RAIL - Back On Track Forum

The Border Mail --> Glenrowan group 'not surprised' at Inland Rail project budget blowout $

QuoteThe leaders of a Glenrowan community group that went into battle to stop a section of Australia's largest rail project being built say they're "not at all surprised" the venture's cost has doubled to $31.4 billion.

The Glenrown Improvers group was fighting to save the site of the Kelly Gang's siege three years ago when they opposed a replacement bridge on Beaconsfield Parade as part of the Inland Rail route between Melbourne and Brisbane. ...

Quote from: Gazza on April 06, 2023, 10:18:15 AMAt this point, you could have spent money selectively on the existing corridor via Sydney and achieved transit times under 24 hours and had the benefit of making things faster for other rail services along there too.

Put it this way.
Melbourne to Sydney takes 11h
Sydney to Brisbane takes 14h

Thats 25 hours. You could easily spend some money on a freight bypass in Sydney, plus realigning a couple of key sections, eg around Gunning and knock an hour or two off!

From what I understand, a lot of the pain on this project is that the ARTC is utterly not prepared to handle projects of this scale.

That doesn't achieve one of the major goals of the inland rail project, though, which was to provide rail transport from the inland agricultural regions to the cities of Melbourne and Brisbane.

Whether this was a legimitate need, or a pork-barrelling exercise by the Nationals, is open to debate IMO.

Quote from: HappyTrainGuy on April 06, 2023, 17:33:55 PM

Quote from: ozbob on April 06, 2023, 09:28:27 AMEbenezer is the preferred terminal for double stacked freighters. From there single stack freight to Kaguru, Bromelton, Acacia Ridge and POB.

I haven't had a chance to look yet at the report but I wonder how much of an impact or reliance inland rail had on TMR's SRFC plans where costings had already somewhat been undertaken from over a decade ago.

I think it has been part of the review process, even it not explicitly stated.

====

Pages 35 & 36 Independent review of Inland Rail Report
https://www.inlandrail.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/Independent%20review%20of%20Inland%20Rail%20Report_0.pdf

4.3 Brisbane terminals

At present Brisbane and South East Queensland are serviced by two terminals capable of providing interstate
intermodal services — Bromelton and Acacia Ridge. Acacia Ridge is expected to reach capacity in 2025-27 and
cannot accommodate the longer 1,800 metre double-stacked trains that are expected to use the Inland Rail
network.
The Commonwealth and Queensland Governments have been considering the business case for intermodal
terminals in South East Queensland along with warehousing and logistics requirements. This work, partly
funded by a $10 million contribution from the Commonwealth Government, will be completed in mid-2023.
Without seeking to pre-empt the outcome of that business case and noting that it may be subject to change,
I observe at this time that Ebenezer is the preferred location for the intermodal terminal from the number of
other sites that have been considered. I also note that some members of the local community do not favour
an intermodal terminal development at Ebenezer at this time and the Commonwealth and Queensland
Government need to provide more information about the benefits and costs of such a development. The
possible locations for an intermodal terminal are shown in Figure 4.4

In this study, Ebenezer is the best option when assessed against the ability to meet the Inland Rail service
requirements, maximising rail freight competitiveness, proximity to end-user freight demand, and alignment
and compatibility with surrounding land uses. Industry through the Review broadly supported Ebenezer,
highlighting concerns with congestion at Acacia Ridge and noting the favourable road connections at Ebenezer
to support the distribution of freight across Brisbane and to the Port of Brisbane. It is expected that the
analysis and considerations by Government will finish in mid-2023.23
The proposed Ebenezer development needs to be appropriately staged and delivered to align with Inland Rail
completion. The entry and exit points to the Ebenezer terminal for both road and rail must be constructed for
maximum efficiency in terminal operations and further attention must be paid to the concerns of the local
community who have informed me through several channels that they do not desire this terminal in their
locality. Concern has also been expressed about a koala site nearby and this matter must be addressed.
Some rail operators seek to run a single-stacked service from Ebenezer to the existing terminals at Bromelton
and Acacia Ridge and while Ebenezer is preferred, stopping Inland Rail at Ebenezer does not connect Inland
Rail more broadly to the existing national network (unlike in Melbourne which still has the options of a single-
stack operation to the port and other lines). Constructing a connection between Ebenezer and Kagaru delivers
a more connected, resilient national network and provides an alternative route between Sydney and Brisbane
in the event that the existing coastal route is unavailable as has been the case several times in 2022 because
of flooding. This extension would also provide a route for Inland Rail through to the port in Brisbane.
The cost of extending beyond Ebenezer to Kagaru is currently estimated to be around $1.3 billion (on the
basis of a double-stacked service) and an added $260 million from Kagaru to Bromelton and Acacia Ridge.
Analysis suggests that rail volumes may decrease by 7.5 per cent in South East Queensland if this does not
occur and this load would likely move to road with significant congestion implications. On the other hand, if
double-stacking stopped at Ebenezer but a single-stack service was offered through to Kagaru there would be
no decline in rail freight demand.24 It thus seems clear that double-stacking should cease at Ebenezer with a
single-stack service offered through to Kagaru. This necessitates a change to the Public Private Partnership
scope where double-stacking is no longer required beyond Ebenezer to Kagaru. This should save significant
cost and still deliver new network connectivity and resilience by providing a direct link between the existing
Sydney to Brisbane north coast line and Inland Rail. This is discussed further in Section 6.1.

Finding
Within the city environs of Brisbane and its port there is no feasible way to operate 1,800 metre
double-stacked freight trains. Smaller single-stacked train operations (as at present) are possible but
there needs to be a terminal outside the city where large double-stacked trains can manage their load
and have the option to single-stack beyond that point or switch to smaller vehicle road haulage for the
end of trip. Considerable analysis has been done by Governments on the options to meet this
requirement and the preference is to develop an intermodal and warehousing terminal at Ebenezer. A
single-stack route for smaller trains to Bromelton terminal should continue and single-stacking through
to Kagaru should be developed

Recommendation 9
An intermodal terminal should be developed at Ebenezer so that its completion aligns with that of
Inland Rail. The final site, lay-out and commercial model should be settled expeditiously between the
Commonwealth and Queensland Governments. The terminal should be run independently by a
terminal owner/operator with an open access regime. Governments should consider who that terminal
operator will be but I note that such an operator already exists in the form of Commonwealth-owned
National Intermodal Corporation.



Kagaru is where the proposed inland rail corridor joins the existing standard gauge line north of Bromelton.

Couriermail --> Cloud over QLD section of Inland Rail after damning review $

QuoteA cloud hangs over the future of the Inland Rail in Queensland, with approvals so far behind there is no estimate on when construction of the project could start in the state.

Transport Minister Catherine King said the government remained committed to seeing the 1700km rail project completed in full through to Queensland "at this stage", but contracts and tendering will only take the rail from Melbourne to Parkes in NSW for now.

She said an independent cost estimator and value engineer will now be engaged to determine the updated cost and schedule for the troubled project. ...

Brisbanetimes --> Queensland's Inland Rail calamity laid bare

QuoteKerry Schott's detailed investigation of the calamitous Inland Rail megaproject has thrust into public view what observers have warned for years: the Queensland side, in particular and increasingly, is a bin fire.

Building the infrastructure for double-stacked freight trains from Toowoomba to the outskirts of Brisbane could cost $9 billion alone. This was almost double the anticipated price tag for the entire Melbourne-to-Brisbane length only eight years ago. ...

... The whole thing made for "pretty grim reading", Dow said.

"The concept of building this line without knowing where it's going to start and where it's going to finish is pretty bizarre, really.

"The ARTC has botched a few things in its history. And this is another one."

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1643984465973374982

Pages 38 & 39 Independent review of Inland Rail Report
https://www.inlandrail.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/Independent%20review%20of%20Inland%20Rail%20Report_0.pdf

4.5 Toowoomba to Gladstone Inland Rail extension

A business case is being developed for the extension of Inland Rail from Toowoomba to Gladstone. This study
covers the route set out in Figure 4.5 below and is expected to be completed in late-2023. It is not intended
for this route to replace any of the existing Inland Rail route but rather to complement the service offered.
The business case is being developed by the Queensland Government with oversight from the
Commonwealth Government, which contributed $10 million for this work in September 2021.

The need, viability and timing of the extension is being examined, as well as how an additional rail connection
to the Port of Gladstone could benefit businesses and communities in regional Queensland. The business case
is also exploring commercial development and private sector funding opportunities.

The Toowoomba to Gladstone extension could provide a better-connected, more resilient and accessible rail
freight network for some commodities. Increased export opportunities for the resource sector and agriculture
producers may be potential benefits. However, infrastructure at the Port of Gladstone is limited and any
investment in the extension must consider the further investment required at the port.

Over time, and once other ports such as Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane become capacity constrained,
Gladstone could become a fourth major port for import/export freight on the east coast. Such port
constraints are not expected until beyond 2050 and my Review noted only limited support for the extension
in the short to medium-term. It should not be seen as an alternative to Inland Rail linking to Brisbane
as it does not cater for one of the main needs for Inland Rail,
which is to service the growing population of South East Queensland.

Toowoomba to Gladstone Inland Rail Extension Business Case
https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/projects/toowoomba-to-gladstone-inland-rail-extension-business-case

https://twitter.com/CatherineKingMP/status/1643831983787900928

It is convenient to blame the politics, but the problems are lot more than that. 

Realistically, what is the chance of Inland Rail actually being completed?

It might get to Ebenezer by 2050, perhaps.  Gladstone?  Less likely ...

Couriermail Quest --> No double-stacked freight trains on Inland Rail through Acacia Ridge: Independent report endorsed $

QuoteThousands of southside residents are celebrating one of the biggest community wins in a decade after a report released today showed double-stacked freight trains will not run past their back doors as part of an inland rail freight line.

The news was released as part of a federal government response to an independent review of Inland Rail by Dr Kerry Schott, who tabled her report with 19 recommendations in January.

One of those recommendations was that the double-stacked freight trains would not go to Acacia Ridge and instead would terminate at a massive intermodal terminal to be built at Ebenezer in Ipswich. ...

I don't see the double stacking terminal being that popular quite frankly as there's no supporting network around it. PN had the same problem when it was looking at merging operations. Now it still runs 2 facilities with trucks moving freight between the two facilities, local businesses/freight forwarders and the port. You need to get double stacking to AR for the big benefit. Otherwise it's just going to be more trains instead.

This was an ARHS Tour to Ebenezer coal mine, 1995.  Line is now closed.

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1644146700196388864

Quote from: HappyTrainGuy on April 07, 2023, 10:56:25 AMI don't see the double stacking terminal being that popular quite frankly as there's no supporting network around it. PN had the same problem when it was looking at merging operations. Now it still runs 2 facilities with trucks moving freight between the two facilities, local businesses/freight forwarders and the port. You need to get double stacking to AR for the big benefit. Otherwise it's just going to be more trains instead.

Acacia Ridge has been ruled out.  It is Ebenezer or nought now.  Probably nought 

I'm guessing something like ending double-stacked at, say, Wellcamp is a non-starter as it's likely that instead of continuing single stacked into Brisbane, they'll just truck everything down the Warrego instead of wasting time moving the containers onto a separate train. Asking the question for practical construction questions and whether a tunnel through the range designed for single stacked trains represents much of a cost saving. It probably doesn't.

QuoteIt is convenient to blame the politics, but the problems are lot more than that.

Realistically, what is the chance of Inland Rail actually being completed?

It might get to Ebenezer by 2050, perhaps.  Gladstone?  Less likely ...

I'm surprised.

This project does not come across as a project as complicated as say a passenger rail project.

Passenger rail projects have to deal with stations, overhead power and wire, lifts and access, much more complicated urban context (buildings, roads, homes).

It raises questions about how a MEL-CAN-SYD-BNE HSR $100 billion project would fare? Would it actually be ~ $150-$200 billion based on reference project class comparison?

HSR projects have blown out overseas, and supporters of that have attempted to explain that away. But now domestic LSR projects here have blown out too...

Not looking good!! 

QuoteAcacia Ridge has been ruled out.  It is Ebenezer or nought now.  Probably nought

Where is the freight that needs to go to the port originating from? Wouldn't each state just send it through to the port in their capital city to be loaded onto a ship?

It seems to be longer and expensive to say, send freight from NSW through to a port in QLD or VIC, for example. Why not send it to Sydney, Wollongong, or Newcastle instead?

Wellcamp should be a freight terminal interchange and electric from there.

Quote from: #Metro on April 07, 2023, 11:42:57 AM

QuoteAcacia Ridge has been ruled out.  It is Ebenezer or nought now.  Probably nought

Where is the freight that needs to go to the port originating from? Wouldn't each state just send it through to the port in their capital city to be loaded onto a ship?

It seems to be longer and expensive to say, send freight from NSW through to a port in QLD or VIC, for example. Why not send it to Sydney, Wollongong, or Newcastle instead?

It's a catch 22. Sometimes you have to go to another port depending on timeframes, what's being exported and the shipper. Similar to airlines. There is direct and then there are stop overs. Peak and off peak. You can fly international out of the Gold Coast but you have more options if you fly out of brisbane. Some ports have bigger backlogs compared to others. For example the boat could wait off brisbane for a day meanwhile out of Sydney it's a 4 day wait to get a berth.

Covid was a good example of this where boats were waiting weeks before being able to dock and offload due to demand and the number of boats.

Here is an example from the automotive sector. Melbourne has 12 car carriers waiting to get into port meanwhile only 4 waiting to get into Brisbane. The problem here in Australia is that we don't have bulk car transport wagons outside of the passenger sector so freight trains can't take cars interstate meaning ships have to go to ports locally rather than splitting them evenly across the country and transporting them to other states via rail. I might be wrong but PN are the only operator that still triple stacks car wagons (double stack container height) between Darwin and Adelaide.
https://www.drive.com.au/news/quarantine-crisis-deepens-thousands-cars-stranded/

Brisbanetimes --> Critical section of Inland Rail link in limbo amid cost blowout

QuoteA critical section of the Inland Rail freight link running across half of NSW into Queensland has been halted indefinitely as the federal government audits the scheme's finances following revelations its cost has blown out to more than $30 billion.

Infrastructure and Transport Minister Catherine King said on Thursday just one section of the proposed 1700-kilometre rail line – from Beveridge outside Melbourne to Parkes in Central West NSW – would be completed by 2027 as she warned of sweeping changes to the rest of the project. ...

... King said more than $2 billion had already been sunk into the project and the government would commission an independent cost assessment before deciding the future of the remaining rail line from Parkes to Brisbane.
 ...

"Inland Rail freight link running across half of NSW into Queensland has been halted indefinitely ... "



This project is now as likely as Eastern High Speed Rail - Buckley's or none!

Utter farce the way rail has been left languishing.

Incompetent Governments and the ARTC - a recipe for failure!

Facebook ...

Government announces overhaul of the Australian Inland Rail project | 7NEWS

~ 28 minutes Press Conference with Ministers King, Gallagher and Dr Schott.



"The cost to deliver a 1,700 kilometre Inland Rail project that would connect Brisbane, country New South Wales and Melbourne has doubled in cost to more than $31 billion. A new review of the project says the former coalition government ignored advice, and there was uncertainty about when the project would be finished.

The rail line from Melbourne to Parkes will take priority in an overhaul of the Inland Rail project, after the independent study found a massive cost blowout under the coalition government.

Inland Rail is a 1,700km line intended to link Melbourne and Brisbane via regional Victoria, NSW and Queensland.

When finished it is expected to reduce truck volumes across at least 20 regional towns, ease congestion on major highways, cut carbon emissions and provide a reliable network for producers, farmers and businesses.

A study released has found the project, estimated to cost $9.3 billion five years ago, has blown out to $31.4 billion.

Report author Kerry Schott said the section between Melbourne and Parkes could be completed by 2027, but there was no indication of the timing of the project beyond this.

Dr Schott said while progress was being made in terms of NSW approval processes, Queensland's work was "well behind".

She would not "hang her hat" on the 2030s estimate for the Queensland leg of the project.
Transport Minister Catherine King said it would take a lot of work to get the project back on track.

"The previous government began this project with no idea where the rail line would start in Melbourne, and where it would finish in Brisbane, or how it would interact with towns, communities and the natural environmental along the route," she said.

Dr Schott found the government-owned Australian Rail Track Corporation did not have the expertise to manage the project, recommending Inland Rail be made a subsidiary company to allow it greater control of project management and approvals processes.

But the academic and Albanese government insist the project should go ahead.

"As it stands, Inland Rail is expected to accommodate and drive a modal shift of 200,000 trucks a year to rail, and this will bring significant benefits in terms of supply chain efficiencies, safety, environmental and congestion reductions," Dr Schott said.

Ms King said the government had accepted in principle or in full all of Dr Schott's recommendations, which would lead to "sweeping changes" to the project.

An independent cost estimator and value engineer will be appointed to undertake detailed assurance work.

Experts would also be added to the ARTC, with recruitment under way for an Inland Rail CEO.
"Inland Rail does remain an important project to meet Australia's growing freight task, improve road safety and to help decarbonise our economy, but we have been left with one almighty mess," the minister said.

Finance Minister Katy Gallagher, who is a shareholder minister in the project, said it would take 18 months to work through detailed costings.

About $2 billion has been spent so far.

Australia's largest state farming body said the benefits of progressing the project were clear and the government was right to progress it.

"A projected $10 per tonne saving for freight would help farmers make ends meet amid soaring food and fibre production costs," NSW Farmers Inland rail task force chair Peter Wilson said.

Opposition infrastructure spokeswoman Bridget McKenzie said the government should address the need for approvals by state Labor governments, which Dr Schott identified as a main reason for delays."

Quote"The cost to deliver a 1,700 kilometre Inland Rail project that would connect Brisbane, country New South Wales and Melbourne has doubled in cost to more than $31 billion. A new review of the project says the former coalition government ignored advice, and there was uncertainty about when the project would be finished.

This is interesting. Looking past the headline $31 billion figure, the per-km cost is only about $18.23 million per kilometre. That is cheaper than light rail, and possibly even some BRT projects.

Was the project grossly under-costed to begin with?



Update: Doing the whole project within the original $14 billion project envelope would have demanded a per-km cost of $8.23 million/km. That seems incredibly low, I understand large parts of the project are essentially going through paddocks and fields, but does this value seem to be well outside the "normal" range??

It's been underestimated but still. Per km is a flawed way of looking at it. Good sections of it are simply just reusing existing track here and there with some extensions and the odd new passing loop etc. IIRC 65-70% of the project is using existing corridors and infrastructure so prices/costings will be lower here vs here in Queensland where there is very minimal infrastructure.

Narromine to Brisbane is the most expensive part of Inland Rail.

Gowrie to Kagaru the most expensive and technically the most challenging section.

Which is why it is now on hold ...



From https://blog.iseekplant.com.au/blog/melbourne-to-brisbane-inland-rail-project

I saw in the Facebook page commentary that 1.8km double stack trains can't got to Acacia Ridge so therefore single stack shorter trains would be needed. 

What can't shorter double stack trains go to Acacia Ridge and other potential rail hubs?

^ cost of reworking the standard gauge line to allow double stack clearances.  Bridges etc.

There are the political problems as well. 
There is now no intent to run double stacks past Ebenezer at best.
End of section.

It is possible they may even terminate the double stack trains at Toowoomba area.

I see little hope for Inland Rail north of Parkes now to be blunt.

Tend to agree bob. A lot has changed since inland rail started. Qube no longer has interest in running trains here now that Pacific National own the ART/have no local freight hub. And speaking of infrastructure such as bridges also the AR terminal would need a complete reconfiguration including possible removal of the Aurizon facilities depending how you want to configure it. By that I mean sacrificing a number of roads to allow for an extra 2 or 4 extra provisioning roads - but then you also potentially lose access to numerous sidings. 1.4km trains are the limit now for PN and I don't see them spending a lot of money on an overhaul of the entire facility even if they could then rent out the extra provisioning roads to Aurizon/Qube.

Aurizon is limited. Qube has no intentions since PN own AR. Maybe if a terminal is built at Ebeezner but they still don't have a trucking network to connect to it nor a qld freight train service. SCT has its own facility so they won't go to AR and they have no intentions of running services in Queensland.

So realistically who will use inland rail in Queensland as new players and what incentive does that provide for both the operator and the artc for the feds to invest a bucket load into delivering it.

The Daily Advertiser --> Independent review of the Inland Rail project reveals huge cost blowout and poor governance $

QuoteThe massive cost blowout and lack of direction of the Inland Rail revealed by the independent review of the project should '"set alarm bells ringing" and be cause for a major rethink of the route.

An independent review of the rail line which is set to run from Melbourne and Brisbane found that the project's budget has exploded to approximately $31 billion from an estimated $10.7 billion in 2015 and has been beset by delays, environmental issues and poor governance. ...

Inland Rail Toowoomba tunnel  22 Jul 2020

Shows a double-stack dual gauge tunnel.

My City Logan 11th April 2023 page 5

http://digital.mycitylogan.com.au/books/lhct/#p=1

Rail won't go through Logan

Inland Rail Map April 2023

(PDF link is high resolution)

https://www.inlandrail.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/Inland%20Rail%20map.pdf

Quote from: ozbob on April 11, 2023, 03:42:06 AMMy City Logan 11th April 2023 page 5

http://digital.mycitylogan.com.au/books/lhct/#p=1

Rail won't go through Logan

Still don't get why this is a Big Win.  The line to the port is most likely to be the Gateway Option which still goes past their properties!!!  I guess their preferred option is a hub out west and all freight to go by truck past someone else's home!!

https://www.ryanmurphy.com.au/news/inlandrail

ABC Radio National --> Can the Inland Rail Project ever get finished?

Imagine building a railway track without knowing exactly where it will start and end?

That's exactly what's happened with the colossal Inland Rail Project from Melbourne to Brisbane, which also doesn't have an end date or a total budget.

Guest: Kerry Schott, former Energy Security Board Chair

Listen online > https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/can-the-inland-rail-project-ever-get-finished-/102204878

No real discussion on the Queensland end and connection to the port?  QLD Government certainly not leading the way in planning either!

Exactly.  If you could sit down with ARTC key staff involved in the Queensland stages I am sure they would be very condemning from the lack of leadership from the Queensland Government.  The Queensland Government has almost been disinterested in this project. They have allowed the project to develop into total disarray in Queensland in my opinion.  There is a lot not being said. 

Our transport bureaucracy is fixated on ' MOAR ROADS! "   

I learned quite a lot from Dr. Schott's interview. Much of the freight is from Queensland to Sydney/Melbourne for consumption.

Which explains why Toowoomba is on the route. It's supporting agriculture and trade.

The Australian --> End Inland Rail at Toowoomba instead of Brisbane, save $9bn, proponents say $

QuoteAlmost a third of the blown-out cost of the $31.4bn Inland Rail project could be saved if the freight line ended at Toowoomba, as advocated by the region's federal MP.

Under the existing plan, the 1700km rail line would run from Melbourne to the Brisbane suburb of Acacia Ridge.

From there, freight could be loaded on to smaller trains or trucked to the Port of Brisbane.

Engineering challenges posed by the Toowoomba range mean the 150km section between Toowoomba and Acacia Ridge would cost about $9.56bn, despite being less than one-tenth of the total distance of the track. ...

Misreporting, the plan is now Ebenezer.

^

Bit of local grand standing. 

The purpose of Inland Rail is get trucks off the roads not put more on the roads ...

Schott looked at this, and as reported:

'The Schott report said consideration had been given to creating the intermodal terminal at Toowoomba but it was "not pursued due to its significant distance from Brisbane, the low level of interest from industry generating concerns about the level of competition, and concerns about the additional road freight traffic this option would generate on the Warrego Highway." '

Brisbanetimes --> Joyce and Birmingham's captain picks criticised in damning rail report

QuoteThe former government ministers responsible for the multibillion-dollar Inland Rail project rejected board candidates with vital and requested skill sets and instead handpicked a Liberal Party fundraiser, a former Nationals vice president and a corporate lawyer for resource giants.

The three-year appointments to the Australian Rail and Track Corporation made by then-ministers Barnaby Joyce and Simon Birmingham, weeks out from the last federal election, were criticised by Dr Kerry Schott in her stunning report last week detailing the slow derailing of one of Australia's largest ever infrastructure projects. ...

Ipswich Tribune --> Controversial section of Inland Rail overhauled $

QuoteTHE controversial Calvert to Kagaru section of the Inland Rail project will not go ahead in its current form following an independent review commissioned by the Albanese Government.

The crucial intermodal terminal will be developed at Ebenezer but will be the end point for Inland Rail's long double stacked freight trains.

A new track would run from Gatton through Grandchester and Calvert to Ebenezer but the new track running from Ebenezer to Kagaru would be single stacked as it joins the Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC) rail network between Acacia Ridge and Bromelton. ...

The Guardian --> Inland rail review supports concerns raised by regional communities