Sunshine Coast Line - is there a Federal freight issue here ?

[Fares_Fair]

Hello,

In light of the Kippa Ring / Redcliffe rail line signing off (after many, many years of false promises).

I was wondering whether the Sunshine Coast line would qualify for any federal government monies as a significant
(I don't know whether it qualifies) trade route.

Does anyone know where one finds information on the freight services and their times, lengths and frequency?
What is their proportion of use of our line - or our use of theirs.

If there is, I think it would be an avenue worth pursuing at a federal level.
I believe the Sunshine Coast line situation will became desperate well before the state's 2031 unfunded pie in the sky document.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[Stillwater]

Yes, it does qualify for federal funding.  The line forms part of the federal government's national freight network.  Some money into track duplication, even for short lengths, would allow for easier and more frequent passing opportunities for passenger and freight trains.  Investing in rail freight infrastructure on the Sunshine Coast Line has a flow-on benefit for passenger rail.  The state government has ignored this aspect IMHO.

[Stillwater]

These may help to give an insight into shared government objectives for strategic transport corridors.
http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/transport/publications/files/Brisbane_Urban_Corridor_Strategy.pdf
http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/transport/publications/files/Bris_Cairns_Corridor_Strategy.pdf

[#Metro]

Ok, comments welcome ---> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?board=29.0

[Fares_Fair]

Hello Stillwater et al,

I am meeting with my Federal member of parliament, Alex Somlyay MP and Member for Fairfax
to discuss the federal implications of the Sunshine Coast line duplication and it's relevance and inclusion in Infrastructure Australia.

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[#Metro]

http://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/national_freight/index.aspx This might help.
Seems to suggest that Coles and Woolworths are using some rail between Brisbane and Nth Qld to move goods. (The Allen Group submission)
Also seems to suggest slow speed, network congestion etc means that freight by rail is not attractive at the moment.

[Fares_Fair]

Thank you Tramtrain, appreciated.

If anyone has any other statistics at hand to assist me, preferably referenced to the source.

I would like to know the current growth rates of the Sunshine Coast and the Gold Coast regions.
I would also like to know the projected growth rates of freight through the Sunshine Coast line compared to current capacity.
I will read throught the reports provided here by Stillwater and Tramtrain.

I am preparing a solid argument for the Federal Government to intervene with regards to the duplication issues of the Sunshine Coast line, and it's capacity for extra services, both freight and passenger.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[#Metro]

We need to get some idea of the cost to fix up this section, roughly.
Evaluation criteria- seems out of date but helpful:

http://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/files/BAF_Evaluat_on_Criteria.pdf

I think you could ask the member for fairfax about how you might go about drafting a submission to IA.
I can't seem to see how one might go about it, but I will ask.

[Stillwater]

Meeting with Mr Alex Somlyay – SCL /NCL upgrade and passing loop extensions

Highlights:

The Brisbane-Cairns single track carries more freight tonnes than does the Sydney-Brisbane interstate and inter-regional corridor, in which the federal government has invested significant sums through the Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC).  The Caboolture-Nambour track is now probably the most congested section of single rail track in Australia. It was recognised as congested as long ago as 1994 in the Bureau of Transport and Communications Economics (BTCE) report of the National Transport Planning Taskforce.

Since the Brisbane-Cairns rail corridor was incorporated into the National Transport Network – the network of roads and railways that the federal government is prepared to help fund – there has been no substantial federal investment in rail on this link, with all available funds going to road upgrades

Growth in rail freight carried is set to exceed 3 per cent a year – the tipping point at which freight that can't be carried by rail will be pushed onto semi-trailers and B-doubles.   There is a high incidence of truck-related crashes on the Bruce Highway

The most likely future scenario is high population and industry growth along the corridor, resulting in an increased freight transport task – estimated at 3.4% per annum growth.  This results in future challenges for the road corridor of capacity constraints and congestion and increasing crash risks. The expansion of regional ports, such as Gladstone, will also highlight rail capacity constraints and congestion.  The efficiency of export goods carted by rail will be affected, with flow-on effects to national trade performance

While freight trains 1500m long are commonplace elsewhere on the interstate freight network funded by the federal government, they are restricted to 650m-670m on the SCL and NCL because of the short passing loops on the line.  Whereas one crew operates a 1500m train elsewhere on the network, the same length of freight train (i.e. two trains on the Queensland network) requires two crews.  More short trains occupy the available train slots.  This increases the conflict between passenger and freight trains for available slots and means that trains have to wait at passing loops while a train clears the single track ahead and they are able to pass

The poor track alignment south of Maryborough West restricts the efficiency and speed of freight trains and, hence, their turnaround times.  This adds to rail transport costs compared with rail.  Even the most efficient train running (the Tilt Train) finds the going tough.  Currently, the tilt train averages only 55 km/h between Landsborough and Nambour, and 66 km/h between Gympie and Maryborough West. This compares unfavourably with average speeds of about 94 km/h between Maryborough West and Bundaberg and 107 km/h between Bundaberg and Rockhampton. Freight train operations are adversely affected south of Maryborough West.  With the exception of a deficient rail bridge at Bundaberg, the focus of any rail upgrade on the Brisbane-Cairns corridor should be between Brisbane and Maryborough West, but especially between Caboolture and Nambour

With expansion of the mining industry in central and north Queensland, the movement of volatile materials is going to increase.  This creates a higher safety risk when these materials are transported by road.  Laird (2003a) estimates rail to be 29 times safer than road per net tonne kilometre (ntk), while the Australasian Railway Association report (PJPL 2005) states that rail freight is between 13 and 23 times safer than road freight (in terms of $ per '000 ntk)
Rail is certainly more efficient than road in terms of energy or fuel use for both mass passenger transport and long distance freight transport.  The ACIL (2001) study indicated that articulated trucks used between three and seven times the energy compared to rail freight and rail used 30% less energy for non-urban passenger transport.

References:
http://www.cgc.gov.au/__data/assets/file/0007/17854/ACT_-_Submission_to_2010_Review-Capital-attachment_A_1.pdf

http://www.core2008.org/assets/papers/monday/1600/Philip-Laird/Philip%20Laird.pdf

http://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/public_submissions/published/files/82_smasuniversityofwollongong_SUB.pdf

[#Metro]

The most likely future scenario is high population and industry growth along the corridor, resulting in an increased freight transport task – estimated at 3.4% per annum growth.  This results in future challenges for the road corridor of capacity constraints and congestion and increasing crash risks. The expansion of regional ports, such as Gladstone, will also highlight rail capacity constraints and congestion.  The efficiency of export goods carted by rail will be affected, with flow-on effects to national trade performance

What assumptions underpin this projection? Is this assuming a 'do-nothing scenario'? I'm wondering because if the line were better it would not only accommodate growth but maybe take market share from road too.

[Stillwater]

for your inquiring mind, TT: http://www.rtbu-nat.asn.au/RTBUAUSQL.pdf

[Fares_Fair]

Hello Stillwater and Tramtrain,

Thank you very much for the information.
I shall start a new topic for the meeting and its discussion and actions.

Kind regards,
Fares_Fair.

[mufreight]

Yes there is a national freight issue here with the NCL, the cost and time benefits of upgrading the rail infrastructure are greater per dollar spent than if the expendature was spent on more road works.

[Stillwater]

Federal funding is being pumped into the 'North Coast Line' upgrade.  What a pity it is not in Queensland, but in NSW instead.

http://www.supplychainreview.com.au/news/articleid/72730.aspx

One of the interesting facts in the article is that one 1500m train is equal to 100 semi-trailers.

Again, what pity that the average train length on Queensland's North Coast line is less than 700m.  QR is selling itself short and not maximising the revenue-raising capacity of its track asset by having short crossing loops – all the loops on the SCL should be lengthened to 1500m, or isolated sections of duplicated track built on the proposed new alignment to act as efficient passing loops.  Indirectly, that would help with scheduling of passenger trains.

[Fares_Fair]

 
agree !

[mufreight]

Extending the current passing loops on the existing alignment between Nambour and Beerburrum would be a complete waste of money, to build a duplicated secrion on the new alignment such as Eudlo - Mooloolah or Mooloolah - Palmwoods would not only provide a passing lane which would enable trains to cross or pass on the move rather than a loop where one train must come to a stand and wait for the other train to clear but would also shorten the transit times over that section because of the better alignment.

[Fares_Fair]

noted, and agree.
Thank you mufreight.
It should be constructed on the new alignment for obvious reasons.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.