Murray Basin standardisation

 
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
Thanks PIMM.  I thought someone said here ages ago that NSW and Vic were different on that.  If it isnt perhaps it will be easier to remember!

Does the grade at the up end of Maryborough have any bearing on it only being available for down trains?

Sponsored advertisement

  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
Can someone remind me what way down is in Victoria?  Up/Down is something i just can't keep in my head (and I know it is different in NSW which is probably part of the confusion....).
james.au
Down is away from Melbourne and Up is towards Melbourne.
I thought that this principle was the same in NSW in relation to Sydney.
.
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
If it's a loop what is the significance of 'will be available for Down trains' or am I looking for the inevitable 'catch' ?

I do hate to ruin your night Yardmaster...

It will be available only for Down trains.
potatoinmymouth
Yeah but why?
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

If it's a loop what is the significance of 'will be available for Down trains' or am I looking for the inevitable 'catch' ?

I do hate to ruin your night Yardmaster...

It will be available only for Down trains.
Yeah but why?
YM-Mundrabilla
Apparently because the signalling configuration will not permit up SG trains to be signalled into the loop. (However, it will be possible for trains already in the loop to be signalled in the up direction towards Ararat - how this might work in practice is anybody's guess.)

You will ask why again and I don't know, sorry. Maybe the additional signalling will be completed at a later date.
  kuldalai Chief Commissioner

At last!

An occupation has been scheduled for next weekend, following which a 651m loop track will be available for Down trains at Maryborough.

Will the new loop be SG or DG?

Ross
SG, to the best of my knowledge.

Can someone remind me what way down is in Victoria?
Down is away from Melbourne, Up is toward Melbourne. The situation is the same in NSW, but with Sydney as the central location.
potatoinmymouth
The additional roads at Maryborough are in fact 3 sg roads . The nearest to the existing mainline not available to traffic as yet . Then the next road # 2 is 650m long sg and only accessible from Down end currently .
Third track not available as yet .

So any sg train could cross at maryborough provide one train was under 650m, from a Down direction just drive straight in do cross and back out . From the Up back in and drive straight out . The other train doing the cross not restricted by length just drive straight through platform road in either direction .

This is all part of progressive stages at Maryborough to arrive at the final commissioned sg layout .

NSW & Victoria both the same discipline .  Down trains run away from capital City and have odd numbers, Up trains run towards the capital City and have even numbers .  So XPT Melbourne to Sydney is a Down train and odd number Melbourne to Albury, then becomes an Up train to Sydney with an even number .  XPT  Sydney to Melbourne Down train with odd number as far as Albury then Up train with even number Albury to Melbourne . Really quite simple and logical .
  awsgc24 Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney
This is all part of progressive stages at Maryborough to arrive at the final commissioned sg layout .
kuldalai
For track diagram of Maryborough (Vic) see: http://www.sa-trackandsignal.net/Pdf%20files/VCRN/VL1166.pdf
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
' So any sg train could cross at maryborough provide one train was under 650m, from a Down direction just drive straight in do cross and back out . From the Up back in and drive straight out . The other train doing the cross not restricted by length just drive straight through platform road in either direction . '
Sorry Kuldalai, please tolerate me for just a minute.

Is my understanding as follows correct, please?

There is (currently) a dead end siding (2 road) at Maryborough which is theoretically available to refuge a train for crossing purposes.
This road is only accessible at the down end.
It is 651 metres in clear.

Hypothetically:

We have a 600 metre train on the down and an 800 metre train on the up approaching Maryborough concurrently for a cross.
The down train must enter the Maryborough - Dunolly (?) section in the process of setting back into the dead end 2 road thereby blocking the up train at Dunolly (?).
How long for the cross to take place - an hour at the best?
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

Not sure what you’re on about YM, the down train doesn’t need to set back. It enters No 2 Road at the up end, waits for the up train to cross, and exits at the down end.

