Gold & Sunshine Coast Regional Rapid Rail (formerly HSR thread)

[aldonius]

As for using the existing CBD tunnels or CRR for standard gauge anything: not happening.

If we ever do get HSR it'll be purpose built corridor. If nothing else, by the time we could use HSR, CRR will be full with normal services anyway.  HSR might well displace Gold and Sunshine Coast services, but that will just serve to free up capacity for Caboolture, Kippa-Ring, Beenleigh and Flagstone.

[#Metro]

A key issue is Central Station access, both from the GC and the SC.

1. Can standard gauge trains get into platforms etc?

2. If not, is Roma Street termination viable (i.e. in and out via Ekka Loop)

[SurfRail]

^ The issue is no different than for CRR (ie if you want to get to Central, you transfer).

[#Metro]

Thanks, I agree Roma St termination and transfer might work but it doesn't really answer my main question. Currently Sunshine Coast trains pass through Roma St, Central, Valley, Bowen Hills, etc, and I wanted to know whether this was possible with a larger gauge train.

[ozbob]

Thanks, I agree Roma St termination and transfer might work but it doesn't really answer my main question. Currently Sunshine Coast trains pass through Roma St, Central, Valley, Bowen Hills, etc, and I wanted to know whether this was possible with a larger gauge train.

No, not as it is.  It could be engineered to make a larger loading gauge but at what cost?

[#Metro]

It would have to be done with CRR, or SC trains would have to depart from Roma Street and then access via Ekka Loop.

On a side note: I think it is sad that something like Clem 7 tunnel can go from Wooloongabba to Bowen Hills, dig under the Brisbane River but we can't get a (wider) train to go from Roma St to Bowen Hills.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Wider trains should not be onthe same netqwork as our suburban trains.

[#Metro]

Wider trains should not be onthe same netqwork as our suburban trains.

But they already are. You have freight trains to the port on the Cleveland line which is triple rail.

You coal trains running around on it also (NG) and the odd CountryLink also (limited).

[Gazza]

-The odd country link train is at 4am, and is scheduled then precisely so it doesn't impact peak hour.

-The freight line to Cleveland is dual gauge yes, but its a 3rd, non electrified track that has no platform faces, and a dedicated flyover at park road.
When CRR is built that means interstate trains will not have to share tracks to reach the port.

The point is, best practice (and indeed the direction As is finally heading) is to separate different types of rail traffic, eg regional rail link means v line trains don't interfere with metro trains.
Another example is the southern Sydney freight line.

Perth leads the country, freight and transperth trains are totally separate, except where they merge over the Fremantle bridge.

It would be hillarous if they spent billions on 250 km/h trains to the GC/SC, only to have them frequently delayed by "congestion at bowen hills" or "police incidents", or just having to travel slowly for several kilometers as they approach central Brisbane, erasing a lot of the time savings HSR is meant to bring.

A fully separated HSR system is the way to go.

[SurfRail]

^ and they shouldn't be to the furthest extent reasonably possible.

You can basically eliminate freight from everywhere on the metropolitan system except for some corridors and very, very occasional movements like the odd cattle train by taking the following steps:

- Inland Rail corridor built from west of Rosewood into Bromelton - removes all freight from the Rosewood and Ipswich lines by providing alternative access to NSW through Milmerran, to NSW and the PoB via Bromelton.  The only Ipswich line freight would be local traffic (eg Dinmore cattle) or if something was going from west of Rosewood to north of Brisbane (which is unlikely and can be better dealt with as set out further below).

- Dedicated connection between Bromelton and Port of Brisbane - removes any need for trains coming from the direction of Bromelton to use the inner Beenleigh or Cleveland lines.  This would probably be south of Acacia Ridge.  Depending on the configuration, access may need to be retained between Acacia Ridge / Moolabin and the PoB via the current route, but use would be much less than now (especially with the other 2 immediately below).

- CRR to Yeerongpilly as per ultimate 2012 scope - eliminates any need to use the DG track for electric passenger trains, so it can be reserved exclusively for trains from Moolabin and Acacia Ridge to the PoB, and the XPT.

- Add a passing loop to the existing Cleveland DG track so freight does not interact with the Cleveland line at all after using the flyover.  May or may not even be required depending on volumes.

