Is there any chance that the bridge on the original alinement (of the original bridge) over the Hawkesbury River could be reinstated (with a refurbishment of the old piers/pylons and tunnel)

One of the Northern piers failed didn't It ? forcing the replacement of the bridge with the current one ?

Consider how deep the piers have to go, and considering the development of new type of bridge such as the Anzac Cable Stayed Bridge, maybe the Hawkesbury River should be spanned in a single span?

According to Sydway, the river is about 1km wide where the existing bridge, especially if the new bridge is at an angle to avoid sharp curves at the northern end.

It might also be a good idea for a new bridge deck to be higher than the existing bridge deck, firstly to reduce the gradient a bid, secondly to allow for flyovers over the existing track, and thirdly so that any long tunnel on the northern side can be replaced by a series of short tunnels (rather like the 10 Zig Zag tunnels near Lithgow).

Expect such a bridge to cost $1bn.

We will need to see if anything materialises in tomorrow’s budget.  

Because this is a NSW Gov. show would they receive funds as grants and would it be released over several Financial years?

Alas I see that the NSFC has been delayed again in the budget  

Alas I see that the NSFC has been delayed again in the budget  

Very disappointing.

I don’t think the NSW Gov. would have championed this project though. No votes compared to road and (maybe) metro rail.

Even well before they flick passed some of their rail freight responsibilities to ARTC, did they ever show any real interest in it.  

The NSFL has not been delayed. The budget outlined infrastructure expenditure totaling around $8 billion. The projects outlined in the budget are "new" in the sense they were not given the go ahead previously such as the NSFL. Remember, the Building Australia fund was $12 billion and $4 billion had already been allocated to projects announced before the budget.

The NSFL has not been delayed. The budget outlined infrastructure expenditure totaling around $8 billion. The projects outlined in the budget are "new" in the sense they were not given the go ahead previously such as the NSFL. Remember, the Building Australia fund was $12 billion and $4 billion had already been allocated to projects announced before the budget.

Interesting. All I can say is a number of media reports have specifically mentioned (in regards to the budget) that this link is being delayed or not funded at all. Will see if I can find them again. I hope you are right and it does get through!

Interesting. All I can say is a number of media reports have specifically mentioned (in regards to the budget) that this link is being delayed or not funded at all. Will see if I can find them again. I hope you are right and it does get through!

Life will be a lot easier if you stop believing things you read in the media

Life will be a lot easier if you stop believing things you read in the media

Unfortunately for most of us that is all we have!

Unfortunately for most of us that is all we have!

A few seconds Googling will find the following on the TIDC website (I'm not going to bother to post a link) -

"TIDC has commenced feasibility studies for the project, including options development and assessment. These studies will identify the scope of works for the concept design and environmental assessment for the project. Further information on the options development and environmental assessment will be placed on this site as it becomes available."

As usual this will probably be followed by 412 posts telling me why I'm wrong - which is why some people don't bother (and I don't generally bother either!)

Does this actually suggest that there is anything that the Commonwealth needs to fund at the moment?

A few seconds Googling will find the following on the TIDC website (I'm not going to bother to post a link) -

"TIDC has commenced feasibility studies for the project, including options development and assessment. These studies will identify the scope of works for the concept design and environmental assessment for the project. Further information on the options development and environmental assessment will be placed on this site as it becomes available."

As usual this will probably be followed by 412 posts telling me why I'm wrong - which is why some people don't bother (and I don't generally bother either!)

Does this actually suggest that there is anything that the Commonwealth needs to fund at the moment?

I am well aware of that site and only just refered to it here:

http://www.railpage.com.au/f-t11349144.htm


Have a read of this:

http://www.minister.infrastructure.gov.au/aa/releases/2009/february/aa014_2009.htm

(I cut the non related parts)



TACKLING CONGESTION ON THE SYDNEY RAIL FREIGHT NETWORK


The allocation of $15 million to accelerate planning and design work on the Government's $840 million investment in a new dedicated freight line between North Strathfield to Gosford; and
Work will start in March/April on a $27.2 million upgrade to the Port Botany Rail Line including track rearrangement, and circuiting and signalling work.
The northern Sydney project will provide access for four freight trains an hour for 22 hours a day, while the Port Botany upgrade will increase the average train load to the Port from 40 to 60 containers.

In addition to these projects in Sydney, the interstate freight system is set to benefit this year from the 17 projects announced as part of the Government's $1.2 billion investment through the Australian Rail Track Corporation.


I would suggest to you there is plenty of funding still required. I know at least some of the planning has been done and I mentioned in that other link it was on the TIDC site for a while. However planning guarantees nothing, when you see funding for the whole project then you know it is going to happen. That is why this link was on the IA wish list. It has not gained full funding yet.

It was meant to be part of this I believe:

http://www.minister.infrastructure.gov.au/aa/releases/2009/April/AA148_2009.htm

And obviously not everything in that list got funding in the budget. Which brings us back to the original point doesn't it?

