Resurrecting the Eaglehawk - Inglewood line New

 
  james.au Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney, NSW
In terms of providing SG into Bendigo, it is definitely useless as a stub.
This point is debatable!
With the demand for rolling stock and locomotive power, plenty of grain and rice and with the completion of the Murray Basin conversion, including Maryborough/Ballarat/Geelong section, this link and the Swan Hill/Piangil line added in as well to SG makes the "stub" a practical and usable concept!
The Bendigo - Swan Hill passenger train can run SG from Bendigo, as Bendigo has the capacity to service SG trains.
So SG Inglewood to Morong, DG to Eaglehawk/Bendigo, then SG to Piangil. This is the only way to future proof the outlay into this infrastructure upgrade!
Inland_Sailor
SG into the SSR Bendigo maintenance base will for sure add more competition to SG maintenance provision.

Sponsored advertisement

  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
On the topic of path availability via Bendigo, if the Eaglehawk to Inglewood line were re-instated, wouldn't it then be easiest to run most up trains via Kyneton, and most down trains via Ballarat, limiting the need to cross one another South of Inglewood.

Obviously, these would predominantly run through the night South of Bendigo and there would still need to be path availability for grainies to run on the Swan Hill line, but surely this would allow much more grain to be moved on rail than is currently available.

An added bonus would be the QUBE Ultima Intermodal service would get a quicker route to the port, and could even possibly be amalgamated with the Deniliquin Rice train at Bendigo if the need was there.

Or am I way off the mark?
  trainbrain Chief Commissioner

On the topic of path availability via Bendigo, if the Eaglehawk to Inglewood line were re-instated, wouldn't it then be easiest to run most up trains via Kyneton, and most down trains via Ballarat, limiting the need to cross one another South of Inglewood.

Obviously, these would predominantly run through the night South of Bendigo and there would still need to be path availability for grainies to run on the Swan Hill line, but surely this would allow much more grain to be moved on rail than is currently available.

An added bonus would be the QUBE Ultima Intermodal service would get a quicker route to the port, and could even possibly be amalgamated with the Deniliquin Rice train at Bendigo if the need was there.

Or am I way off the mark?
Gman_86
too much time on your hands...........
  BigShunter Chief Commissioner

Location: St Clair. S.A.
On the topic of path availability via Bendigo, if the Eaglehawk to Inglewood line were re-instated, wouldn't it then be easiest to run most up trains via Kyneton, and most down trains via Ballarat, limiting the need to cross one another South of Inglewood.

Obviously, these would predominantly run through the night South of Bendigo and there would still need to be path availability for grainies to run on the Swan Hill line, but surely this would allow much more grain to be moved on rail than is currently available.

An added bonus would be the QUBE Ultima Intermodal service would get a quicker route to the port, and could even possibly be amalgamated with the Deniliquin Rice train at Bendigo if the need was there.

Or am I way off the mark?
too much time on your hands...........
trainbrain

Settle down trainbrain, you've been mixing ya Red Cordial too strong, sounds a productive plan to me. kuldalai put the forecast on the table, someone has to work out how to sort it out and Gman_86 has put a productive idea on the deck.

Do you think anyone from the Gov't or V/Line will have a better plan. Rolling Eyes  Perhaps if they are paying attention to this site, things couldn't be much worse off.

BigShunter.
  BrentonGolding Chief Commissioner

Location: Maldon Junction
On the topic of path availability via Bendigo, if the Eaglehawk to Inglewood line were re-instated, wouldn't it then be easiest to run most up trains via Kyneton, and most down trains via Ballarat, limiting the need to cross one another South of Inglewood.

Obviously, these would predominantly run through the night South of Bendigo and there would still need to be path availability for grainies to run on the Swan Hill line, but surely this would allow much more grain to be moved on rail than is currently available.

An added bonus would be the QUBE Ultima Intermodal service would get a quicker route to the port, and could even possibly be amalgamated with the Deniliquin Rice train at Bendigo if the need was there.

Or am I way off the mark?
Gman_86
With Bendigo > Melbourne being double track all the way and constructed to British Main Line standards there shouldn't be any pathing problems outside the peak should there? Oh, hang on.......
  kuldalai Chief Commissioner

The number of extra trains per day via Bendigo would not be many and with 60 minute off peak passenger frequency it is possible to punch trains through especially on the Up hard on the heels of Up passes  ex Bendigo. On Down with MT trains faster speed so probably easier to get through between the hourly passes.

BUT only talking about 4 - 6 extra tarins a day mainly in evenings or overnight so potentially no big deal. As others have suggested may work better as Ultima Intermodal via Bendigo overnight both ways, otherwise Down MT grains via Bendigo, Up loaded via Dunolly .
Any stuff up on the bg lines or on the dg stction and the whole thing will grind to a halt, with Inglewood - Eaglehawk re-opened you have a b safety valve in case of trouble South of Inglewood.

