Murray Basin standardisation

 
  Jack Le Lievre Assistant Commissioner

Location: Moolap Station, Vic
and the silly thing will be that fuel point at Ouyen will be supplied by road. While i think the Corio refinery still has connectivity to the network, there's probably not been a train loaded with fuel there in 20 years, never mind the fact there's probably no serviceable rail fuel wagons in this part of the country. 4-6 wagons a week just for rail services would surely be justifiable. Agriculture would probably burn through at least that again in the peak season.

re-instating the fuel point at Marybough would likely be better than Ouyen i think however.

And i know, this all makes sense, however it would seem not so much to those that call the shots

given the length of the track there needs to be a siding every 100km or so big enough to put away a full length train. anything up to 50 cars.
Galron
Firstly, the loading gantry at the Corio Refinery had multiple PINs put on it by WorkSafe Victoria and Energy Safe Victoria, and at the time neither Shell, PN nor anyone else was willing to put up the money to rebuild it. So it was dismantled and as part of this process, all of the "Shell" rail was pulled up, apart from the rail laid in the concrete foundation of the loading gantry. V/Line have spoken about removing the points, but they are lazy. Another thing is that it was/is B/G access only, and V/Line being V/Line they would not allow the S/G to cross their track. There has been some fuel returned to rail, but it isn't transported in Tank Wagons, it is transported in ISO Tanktainers.

As has been stated before, local opposition to the fuel point at Maryborough saw the fuel point close, and that is not going to change anytime soon. And before people say "They fuel V/Locities at Maryborough", the reason that happens is that the locals get to keep their Passenger Services, which they see as a nice shiny thing, as opposed to a noise dirty freight train.

Sponsored advertisement

  emmastreet Chief Train Controller

Location: Goulburn Valley
and the silly thing will be that fuel point at Ouyen will be supplied by road. While i think the Corio refinery still has connectivity to the network, there's probably not been a train loaded with fuel there in 20 years, never mind the fact there's probably no serviceable rail fuel wagons in this part of the country. 4-6 wagons a week just for rail services would surely be justifiable. Agriculture would probably burn through at least that again in the peak season.

re-instating the fuel point at Marybough would likely be better than Ouyen i think however.

And i know, this all makes sense, however it would seem not so much to those that call the shots

given the length of the track there needs to be a siding every 100km or so big enough to put away a full length train. anything up to 50 cars.
Firstly, the loading gantry at the Corio Refinery had multiple PINs put on it by WorkSafe Victoria and Energy Safe Victoria, and at the time neither Shell, PN nor anyone else was willing to put up the money to rebuild it. So it was dismantled and as part of this process, all of the "Shell" rail was pulled up, apart from the rail laid in the concrete foundation of the loading gantry. V/Line have spoken about removing the points, but they are lazy. Another thing is that it was/is B/G access only, and V/Line being V/Line they would not allow the S/G to cross their track. There has been some fuel returned to rail, but it isn't transported in Tank Wagons, it is transported in ISO Tanktainers.

As has been stated before, local opposition to the fuel point at Maryborough saw the fuel point close, and that is not going to change anytime soon. And before people say "They fuel V/Locities at Maryborough", the reason that happens is that the locals get to keep their Passenger Services, which they see as a nice shiny thing, as opposed to a noise dirty freight train.
Jack Le Lievre
Tell me more about fuel on rail in Tanktainers please. Where from and where to?
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
This might show next steps for the project



Showing:

  • Fueling facilities being added at Ouyen
  • Signalling upgrades at Maryborough wasn't this already done a couple of years ago?
  • New siding at Donald seems to say they are putting one back in?
8502

New passing loops between Maryborough and Ararat and between Maryborough and Ballarat seem like a massive win.

So too does the mention of re-railing between Maryborough and Ararat.
  Galron Chief Commissioner

Location: Werribee, Vic
Presumably that restriction doesn't apply to the cattle road trains that carry fuel on the trailers and top up the truck tanks when stopped.
Djebel
If your talking about the belly tanks that sit under the load on the trailer then thats ok, its the "load" you cant shift into your truck tanks.
  hbedriver Assistant Commissioner

Why on earth are they spending another cent on Ararat-Maryborough?

Throwing an imperial hundredweight of gold nuggets at it will not change that this will always be a slow track due to curves and hills, quite apart from trains spending an extra three hours for the Great Way Round.

The reason they won’t standardise Gheringhap to Maryborough is beyond me. The shorter trip might avoid also any need to re-fuel along the way.

Still, Ouyen is the logical place to fuel, given it remains a crew depot. Wonder whether all Operators will be allowed to use it?
  kitchgp Chief Commissioner

How does the Dunolly turnout replacement get to be a feature of the project? Isn’t that routine maintenance?

If there are no plans to SG (DG) Maryborough - Gheringhap, what is the point of the loop at Tourello to pass 4 VLocitys a day between Ballarat and Maryborough? The line is already Automatic and Track Control. Wouldn’t the money be better spent expanding Maryborough?

What happens to Korong Vale – Manangatang?
  duttonbay Minister for Railways

How does the Dunolly turnout replacement get to be a feature of the project? Isn’t that routine maintenance?
kitchgp
I assume this means the turnout for Yelta or Korong Vale, with the line splits into different gauges. What is the physical arrangement at Dunolly?
  emmastreet Chief Train Controller

Location: Goulburn Valley
Why on earth are they spending another cent on Ararat-Maryborough?

Throwing an imperial hundredweight of gold nuggets at it will not change that this will always be a slow track due to curves and hills, quite apart from trains spending an extra three hours for the Great Way Round.

The reason they won’t standardise Gheringhap to Maryborough is beyond me. The shorter trip might avoid also any need to re-fuel along the way.

Still, Ouyen is the logical place to fuel, given it remains a crew depot. Wonder whether all Operators will be allowed to use it?
hbedriver
Imagine the uproar if the trucking industry was told the road from Mildura to Melbourne was via Ararat.
  Carnot Minister for Railways

How does the Dunolly turnout replacement get to be a feature of the project? Isn’t that routine maintenance?

If there are no plans to SG (DG) Maryborough - Gheringhap, what is the point of the loop at Tourello to pass 4 VLocitys a day between Ballarat and Maryborough? The line is already Automatic and Track Control. Wouldn’t the money be better spent expanding Maryborough?

What happens to Korong Vale – Manangatang?
kitchgp
Tourello loop is to enable more passing paths for BG trains, mainly freight.  Maryborough yard is probably in the "too hard" basket.

Korong Vale - Manangatang just had a whole lot of sleeper upgrades (many of which are single gauge BG concrete).
  Carnot Minister for Railways

Why on earth are they spending another cent on Ararat-Maryborough?

Throwing an imperial hundredweight of gold nuggets at it will not change that this will always be a slow track due to curves and hills, quite apart from trains spending an extra three hours for the Great Way Round.

The reason they won’t standardise Gheringhap to Maryborough is beyond me. The shorter trip might avoid also any need to re-fuel along the way.

Still, Ouyen is the logical place to fuel, given it remains a crew depot. Wonder whether all Operators will be allowed to use it?
hbedriver
Maryborough to Gheringhap standardisation was canned primarily due to pathing issues through a busy Ballarat (especially during the day), and the cost to make that work if it was at all possible.
  james.au Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney, NSW
Why on earth are they spending another cent on Ararat-Maryborough?

Throwing an imperial hundredweight of gold nuggets at it will not change that this will always be a slow track due to curves and hills, quite apart from trains spending an extra three hours for the Great Way Round.

The reason they won’t standardise Gheringhap to Maryborough is beyond me. The shorter trip might avoid also any need to re-fuel along the way.

Still, Ouyen is the logical place to fuel, given it remains a crew depot. Wonder whether all Operators will be allowed to use it?
Maryborough to Gheringhap standardisation was canned primarily due to pathing issues through a busy Ballarat (especially during the day), and the cost to make that work if it was at all possible.
Carnot
I think the real reason is they didnt want to shut down Ballarat and annoy all the passengers for a period of time, and incur the political cost....

Cutting off nose to spite face and all that.
  Donald Chief Commissioner

Location: Donald. Duck country.
Hasn't the Ballarat line been shut down on and off for the best part of 18 months?
It would have been the perfect time to do the dual gauging, but ...
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Hasn't the Ballarat line been shut down on and off for the best part of 18 months?
It would have been the perfect time to do the dual gauging, but ...
Donald

Totally.  yet another poorly planned series of works which could have been done to avoid further downtime.
  Carnot Minister for Railways

I think the Govt were waiting on the Deloitte Business Plan first before they did anything. Thus no action during the Ballarat line upgrade.

Govt should still release the full Deloitte report but they haven't. Transparency is dead with the current State Govt. Pathetic.
  BigShunter Chief Commissioner

Location: St Clair. S.A.
I think the Govt were waiting on the Deloitte Business Plan first before they did anything. Thus no action during the Ballarat line upgrade.

Govt should still release the full Deloitte report but they haven't. Transparency is dead with the current State Govt. Pathetic.
Carnot
It's hard to say what is on and what is off the table at the minute. This seems to be the latest document that comes up when searching The Freight-Passenger Rail Separation Project.