With all that in place there would be virtually no need for any interaction between freight and passenger trains other than:

- NCL anywhere between Albion and further north (where freight switches over to the Ekka loop)
- Ekka loop (which is going to be nearly 100% out of service passenger trains)
- Roma Street west junctions to Sherwood (where freight switches over to Tennyson to get to Moolabin, Acacia Ridge or the PoB)
- Roma Street west junctions to Buranda (short-cut to the above after-hours when the Merivale lines are less busy)

You could even minimise the freight task on these corridors if the Surat Basin railway is built.  That would let you run freight directly from Gladstone and points north into NSW and beyond without needing to transit through Brisbane, and it would provide an alternative route into Brisbane via the Inland line to Bromelton.  Built properly to take 1,800m consists on a good alignment, it might be cheaper and offer comparable travel times to Brisbane (or be cheap enough due to the longer trains that it outweighs the time advantage the NCL would have).  You also wouldn't need to spend quite so much upgrading the NCL south of Gladstone.  The local freight task on this stretch of the NCL would have more room to grow as well.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Wider trains should not be onthe same netqwork as our suburban trains.

But they already are. You have freight trains to the port on the Cleveland line which is triple rail.

How often do you think dual gauge trains actually continue onto the port of Brisbane??

[ozbob]

The last one was years ago I think ..   

[#Metro]

RACQ calls for Steve Irwin Way duplication to battle traffic

Motorists on the Bruce Highway on Sunday faced delays of up to two hours after a fatal motorbike accident and the congestion flowed over onto Steve Irwin Way, leaving those heading south at the end of the weekend few options to avoid the traffic.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/racq-calls-for-steve-irwin-way-duplication-to-battle-traffic-20160404-gny29l.html

Same thing happens during holidays etc.

This is why upgraded rail (200-250 km/hour) would have an advantage I think. It's fast and has capacity that can be expanded.

[#Metro]

Notification

I have renamed this thread from HSR to MSR. Happy to hear comment about it.

I think the tern HSR has a lot of this futuristic 'baggage' associated with it which is not helping.

Trains going at 200 - 250 km with upgrades for regional transport is entirely reasonable IMHO and there is a move to it in Victoria with the

higher speed V/Locity trains.

The Bruce Highway will have billions and billions spent on it. It would be better to have some of those funds spent on upgrades to the rail line IMHO that would solve the main issues that cause people not to use it: slow speed and poor service.

[#Metro]

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/infrastructure/single-view/view/dual-gauge-to-enable-high-speed-to-madrid-airport.html

SPAIN: The cabinet has given its approval for the Ministry of Development to spend €15·86m on equipping the rail link to Barajas Airport in Madrid for dual-gauge operation, enabling high speed services to use the new €190m route from Chamartín.

[verbatim9]

A key issue is Central Station access, both from the GC and the SC.

1. Can standard gauge trains get into platforms etc?

2. If not, is Roma Street termination viable (i.e. in and out via Ekka Loop)

Aren't the Gold Coast Trains series 260 and NGR the same width as a standard guage train? Only the wheel sets are narrow guage which can be converted to standard if the tracks are widened?

[Gazza]

Wider trains should not be onthe same netqwork as our suburban trains.

But they already are. You have freight trains to the port on the Cleveland line which is triple rail.

How often do you think dual gauge trains actually continue onto the port of Brisbane??

Is a dual gauge train like a maglev bus?

[#Metro]

I get a lot of criticism thrown my way for merely exploring the idea of concepts.

I get even more criticism when I find that parts of the proposals are actually workable.

The QR electrical systems are HSR compatible. There is also a precedent in Sydney where existing rail alignments can be converted to different

modes.


For example, CityRail alignments are being converted to metro. Now there they have the opposite issue - the track is fine but I think the

metro has a different electrical system.

http://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au/news/game-changer/moncrieff-mp-steve-ciobo-pushes-gold-coast-to-rail-company-mtr-corporation-for-fast-trains-on-east-coast-of-australia/news-story/1dac41bf35efee449d484902e79ec183

Transport and M1 congestion is at the top of the wish list from residents.

A spokesman for advocacy group Rail Back on Track, Robert Dow, said the Coast to Brisbane route would have high patronage and could be a testbed for a future east coast fast rail network.

"The first cab off the rank as far as we're concerned could be Brisbane to the Gold Coast, without a doubt at all," he said.

There is also this from 7 News, featuring Jeff Addison (can't embed this)

https://twitter.com/7NewsQueensland/status/720173976429826049


I am against HSR between capital cities at this point in time. But upgrading specific QR corridors Brisbane - Gold Coast and Brisbane -

Sunshine Coast to have trains run 200 km/hr - 250 km/hour is entirely reasonable and would capture all existing patronage and then more on

top of that. There is no competition between rail and air along such short distances.


Instead of trying to compete against planes, fast rail should focus on competing against motorway lanes which are restricted to 100 km/hour

or so and have limited capacity (2000 pphd/lane) over shorter regional distances.


Access through the Brisbane CBD can be solved if the CRR tunnel is designed such that it can accommodate standard gauge trains at some

point in the future. It would also permit access to the Sunshine Coast in a future stage if done properly.

[petey3801]

You get a lot of criticism because people are getting sick of having your opinion rammed down their throats whether they like it or not.

Yes, QR's electrical supply is the same as HSR. Whoopty-doo. So are many, many other rail systems around the world. Doesn't mean jack. Even if they weren't compatible and the HSR trains for some reason had to use the QR tracks (leaving out the whole wrong gauge thing), there are plenty examples of dual power HSR trains around, such as the Thalys (which is, in fact, triple power, some are even quad power I believe).

There are so many other factors involved, power supply systems is one of the lowest things on the list.

Narrow gauge is more than suitable to have 200km/h trains to the Gold and Sunshine Coasts. Stand alone standard gauge is a waste of money, lacks flexibility when things go wrong etc. It requires completely seperate infrastructure maintenance vehicles, completely seperate rollingstock, completely seperate depot purely for a few stranded SG investments.

Also, you do realise that for HSR/MSR to succeed, it needs to have very few stations. No point having a 200-250km/h train running all (current) stations Beenleigh to the Gold Coast. 160km/h is around the highest speed that is useful for the current line. To increase speed means to reduce stations, to the point that having any more than one station between Beenleigh and Robina makes the higher speed redundant. That also means much less patronage capture, less mobility around the coast than current line etc.
High speed trains take a lot of distance to accellerate and to come to a stop. The time at the top speed needs to be worth actually getting to that speed to start with.

Keeping things as narrow gauge makes things much easier in the grand scheme of things. Narrow gauge means it can use CRR if that route ends up being used, without extra costly inclusions to make it SG compatible. It means if something goes wrong, the trains can be routed around the problem (say, for instance, the M1 corridor is closed for maintenance: The GC trains can then be routed back on the BNH line back to the City, etc). It means the trains can be maintained in current maintenance centres, stabled in current stabling, the tracks can be maintained with current infrastructure machines, and so on and so forth. As long as a new (if ever built) M1 corridor is built to be gauge convertable if, IF an East Coast HSR line is built, that should be all that matters for the time being. Any new SG link will be put through a new corridor in to the City anyway, as by the time it is built (if ever), CRR will be more than filled up with QR commuter trains.

Side note: East coast HSR is not only capital to capital. It is also about capital to regional and regional to regional. The generally accepted 'rule of thumb' is 3.5hrs by train will achieve roughly 50-50 patronage with air travel. 3hrs or less will capture majority market share for HSR between capitals.

[#Metro]

Not everyone has the benefit of the experience of working in the rail industry etc, nor should they be expected to be.

If I see an idea that I don't agree with then I say that and list out my reasons, or I just ignore it and move on.

What I don't do is call for censuring / censoring.


If an idea is unsound or flawed, that will come out of the discussions in good time.


There are people who want daylight saving on this forum, or rail services to port of Brisbane, or frequent rail between Toowoomba and

Brisbane, regular rail services on exhibition, or reopening of the Tennyson line/Tennyson station, HSR between capital cities, and so on.

Outside this forum, there are people promoting anti-Vax and fluoride as poison.


Do I  care if people write about these things despite the fact I disagree with them? Not really. Far more unusual things get debated in places

like City Hall (Quirk Metro, road tunnels from Buranda to Indooroopilly), Parliament (HSR, East-West Link) and so forth.

[#Metro]

petey3801, you rightly point out that the alignment between Brisbane and Gold Coast needs to be straightened out as it is an 1800s relic.

The reason why I raised SG dual gauging as an option was because I was not certain if the higher speeds can be accessed with narrow gauge.

In addition to this, this approach is used to deliver the SG XPT from Sydney into Brisbane over the narrow gauge QR network. So it is not

without precedent.


In addition to this, as you are well aware, before federation the states could not agree on a standard gauge. As capital cities were not

connected back then anyway, and networks were localised around cities, it did not matter much then. However, later on, networks grew and

were incompatible.  If the Gold Coast line were upgraded to higher speed, then it is valid to ask whether or not that should be compatible with

further extension southwards, or if people are comfortable with limiting it to the Gold Coast and no further.


What I am interested is whether narrow gauge trains can reach speeds of at least 200 km/hr or 250 km/hour in regular service. So I put that

question to you - can they do that? Never mind about the wiggly alignment between Beenleigh and Brisbane. The alignment could be

straightened with time.

Brisbane-Beenleigh probably needs to be quad track all the way from Brisbane to Beenleigh and two tracks could be reserved exclusively for

Gold Coast services so that the high speed or express trains being caught behind the Beenleigh all stoppers are not an issue as well.

[Gazza]

I think the point Petey is making is that there is a difference between having your opinion, and spamming that opinion repeatedly.

[#Metro]

This is a foam thread. It is in the foam section and it is signed and posted with warnings as such.

[#Metro]

I think I will look into this over the next week or so. It might be sufficient for task and QR already has experience operating tilts.
It already runs in the NCL.

Queensland High-Speed Line, Australia
http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/queensland/

Operator Queensland Rail

Opening date 1998-2001
Route length (Brisbane-Rockhampton) 639km (397 miles)
Route length (Brisbane-Cairns) 1,681km (1,045 miles)
Maximum line speed 160km/h (100mph)
Gauge 1,067mm (3ft 6in)
Voltage 25kV

[aldonius]

What matters is alignment and station spacing - getting up to speed and staying up to speed. A 160 km radius from Brisbane CBD will get you north of Gympie and south of Byron. 95 km radius will get you Nambour or the border.

[#Metro]

Yes, good points Aldonius.

Station spacing will not be so much of an issue on the SC line if the services are express and the track is amplified to support that.

Trouts Rd would help that enormously, but then that has to connect back into the current system - it is harder to see how that would work

unless there was more tunnels to Roma Street linking to CRR.


For the Gold Coast, there is a nice big express section between Park Road and Beenleigh (2 stops currently). The alignment is wiggly as we all

know, so that would have to change as well.

[#Metro]

I had some more thought about this. There are broadly two ways to go about this.

1. Upgrade the current network (smooth curves, tilt trains etc)

2. Start something new


OPTION #1 really does not break with the legacy of the network. The narrow gauge is from pre-federation and if there were to be

a HSR network in the future, it would need to plug into SEQ Regional Rapid Rail to get into Brisbane, in a similar way the XPT plugs

(sort of) into the QR network into Brisbane. It would need to meet a national standard, which would likely be standard gauge, not

narrow gauge. We would not want to repeat the rail gauge problems Australia had in the 1800s. Speeds would be limited to 160

km/hour and it would be incompatible with a future HSR.


OPTION #2 means that SEQ Regional Rapid Rail can be built for purpose rather than built for compromise. It would allow a future HSR

to plug into it, and rollingstock would be easier as standard gauge is standard across the world. While it would require its own

dedicated trains, maintenance and depot, this is accepted for a system that converts from buses to light rail.

Nobody says 'Oh, light rail, you would need to build a new depot because it can't use the existing bus depot,  and you need to

maintain wires and you need different  mechanics to work on the vehicles etc, IT'S JUST TOO HARD!'


It is just accepted that it is a new system and that it is custom designed. It could also be single driver operated, unlike QR trains which

require two staff per train.


For decades QR had to maintain different trains. They had steam to start with, then introduce diesel trains, and run freight trains

on a passenger network at the same time, and then add electrics etc. They run tilt trains which probably have different requirements

again. They have to maintain electrical systems, whereas with diesel etc they did not.  I am sure in overseas places they would have

different depots for U-Bahns, S-Bahns and ICE trains, each with their own individual maintainence requirements.


So I don't think its a valid argument actually. It is just a choice. It might just be part of running a rail operation that is specialised for a

different, regional task.

[#Metro]

I have updated the SEQ Regional Rapid Rail map ---> http://tiny.cc/SEQHSR


SEQ Regional Rapid Rail

(NB: later thread discussions may modify this proposal greatly)

The QR system would focus on Brisbane City and Ipswich

The thing about the QR system is that it really is more like a metro with the station spacing. So it could be run like a metro, provided

capacity issues are solved and more trains ran all day (15 minutes all lines). Metros generally don't run far out of cities because the

number of stations becomes so high the journey times exceed the travel time budget people have (Marchetti Constant).


So I have added purple lines to delineate the Northern and Southern maximum extents for the QR CityTrain Network. It's rough and

might change with feedback, but basically, anything outside those lines would really be better suited to a Regional Rapid Rail service

specifically designed for higher speed over longer distances.


Regional Rapid Rail for Gold and Sunshine Coasts

North

QR trains would travel as far as Kippa-Ring, but would not continue to Dakabin, Burpengary, Caboolture etc as

areas north of the purple boundary line would be getting SEQ Regional Rapid Rail access. The travel times on the QR network out that

way are greater than 40 minutes. It would be faster to just use a new network. Trouts Road would be built to standard gauge to allow

SEQ Regional Rapid Rail trains to access the CBD/Roma Street.


South

The Beenleigh line is a mess with curves, and close stations. It does not seem like a good investment to spend lots of money on ironing

that out and then only having trains that are limited in speed to 160 km/hour and close station spacing that would negate high speed

anyway. It seems more appropriate to treat it as a metro system with close station spacing, rather than a long distance corridor to

access the Gold Coast. For this reason, Beenleigh line trains would terminate at Beenleigh and go no further than that.


Gold Coast

Gold Coast trains would have a gauge change to standard gauge and be separated from the QR network. From Beenleigh to the

Brisbane CBD, the Beenleigh line would not be used for Gold Coast services. Instead, a new M1 alignment is used to get into the

Brisbane CBD. Again this raises questions about CRR. If the purpose of CRR is to deal with growth from Gold Coast commuters, then

SEQ Regional Rapid Rail would need to run through the CRR tunnel. The Beenleigh trains would continue to run over the Merivale

Bridge, and with all the GC trains deleted from the Beenleigh line, there would be space freed up. The CRR tunnel would have to

accommodate the future possibility of standard gauge track.


It would be rather pointless if the Gold Coast line was upgraded to Rapid Rail but then the trains couldn't get into the Brisbane CBD

because the track wouldn't fit into the tunnel and another special 'Gold Coast/HSR only' tunnel had to be drilled.


If a HSR from NSW were ever to be built, the network would be HSR compatible. The HSR could plug into it maybe around Acacia Ridge

or whatnot. It would not be plugging in at the Gold Coast / Coolangatta end of the line. That means interstate pax do not have to

get caught behind all stops Gold Coast Regional Rapid Rail trains.


A controversial proposal would be to suggest that lanes be taken away from the M1 and be given to the SEQ Regional Rapid Rail

proposal. It could be justified on the following grounds: (a) the train is 2x faster than the cars, (b) the line has a capacity of 12 000

pphd, whereas the car lanes it is replacing would only carry 1200 - 1500 pphd at best, and (c) land acquisition costs for the new

rail corridor are very significantly reduced compared to having to do one from scratch and have property resumptions etc.


This M1 alignment is similar to an idea that Gazza once mentioned in the forum. I think his argument was that the SE busway

should have been QR rail from the beginning and run to the Gold Coast along the M1 alignment rather than the legacy Beenleigh

line with its twists and turns.

[#Metro]

So far the map looks like (work in progress):

North

Maroochydore Central
Kawana
Caloundra
Bells Creek (future)
Caboolture
Burpengary
North Lakes
Aspley (Nth busway can connect here)

Roma Street
(CRR Tunnel- Standard Gauge)

Trouts Road corridor would be used to separate SEQ Regional Rapid Rail from the Brisbane QR Network.

Estimated Travel Time to Maroochydore Central - 30-40 minutes. (200 - 250 km/hour)

South

Roma Street
(CRR Tunnel- Standard Gauge)
Springwood (Sth busway can connect here)
Beenleigh
Ormeau
Coomera
Helensvale
Nerang
Robina
Varsity Lakes
Palm Beach
Coolangatta Airport

Estimated Travel Time to Beenleigh 10 minutes. (200 - 250 km/hour)

Gold Coast Stations - add 30-40 minutes. So around 50 minutes to Coolangatta Airport (not exact).


The M1 alignment would be used to take SEQ Regional Rapid Rail trains out of the Brisbane CBD and to Beenleigh.

At Beenleigh, the existing Gold Coast alignment (repurposed) would be used. The Gold Coast line would be separated and removed

from the Brisbane QR network (similar to how parts of the Sydney CityRail network are being repurposed for Sydney Metro).

General Comments
Potential depot locations indicated.
Work in progress.

[petey3801]

Gazza is 100% correct, I was meaning the constant spamming of your opinion everywhere (not just this thread). The above is exactly my point: 4 posts in a row spamming your opinion. Cool it down a bit and people might start looking at your opinions again. As for the rest of it, i'll reply to that later when I have time and am not on a phone. But until then, get the idea of HSR "plugging in to the QR network like the XPT", if HDR is ever built it will take its own alignment in to/out of the City. No point building a HSR East Coast line and then plugging it in to the current commuter routes in Brisbane, then saying "Sorry, we need all these paths for commuter trains in peak, no room for HSR trains 6am-9am and 4pm-7pm". It won't want to be sitting in behind local trains in to the City, it won't be stopping at Boggo Rd, W'gabba, Albert street etc. It will make one single stop at a terminus station.

[HappyTrainGuy]

petey3801, you rightly point out that the alignment between Brisbane and Gold Coast needs to be straightened out as it is an 1800s relic.

The reason why I raised SG dual gauging as an option was because I was not certain if the higher speeds can be accessed with narrow gauge.

In addition to this, this approach is used to deliver the SG XPT from Sydney into Brisbane over the narrow gauge QR network. So it is not

without precedent.


In addition to this, as you are well aware, before federation the states could not agree on a standard gauge. As capital cities were not

connected back then anyway, and networks were localised around cities, it did not matter much then. However, later on, networks grew and

were incompatible.  If the Gold Coast line were upgraded to higher speed, then it is valid to ask whether or not that should be compatible with

further extension southwards, or if people are comfortable with limiting it to the Gold Coast and no further.


What I am interested is whether narrow gauge trains can reach speeds of at least 200 km/hr or 250 km/hour in regular service. So I put that

question to you - can they do that? Never mind about the wiggly alignment between Beenleigh and Brisbane. The alignment could be

straightened with time.

Brisbane-Beenleigh probably needs to be quad track all the way from Brisbane to Beenleigh and two tracks could be reserved exclusively for

Gold Coast services so that the high speed or express trains being caught behind the Beenleigh all stoppers are not an issue as well.

And I've said several times and in different threads when this keeps getting mentioned. The tilts can push over 200kph so there is potential to build a narrow gauge train able to push 200kph. The current official highest speed for a train in Australia is the ETT in the 210-220 mark along with rumor having it and the DTT being pushed even further in testing. And quite a lot of the existing rollingstock can already push 160kph but there are reasons as to why they don't. Passenger comfort in curves, station spacing, noise, wear rates, infrastructure etc etc etc. Remember when the SMU220 had a few high speed mods? The 2 downfalls of the software mods was that components suddenly experienced higher wear rates from vibration along with internal noise increasing. But even on the existing network 160kph is literally the most you need due to station spacing. Remember if you want higher top speeds you have to change the gearing. Your acceleration rate will slow down which puts even more constraints on hitting top speed before slowing down for the next station. I also bring up the SMU issue again. When the train gets faster you need to add more noise protection to each carriage. This increases the weight/room and design such as how you attach doors to the train and the two carriages together. So you start limiting the amount of doors but now boarding time has slowed and it just drags on and on. You can start looking at composite materials but then you look at the price tag. No matter what way you look at it it then becomes such a stupid idea. You could build it but you are effectively talking about getting the current ETTs to now go from long distance services to operating short haul suburban work on the Gold Coast line.

And a light rail depot in a bus depot is not the same as a railway depot. You need the service roads. You need the wheel shed. Then you need the cranes. You need the spares. You need the cleaning shed (The NGR will use the existing facilities on the exhibition line remember). You need the equipment. The machinery and the list goes on and on. You can go into more detail and say you need the staff (railway depots are 24/7 and bus depots are usually pretty close to business hours) and now you then need the recovery/mtce trains (that has its own problems. You got to buy your own if you can't connect it to another railway line where you can then pay someone else for the mtce vehicles - remember prior to the QR split the ARTC was paying Queensland Rail to use their rail grinding services for their network in Victoria and NSW ).

Quite a few of us here can go into even further detail about why everything you mentioned simply won't work here. Someone has to pay for all this. It's not just a few bucks. You'd be looking at billions. You have to pay for the mtce infrastructure (mtce facilities, railway mtce vehicles, railway infrastructure services etc), the corridor/infrastructure, the trains, driver training... Its simply 10 minutes from foam central.

Yes, QR has had a lot of trains over the years but a lot of them were interchangeable and worked with each other (either in recovery, in service or in mtce. The Sunlander used to be electric hauled to Rocky before the diesel loco fired up and did Rocky-Cairns. The same with freight trains). They also had the numbers were parts could easily be shared between each other. A few derailments gave them even more spares. And the locos were generally assigned a depot as part of the network where they spend the most of their life. It wasn't uncommon for locos from up north to be sent to Redbank for some mtce/repairs/overhauls. You do not get that with a new gauge operating with other rollingstock on a different gauge across the entire state.

If you really want to get to the city faster with higher capacity you build a new alignment CRR-Beenleigh. You make it 6 car trains with an upgrade to 9 car at a later date. Once Trouts road/Landsborough gets up upgrade to 9 car trains and run them through. CRR was originally planned at 9 car but 'cutting costs' with the famous 7 car trains came up. Its exactly what QR has been planning for quite a while due to how all the stations can easily have station modifications to allow 9 car trains. Did you know the strathpine interchange plans from 2005 or something had plans from Translink/Queensland rail about 9 car trains for Trouts road services?

[Gazza]

Let's short circuit the discussion a bit.

How many stops do you want in the system?
What average station spacing does that spit out?
Once you have an average station spacing, that gives you the optimal max speed you need.

[#Metro]

And I've said several times and in different threads when this keeps getting mentioned. The tilts can push over 200kph so there is potential to build a narrow gauge train able to push 200kph. The current official highest speed for a train in Australia is the ETT in the 210-220 mark along with rumor having it and the DTT being pushed even further in testing.

Yes, but I really wonder if this is just the 'experimental speed record' that isn't for use in general passenger service.

QR hasn't rolled out trains at 200 km/hr on the existing network to Cairns, so I really wonder about the general applicability of this.

However, happy to consider it. There seems to be two general broad options emerging from this.

[#Metro]

Let's short circuit the discussion a bit.

How many stops do you want in the system?
What average station spacing does that spit out?
Once you have an average station spacing, that gives you the optimal max speed you need.

Gazza, current thinking on the concept is here http://tiny.cc/SEQHSR

For the SC line the distance is 102 km (Maroochydore) with 9 stations to the Sunshine Coast (including Roma St and one other station

that would not be built until further development at Bells Ck). That gives average station spacing of 11.3 km for the SC line.


The GC line is different - it has a long fast stretch, one stop in Logan,  and then existing GC stations to deal with. It is 11 stations over 98

km (including Roma Street). That gives an average spacing of 8.9 km for the GC line.

[#Metro]

The above is exactly my point: 4 posts in a row spamming your opinion. Cool it down a bit and people might start looking at your opinions again.

I don't tell people how or what they should or should not write or structure their responses.

It is obvious multiple posts have to be used when a large or complex text/idea is posted, or there are multiple questions from multiple

people on different aspects of the same thing.

[HappyTrainGuy]

And I've said several times and in different threads when this keeps getting mentioned. The tilts can push over 200kph so there is potential to build a narrow gauge train able to push 200kph. The current official highest speed for a train in Australia is the ETT in the 210-220 mark along with rumor having it and the DTT being pushed even further in testing.

Yes, but I really wonder if this is just the 'experimental speed record' that isn't for use in general passenger service.

QR hasn't rolled out trains at 200 km/hr on the existing network to Cairns, so I really wonder about the general applicability of this.

Good luck  ggetting a train to go 100 on the way to  cairns.

[petey3801]

For decades QR had to maintain different trains. They had steam to start with, then introduce diesel trains, and run freight trains

on a passenger network at the same time, and then add electrics etc. They run tilt trains which probably have different requirements

again. They have to maintain electrical systems, whereas with diesel etc they did not.

All on the same gauge and all electrics (apart from the ETT) were/are maintained in the same place, Mayne. Steam and diesel were also maintained there to an extent. Different gauge for a small amount of trains creates a hell of a lot of costs, as has already been said (new SG depot for a small number of trains, all new infrastructure maintenance machines etc.etc.). Think about how much improvement of the current network that could be done for the cost of converting the GC/SC lines, buying new rollingstock for those lines alone, new machines etc.etc.etc.

I am sure in overseas places they would have different depots for U-Bahns, S-Bahns and ICE trains, each with their own individual maintainence requirements.

They most likely do have different depots for the different parts, but then again:
1) One is a metro;
2) One is regional stock;
3) One is high speed intercity stock;
4) Each of those have hundreds of units, not, say, 20 units to maintain. All are also on the same gauge, allowing use of the same infrastructure machines across the three (possible restriction on the metro network, depending on how big the tunnels are).

QR hasn't rolled out trains at 200 km/hr on the existing network to Cairns, so I really wonder about the general applicability of this.

That is becacuse it costs a large amount of money to build tracks to a 200km/h+ alignment. Remember how the east coast HSR project was projected to cost $64-$120billion? Yeah, Brisbane to Cairns is a very similar distance to Brisbane to Melbourne. Also notice how nowhere in Australia has bothered getting trains up to more than 160km/h service speed? Same problem, $$$$$$.
There is nothing stopping anyone from building a 200km/h narrow gauge railway, it just costs $$ that is often better spent elsewhere at this point.

It is obvious multiple posts have to be used when a large or complex text/idea is posted, or there are multiple questions from multiple

people on different aspects of the same thing.

Uhh, no, multiple posts do NOT have to be used anywhere near as much as you use them. Nobody on this forum uses multiple posts apart from Bob who does for things like posting media releases, new stories etc. Making multiple posts back to back, minutes apart in the same threads is spamming. If you want to seperate different parts of the posts, simply put a bit of space between the two 'paragraphs', such as:



This. Easy to see that it is a new point/part of the post. No need for multiple posts back to back.

I don't tell people how or what they should or should not write or structure their responses.

Probably because nobody else makes back to back posts all the time, giving people the s##ts.

If the Gold Coast line were upgraded to higher speed, then it is valid to ask whether or not that should be compatible with

further extension southwards, or if people are comfortable with limiting it to the Gold Coast and no further.

Gold Coast line, if it does get further south than Cooly, will have no need of going any further south than Byron Bay, possibly Ballina at the absolute limit. No need for interconnectivity between the NSW SG network and the GC line. And that's a massive, massive IF it gets extended past the border.

What I am interested is whether narrow gauge trains can reach speeds of at least 200 km/hr or 250 km/hour in regular service. So I put that

question to you - can they do that?

Can't see why not. I can't find where you said it at the moment, but you said something along the lines of 'Not everyone has railway related experience'. Maybe you should actually start listening to the people who DO have experience in the different fields instead of simply ignoring them and continuing on with your crusades.

For the SC line the distance is 102 km (Maroochydore) with 9 stations to the Sunshine Coast (including Roma St and one other station

that would not be built until further development at Bells Ck). That gives average station spacing of 11.3 km for the SC line.


The GC line is different - it has a long fast stretch, one stop in Logan,  and then existing GC stations to deal with. It is 11 stations over 98

km (including Roma Street). That gives an average spacing of 8.9 km for the GC line.

For that sort of station spacing, 160km/h is more than enough. Any higher than that and the trains won't actually make it to their top speed and in the rare instance that they do, they will not be there for very long at all (1, 2mins max).
To give you an idea of train operations:
The 160/260s have the fastest accelleration of all current QR units (700s will have slightly better accelleration with a 140km/h top speed), with their top speed of 130km/h.
These units take approx 700m to stop comfortably and approximately 1km to get to their top speed (130km/h). Those rates increase exponentially. For example, 60km/h to stop is comfortable at 150m. 80km/h to 60km/h at the same comfortable decell rate takes 150m, stopping distance approx 300m. Thats double the stopping distance for 20km/h extra speed. For something geared for 160km/h running, increase that to, say, 1km+ to stop comfortably, 1.5-2km, possibly more, to get to top speed, depending on gearing. 200km/h? Likely be looking at 3-4km to stop comfortably, 5km or more to get to top speed (educated guess). Pointless with station spacing of 10km or so. For 200km/h+, you want station spacing of 30km or better to make it worth it, getting higher as the speed gets higher.

[aldonius]

These units take approx 700m to stop comfortably and approximately 1km to get to their top speed (130km/h).

This is super useful info for me at least, thanks! Now I can calculate what the acceleration and deceleration stats are, which means sectional running time calculations for new lines can have pretensions of accuracy (only pretensions, because hills mess this all up). I presume the 700m stopping distance is from 130km/h?

[petey3801]

Yep, from 130km/h. I used to have the accell/decell stats, but no idea where they are nowadays! Those distances are only rough guides though, but relatively accurate.

[#Metro]

Uhh, no, multiple posts do NOT have to be used anywhere near as much as you use them. Nobody on this forum uses multiple posts apart from Bob who does for things like posting media releases, new stories etc. Making multiple posts back to back, minutes apart in the same threads is spamming. If you want to seperate different parts of the posts, simply put a bit of space between the two 'paragraphs', such as:



This. Easy to see that it is a new point/part of the post. No need for multiple posts back to back.

Ozbob, did you have a comment on this? If you look back through this thread, I have always used paragraphs where I was on one text,

and used a separate post where I felt it was necessary.