The main thing is the half completed MB job with the bumper grain harvest and all trains going down a dg bottlekneck between Dunolly and Maryborough coupled with the long single line sections  (Korongvale - Warrenheip bg) and (Maryborough - Maroona sg) will be unworkable  unless Inglewood - Eaglehawk is re-opened for say 40 - 50kmh then the bg lines can run more than one train on each line per day.  Spend
$ 20 - 25 m to re-open as fit for purpose (NO VLP "gold plating") and you more than double train capacity on the two bg lines, plus by cascade releases paths between Dunolly and Maryborough for more sg trains.  Its a no brainer to not do so in the face of the forecast bumper grain harvest would be negligent in not making  best use of the existing rail network assets,and would condemn daily up to 180 extra road grain tracks on local road networks.

Such project would use locally sourced materials and labour over 8 - 10 weeks in a job creation short term project for the region economy.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Would you consider running a second track from Bendigo to Castlemaine and to maryborough as SG?
  Bonzel Junior Train Controller

And how much money will that all cost? The BG line would have to be slewed onto one of the old alignments as the single line now runs up the centre or to one side or the other on curves , Kangaroo Flat and Ravo Loops what happens there? , signalling all shifted. And the cost of building a new SG line . Just finish off SG to Sealake and Manangatang the easist.
  Carnot Minister for Railways

And how much money will that all cost? The BG line would have to be slewed onto one of the old alignments as the single line now runs up the centre or to one side or the other on curves , Kangaroo Flat and Ravo Loops what happens there? , signalling all shifted. And the cost of building a new SG line . Just finish off SG to Sealake and Manangatang the easist.
Bonzel
As a long term project - yes, absolutely.  But I can see gauge conversion being kicked down the road for another 4-5 years going by past form.  I would love to see a copy of the latest (secret) MBRP business plan.

But in the next 5 years the stop-gap measure of reopening Eaglehawk to Inglewood makes heaps of sense.
  Bonzel Junior Train Controller

Agreed short term  BG fix only.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
A long shot discussed on here previously (if i was in charge) to connect Bendigo to SG via Maryborough to Castlemaine and thence to Heathcote Junction via as much of the old Bendigo to Heathcote line into the NE SG.  This would provide much benefit to regional Victoria.
  Inland_Sailor Junior Train Controller

Would you consider running a second track from Bendigo to Castlemaine and to maryborough as SG?
bevans
Most of that line is ripped up and rail trailed!
This is why the logical way to get SG to Bendigo and beyond is via the Inglewood - Eaglehawk link. Ideally it would require a new curve built to connect to the Dunolly line at Inglewood, effectively a triangle. [like they now have at Ararat] Another would be needed at the Eaglehawk junction, for the Swan Hill line to be converted to SG. Then about 10KM of DG from the Eaglehawk junction into Bendigo. [20km if Marong is ever to get a passenger service]
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
A long shot discussed on here previously (if i was in charge) to connect Bendigo to SG via Maryborough to Castlemaine and thence to Heathcote Junction via as much of the old Bendigo to Heathcote line into the NE SG.  This would provide much benefit to regional Victoria.
bevans
A long shot? More like a Moon shot.

We will be settling people on Mars before we are sending trains to Heathcote again.
  railblogger Chief Commissioner

Location: At the back of the train, quitely doing exactly what you'd expect.
Would you consider running a second track from Bendigo to Castlemaine and to maryborough as SG?
Most of that line is ripped up and rail trailed!
This is why the logical way to get SG to Bendigo and beyond is via the Inglewood - Eaglehawk link. Ideally it would require a new curve built to connect to the Dunolly line at Inglewood, effectively a triangle. [like they now have at Ararat] Another would be needed at the Eaglehawk junction, for the Swan Hill line to be converted to SG. Then about 10KM of DG would be needed from the Eaglehawk junction into Bendigo. [20km if Marong is ever to get a passenger service]
Inland_Sailor
Swan hill still has a passenger service so to convert that line to SG you would need to do one of four things:
  • Cancel the service
  • Purchase SG stock (or convert existing stock) to allow the service to run
  • Purchase Talgo gauge-convertible stock and install associated infrastructure
  • Convert the whole line to Southern Cross to SG
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
A long shot discussed on here previously (if i was in charge) to connect Bendigo to SG via Maryborough to Castlemaine and thence to Heathcote Junction via as much of the old Bendigo to Heathcote line into the NE SG.  This would provide much benefit to regional Victoria.
A long shot? More like a Moon shot.

We will be settling people on Mars before we are sending trains to Heathcote again.
Gman_86

Sure but can you see the benefit?

Mars is slated for 2035
  Inland_Sailor Junior Train Controller

  • Convert the whole line to Southern Cross to SG
railblogger
This would be the ideal solution.
Then we'd have the airport line in SG, connecting to Bendigo and beyond in SG, also connecting to a converted Shepparton SG, as well as the NE/Inland Rail SG line.
  trainbrain Chief Commissioner

still too much time on peoples hands.....................
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
Standardising the Bendigo to Swan Hill line is a long way off. Discussing this as if it is imminent is premature.

Standardising the entire Melbourne to Bendigo line is not going to happen in the foreseeable future. Discussing this as if it is likely is not much more than overdosing on foam.

Sure but can you see the benefit?
bevans
Who would it benefit? Bearing in mind, the vast majority of the old alignment via Heathcote was sold off decades ago. The cost to just compulsory acquire the required land would be prohibitive enough to ensure that it most probably won't happen.
  LancedDendrite Chief Commissioner

Location: Gheringhap Loop Autonomous Zone
The question as always must be asked: what are the freight flows in Bendigo that justify a "direct" connection to the North East SG line via the long-defunct Heathcote line - which might I add points towards Melbourne and not interstate towards Sydney? I am yet to see any worthwhile freight tasks mentioned.

SSR/Bendigo Railway Workshops have already done SG loco construction and maintenance work in the past. They trucked locos in and trucked locos out. Not a major problem. There is plenty of competition for SG locomotive maintenance between Melbourne and Sydney - Gemco in Dynon, the (admittedly small) operations in Seymour, Junee Railway Workshops, CFCLA's Goulburn Railway Workshops... and everything up in Sydney.
If SSR wanted to move into SG maintenance work in Victoria in a big way then a greenfields site somewhere in Western Victoria would be far better than to continue using North Bendigo. As it stands there just isn't enough demand for it - unlike on BG where they have much less competition these days.
  Bonzel Junior Train Controller
  NSWGR8022 Deputy Commissioner

Location: From the lands of Journalism and Free Speech
looks like a little track is missing?

Where is this exactly please?
  james.au Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney, NSW

SSR/Bendigo Railway Workshops have already done SG loco construction and maintenance work in the past. They trucked locos in and trucked locos out. Not a major problem. There is plenty of competition for SG locomotive maintenance between Melbourne and Sydney - Gemco in Dynon, the (admittedly small) operations in Seymour, Junee Railway Workshops, CFCLA's Goulburn Railway Workshops... and everything up in Sydney.
If SSR wanted to move into SG maintenance work in Victoria in a big way then a greenfields site somewhere in Western Victoria would be far better than to continue using North Bendigo. As it stands there just isn't enough demand for it - unlike on BG where they have much less competition these days.
LancedDendrite
4 points.

1. I dont think that having even more competition can hurt.
2. Location is important in competition and having a facility in Bendigo gives more options for maintenance activity in the south end of the east coast SG network.
3. Railing wagons/locos into Bendigo would surely be an easier task than roading the rollingstock across to the SG network and craning it all back on.  And definately a cheaper one.
4. In theory, More SG work at bendigo helps spread cost, helping reduce BG maintenance cost.
  Carnot Minister for Railways

looks like a little track is missing?

Where is this exactly please?
NSWGR8022
A few hundred metres just East of the junction at Inglewood is missing.  Also about 800m between Bullabul Creek and Morses Lane towards Bridgewater (that was the washaway section).
  NSWGR8022 Deputy Commissioner

Location: From the lands of Journalism and Free Speech
looks like a little track is missing?

Where is this exactly please?
A few hundred metres just East of the junction at Inglewood is missing.  Also about 800m between Bullabul Creek and Morses Lane towards Bridgewater (that was the washaway section).
Carnot

Now I understand the train was turning to the south for Dunolly.
  Greensleeves Chief Commissioner

Location: If it isn't obvious by now, it should be.

SSR/Bendigo Railway Workshops have already done SG loco construction and maintenance work in the past. They trucked locos in and trucked locos out. Not a major problem. There is plenty of competition for SG locomotive maintenance between Melbourne and Sydney - Gemco in Dynon, the (admittedly small) operations in Seymour, Junee Railway Workshops, CFCLA's Goulburn Railway Workshops... and everything up in Sydney.
If SSR wanted to move into SG maintenance work in Victoria in a big way then a greenfields site somewhere in Western Victoria would be far better than to continue using North Bendigo. As it stands there just isn't enough demand for it - unlike on BG where they have much less competition these days.4 points.

1. I dont think that having even more competition can hurt.
2. Location is important in competition and having a facility in Bendigo gives more options for maintenance activity in the south end of the east coast SG network.
3. Railing wagons/locos into Bendigo would surely be an easier task than roading the rollingstock across to the SG network and craning it all back on.  And definately a cheaper one.
4. In theory, More SG work at bendigo helps spread cost, helping reduce BG maintenance cost.
james.au
In reference to those four points:

1. More competition may not hurt the end user, but will certainly hurt the bottom lines of those going for it and the return on SSR's investment would likely make it unviable for them to work it that way.
2. They already do that out the back of a truck. An SSR work crew did some work that way on G523 several weeks back while it was loading a train at Warracknabeal.
3. Easier maybe, but very doubtful it'd be quicker and time is money.
4. Potentially, but they already do SG work at Bendigo as has been said. 4911 was resurrected here back in 2011 or so, the BRM pair were built here and there's a pair of damaged BGKF's here for repair work that were trucked down from NSW.

EDIT: It's the BRW Bendigo guys who are working on SSR's CLF's and CLP's getting them right as well, working on the locos in Coota so they're certainly not restricted to just being in Bendigo.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: