Article: Inland rail project faces uncertainty

[ozbob]

From the ABC News click here!

Inland rail project faces uncertainty

Inland rail project faces uncertainty
By Fidelis Rego

The future of a major rail project through Queensland's southern inland is in limbo.

In 2006, a consortium of mining and infrastructure companies was given an exclusive contract to build a 204-kilometre rail line between Wandoan and Banana.

It is designed to link Surat Basin coal mines to the Port of Gladstone.

Lawyer Tom Marland says the consortium has failed to act on its notice of intention to resume the land, leaving the landholders he represents with thousands of dollars in legal fees.

"We're in limbo as to whether, if or when it's going to proceed," he said.

"They're unable to claim any of those costs under the Act until such time as the land is actually taken."

Surat Basin Rail CEO Allan Miller says the rail line will be built on a slower time frame because of challenging market conditions.

The State Government says it is disappointed with the latest development.

Deputy Premier Jeff Seeney says landholders should seek compensation for expenses accrued over the discontinued notices of intention to resume.

[SteelPan]

This project was proposed, like a dozen other "all set to happen" projects, by the "Inland Rail" mob over the last decade and a half.  They've taken a lot of people up a lot dry gully's over the many years past.

The state govt have now made it very clear, 1) they never liked the previous exclusive mandate arrangement, 2) any extension to the now expired previous mandate would need to be of a "long term" nature, meaning the Surat Rail project is still some years off and 3) land holders (and others) who've been waiting and waiting and waiting on this "all set to roll" project have been, are been and sadly may continue to be put through considerable emotional and fiscal uncertainty while these "experts" continue to expect the rest of the community to effectively subsidise them!

I hope in 2013, the state govt has enough sense to open the Surat Rail project up to other parties who can REALLY deliver - they deserve any future success! 

[colinw]

Surat Basin Rail is in limbo for a good reason - Xstrata has placed a hold on their Wandoan project due to adverse market conditions and increased state royalties which make it a marginal economic proposition.

Without Wandoan coal going ahead, there will be no Surat Basin Rail. To build it without Xstrata committing to their mine and to using the line would be financially irresponsible.

I agree that the Inland rail mob have been mostly a load of hot air. I wonder how that tree at Goondiwindi is going?

[mufreight]

I agree that the Inland rail mob have been mostly a load of hot air. I wonder how that tree at Goondiwindi is going?

The tree died, the plaque has been stolen and the length of rail was still lying in the weeds a couple of years ago.
Need any more be said.   

[mufreight]

There is obviously some confusion here as there are two seperate projects, the first is the Inland railway from the NSW border supposedly to go to Brisbane for the SG traffic then there is the other inland rail link which is intended to provide a link that will allow mainly coal traffic to be routed through Wandoan to Bannana and to Gladstone which is supposed to be constructed initally as a NG line but laid using DG sleepers to enable operation of SG trains.
The present proposals are for the SG line to be built from North Star in NSW to cross the border at Carrington to join the existing ng line as far as Inglewood then to Millmerran to Gowrie west of Toowoomba with the line to be extended at a future time down the range to join the existing ng line as far as Rosewood then accross to join the SG line in the region of Kagaru/Tamrookum.
The absurdity of constructing the line via Gowrie (Toowoomba) rather than via Warwick which would add at least 1 1/2 hours on to the transit time (and additional cost) for freight into Brisbane disadvantaging rail freight against competing road freight services obviously has not been lost on investors who have not come to the party.

[mufreight]

Themajority of freight would come from WA, Whyalla and Adelaide and Melbourne.
Traffic from Melbourne routed via Cootamundra, Gorbang Junction (Parkes) and up the inland line if via Thane (Warwick) to Tamrookum and then to Brisbane would be time competive with road freight. and have a pricing advantage.
Loading from the west gains even more in time competivness with the potential advantage of double stacking bringing a cost advantage and avoiding any conflict with overhead wireing which would occour it the line were to be routed via Toowoomba.
Such a line if it is ever built would remove any need for the construction of dual gauge to Moree.

As for a standard gauge line from the Down coal fields into the Gladstone coal terminal there are a number of advantadges in that trains could operate with higher payloads, 100 tonnes per waggon as against about 70 tonnes per waggon on the central Queensland ng lines and a 40 tonnes per waggon on the trains operating into the Port of Brisbane.

[colinw]

Via Warwick is not happening any time soon, for the same reason the original Via Recta remained unbuilt between Mt Edwards & Maryvale.  The terrain there is horrendous, and any credible route with 1:80 or 1:100 grades would involve tunneling & viaducts on a heroic scale, with a negative cost/benefit ratio.

Frankly, the whole inland rail scheme is an insane boondoggle, and any Government that puts even a single dollar toward it has no sense whatsoever.

We need our existing regional & interstate networks brought up to a reasonable standard, not completely insane spending on pipe-dreams like this.

If you did want to cross the main range by rail anywhere between the border & north of Toowoomba, the best option is roughly along the route of the Gatton to Clifton Road, a far more gentle ascent of the divide than any other in the region.  But even then it is going to cost a fortune to provide a route with better than 1:40 gradients.

There will be no commercial investors in any such scheme, and any Government supporting it is playing fast & loose with your tax dollars to the detriment of other more pressing needs.

[somebody]

What is so important about having easier than 1:40 gradients for intermodal?  Approaching Sydney from the Hawkesbury R and approaching Junee from Sydney both see that level of grade.

[SurfRail]

I'm not certain I agree with colin on this one.  Sydney is going to be virtually impassible in the coming years even with the various freight upgrades happening there and the recent works on the north coast route.  There needs to be a decent route around Sydney, even if it isn't quite as advanced as the ones floating around.

Basically, we should be seeking to be as free from the mercy of RailCorp and the NSW Government as possible, since they are so demonstrably crap at implementing projects on time or on budget.

[mufreight]

What is so important about having easier than 1:40 gradients for intermodal?  Approaching Sydney from the Hawkesbury R and approaching Junee from Sydney both see that level of grade.

The opportunity exists with the inland line to not only avoid gradients of 1:40 but also to have higher transit speeds and double stacking, because gradients of 1:25 were used in the 1800's does not mean that we should persist with alignments to the standards of that era today.

An alignment following the existing ng line from Carrington to Thane then bypassing Warwick to the north through to Murphys Gap rather than Maryvale then with a tunnel through the range gives a far more direct line.
Yes there is a long tunnel, aprox 5.5 km through the main range and two relatively short tunnels of less than 1km near Boonah for the line to reach the existing SG line at a point between Bromelton and Tamrookum where the Qld Government has commenced work on a large industrial estate.

It will be a tragedy if the Inland line is not built but if constructed via Gowrie as proposed it will commit rail to a position of never being able to compete with road either on a cost basis or time which will in its own way be as big a tragedy with an ongoing ecenomic disadvantage to the state.

[somebody]

I certainly can't see double stacking through Sydney!

[mufreight]

I certainly can't see double stacking through Sydney!

I have not found any suggestion anywhere in this thread of double stacking through Sydney, at the present time double stacking takes place from the West as far as Gobang Junction (Parkes) so it would be possible to improve clerances on the route from Gorbang Junction north on the Inland line into Acacia Ridge, the economies of operation would give rail a competitive edge over road freight.  A further extension of double stacking operation would be possible by improving vertical clerances on the line south from Gobang Junction to Cootamundra and through to Melbourne.

The operation of double stacking through the Sydney area is unlikely without the construction of a high clearance freight route without overhead and the raising of many overbridges, it could be done but the levels of disruption and the cost make it highly improbable.

[somebody]

I read somewhere that the issues for DS between southern Sydney Freight Line and Nth Mel and out to Parkes by Coota is actually not much. Once the SSFL is complete there maybe a project to fix the remaining issues. DS Syd-Mel is probably not a huge criteria at this time.

I'd have to imagine that is assuming some curve reduction is also done.  I'm fairly sure there are a number of short tunnels in the part to Goulburn from Sydney.

[mufreight]

I read somewhere that the issues for DS between southern Sydney Freight Line and Nth Mel and out to Parkes by Coota is actually not much. Once the SSFL is complete there maybe a project to fix the remaining issues. DS Syd-Mel is probably not a huge criteria at this time.

I'd have to imagine that is assuming some curve reduction is also done.  I'm fairly sure there are a number of short tunnels in the part to Goulburn from Sydney.

Apart from road overbridges there are a few rail bridges that would require raising the truss ties, in some cases this is not feasable and the bridge itself will require replacement, this also applies to a number of bridges on the proposed inland route.
As is the case with the line between Maitland and Kyogle there are a number of locations along the proposed inland line where curve realignment and grade easing works could be progressively undertaken to reduce transit times as well as upgrading the track standards to give heavier axle loads.