No 2 Road is a loop, just only set up for one direction at the moment.
  Galron Chief Commissioner

Location: Werribee, Vic
Not sure what you’re on about YM, the down train doesn’t need to set back. It enters No 2 Road at the up end, waits for the up train to cross, and exits at the down end.

No 2 Road is a loop, just only set up for one direction at the moment.
potatoinmymouth
Down end is not currently connected - no signaling cables for it by accounts. # 2 road is only available for down trains, who will need to back out of the road, aka set back. Works this weekend are to get the track accessible, and, to a point, usable.
  ngarner Train Controller

Location: Seville
' So any sg train could cross at maryborough provide one train was under 650m, from a Down direction just drive straight in do cross and back out . From the Up back in and drive straight out . The other train doing the cross not restricted by length just drive straight through platform road in either direction . '
Sorry Kuldalai, please tolerate me for just a minute.

Is my understanding as follows correct, please?

There is (currently) a dead end siding (2 road) at Maryborough which is theoretically available to refuge a train for crossing purposes.
This road is only accessible at the down end.
It is 651 metres in clear.

Hypothetically:

We have a 600 metre train on the down and an 800 metre train on the up approaching Maryborough concurrently for a cross.
The down train must enter the Maryborough - Dunolly (?) section in the process of setting back into the dead end 2 road thereby blocking the up train at Dunolly (?).
How long for the cross to take place - an hour at the best?
YM-Mundrabilla
I get where YM is coming from but I gather, from subsequent posts, that he has his train directions reversed. So an 600m long up crossing an 800m down causes the problem he's querying.
The up will fit but has to clear the up side of Maryborough's yard limits to reverse into the siding while the down is coming towards Maryborough; the down train won't fit in the loop so the up must be the one to clear the line. The up has to occupy the same section of main as the oncoming down so unless there is some sort of block post between Ararat and Maryborough where it can be halted to enable the up to do the shunt there will be major delays to the down.
At least it is only a temporary problem.

Neil
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

Not sure what you’re on about YM, the down train doesn’t need to set back. It enters No 2 Road at the up end, waits for the up train to cross, and exits at the down end.

No 2 Road is a loop, just only set up for one direction at the moment.
Down end is not currently connected - no signaling cables for it by accounts. # 2 road is only available for down trains, who will need to back out of the road, aka set back. Works this weekend are to get the track accessible, and, to a point, usable.
Galron
Which is what I thought we were talking about - the situation after this weekend, with the down end dwarf on No 2 Road commissioned. My apologies.
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
We don't even seem to agree whether the up or the down end of the current 'dead end refuge siding' (so called loop) is connected so we have no hope of agreeing on anything else.
Thank Goodness we are not issuing Train Orders!
  Bonzel Locomotive Fireman

We don't even seem to agree whether the up or the down end of the current 'dead end refuge siding' (so called loop) is connected so we have no hope of agreeing on anything else.
Thank Goodness we are not issuing Train Orders!
YM-Mundrabilla
At Maryborough for the last few months has been.  Main line No1 road along side platform dual gauge , 2-3-4 yard roads SG.  The yard roads have been connected to the mainline at the down end (Dunolly end) for months by a set of DG points in the mainline then sets of SG points from 2 to 3 and from 3 to 4.  At the up end (Ballarat end)  2-3-4 were connected to each other for months,  yesterday 27-10-18 the missing link DG points were installed in mainline connecting to 2 road.
  kuldalai Chief Commissioner

We don't even seem to agree whether the up or the down end of the current 'dead end refuge siding' (so called loop) is connected so we have no hope of agreeing on anything else.
Thank Goodness we are not issuing Train Orders!
At Maryborough for the last few months has been.  Main line No1 road along side platform dual gauge , 2-3-4 yard roads SG.  The yard roads have been connected to the mainline at the down end (Dunolly end) for months by a set of DG points in the mainline then sets of SG points from 2 to 3 and from 3 to 4.  At the up end (Ballarat end)  2-3-4 were connected to each other for months,  yesterday 27-10-18 the missing link DG points were installed in mainline connecting to 2 road.
Bonzel
Yes its a progressive on going thing as the rest of the Claytons Yard at Maryborough is commissioned .
  Lockspike Deputy Commissioner

Yes its a progressive on going thing as the rest of the Claytons Yard at Maryborough is commissioned .
kuldalai
I understand that it's the issue of lack of oversight that has caused many problems with this project, however,
I'd hate to be holding my breath until this project is functional. Rolling Eyes
  Dangersdan707 Chief Commissioner

Location: On a Thing with Internet
How many of The roads are DG? Or have BG acsses?
  mikesyd Chief Commissioner

Location: Lurking
How many of The roads are DG? Or have BG acsses?
Dangersdan707
The Platform Road is DG. All the Yard is now SG.

Access to the old Loco area and the Velocity Stabling is of course still BG.

Nothing else - a BG train can't cross another BG train between Ballarat and Korong Vale now.
  hbedriver Chief Train Controller

My understanding is that we have:-

1 road. Dual gauge, bi-directional.
2 road. Standard gauge, not in use.
3 road (numbered as an interim as 2 road). Standard gauge, signalled for down moves only.
4 road. Standard gauge, not in use.

My understanding is that this stage allows a minimalist ability to cross SG trains, pending completion of more track work and signalling. Others might deem it a bit silly to commission full signalling for a relatively short term, then have to re-do most of it (especially at the up end) after perhaps only a handful of trains have actually used the facility.


I suspect that there won't be much need for crossing trains this coming season. I understand around 80% of grain crops around Swan Hill have failed, and I expect that the Mildura / Sea Lake / Ultima lines won't be much better off. If correct, I expect that there won't be too many trains needing to cross the Fruity, so really why worry about crossing loops this year?
  kuldalai Chief Commissioner

Within the Rail Industry key stakeholders reckoned the minimum objectives with the MB standardization  was to have a converted sg railway that would have similar capacity but upgraded to 21 tonne axle loads to the bg network it replaces, plus allow access from Maryborough on sg to both Portland and Geelong so as to generate more tonnage on rail, and less on road , increased competition between ports .

To date owing to arguably inadequate detailed initial scoping the likely outcome owing to serious deficiencies in areas like lack of holding roads at North Geelong, lack of long /crossing staging roads at Maryborough, lack of crossing facilities between Maryborough and Ararat and between Maryborough and Ballarat the final result will no doubt be a standardized network that is inferior to the broad gauge network it replaces .  Add to that absurdities such as dual gauging Ballarat - Maryborough just so VLP can retain a broad gauge train set, and one can see why the whole project needs a detailed re think NOW before further stages of conversion are undertaken . (Before allowing to just  dig ourselves into an even deeper hole .)

2018/19 will be a non event grain harvest, but just wait till it is anything like a normal or above average grain harvest and the flaws in the current and proposed sg network will be exposed with a vengeance in excessively long transit times incurring extra costs to rail operators , and trains standing idle , unnecessarily long cycle times requiring more trains operating on a degraded network with inadequate crossing and staging abilty to handle even a normal sort of grain harvest, lest being able to handle a bumper crop , and certainly not allowing  for any capacity to attract  any new business to rail .
  trainbrain Deputy Commissioner

How many of The roads are DG? Or have BG acsses?
The Platform Road is DG. All the Yard is now SG.

Access to the old Loco area and the Velocity Stabling is of course still BG.

Nothing else - a BG train can't cross another BG train between Ballarat and Korong Vale now.
mikesyd
Not quite true, there is a Crossing Loop at Warrenheip, just East of Ballarat.
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

Not quite true, there is a Crossing Loop at Warrenheip, just East of Ballarat.
trainbrain

...and therefore not between Ballarat and Korong Vale.
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
To date owing to arguably inadequate detailed initial scoping the likely outcome owing to serious deficiencies in areas like lack of holding roads at North Geelong, lack of long /crossing staging roads at Maryborough, lack of crossing facilities between Maryborough and Ararat and between Maryborough and Ballarat the final result will no doubt be a standardized network that is inferior to the broad gauge network it replaces .  Add to that absurdities such as dual gauging Ballarat - Maryborough just so VLP can retain a broad gauge train set, and one can see why the whole project needs a detailed re think NOW before further stages of conversion are undertaken . (Before allowing to just  dig ourselves into an even deeper hole .)
kuldalai

Re North Geelong - this was never part of the project but probably should have been.  Like Ballarat, they never thought through the whole thing before they did the business case.  Post SG the whole Geelong area probably needs a good look at to rationalise things there.


2018/19 will be a non event grain harvest, but just wait till it is anything like a normal or above average grain harvest and the flaws in the current and proposed sg network will be exposed with a vengeance in excessively long transit times incurring extra costs to rail operators , and trains standing idle , unnecessarily long cycle times requiring more trains operating on a degraded network with inadequate crossing and staging abilty to handle even a normal sort of grain harvest, lest being able to handle a bumper crop , and certainly not allowing  for any capacity to attract  any new business to rail .
kuldalai


There is nothing like pressure points for governments to react to - proactivity is not in their dictionary.  However, it will help focus exactly what is required and what is not (and would be a waste).
  BigShunter Chief Commissioner

Location: St Clair. S.A.
There is nothing like pressure points for governments to react to - proactivity is not in their dictionary.  However, it will help focus exactly what is required and what is not (and would be a waste).
james.au
Perhaps you may be right, james, but it seems such a cock-arsed way of getting a project to work. As kuldalai said, it would be a smart move to construct something that operates effectively, in an average harvest........... at least Rolling Eyes

But this again, seems to be the way with most govt projects, they are built to operate at the minimum average, not average average, let alone maximum ! The same has happened over in this colony, they have recently opened the new RAH ( royal adelaide hospital ) if they get a minor rush with ambulances, there are ramping problems, bit of the old flue during winter, bed shortages. wouldn't you expect more ambulances over weekends or holidays, more sick people in winter time and build to cator for these events.

Back to the MBRP, hopefully with their re-think on the seperation plan through Ballarat a few pennys drop and a bit more scope can be built into the project, between A-rat, M-borgh, B-rat and free the crunch point up a bit.

BigShunter.
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
There is nothing like pressure points for governments to react to - proactivity is not in their dictionary.  However, it will help focus exactly what is required and what is not (and would be a waste).
Perhaps you may be right, james, but it seems such a cock-arsed way of getting a project to work. As kuldalai said, it would be a smart move to construct something that operates effectively, in an average harvest........... at least Rolling Eyes

But this again, seems to be the way with most govt projects, they are built to operate at the minimum average, not average average, let alone maximum ! The same has happened over in this colony, they have recently opened the new RAH ( royal adelaide hospital ) if they get a minor rush with ambulances, there are ramping problems, bit of the old flue during winter, bed shortages. wouldn't you expect more ambulances over weekends or holidays, more sick people of winter time and build to cator for these events.

Back to the MBRP, hopefully with their re-think on the seperation plan through Ballarat a few pennys drop and a bit more scope can be built into the project, between A-rat, M-borgh, B-rat and free the crunch point up a bit.

BigShunter.
BigShunter
I know but this is government and in the absence of a financially viable business model (which this rail isn't) there isnt a lot of interest in spending extra.

And agreed, the FPSP I hope will lead to some rationality around Ballarat - and given it will come out post election perhaps might have some of the difficult decisions finally made....
  BrentonGolding Chief Commissioner

Location: Maldon Junction
https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/slow-progress-on-murray-basin-rail-project

Interesting to contrast the comments of Tim Fischer quoted in the article with the "all good, nothing to see here" comments from the government.

"The Australian Rail Track Corporation has taken over the construction and final planning, but some elements of Victorian Transport and ­V/Line have caused massive ­delays in this vital project"

“Rail project Victoria has also finally stepped up, as it’s realised the absurdity of having completed the standardised gauge of Geelong and Mildura without the new east Ararat triangle”

BG

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: