POLL: Would you support a HSR study into a Nth QLD route (Brisbane to Cairns)

[#Metro]

5 day poll.
If this result comes back positive, I might consider writing something...

[Golliwog]

I think have a look at it in the study, but I doubt theres going to be enough demand for it to be viable for quite some time.

[ozbob]

Personally, I would rather the $20 million go to the duplication of the line from Beerburrum to Nambour, with increased stabling at Yandina.

[Arnz]

Agree with OzBob said.

Tough I'd rather see extra stabling south of Beerwah, initially for Landsborough terminators (with room to expand and converting the yard for Beerwah-Nambour shuttles and CAMCOS stabling in the future, once CAMCOS is built).

[#Metro]

I think have a look at it in the study, but I doubt theres going to be enough demand for it to be viable for quite some time.

I can understand the level of cynicism about things like this, but solid evidence is always needed. I think the viability of the scheme has been pre-judged. I know of no HSR study from Brisbane to Cairns, while there have been many down on the East Coast Brisbane-Sydney-Melbourne for example.

Its only a study. While some might rather that $20 million go into a local rail project, the fact is that money has already been allocated to the study of a Sydney-Melbourne/Canberra area, it is a sunk, irretrievable cost now, and I don't think it would hurt or add any greater cost to include a quick study of a Brisbane-Cairns line.

May as well do it while the chance is there. Things like this don't come around all that often.

[mufreight]

You have to be kidding, that $20 million would be far better spent electrifying the fourth line Corinda to Panhard Street and building the fourth platform at Oxley rather than being used to create more smoke as an excuse to do nothing and justify the existence of more of the seat polishing pie in the sky bureaucrats.

So lets waste $20 million for another study for no practical reason that would be far better expended funding infrastructure that is actually needed NOW.

As for a high speed rail link between Brisbane and Cairns the reality is that unless the technology is there to do the trip in less than three hours at a cost comparable to making the journey by plane it is not going to happen.

The proposition has failed in terms of cost to construct the infrastructure, the technology for such a line to be competitive with air does not exist and even were the technology available at an affordable cost to the country the travel demand to justify such a project does not exist and will not exist in the foreseeable future.

Where can I get some of what some of these blokes must be smoking so I can join the joke.   :bi

[#Metro]

I think there is no harm in asking for a spot in something that is going to happen anyway (the study).
If people want to vent on how the money would be better spent elsewhere, that's fine, just drop a line to
http://www.anthonyalbanese.com.au/file.php?file=/contact.html

We have to exercise caution when comparing train speed against airports, especially if we are talking about "hop-on, hop off" traffic and not major city-major city single point destinations.

I would guess that it takes 10-20 minutes to Fly a commercial airline from Brisbane Airport to the Gold Coast and vice-versa. I could easily wave this justification around as "proof" that a QR train line between Brisbane and the Gold Coast should never be built and would be economically unviable because the aircraft is faster than the Varsity Lakes Express train hands down, every time.

I could also use the same argument to argue that CAMCOS should never be built as it would be faster to fly people from Brisbane to Sunshine Coast airport using aircraft.

The Hon Anthony Albanese MP
Federal Member for Grayndler

Electorate Office
334a Marrickville Road
MARRICKVILLE NSW 2204
www.anthonyalbanese.com.au

Phone: (02) 9564 3588
Fax: (02) 9564 1734

Parliament House Office
PO Box 6022
Suite MG43
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600

Phone: (02) 6277 7680
Fax: (02) 6273 4126

Email: A.Albanese.MP@aph.gov.au

[Stillwater]

The $20 million study is a sop to the Greens, which Labor needs to keep on side in the federal arena.  It's purpose, I suspect, is to prove that a VFT is not viable.  The Government's attitude to this is illustrated that the media applied under FOI for any recent advice to government on a VFT.  The department recommended against a VFT and denied the Channel 7 request under FOI.  The Minister overruled his department and released the report saying that VFT is not viable.  That is a sign of where the $20 million report is headed.  Because it costs a lot more, it will say NO more emphatically.  Here is some interesting reading:
www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bp/1997-98/98bp16.htm
www.infrastructure.gov.au/rail/trains/high_speed/pdf/ECVHST_Scoping_Study.pdf

[verbatim9]

Would like to see duplication up to marborough and extension to Harvey bay

[Golliwog]

I think the point of the question is being missed. Its not about what you would rather see the money being spent on. Its already going to the study on HSR, the question is should they look at including a route from Brisbane to Cairns/Townsville?

[ozbob]

Well lets be blunt, HSR in Australia is a dream.  It is a political con game.  The point many are making is that rather than pointless expenditure on meaningless studies the money should be directed to providing proper transport options for all Australians.  

Suburban networks, long distance freight networks are groaning.  HSR is a smoke screen.  Welcome to the world of polyticks ...

" ... senior lecturer in transport planning at RMIT University, Paul Mees, expressed little faith that the
feasibility study, which is the 10th study of its kind since 1984, would drive the development of the fastrail
link. 'What I find frustrating is the idea that we might be about to spend yet another $20 million redoing
the engineering work that we've done nine times before and coming up with the same
conclusions' Dr Mees said. 'I almost think that there's some kind of cargo cult mentality going on here,
that if we just offer up enough studies to whichever law of universe supposedly grants favours, then
somehow a very fast train will descend', he said."

Canberra Times, 18/9/10

We will have 15 minute frequency Doomben line long before HSR  

[#Metro]

I think the point of the question is being missed. Its not about what you would rather see the money being spent on. Its already going to the study on HSR, the question is should they look at including a route from Brisbane to Cairns/Townsville?

Precisely. Did any one of those 9 studies do Cairns-Brisbane tilt train route?
Probably not.

[ozbob]

If HSR rail is no go between Melbourne - Sydney and Sydney to Canberra, it is definitely not a goer between Brisbane and Cairns.  The projected use would be lower and costs much greater due to the considerable distances relative to Sydney to Melbourne for example.

[ozbob]

Would like to see duplication up to marborough and extension to Harvey bay

Yes, and regular rail services.  But first duplication to Nambour must be a priority.  Duplicate Beerburrum to Landsborough and then staged duplication of sections to Nambour.  Progressive sections constructed on the new alignments which will allow trains to pass and then negotiate the remaining single sections.  This will allow progress even in times of slow funding.  Beerburrum to Landsborough is ready to go, or as they like to say ' shovel ready '.

[verbatim9]

No but yes to Duplication up to Nambour or even Gympie. Finish the  Electrification from Rockhampton to Cairns.

[Stillwater]

The first stage of the study did not even look at the viability of HSR north of Brisbane.  While Melbourne-Brisbane is the focus of the study, there may be a case to extend the run beyond Brisbane to Hervey Bay perhaps.  At some point, these trains will have to be cleaned and serviced.  Ideally, that should be beyond the terminus in Melbourne or north of Brisbane.  With train building and servicing expertise already available at Maryborough, that could be its natural service point.  HSR could provide jobs and apprenticeships locally.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Wait till the rainy season

[colinw]

This thread made for an excellent giggle. Of all the priorities for rail in this country that I can think of, HSR from Brisbane to Cairns is NOT one of them.

+1 to Mufreight's suggestion for using the $20M to stick up some wires and an extra platform at Oxley. Failing that, surely the piddly little duplication to Shorncliffe could be done for $20M & change?

But HSR to Cairns.  Ho, ho, ho, good one!!!!  

[Mr X]

Anyone want to second a motion for a maglev spine off to Mt Isa into Kattersville?   

[colinw]

This is Queensland. We'd end up with a narrow gauge low speed Maglev.

[#Metro]

I think we have enough uses for $40 billion closer to home, than spending it on HSR.

[colinw]

$40 billion worth of plasma telly giveaways for the voters?

But seriously, I think we need to get our urban public transport systems sorted long before we think about HSR outside the Newcastle - Sydney - Canberra axis. 

[#Metro]

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/rail/trains/high_speed/

How about decent 15 minute frequency on trains in both directions for starters...

cf. National Broadband network - $50 bn..
56 million passengers is about what the QR network carries today

Phase One

The Hon Anthony Albanese MP, the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, launched the report from phase one of the study on 4 August 2011:

   A blueprint to Australia's transport future: First stage of high speed rail study released;
   High Speed Rail: Interim Report Released Address to Infrastructure Partnerships Australia's Partnerships 2011 Conference - Sydney, 4 August 2011.

The report found that such a network could:

   cost between $61 billion and $108 billion (in $2011) to build and involve laying more than 1,600 kilometres of new standard-gauge, double-track;
   achieve speeds of up to 350 kilometres per hour and offer journey times as low as 3 hours between Brisbane and Sydney and Sydney and Melbourne; just 40 minutes from Sydney to Newcastle; and 1 hour between Sydney and Canberra;
   carry around 54 million passengers a year by 2036 including, for example, about half those who would have flown between Sydney and Melbourne - currently the world's fifth busiest air corridor; and
   offer competitive ticket prices, with one way fares (in $2011) from Brisbane to Sydney costing $75 - $177; Sydney to Melbourne $99 - $197; and $16.50 for daily commuters between Newcastle and Sydney.

Copies of the report are available for download below:

   High Speed Rail Study - Phase One Report Executive Summary [PDFPDF: 1207 KB]
   High Speed Rail Study - Phase One Report [PDFPDF: 9207 KB]
   High Speed Rail Study - Phase One Report Appendices [PDFPDF: 7783 KB]
   High Speed Rail Study - Phase One Report Full Report [PDFPDF: 16120 KB]

[colinw]

Sounds like a mechanism for inducing demand and otherwise unnecessary travel.

Just like any other mode, rail is NOT environmentally friendly if it generates lots of demand and then burns energy whizzing people around on trips they would not otherwise have made.

[Mr X]

^^ Agreed, though you could say the same for aircraft and cheap fares, which are far less environmentally friendly than trains.

This is Queensland. We'd end up with a single track narrow gauge low speed Maglev.

Fixed.

Ok enough foaming from me  

[Arnz]

This is Queensland. We'd end up with a single lane low speed Maglev bus

Fixed :p

[petey3801]

This is Queensland. We'd end up with a single lane low speed bus tunnel.

Fixed 

[colinw]

I didn't realise you were Can-Do's public transport adviser, petey3801! 

[#Metro]

Sounds like a mechanism for inducing demand and otherwise unnecessary travel.

Just like any other mode, rail is NOT environmentally friendly if it generates lots of demand and then burns energy whizzing people around on trips they would not otherwise have made.

Well it depends Colin W. It could be environmentally friendly if it diverts people off planes, on the other hand, if the alignment goes through
endangered wetlands, kills rare plants etc then it might not. So it depends on the alignment and specifics.

The report is a good read, although I did a quick search on NPV and net present value and I couldn't find one.

[Golliwog]

Sounds like a mechanism for inducing demand and otherwise unnecessary travel.

Just like any other mode, rail is NOT environmentally friendly if it generates lots of demand and then burns energy whizzing people around on trips they would not otherwise have made.

Well it depends Colin W. It could be environmentally friendly if it diverts people off planes, on the other hand, if the alignment goes through
endangered wetlands, kills rare plants etc then it might not. So it depends on the alignment and specifics.

The report is a good read, although I did a quick search on NPV and net present value and I couldn't find one.

What I think Colin was getting at is rather than taking passengers away from planes, you'll just end up with more people travelling. I mean, can you imagine the airlines just lying down and taking a massive loss in customers? They'll be out spruiking themselves and cutting fares where they can, while the HSR would be doing something similar in an attempt to break into the market.

[colinw]

Sounds like a mechanism for inducing demand and otherwise unnecessary travel.

Just like any other mode, rail is NOT environmentally friendly if it generates lots of demand and then burns energy whizzing people around on trips they would not otherwise have made.

Well it depends Colin W. It could be environmentally friendly if it diverts people off planes, on the other hand, if the alignment goes through
endangered wetlands, kills rare plants etc then it might not. So it depends on the alignment and specifics.

The report is a good read, although I did a quick search on NPV and net present value and I couldn't find one.

Agreed, however at 54 million journeys per year you are looking at quite a lot of induced demand. That is quite a lot higher than current air volumes. (e.g., 2010 Syd <-> Mel volume is about 780,000 per month - source here).

[#Metro]

Agreed, however at 54 million journeys per year you are looking at quite a lot of induced demand. That is quite a lot higher than current air volumes. (e.g., 2010 Syd <-> Mel volume is about 780,000 per month - source here).

So that's equal to 23 % growth each and every year for the next 25 years.

Something seems wrong, especially given that point to point train will be equal or slower than air between cities (where most of the demand will be generated).

Someone is on crack and it isn't me...

[Golliwog]

Agreed, however at 54 million journeys per year you are looking at quite a lot of induced demand. That is quite a lot higher than current air volumes. (e.g., 2010 Syd <-> Mel volume is about 780,000 per month - source here).

So that's equal to 23 % growth each and every year for the next 25 years.

Something seems wrong, especially given that point to point train will be equal or slower than air between cities (where most of the demand will be generated).

Someone is on crack and it isn't me...

Depends, how many do you think they may be taking off the roads as well? Even with my limited long distance rail experience (Paris-London, and some around England) it is generally much more pleasant than air travel.

[SurfRail]

No further north than the Sunshine Coast, and even then CAMCOS, Beerburrum-Nambour duplication and realignment and longer passing loops further north are higher priorities.

[Stillwater]