I recently had to put together some (non-rail related) submissions for "one off" infrastructure and similar funding. The criteria include that the projects have to be "ready to roll", construction work has to start no later than July and all be completed in 2011. No ongoing funds after 2011 are available, so no projects that need ongoing federal funding (e.g. to staff a facility, unless we can pay for that ourselves) are eligible. They also had to be projects not already funded from some other source.

Fortunately we had some planned, but unfunded, projects that fit that mould. Moreover they are things that meet the intention of "JobsFund" of keeping people in vulnerable areas and industries in employment when much of their other work has dried up. Now it's just a matter of seeing whether they get accepted or not.

The fact that, in the recent budget, some NSW infrastructure projects that involve only planning and scoping got funding, but not the actual construction of the same projects doesn't surprise me at all. It sounds exactly like the former were "ready to roll" and the latter were not. It also explains the Oppositions criticism about broadband projects that have been funded but don't appear to have the essential "ready to roll" status.

And obviously not everything in that list got funding in the budget. Which brings us back to the original point doesn't it?

What, that you had no other sources except the media?

Personally, I think that there would be more benefit in tunnelling a lot further east to move most of the passenger trains.  This was written over 2 years ago:

http://cust.idl.net.au/athol/download/Northern%20Beaches%20Rail.pdf

Athol

Personally, I think that there would be more benefit in tunnelling a lot further east to move most of the passenger trains.  This was written over 2 years ago:

Purely speculative, but has consideration ever been given to servicing the northern beaches by extending the Eastern Suburbs line under the heads and up through Manly?

In relation to the NSFC and the current committment to it by the feds, Anthony Albanese (Infrastructure Minister) had this to say today on ABC Insiders

As well in the Budget, the northern Sydney freight line was delivered $850 million. This is probably the single most important project that we can have to improve passenger transport as well as freight transport on rail in Sydney.

http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2009/s2572762.htm

I think I heard his missus (Carmel Tebbutt) say the same thing the day after budget day on ABC local radio.

Cheers Arctic!

Well as long as there is no political slant on that then I think that is great news! It is one of the most important rail links in Sydney and for East Coast freight!. I think and it would have been crazy if it missed out on funding or was "postponed". Pity there is not a little more info.

In relation to the NSFC and the current committment to it by the feds, Anthony Albanese (Infrastructure Minister) had this to say today on ABC Insiders

As well in the Budget, the northern Sydney freight line was delivered $850 million. This is probably the single most important project that we can have to improve passenger transport as well as freight transport on rail in Sydney.

http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2009/s2572762.htm

I think I heard his missus (Carmel Tebbutt) say the same thing the day after budget day on ABC local radio.

I've searched and searched through the budget papers, and I can't find any mention of this!  It's a sizeable amount of money and if they really were going to spend it, I'm sure that it would be as prominent as the Hunter Expressway, planning for metro, etc..

Athol

The Hunter Expressway and West Metro planning and associated studies (and many other peojects such as Light Rail on Gold Coast and Regional Rail in Victoria) were not formally announced before the budget whereas the NSFC was.

Need to troll thru the budget papers and find the actual funding forecast 2009-10 for the corridor works  

And lets stop being as ignorant as the media by calling this a freight line because it's not 'a line'  

There doesn't seem to be much point in double-stacking Melbourne-Sydney if they can't do it straight through to Brisbane.
Melbourne-Brisbane is the rail growth market. Having Sydney in the way with its low catenary overhead is no help.
Melbourne-Sydney is too short to bother with trains for the most part.

Melbourne-Sydney is too short to bother with trains for the most part.

I'd argue that from the overnight XPT the sight of all the trucks on the adjacent Hume Highway is awful.

Noticed in yesterday's SMH a TIDC advertiseemnt seeking tenders for organisations to undertake environmental studies etc for the NSFG.  Tenders closing late August 2009, I think.  Went to a funeral today so its made details about the tender a bit hazy.  Anyhow, it appears the project is progressing.

Cheers

Rod Gayford

Melbourne-Sydney is too short to bother with trains for the most part.

That would also mean that the analysis ARTC has done and published is overly optomistic. Big call there. I guess when all the upgrading works are finished we will all see if they have delivered what ARTC think they would.

Melbourne-Sydney is too short to bother with trains for the most part.

That would also mean that the analysis ARTC has done and published is overly optomistic. Big call there. I guess when all the upgrading works are finished we will all see if they have delivered what ARTC think they would.

Terminal capacity will be the big issue. Most distribution centres are unlinked or not linked to the rail network and that's going to be hard to fix  

Terminal capacity will be the big issue. Most distribution centres are unlinked or not linked to the rail network and that's going to be hard to fix  

I was speaking to a guy who had a business moving freight between Sydney and the Nothern Rivers quite a while ago.

He told me that when Darling Harbour was still up and running it was great. They would pick up the local freight from Sydney, take it to Darling Harbour where they had there own allocated louvre vans, load em up and each van would be dropped off at which ever major centre is was for. They would then unpack the van to local trucks and deliver away. When Darling Harbour closed and Trackfast was started, the SRA didn't want to do it that way, so the only option was to go to truck as line-haul. Talk about the railways shooting themselves in the foot.

Maybe if the line-haul segment for rail starts to get real cheap, companies may think of running vans again.