• Login to Railpage
  • Information
    • Lineside Locations
    • Liveries
    • Locomotives
    • Organisations
    • Railcams
    • Sightings
  • Correspondence
    • Forums
    • News Index
    • News Archive
    • Polls
  • Content
    • Photos
    • Photo competitions
    • Old gallery
    • Jobs
    • Downloads
    • Timetables
    • Links
    • Events Calendar
    • Rail Passes
    • Railpage Websites
  • Website
    • Ideas
    • Advanced Search
    • Statistics
    • Forums Statistics
    • Bookmarklets
    • Feedback
    • Copyright
    • Membership List
    • Platform Status
    • Donate
    • Twitter
  • Help
    • Glossary
    • Terms of Use
    • Privacy Statement
    • Rules for Posting
    • Website Help & FAQ

Railpage

 

 
  • Home
  • Forums
  • Signalling and Infrastructure
  • ARTC - 10 years in NSW
    • About Railpage
    • Railpage Australia™
    • Help For Beginners
    • Locations
    • News
    • Australian Railway News
    • New South Wales
    • Sydney Suburban
    • Victoria
    • Melbourne suburban
    • Queensland
    • South Australia
    • Tasmania
    • Western Australia
    • NT
    • ACT
    • Operators
    • Locomotives and Rolling Stock
    • Signalling and Infrastructure
    • Sightings
    • General
    • Australian Rail Employment
    • Trams and Light Rail
    • Simulator Forums
    • MSTS General Discussions
    • MSTS Routes
    • MSTS 3D
    • Trainz General Discussions
    • MetroMSTS Projects
    • MS Train Simulator X
    • Open Rails
    • BVE Trainsim
    • Train Simulator
    • Model Railways
    • Model Railways - General Discussions
    • Special Interest Groups
    • Australian Miniature Railways
    • Gheringhap Loop
    • Railway Archaeology
    • Railway Photography
    • Radio and Scanning Discussions
    • RTSA
    • Other Transport
    • The Bogies
    • Railway Preservation and Tourism
    • Preservation and Tourist Railways
    • International Railway News
    • International Discussion
    • General Forums
    • The Lounge
    • Test Forum
    • Armchair Operators
    • Archived Threads
    cootanee posted 02 Oct 2014 07:58
    Posted in Signalling and Infrastructure » ARTC - 10 years in NSW

    Concrete sleepers = mud holes debate seems to have dominated discussions about ARTC.
    Given this thread is about the NSW Lease I’ll focus on that.

    Going into the Lease there was an expectation that ARTC would be a commercial enterprise and drive down costs. The feds weren’t prepared to invest in RIC/RAC because they were perceived them inefficient, union dominated, etc. So why concrete sleepers and not timber/ballast?
    ARTC’s original strategy was quite modest. Concrete sleepers would be used on tighter curves.

    Around the time of the NSW Lease several derailments put the spotlight on sleeper condition across NSW particularly on the NSW interstate network. http://www.otsi.nsw.gov.au/rail/IR-SteelSleeper-final.pdf

    Along the east coast thousands of sleepers needed to be replaced and deterioration was ongoing. ARTC took the view that wholesale replacement was warranted. Concrete sleepers were modern, economically sustainable, and politically appealing (for funding). ARTC challenged the market to meet or better the whole of life cost against timber, a relatively ballsy move.

    It was able to convince the feds to fund a batch of 500,000. This provided employment benefits in two regional centres. In time the feds agreed to fund further batches which resulted in a new sleeper plant at Bomen. This allowed ARTC to complete concrete sleepering across the network.

    Whilst these sleeper purchases were federally funded, installation was not. ARTC selected the most affordable and quickest means of doing so. ARTC have long acknowledged the ballast and drainage problems however given a lack of funds and immediate safety issues, sleeper replacement was the priority.

    Edit history

    Edited 02 Oct 2014 08:00, 7 years ago, edited by cootanee

    Concrete sleepers = mud holes debate seems to have dominated discussions about ARTC.
    Given this thread is about the NSW Lease I’ll focus on that.

    Going into the Lease there was an expectation that ARTC would be a commercial enterprise and drive down costs. The feds weren’t prepared to invest in RIC/RAC because they were perceived them inefficient, union dominated, etc.  So why concrete sleepers and not timber/ballast?
    ARTC’s original strategy was quite modest. Concrete sleepers would be used on tighter curves.

    Around the time of the NSW Lease several derailments put the spotlight on sleeper condition across NSW particularly on the NSW interstate network.  http://www.otsi.nsw.gov.au/rail/IR-SteelSleeper-final.pdf

    Along the east coast thousands of sleepers needed to be replaced and deterioration was ongoing. ARTC took the view that wholesale replacement was warranted. Concrete sleepers were modern, economically sustainable, and politically appealing (for funding).  ARTC challenged the market to meet or better the whole of life cost against timber, a relatively ballsy move.

    It was able to convince the feds to fund the purchase a batch of 500,000. This provided employment benefits in two regional centres. In time the feds agreed to fund further batches which resulted in a new sleeper plant at Bomen. This allowed ARTC to complete concrete sleepering across the network.

    Whilst these sleeper purchases were federally funded, installation was not.  ARTC selected the most affordable and quickest means of doing so. ARTC have long acknowledged the ballast and drainage problems however given a lack of funds and immediate safety issues, sleeper replacement was the priority.

    About this website

    Railpage version 3.10.0.0037

    All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest is © 2003-2021 Interactive Omnimedia Pty Ltd.

    You can syndicate our news using one of the RSS feeds.

    View mobile site

    Stats for nerds

    Gen time: 0.5187s | RAM: 5.73kb