South Coast line.

Apparently, 2+2 seating is favoured by passengers. This would provide a more accessible train, anyway. I am sure they can shed a few seats, as I recall it being said earlier on this forum that regional trains don't usually run near full capacity.

Thanks
  TrainLover222 Junior Train Controller

Location: On the Canberra Xplorer
My point LanceD is that vline is building there own fleet of long distance trains and NSW is building it's own fleet of trains. NSW isn't going to add on to a Victorian order and whatever SG rollingstock vline needs can easily be added on to whatever vlocity order is being built for your BG "long distance" trains. In no way would there be enough volume for vline SG rolling stock to double the NSW order.
In an ideal world, like most countries all the various state services would be under one federal umbrella and yes would be the same platform. ie Prospector, Hunter/ V/locity/ Sprinter/ XLP/ END/ Adelaide 2000 and 3000 class and likewise the spark fleets would be three different platforms only.

However its worth noting that most of the stock is related to some degree or just the next generation.

ie
- Australind is related to XPL and XPT
- XPL/END -> V/locity
- Prospector  -> Hunter

And Srpinter fits in somewhere I'm sure

Or something like that.
RTT_Rules
I think that wouldn't work. I believe the variety of operators currently existing (including private operators such as Great Southern Rail) is the best idea. Australia is large country with many different railway standards across it.

Thanks
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
My point LanceD is that vline is building there own fleet of long distance trains and NSW is building it's own fleet of trains. NSW isn't going to add on to a Victorian order and whatever SG rollingstock vline needs can easily be added on to whatever vlocity order is being built for your BG "long distance" trains. In no way would there be enough volume for vline SG rolling stock to double the NSW order.
In an ideal world, like most countries all the various state services would be under one federal umbrella and yes would be the same platform. ie Prospector, Hunter/ V/locity/ Sprinter/ XLP/ END/ Adelaide 2000 and 3000 class and likewise the spark fleets would be three different platforms only.

However its worth noting that most of the stock is related to some degree or just the next generation.

ie
- Australind is related to XPL and XPT
- XPL/END -> V/locity
- Prospector  -> Hunter

And Srpinter fits in somewhere I'm sure

Or something like that.
I think that wouldn't work. I believe the variety of operators currently existing (including private operators such as Great Southern Rail) is the best idea. Australia is large country with many different railway standards across it.

Thanks
TrainLover222
Not so sure on that, they are moving to more common platform and as above most of the different models came from a previous in another state and they are all basically doing similar roles and would only need internal layout changes, not overall. BG/SG has no impact on the design.

If the likes of some national organisation was running the show from the start, they would have standardised years ago. Narrow Gauge services are obviously different case.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

What would your suggestion achieve. Look at the incompetance of federal bodies in this country as it stands. ARTC being the biggest screw up of them all.
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
What would your suggestion achieve. Look at the incompetance of federal bodies in this country as it stands. ARTC being the biggest screw up of them all.
simstrain
We will never know as it has never happened, but somehow manages to occur off-shore in most countries.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

What would your suggestion achieve. Look at the incompetance of federal bodies in this country as it stands. ARTC being the biggest screw up of them all.
We will never know as it has never happened, but somehow manages to occur off-shore in most countries.
RTT_Rules

Australia isn't like the rest of the world now is it. Our rail systems were created before there was an Australia when we were still colonies. The feds have no idea when it comes to infrastructure because most of it is built by the state governments with the feds only playing lip service and putting money in.
  TrainLover222 Junior Train Controller

Location: On the Canberra Xplorer
What would your suggestion achieve. Look at the incompetance of federal bodies in this country as it stands. ARTC being the biggest screw up of them all.
We will never know as it has never happened, but somehow manages to occur off-shore in most countries.

Australia isn't like the rest of the world now is it. Our rail systems were created before there was an Australia when we were still colonies. The feds have no idea when it comes to infrastructure because most of it is built by the state governments with the feds only playing lip service and putting money in.
simstrain
I don't think there's any going back now, considering how large the networks of Queensland, NSW and Victoria (among all other states) have become. Each state now has a complex railway network running under its own gauge, plus the standard gauge lines such as the ones to Melbourne, Brisbane & Adelaide/Perth used by freight and XPT and Great Southern Rail passenger services.

While I doubt it, maybe a train compatible with different gauges may be brought up in the proposals. You know, one that has multiple sets of wheels to suit both broad and standard gauge trackage.

Improvements I think are definite for the network. As I have mentioned, new trains fleets and track improvements should see increased patronage, which means more income for TrainLink, which means more investment. Hopefully the new XPTs can trigger such a cycle.

I would expect a good train for these replacements. With the start-of-the-art Waratahs now being in service (with more to come) and the new to-be-built intercity trains, which provide improved features and speed, I think Transport for NSW is upping their game. In the respect of new lines built and new trains (particularly in the Sydney area), I don't think we need to get too harsh on Gladys. Still, I miss the Sydney Monorail!

Back to the point, we already have a lot of standard gauge trackage. I can't manage to picture a change of gauge for TrainLink services, and with these standard variations across such a large country, I doubt a single long-distance rail operator will be formed. Some integration might happen in the new trains see significantly increased patronage and speed, I presume.
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
What would your suggestion achieve. Look at the incompetance of federal bodies in this country as it stands. ARTC being the biggest screw up of them all.
We will never know as it has never happened, but somehow manages to occur off-shore in most countries.

Australia isn't like the rest of the world now is it. Our rail systems were created before there was an Australia when we were still colonies. The feds have no idea when it comes to infrastructure because most of it is built by the state governments with the feds only playing lip service and putting money in.
simstrain
Not sure what point you are trying to make and who gives a crap who built the original railways.

There was a time when not that long ago the feds invited all the states to hand over their non suburban railways only SA and Tas agreed. I'm sure some of the others later regretted this and basically most of what Whitlam tried to achieve has since occurred by default.

However the Regional Passenger operations have not gone under a federal umbrella because what pax operations that they were given, some of it became or was already nonviable and was closed the other sold.  By the time a more national interest came in, basically the mid 90's, the feds have moved on from running trains full stop.

It was federal influence that basically introduced standard gauge connection to each state.
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
What would your suggestion achieve. Look at the incompetance of federal bodies in this country as it stands. ARTC being the biggest screw up of them all.
We will never know as it has never happened, but somehow manages to occur off-shore in most countries.

Australia isn't like the rest of the world now is it. Our rail systems were created before there was an Australia when we were still colonies. The feds have no idea when it comes to infrastructure because most of it is built by the state governments with the feds only playing lip service and putting money in.
simstrain
Not sure what point you are trying to make and who gives a crap who built the original railways.

There was a time when not that long ago the feds invited all the states to hand over their non suburban railways only SA and Tas agreed. I'm sure some of the others later regretted this and basically most of what Whitlam tried to achieve has since occurred by default.

However the Regional Passenger operations have not gone under a federal umbrella because what pax operations that they were given, some of it became or was already nonviable and was closed the other sold.  By the time a more national interest came in, basically the mid 90's, the feds have moved on from running trains full stop.

It was federal influence that basically introduced standard gauge connection to each state.
  RTT_Rules The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dubai UAE
What would your suggestion achieve. Look at the incompetance of federal bodies in this country as it stands. ARTC being the biggest screw up of them all.
We will never know as it has never happened, but somehow manages to occur off-shore in most countries.

Australia isn't like the rest of the world now is it. Our rail systems were created before there was an Australia when we were still colonies. The feds have no idea when it comes to infrastructure because most of it is built by the state governments with the feds only playing lip service and putting money in.
I don't think there's any going back now, considering how large the networks of Queensland, NSW and Victoria (among all other states) have become. Each state now has a complex railway network running under its own gauge, plus the standard gauge lines such as the ones to Melbourne, Brisbane & Adelaide/Perth used by freight and XPT and Great Southern Rail passenger services.

While I doubt it, maybe a train compatible with different gauges may be brought up in the proposals. You know, one that has multiple sets of wheels to suit both broad and standard gauge trackage.

Improvements I think are definite for the network. As I have mentioned, new trains fleets and track improvements should see increased patronage, which means more income for TrainLink, which means more investment. Hopefully the new XPTs can trigger such a cycle.

I would expect a good train for these replacements. With the start-of-the-art Waratahs now being in service (with more to come) and the new to-be-built intercity trains, which provide improved features and speed, I think Transport for NSW is upping their game. In the respect of new lines built and new trains (particularly in the Sydney area), I don't think we need to get too harsh on Gladys. Still, I miss the Sydney Monorail!

Back to the point, we already have a lot of standard gauge trackage. I can't manage to picture a change of gauge for TrainLink services, and with these standard variations across such a large country, I doubt a single long-distance rail operator will be formed. Some integration might happen in the new trains see significantly increased patronage and speed, I presume.
TrainLover222
The networks are not overly large or complex. Rationalisation and curtailment poor performing lines has left most of the states with a handfull of truck lines. Even Qld no longer has the lightweight branches the used to criss cross the state, most closed and ripped up. Away from the coal networks and NCL, there is basically just the Mt Isa Line, Longreach, Charileville (for now) and Thallon. NSW and Vic, not alot different with Grain the main stay off the interstate and SA very little ignoring the isolated Eyre network. I think only Whyalla and Adelaide Port and NT line?

Gauge wise, NG is mostly limited to isolated distance parts of the country away from the SE corner and even Qld traffic is mostly intra state as is WA. Regardless the context was standardise passenger vehicles using for regional and interstate traffic which basically does not apply and was acknowledged. ie focusing on SG and BG fleets.

There is no need to change gauge for any of the regional pax services as BG and SG is basically the same just a different wheel position on the axle.

My comment was
Had Australia gone down a different path with Nationalisation of the state railways as per Whitlam or any other option, The bulk of regional services and DMU Interurban services could easily be exactly the same rolling stock, just BG and SG versions. Even the ones we have today are mostly built on the back of each other with more cosmetic changes than anything. Perth and Brisbane's last suburban rail fleet orders were I believe pretty much identical with only very minor again mostly cosmetic differences.

Yes I miss the Monorail too, but go there now and you can see why its gone.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

I was thinking today about the other potential productivity booster for NSW Trains: tilting.

On the NCL is has the potential to make a huge difference IMHO.

ATM, 5 XPT sets for 30-35 cars operating concurrently to provide 6 trains a day, including 2 red-eyes.

Grafton is @700km.  Even though the NCL is an endless succession of 300m radius curves, in theory a tilting train should be able to operate at ~100kph on the bendiest part of the route.  An average of 112kph gives a transit time of 6:15, or 6:45 allowing for stops (vs the very generous 10hrs for the XPT now).

A sub 7hr transit time means each train can run up and down during the day, and back up again overnight as a red-eye.  A timetable like this:



This timetable does everything the current one does (except service Brisbane), but uses only 2 sets.  Say it's a 4 car DMU/EMU hybrid, it's only 8 cars, vs the current fleet of 30+
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

What about kyogle, coffs harbour, wauchope, macksville and kempsey. These stations are necessary to make the services viable. There is no point in having a limited stops train because the whole benefit of the train services is in connecting the communities along the line.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

the alignment is not the only thing slowing the XPT's either.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

What about kyogle, coffs harbour, wauchope, macksville and kempsey. These stations are necessary to make the services viable. There is no point in having a limited stops train because the whole benefit of the train services is in connecting the communities along the line.
simstrain

Who said anything about axing stops?  

the alignment is not the only thing slowing the XPT's either.
simstrain


Agreed.  The attitude of the staff plays a role too.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

What about kyogle, coffs harbour, wauchope, macksville and kempsey. These stations are necessary to make the services viable. There is no point in having a limited stops train because the whole benefit of the train services is in connecting the communities along the line.

Who said anything about axing stops?  

the alignment is not the only thing slowing the XPT's either.


Agreed.  The attitude of the staff plays a role too.
djf01

Those stops weren't in your timetable and so I was under the idea that maybe you were going to remove them from the stopping pattern.

I was thinking more along the lines of waiting for crossings at loops with freight and other XPT's on the north coast that slow the XPT down.
  TrainLover222 Junior Train Controller

Location: On the Canberra Xplorer
I was thinking today about the other potential productivity booster for NSW Trains: tilting.

On the NCL is has the potential to make a huge difference IMHO.

ATM, 5 XPT sets for 30-35 cars operating concurrently to provide 6 trains a day, including 2 red-eyes.

Grafton is @700km.  Even though the NCL is an endless succession of 300m radius curves, in theory a tilting train should be able to operate at ~100kph on the bendiest part of the route.  An average of 112kph gives a transit time of 6:15, or 6:45 allowing for stops (vs the very generous 10hrs for the XPT now).

A sub 7hr transit time means each train can run up and down during the day, and back up again overnight as a red-eye.  A timetable like this:



This timetable does everything the current one does (except service Brisbane), but uses only 2 sets.  Say it's a 4 car DMU/EMU hybrid, it's only 8 cars, vs the current fleet of 30+
djf01
That would be amazing! I wouldn't be surprised if the new trains had tilting capabilities, and this would make more regional services faster than car travel! I thought the track down that way would be bad, considering it takes three hours less by car to get there.

How hard would it be to get a train that has already been designed and put into production (such as a V/Locity or Prospector) and modify it to have the ability to tilt? Easy job or not?

Thanks
  TrainLover222 Junior Train Controller

Location: On the Canberra Xplorer
What about kyogle, coffs harbour, wauchope, macksville and kempsey. These stations are necessary to make the services viable. There is no point in having a limited stops train because the whole benefit of the train services is in connecting the communities along the line.

Who said anything about axing stops?  

the alignment is not the only thing slowing the XPT's either.


Agreed.  The attitude of the staff plays a role too.

Those stops weren't in your timetable and so I was under the idea that maybe you were going to remove them from the stopping pattern.

I was thinking more along the lines of waiting for crossings at loops with freight and other XPT's on the north coast that slow the XPT down.
simstrain
One thing I failed to bring up is that regional services only stop at stations in which passengers are booked to board/disembark. I guess that pretty much solves the "too many stations" thing.

I am trying to rediscover the example I had on Google Maps, but it appears that regional trains are competitive time-wise with road travel on some fairly windy pieces of track.

Thanks

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: