LOL- I guess I meant it might take as long as 37 years to complete (sort of/in some way/with bits/left out/put in/changed/rescoped/upgraded/high vis......
If it's going to take 37 years, and be just as rubbish as Neighbours -- then please -- just put it out of all our miseries and close the whole Murray Basin.LOL- I guess I meant it might take as long as 37 years to complete (sort of/in some way/with bits/left out/put in/changed/rescoped/upgraded/high vis......But that's about to finish. I hear the last episode is will be screened in September.Hmmmm....a saga that will run as long as Neighbours.
https://vic.nationals.org.au/media-releases/ministers-excuses-leave-murray-basin-rail-project-under-a-fresh-cloud-of-doubt/
The PAEC website hasn't released the transcript yet for the June 6th stoush, but I'm sure it'll be juicy.
https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/paec/article/4880
The current works are all funded jointly by Feds and Victoria key highlights being re-railing Maryborough - Ararat (new rail being dropped off now) , upgrade Ouyen - Murrayville (complete), restore siding at Donald(in hand), a new crossing loop near the current Wiltshire Block Point, re-activate crossing loop at Tourello. .But that's about to finish. I hear the last episode is will be screened in September.Hmmmm....a saga that will run as long as Neighbours.
https://vic.nationals.org.au/media-releases/ministers-excuses-leave-murray-basin-rail-project-under-a-fresh-cloud-of-doubt/
The PAEC website hasn't released the transcript yet for the June 6th stoush, but I'm sure it'll be juicy.
https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/paec/article/4880
Anyway, the Murrayville-Ouyen section upgrade appears to have been completed (now 40 km/h line speed - woohoo!!), and new rail continues to be dropped off between Ararat and Maryborough so that will help.
I do have my doubts about the rest of it though, particularly the new loops and Dunolly Yard improvements if the new Fed Govt pulls the pin completely.
This is a line that has not seen a freight train since December 2020. That is remarkably good for a line which sees such low tonnage40!! that's it after all this time? Ok a freight train doesn't have to run at TGV speed but you'd think for efficiency it might be a tad higher. Is the funding for what was already announced in the revamped/descoped project under the Federal/State arrangement already allocated, so that part can be completed at least ?a saga that will run as long as Neighbours.But that's about to finish. I hear the last episode is will be screened in September.
Anyway, the Murrayville-Ouyen section upgrade appears to have been completed (now 40 km/h line speed - woohoo!!), and new rail continues to be dropped off between Ararat and Maryborough so that will help.
I do have my doubts about the rest of it though, particularly the new loops and Dunolly Yard improvements if the new Fed Govt pulls the pin completely.
I'm not convinced the line has to go through the center of Ballarat - why not build a bypass from Warrenheip to North Ballarat? That way you could get a direct route to Geelong while also freeing the existing BG track for passenger services.
I'm not convinced the line has to go through the center of Ballarat - why not build a bypass from Warrenheip to North Ballarat? That way you could get a direct route to Geelong while also freeing the existing BG track for passenger services.Absolute guarantee to ensure that SG via Ballarat never happens.
Seems like a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist, however, a single SG line could probably fit within or alongside the freeway easement from Nth Ballarat to Warrenheip.I'm not convinced the line has to go through the center of Ballarat - why not build a bypass from Warrenheip to North Ballarat? That way you could get a direct route to Geelong while also freeing the existing BG track for passenger services.
Cost of buying the land would probably make the bypass option very uneconomical.
Also, geography probably isnt amenable at the Warrenheip end.
Agree. A solution looking for a problem that either does not exist or certainly should not exist.Seems like a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist, however, a single SG line could probably fit within or alongside the freeway easement from Nth Ballarat to Warrenheip.I'm not convinced the line has to go through the center of Ballarat - why not build a bypass from Warrenheip to North Ballarat? That way you could get a direct route to Geelong while also freeing the existing BG track for passenger services.