The Australian Government will also contribute $5 million for further planning work on a 50:50 basis with Victoria, which will develop options to take forward the standardisation the Murray Basin Freight Rail Network. This planning will include options for:

·         standardisation of the Sea Lake and Manangatang Lines

·         converting the broad gauge line between Maryborough and Gheringhap to dual gauge, and

·         options for the separation of freight and passenger rail on the Ballarat rail corridor.

This planning work will take into account the priorities and needs of regional businesses and industries, the freight and logistics sectors, and local communities.

https://investment.infrastructure.gov.au/projects/ProjectDetails.aspx?Project_id=062827-15VIC-PKG

However I won't hold my breath and believe it when it happens.

BigShunter.
  Carnot Minister for Railways

It mentions that planning for full standardisation would be complete by the end of 2021. Will we see that report?  I'm not holding my breath...
  Donald Chief Commissioner

Location: Donald. Duck country.
That would have required the pj wearing public service would have to actually do something productive.  (Apart from attending zoom meetings.)
  BigShunter Chief Commissioner

Location: St Clair. S.A.
It mentions that planning for full standardisation would be complete by the end of 2021. Will we see that report?  I'm not holding my breath...
Carnot
Timetable:

Construction commenced in February 2015 and is expected to be completed by late 2023. The planning work for full standardisation options is expected to be completed by late 2021.

Still won't hold my breath.

BigShunter.
  wobert Chief Commissioner

Location: Half way between Propodolla and Kinimakatka
Well they want to get a move on, there's going to be a thumping harvest in the Mallee from what I've just seen.
  james.au Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney, NSW
I think the Govt were waiting on the Deloitte Business Plan first before they did anything. Thus no action during the Ballarat line upgrade.

Govt should still release the full Deloitte report but they haven't. Transparency is dead with the current State Govt. Pathetic.
It's hard to say what is on and what is off the table at the minute. This seems to be the latest document that comes up when searching The Freight-Passenger Rail Separation Project.

The Australian Government will also contribute $5 million for further planning work on a 50:50 basis with Victoria, which will develop options to take forward the standardisation the Murray Basin Freight Rail Network. This planning will include options for:

·         standardisation of the Sea Lake and Manangatang Lines

·         converting the broad gauge line between Maryborough and Gheringhap to dual gauge, and

·         options for the separation of freight and passenger rail on the Ballarat rail corridor.

This planning work will take into account the priorities and needs of regional businesses and industries, the freight and logistics sectors, and local communities.

https://investment.infrastructure.gov.au/projects/ProjectDetails.aspx?Project_id=062827-15VIC-PKG

However I won't hold my breath and believe it when it happens.

BigShunter.
BigShunter
There is/was also $10million for a study into the freight needs around Shepparton from about 2017 but ive seen absolutely nothing of that nature in 5 years
  Donald Chief Commissioner

Location: Donald. Duck country.
James,

Can't find the freight needs or the report?
  justarider Chief Commissioner

Location: Released again, maybe for the last time??
Did anybody actually read the publication date of this "latest document" ?  
And factor in it's the Feds making promises they hope Victoria will implement.
https://investment.infrastructure.gov.au/projects/ProjectDetails.aspx?Project_id=062827-15VIC-PKG

A lot has changed in 9 months. They are getting on with needed repairs. The rest of MBRP not so much.

A $10m study to investigate the feasibility of more SG conversions.
I can do that for 10cents, NO chance in a decade.

cheers
John
  james.au Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney, NSW
James,

Can't find the freight needs or the report?
Donald
The report.

There is definitely freight there.
  BigShunter Chief Commissioner

Location: St Clair. S.A.
Did anybody actually read the publication date of this "latest document" ?
And factor in it's the Feds making promises they hope Victoria will implement.
https://investment.infrastructure.gov.au/projects/ProjectDetails.aspx?Project_id=062827-15VIC-PKG

A lot has changed in 9 months. They are getting on with needed repairs. The rest of MBRP not so much.

A $10m study to investigate the feasibility of more SG conversions.
I can do that for 10cents, NO chance in a decade.

cheers
John
justarider
Certainly did John and also some of what's promised by the Feds is subject to the Vic Gov't coughing up the other half, not to mention " options for the separation of freight and passenger rail on the Ballarat rail corridor " which probably includes the clause, this is all too Bloody Hard.

With the instillation of a passing loop between A'rat & M'borough it is obvious there won't be standard gauge through Ballarat for quite some time.  Rolling Eyes

BigShunter.
  cbinyon Chief Train Controller

Location: London, England
The Sea Lake and Manangatang lines have received the critical maintenance as well as Dunolly to Korong Vale. So line speeds are back the previous normal so the BG trains have a better shot at competing this harvest compared to last.

SG is compromised on the NW line as long as all the trains have to run via Ararat. BG retains the advantage of a 24 hour turn around loading cycle which has been evident of late with PN & SSR BG grainys.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: