Canberra MSR option, and side benefits to south main traffic.

[rtt_rules]

Canberra line MSR, and improve south main as well

I think we all acknowledge that the Syd-Can route is a prime candidate for probably Australia's entry into the Medium Speed Rail market, ie up to 220km/hr which I believe is fastest you can go with line side signally. To leave the line and overall service as is longterm is to leave it lost at sea. Yeah theres a train, but its not popular, nearly double the drive time and even though its a prime candidate to compete with air travel, it simply cannot at over double the CBD to CBD travel time.

The following proposal is not cheap, but between the three govts is afforable and also services and imrpoves others as well that should be a win:win:win for numerous voters. For example
- Reduce travel time Syd to Can from nearly 4.3hr to 2.5hr
- Redcue commuter time for the Gouburn traffic by around 30min
- Reduce freight travel time between the state capitals by 15-25min and save alot of fuel in process
- Reduce XPT travel time between the state capitals by same 20-30min
- Even with increase Can-Syd services, there should be minimum impact if any on ability to run freights as all trains clear the Camp-Golburn section faster which effectively increases track capacity.
- ANd if successful would potentially reduce the number of Syd-Can flights and some of the congestion on Syd Airport.

For this purpose I have not looked at improving Central to Cambelltown and assume it stays the same, but probably something needs to be done to add capacity at a few places were possible.

Also assumed Can line remains dieseled, cheapest way to upgrade, same in Sydney area. But otherwise line could be sparked to extra height 25KVAC using dual voltage gear to enable 25kV running from Macurthur. No reason future south line commuter DMU could also not be replaced with dual voltage sets either.

I've also cut two mid route stations on main line as they are very close to other stations so unless popular train wouldn't stop and normal commuter sets could be used with connecting services if required. I'm assuming all Can bound trains would be preceeded by a all stopper to Goulburn and likewise following Syd bound. Canberra branch I believe is probably a cheaper than most upgrade, much of the land is flat'ish and low cost argicultural to buy back. I propose complete new 200-220km/hr rated track on mostly new alignment. Especially past the tip train the track would be closed ripped up and built new in one movement to reduce cost. Tip train would require track to Targo to remain open but new line would probably by-pass much of current anyway.

On the main line, as many have posted previously in various groups, simply using the orginal alignment would have significant improvements, most of the route is rural and while not as cheap as Canberra branch still lower cost to purchase than anything in Syd suburbia. Also old alignment can be swapped or sold off where possible.

I've also assumed new Canberra DMU or XPT style push pull use tilt technology to add another 10-25% in speed on curves over standard trains as per Europe, noting that while a freighter maybe able to take a curve at 115km/hr safely and a modern DMU probably 120-130km/hr (ie+10%), with tilt you can add that little bit more, potentially up to 140km/hr which all adds up and reduces capital cost of track upgrade. Also noting post 115km/hr for freight, any further alignment improvement cost is now born by the fast Canberra service alone and not shared or benefited by others.

Proposed section time improvements are below

                Current Explorer            Proposed Explorer                Proposed 200-220km/hr tilt train      
                Dist   Section  Section   Time      Ave Spe   Section  Time   km/hr   Ave Spe   Section   km/hr
                           (km)       (km)          (hr:min)           (km/hr)   (min)      (hr:min)               (min)     (min)
Central                 0   0   0:00   0:00   0   0:00   0:00   0   0:00   0:00   0
Strathfield   12   12   0:12   0:12   60   0:12   0:12   60   0:12   0:12   60
Campbelltown   55   43   0:42   0:54   61   0:42   0:54   61   0:42   0:54   61
Mittagong   132   77   0:54   1:48   86   0:37   1:31   125   0:27   1:21   171
Bowral                 136   4   0:06   1:54   40   -   -   -   -   -   -
Moss Vale   146   10   0:06   2:00   100   0:07   1:38   120   0:06   1:27   140
Bun                 162   16   0:13   2:13   74   -   -   -   -   -   -
Goulburn                 225   63   0:37   2:50   102   0:38   2:16   125   0:27   1:54   176
Targo                 262   37   0:27   3:17   82   0:18   2:34   123   0:13   2:07   171
Bungendore   294   32   0:27   3:44   71   0:15   2:49   128   0:11   2:18   175
Quean                 321   27   0:30   4:14   54   0:13   3:02   125   0:09   2:27   180
Canberra                 330   9   0:11   4:25   49                  
Can Airport   329   8            0:07   3:09   69   0:06   2:33   80
      
                            distance   Total time   Ave        Total                 Ave       Total                  Ave
                                         time                     km/hr     time                     km/hr     time                     km/hr
      330   4:25   -   75   3:09   -   104   2:33   -   129

   
By simply doing the track work the Explorer should get the trip down to about 3hr, enabling an increase from 3 to 4 runs per day with assumed late run on Friday to enable set rotation for over night stabling in Sydney and maintainence. Explorer frequency is still such Can branch is simple safe working wise, ie no passes.

By reducing Explorer time from 4:25 to 3:09 hrs, the average speed increases only minimally from 75 to 104km/hr and slightly ahead of recommended travel time by car. I've kept the current route km in upgrade not knowing if any would be saved, but the current route has a 20km penalty over road. The higher speed tilt achieves an average of alomost 130km/hr. Number of stations and the unchanged time to Cambelltown impacting on any major improvement from here. At nearly 100km long with an average speed of barely 65km/hr, the Canberra branch has alot to offer to reduce the timetable.

Going to tilt train you can do 5-6 return runs per day each set. 4 sets would give you a 90min departure frequency and requires passing on Can branch. A passing lane at one co-orinated station would be enough although a few more stop and pass at other locations as a back up.

I have also assumed that the Fyshwick station be closed, from Queanbyane the new line would be built straight crossing the river then curving nth of the commerical/industrial complex at Fyshwick, basically staying nth of Tennant St. Then when river has a effectively straight leg follow that alignment and once crossed that of the road staying west of Piallgo Street to an assumed viaduct across the road and into Can airport. Not unlike Brisbane with station perhaps nth of Unlinga Pl. All this new line is over argricutural or flood plain. Eliminates a few LX's. Also provides a far better location for terminating the train ie use of facilities at airport, especially for regional flights connecting to train to Sydney or vice versa. Unless the train could be moved closer to Can central, I don't see the point of keeping Fyshwick. You could push the existing station back then have the line sweep around to the airport as an alt, but would add considerable cost.

Est Project cost,
- Canberra branch (100km) and new station at airport, probably looking at $1.0 to 1.5B to get the fast alignment including a few new trains.
- Mainline (180km), probably $1.5-2.5B for both duplication new alignment.

So total cost is $2.5-$3.5B but is funded by 3 govts and have benefits to multiple end users. for example
- South Main line communters, makes commuting more viable helps with land
- Canberra, people going to/from potential train time if 75-80% of driving offering in seat entertainment, buff and WLAN on new trains in two classes.
- Syd-Mel freight operations, slightly faster and less fuel intensive, so more competive with road.
- Countrylink gets an increase in buffer for XPT turnaround time and slightly reduced running time.

Regards
Shane

[SurfRail]

As long as it doesn't become a stranded investment if HSR pops up.  It would be easier to say goodbye to the line via Bungendore than to any new alignment should the HSR need to take a different route.

My personal preferred option is
- Sydney Terminal (oops sorry, can't call it that anymore) Central
- Sydney Airport
- Wollongong
- Moss Vale
- Goulburn
- Canberra (a station location adequate to permit the line to travel to the south of Canberra direct to Albury).

This is best case scenario (ie the line involves tunnelling through mountain).  It would probably be more likely the line would depart Canberra to the north, which would be cheaper and allow a Wagga Wagga stop, but would be slower.

However, you would still need a decent CityRail service to connect to Moss Vale.  That could potentially be a job for electrification at 1500V and OSCARs or V-set replacements.

There would ideally be less freight on the main south once the Brisbane-Melbourne line gets up and running too.

[Stillwater]

A Canberra Airport termination a good idea.  Developments such as this are expensive, but costs can be defrayed through consideration of land use along new track.  For instance, this plan would facilitate the expansion of Goulburn -- the 'new Goulburn', if you like.  Over time, it could be a city of 70,000 to 80,000 -- highly attractive to industry reliant on good rail links to Melbourne and Sydney and also to retirees for whom the city offers a good lifestyle close to Canberra and Sydney.  Until now, the size of the city has been inhibited by an unreliable water supply, but construction of a new water pipeline from the Southern Highlands has overcome that problem.

[somebody]

A Canberra Airport termination a good idea. 

Not sure if anyone actually said that, but I don't see why you wouldn't serve the existing Canberra Railway Station, unless it's too hard to connect up.

I actually don't see much value in the airport station.  Who's it aimed at?  Canberrans wouldn't be using it as an airport train service, and Sydney Airport has the real connections, not Canberra.

I'd prefer this bypassed the Airport at Sydney, and anyway it's impossible to reach Sydney Terminal if going that way.

[Stillwater]

Check out the Canberra Airport master plan.  Aim is to make Canberra Sydney's 'second airport'.  Don't know about that, but it would be ideal for tourist charter flights from overseas.

[SurfRail]

I'd prefer this bypassed the Airport at Sydney, and anyway it's impossible to reach Sydney Terminal if going that way.

Who says?

It would have its own alignment - you don't expect it to share with CityFail and CountryStink in the Sydney basin, do you?  It would also need to accommodate extension to the north, so it wouldn't necessarily be using platforms 1-15.

[SurfRail]

Also as the proposed Syd-Mel VFT won't run via Canberra to emable it to remain slightly competitive with air (going via Can will easily make it a 4.5hr trip due to extra distance, considerable cost and impact on speed due to extensive tunneling), a connection service will be required and going from VFT to the current service is hardly going to assist the VFT be a sucess.

As far as I am aware, sending the VFT via Canberra is a given, in all the work being carried out and that has been carried out to date.  It is too important to just bypass.

Re: Canberra Airport vs existing terminus. I haven't been to Canberra station, but assume its like most and has nothing in way of services, maybe a few taxis turn up at train time. I assume Canberra Airport however has like most, food, shops, taxi, buses, carparks, hire cars, hotel info etc etc. What puts me off taking longdistance trains to some locations as a family holiday is that you will be dumped at an over rated bus stop and even getting a cab is a challenge unless you get the numbers in advance etc. Can airport has everything, why not use it, there should be more of this multi modal common user going on. I've hired a car and booked a hotel on arrival at Roma St Station as well as Greymouth in NZ, this is not a common option in Australia outside the capitals.

There is virtually nothing at Canberra Airport, and the Canberra rail station is for all intents and purposes a bigger version of Doomben.  There is a bus stop which features what looks like the world's biggest ant colony, and not that many services run into the station itself.

I orginally looked at stopped at Fyshwick and then Airport or vice versa, but its messy for such a short run. If the station wad further in towards the city centre, it would be different. Perhaps the easement from Queanbyane station (there would still be a HR station for route Can Airport to Sydney) to Fyswick station could at some stage be used as part of Canberra Light rail project. The remainder of the yard not required by the LR project could be sold off.

Doubtful that they would use the existing line for LRT, except the bit around Fishwyck where the current transport plan shows the option of using either this stretch or the adjacent main road.  The long term planning identifies a high frequency route (which could be bus or light rail) going via Canberra Avenue all the way into the heart of Queanbeyan after Fishwyck, so none of the NSW section would be relevant (and justly so - it is right on the edge of town and won't service many people).

[Stillwater]

There is a mini city at Canberra Airport, including DFO centre and about 20 office blocks.  The airport terminal has just gone through a multi-million dollar upgrade.  Google it.  Canberra Station has an air-conditioned waiting room and two dispensing machines, one for drinks in cans and the other dispensing bags of snacks.

[somebody]

I'd prefer this bypassed the Airport at Sydney, and anyway it's impossible to reach Sydney Terminal if going that way.

Who says?

It would have its own alignment - you don't expect it to share with CityFail and CountryStink in the Sydney basin, do you?  It would also need to accommodate extension to the north, so it wouldn't necessarily be using platforms 1-15.

I do.

A new corridor through the Sydney basin would price this out of existence.

[SurfRail]

I'd prefer this bypassed the Airport at Sydney, and anyway it's impossible to reach Sydney Terminal if going that way.

Who says?

It would have its own alignment - you don't expect it to share with CityFail and CountryStink in the Sydney basin, do you?  It would also need to accommodate extension to the north, so it wouldn't necessarily be using platforms 1-15.

I do.

A new corridor through the Sydney basin would price this out of existence.

It is the whole basis on which the study is proceeding, I believe. 

You couldn't send this via the Cowan Bank and you would not need an interchange at Hornsby, so it makes virtually no sense to connect it to either the Northern or North Shore lines.  That means new corridor from the north optimised for speed.

Departure to the south - likewise would involve a new corridor if it is to go via the South Coast.  For a via MSR route, there is some scope for existing trackage to be used, but the network should be at very high densities by the time this gets up, so you may as well build a new line properly instead of tinkering around with existing corridors.

[SurfRail]

I'll repeat, I don't care what any report says on a VFT, no VFT will go via Canberra to Melbourne and still remain with a sub 4hr Syd-Mel timetable.

I care very much what the report says, especially if (as some luminaries have reasoned) a 3.5 hr timetable via Canberra is found to be possible and in fact feasible.

By all means speed up the Xploder, but without substantial money to build and upgrade a corridor, Murrays or the plane is (sadly) still faster and my preferred means of getting there.