i_know_nothing Train Controller

I agree, sounds excess. But that's the figure quoted to the heritage groups by TasRail. Probably explains why points get pulled out at places like Boyer.

Sponsored advertisement

  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
TasRail could send the heritage rail groups a bill for maintenance of these points and sidings if you really want to press the ownership question. I believe it costs TasRail $100,000 per year to maintain one set of points.
i_know_nothing

Seriously?
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
You could make a set of basic points for that price.

I figure a couple of guys with basic tools and grease could maintain the entire fleet of points in active use by tasrail.
  1771D Junior Train Controller

As with QR since corporatisation, the quoted price for points maintenance is always excessive.  They then use this as an excuse to remove turnouts.
  BP4417 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Launceston, Tasmania
TasRail could send the heritage rail groups a bill for maintenance of these points and sidings if you really want to press the ownership question. I believe it costs TasRail $100,000 per year to maintain one set of points.

Seriously?
bevans
I have a Doctor of Engineering friend who could work our Wear and Tear for the heaviest trains regarding any points anywhere in Australia.

Bevans, there is no doubt who the owners of these points are
For private sidings and private loops there probably was a maintenance agreement regarding these points and sidings when their installation process was being discussed, without a written agreement the points could never be installed.

If I recollect the original A.N. Tasrail put up the same argument about point maintenance. It later transpired this cost was covered by access fees and weight distance fees charged to Heritage Rail.
  ssaunders Train Controller

TasRail could send the heritage rail groups a bill for maintenance of these points and sidings if you really want to press the ownership question. I believe it costs TasRail $100,000 per year to maintain one set of points.

Seriously?
I have a Doctor of Engineering friend who could work our Wear and Tear for the heaviest trains regarding any points anywhere in Australia.

Bevans, there is no doubt who the owners of these points are
For private sidings and private loops there probably was a maintenance agreement regarding these points and sidings when their installation process was being discussed, without a written agreement the points could never be installed.

If I recollect the original A.N. Tasrail put up the same argument about point maintenance. It later transpired this cost was covered by access fees and weight distance fees charged to Heritage Rail.
BP4417

That's how it works, pay your access fees, but alas no Tas group has run on the main for what must be nearly 10 years.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
I have a Doctor of Engineering friend who could work our Wear and Tear for the heaviest trains regarding any points anywhere in Australia.

Bevans, there is no doubt who the owners of these points are
For private sidings and private loops there probably was a maintenance agreement regarding these points and sidings when their installation process was being discussed, without a written agreement the points could never be installed.

If I recollect the original A.N. Tasrail put up the same argument about point maintenance. It later transpired this cost was covered by access fees and weight distance fees charged to Heritage Rail.

That's how it works, pay your access fees, but alas no Tas group has run on the main for what must be nearly 10 years.
ssaunders
No usage = no fees = removal of points. But issue is why is there no usage? My understanding its Tasrail with the blockage to the mainline, not the heritage operators.
  12CSVT Chief Commissioner

Location: Drowning in accreditation red tape!
No usage = no fees = removal of points. But issue is why is there no usage? My understanding its Tasrail with the blockage to the mainline, not the heritage operators.
RTT_Rules

No heritage usage due to Tasrails network insurance policy precluding passenger services, arising from the risk ratings assessed following the string of derailments resulting from P.N.'s abandonment of track maintenance previous to the Tas. Govt reacquisition of the network. Of course, since then, the network has been completely upgraded, yet no insurance risk reassessment has been undertaken. The Govt can direct that does occur, but hasn't and seems unlikely too, with Govt P.S. advisers seeming to be hostile to heritage rail (some have been identified as having connections with the bike lobby and its campaign for rail trails).
  BP4417 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Launceston, Tasmania
No usage = no fees = removal of points. But issue is why is there no usage? My understanding its Tasrail with the blockage to the mainline, not the heritage operators.

No heritage usage due to Tasrails network insurance policy precluding passenger services, arising from the risk ratings assessed following the string of derailments resulting from P.N.'s abandonment of track maintenance previous to the Tas. Govt reacquisition of the network. Of course, since then, the network has been completely upgraded, yet no insurance risk reassessment has been undertaken. The Govt can direct that does occur, but hasn't and seems unlikely too, with Govt P.S. advisers seeming to be hostile to heritage rail (some have been identified as having connections with the bike lobby and its campaign for rail trails).
12CSVT
Its a pity there is not a friendly Pro Bono Lawyer willing to take an access case to the ACCC as Tasrail,s Insurance Policy is anti competition considering Tasmania is a signatory to the Open Access Legislation. Its unusual for a Government entity to seek out Insurance Brokerage outside the Tasmanian Governments own Insurance Actuaries.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: bevans, Boss, chriswoo, RTT_Rules

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.