Cost of buying the land would probably make the bypass option very uneconomical.
Also, geography probably isnt amenable at the Warrenheip end.
I'm not convinced the line has to go through the center of Ballarat - why not build a bypass from Warrenheip to North Ballarat? That way you could get a direct route to Geelong while also freeing the existing BG track for passenger services.Its not technically difficult to go SG through Ballarat. The design prioritising the SG as the main line for speed. Arranging any gauge crossings to access platform 1 to be low speed for the BG be operationally 'near' the platform should alleviate any pathing and run-time issues.
Double stacking of agricultural freight is incredibly rare as it is heavy (esp if it is grain in boxes) so that makes the Lydiard street crossing suggestion a bridge we dont need to cross.I'm not convinced the line has to go through the center of Ballarat - why not build a bypass from Warrenheip to North Ballarat? That way you could get a direct route to Geelong while also freeing the existing BG track for passenger services.Its not technically difficult to go SG through Ballarat. The design prioritising the SG as the main line for speed. Arranging any gauge crossings to access platform 1 to be low speed for the BG be operationally 'near' the platform should alleviate any pathing and run-time issues.
If one was prepared to forgo the Lydiard street crossing, sinking the middle road a few feet would cater for double stacking. Workshop access and further connections to the west. There's certainly enough real estate to cater for largely segregated tracks at the station and points north and west.
Yet wasting ones breath, freight means nothing to this state and talking 'vision' and 'strategic' is pointless. One only has to see placement of signals at Wendouree to see that there is no vision.
Double stacking of agricultural freight is incredibly rare as it is heavy (esp if it is grain in boxes) so that makes the Lydiard street crossing suggestion a bridge we dont need to cross.
Totally agree. These would be lost if the line went elsewhere.Double stacking of agricultural freight is incredibly rare as it is heavy (esp if it is grain in boxes) so that makes the Lydiard street crossing suggestion a bridge we dont need to cross.
Ballarat SG plans should not avoid the station for the following reasons:
1. SG is important for passenger services on that gauge
2. Maintenance facilities and Ballarat East and Ballarat North will require (or should require) SG for maintenance activities
3. The Ballarat Intermodal Facility would benefit from SG which may be available using the old down line?
Occurred to me last month when I was waiting for a train at Ballarat station (in the blistering cold wind...), SG would re-connect Ballarat with all points westward of Ararat as well as giving an alternative "northern" route for ARTC freight putting some much-needed redundancy into that route.Double stacking of agricultural freight is incredibly rare as it is heavy (esp if it is grain in boxes) so that makes the Lydiard street crossing suggestion a bridge we dont need to cross.
Ballarat SG plans should not avoid the station for the following reasons:
1. SG is important for passenger services on that gauge
2. Maintenance facilities and Ballarat East and Ballarat North will require (or should require) SG for maintenance activities
3. The Ballarat Intermodal Facility would benefit from SG which may be available using the old down line?
Something that I proposed years ago that Geelong - Ballarat - Ararat SG would provide enormous additional capacity or redundancy.Occurred to me last month when I was waiting for a train at Ballarat station (in the blistering cold wind...), SG would re-connect Ballarat with all points westward of Ararat as well as giving an alternative "northern" route for ARTC freight putting some much-needed redundancy into that route.Double stacking of agricultural freight is incredibly rare as it is heavy (esp if it is grain in boxes) so that makes the Lydiard street crossing suggestion a bridge we dont need to cross.
Ballarat SG plans should not avoid the station for the following reasons:
1. SG is important for passenger services on that gauge
2. Maintenance facilities and Ballarat East and Ballarat North will require (or should require) SG for maintenance activities
3. The Ballarat Intermodal Facility would benefit from SG which may be available using the old down line?
Yeah I meant to say it would re-connect Ballarat with all points west-wards - full-stop. And it's a shame to hear that they didn't consider dual-gauging those sleepers. Even here in SA we've dual-gauged all the sleepers used in the urban area just in case it all goes standard gauge sometime in the future.Something that I proposed years ago that Geelong - Ballarat - Ararat SG would provide enormous additional capacity or redundancy.Occurred to me last month when I was waiting for a train at Ballarat station (in the blistering cold wind...), SG would re-connect Ballarat with all points westward of Ararat as well as giving an alternative "northern" route for ARTC freight putting some much-needed redundancy into that route.Double stacking of agricultural freight is incredibly rare as it is heavy (esp if it is grain in boxes) so that makes the Lydiard street crossing suggestion a bridge we dont need to cross.
Ballarat SG plans should not avoid the station for the following reasons:
1. SG is important for passenger services on that gauge
2. Maintenance facilities and Ballarat East and Ballarat North will require (or should require) SG for maintenance activities
3. The Ballarat Intermodal Facility would benefit from SG which may be available using the old down line?
Sadly, someone at Vline must have read my post as they immediately set about resleepering much of Ballarat - Ararat with BG concrete sleepers so 'cementing' the section as BG for virtually ever.
With half a brain they could have had their cake and eaten it too for no additional sleeper cost.
Take a look at this article team and the detailed psychology of the marketing message https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/new-funds-put-rail-freight-capacity-on-track incredible the minister has taken this approach of projecting all is in hand and we are all good. Why are we talking about more sidings now? This should have been already completed.This is why a decent opposition is needed. Right now Labor can do whatever and it wont be challenged. No-one is there on the other side to shine a light on the reality and possibly embarrass them into doing the right thing. Shame really.
Where are the roads in Mildura yard that could have been made available for storage of wagons.
Note the issues around grain trains accessing Yelta since Victrack pulled out the yard at Mildura. Also the minister states the proposed works will allow 5 trains per week instead of the current 3, it was at 5 trains on BG.
What a dishonest comedy.
Take a look at this article team and the detailed psychology of the marketing message https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/new-funds-put-rail-freight-capacity-on-track incredible the minister has taken this approach of projecting all is in hand and we are all good. Why are we talking about more sidings now? This should have been already completed.... installation of over... 8000 joints between the rail...
Do they mean welds? Bear in mind these media releases are written by spin doctor public relations people do not know what they're dealing with.Take a look at this article team and the detailed psychology of the marketing message https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/new-funds-put-rail-freight-capacity-on-track incredible the minister has taken this approach of projecting all is in hand and we are all good. Why are we talking about more sidings now? This should have been already completed.... installation of over... 8000 joints between the rail...
I thought CWR was the way of the future not joints and fish plates
Occurred to me last month when I was waiting for a train at Ballarat station (in the blistering cold wind...), SG would re-connect Ballarat with all points westward of Ararat as well as giving an alternative "northern" route for ARTC freight putting some much-needed redundancy into that route.Were you considering running SG trains via Balalrat and Maryborough and to Ouyen and then SA or are you thinking Ballarat to Ararat and then to SA?
Take a look at this article team and the detailed psychology of the marketing message https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/new-funds-put-rail-freight-capacity-on-track incredible the minister has taken this approach of projecting all is in hand and we are all good. Why are we talking about more sidings now? This should have been already completed.... installation of over... 8000 joints between the rail...
I thought CWR was the way of the future not joints and fish plates
Subscribers: 501M, awsgc24, Beta4Me, bevans, Boss, Boss 2, C2, david harvey, DounutCereal, doyle, Duncs, Edith, ElliotProvis, freightgate, fzr560, garethsh, GheringhapLoop, Greensleeves, Jack Le Lievre, james.au, JoppaJunction, KngtRider, Lachlan's Train Channel, loco958, max_thum, Nightfire, NSWGR8022, Papad, PeeJay, Pressman, R766, Radioman, reubstar6, SAR526, steamfreak, TheMeddlingMonk, Union_Bay, wurx, x31