The Sunshine Coast Case : Rail duplication Beerburrum to Nambour

[#Metro]

You are ignoring the timing issue, the red pin near the core won't happen until 2016, the red pin on the NCL is there now.

Not sure how to find out the NPV for the NCL.
I'd also be interested to see the breakdown of the $9 billion NPV for CRR.

Yes, but my point was that in any choice of alternatives some projects will have a higher benefit than others, and that the BCR alone is not enough information
to inform a judgement.

How much would the NCL upgrade cost?

There is an intrinsic difference between importance and urgency. Something can be important but not urgent...

Again, I am not convinced until I see a size for the benefit of the NCL upgrade. Then we can compare.
If the size of the benefit of a project cannot be expressed in dollar terms, then the case is already on shaky foundations because it will be hard to
convince anyone to support something where the benefits cannot be quantified in common terms.

[#Metro]

Sorry, but this is just another of your false dichotomies.

The NCL upgrade does not cost anything near what CRR costs.  It can easily be done without going to IA or private enterprise, simply by reprioritising some funding and driving some efficiency.

How much will it cost again? The NCL upgrade that is.

You do have a point - CRR is supposed to be paid (ideally) by IA (ATM Australia) so not really competing for the same pot of money is it.
This changes the situation.

The NCL upgrade really should be compared to the alternatives, rather than CRR, as CRR and the NCL are obviously located in different places
and may not be competing for the same $$$ (if ATM Australia hasn't run out of cash, lol).

So the alternatives are
1. Do nothing
2. Do minimum (hmm... more buses I suppose)
3. Do minimum 2 (partial upgrade to rail)
4. Upgrade the Bruce Highway
5. Full rail upgrade

PS: You still need to know how much benefits the NCL upgrade will generate - that's basic stuff. We can calculate this if we know the cost.

[Fares_Fair]

I understand the principle of what you are saying TT,

but what of the benefits of 1500m freight trains as opposed to 650m long ones?
CRR won't allow that for North Quensland and our eastern seaboard, why? there's a bottleneck further up the track.
what of the immediacy for NCL bottleneck removal compared to 2016 deadline for Merivale Street bridge?

CCR, a core capacity upgrade with a Sunshine Coast / NCL bottleneck doesn't assist us in any meaningful way.

@TT, I do not know the NPV for the NCL upgrade.

Allow me to frame the question in a different way.
Suppose you have a red pin and a map of the rail network. The red pin represents a bottleneck.
You have to place the pin somewhere, BUT  you have a choice of placing the pin in one of two locations - on the Merivale Bridge or
on the Sunshine Coast line.

Which bottleneck is worse - one located pretty much next to the core or one located on the SC line?

In this case we are deciding not which option is better, but which option is least worst.

None of this is to say CRR is a higher priority than NCL or vice-versa,  but I think we have to choose.
NPV will shed light on the situation. The benefits of CRR are around $9 billion. The NCL upgrade would have to generate
at least $9 billion worth of benefits to be a higher priority than the NCL in my opinion.

Sorry, but this is just another of your false dichotomies.

The NCL upgrade does not cost anything near what CRR costs.  It can easily be done without going to IA or private enterprise, simply by reprioritising some funding and driving some efficiency.

SR, apart from your incessant false dichotomy line.
If that is the only 'productive' thing you can say about the entire issue.
You have said it.
My arguments stand.

EDIT: Misunderstood this post by SR, apologised in post below.

Nowhere have I said that they offer the same advantages or disadvantages, it is merely predicated upon cost or economy and advantage.
They both serve different purposes, but with common advantages.
CRR isn't needed until 2016 (and yes it would need to be resolved quickly given the timeframe), NCL is needed NOW, and has been since well before 2008.

NCL is part of a national north-south freight corridor and does come under IA jurisdiction on a number of points.

I don't think you realise the total cost of the NCL upgrade.
It was $300m (in 2009) for Beerburrum to Landsborough and around $1.8b (estimate only from 2009 report which may well have some 'space' in it) for Landsborough to Nambour.

I have no information on how many short passing loops there are between here and Cairns, but that would cost extra on top to attain 1500m trains all the way through to Cairns.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[somebody]

$1.8bn seems pretty pricey.  Might be some tunnels at least at one point but still...

[Fares_Fair]

$1.8bn seems pretty pricey.  Might be some tunnels at least at one point but still...

Yes, 2 tunnels, 1 between Landsborough - Mooloolah and 1 between Mooloolah - Eudlo, and a lot of aerial construction.

[SurfRail]

I understand the principle of what you are saying TT,

but what of the benefits of 1500m freight trains as opposed to 650m long ones?
CRR won't allow that for North Quensland and our eastern seaboard, why? there's a bottleneck further up the track.
what of the immediacy for NCL bottleneck removal compared to 2016 deadline for Merivale Street bridge?

CCR, a core capacity upgrade with a Sunshine Coast / NCL bottleneck doesn't assist us in any meaningful way.

@TT, I do not know the NPV for the NCL upgrade.

Allow me to frame the question in a different way.
Suppose you have a red pin and a map of the rail network. The red pin represents a bottleneck.
You have to place the pin somewhere, BUT  you have a choice of placing the pin in one of two locations - on the Merivale Bridge or
on the Sunshine Coast line.

Which bottleneck is worse - one located pretty much next to the core or one located on the SC line?

In this case we are deciding not which option is better, but which option is least worst.

None of this is to say CRR is a higher priority than NCL or vice-versa,  but I think we have to choose.
NPV will shed light on the situation. The benefits of CRR are around $9 billion. The NCL upgrade would have to generate
at least $9 billion worth of benefits to be a higher priority than the NCL in my opinion.

Sorry, but this is just another of your false dichotomies.

The NCL upgrade does not cost anything near what CRR costs.  It can easily be done without going to IA or private enterprise, simply by reprioritising some funding and driving some efficiency.

SR, apart from your incessant false dichotomy line.
If that is the only 'productive' thing you can say about the entire issue.
You have said it.
My arguments stand.

Nowhere have I said that they offer the same advantages or disadvantages, it is merely predicated upon cost or economy and advantage.
They both serve different purposes, but with common advantages.
CRR isn't needed until 2016 (and yes it would need to be resolved quickly given the timeframe), NCL is needed NOW, and has been since well before 2008.

NCL is part of a national north-south freight corridor and does come under IA jurisdiction on a number of points.

I don't think you realise the total cost of the NCL upgrade.
It was $300m (in 2009) for Beerburrum to Landsborough and around $1.8b (estimate only from 2009 report which may well have some 'space' in it) for Landsborough to Nambour.

I have no information on how many short passing loops there are between here and Cairns, but that would cost extra on top to attain 1500m trains all the way through to Cairns.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

My comment was actually directed at TT with his pin the tail on the donkey line.  If you read again I'm actually agreeing with you!

[Fares_Fair]

I understand the principle of what you are saying TT,

but what of the benefits of 1500m freight trains as opposed to 650m long ones?
CRR won't allow that for North Quensland and our eastern seaboard, why? there's a bottleneck further up the track.
what of the immediacy for NCL bottleneck removal compared to 2016 deadline for Merivale Street bridge?

CCR, a core capacity upgrade with a Sunshine Coast / NCL bottleneck doesn't assist us in any meaningful way.

@TT, I do not know the NPV for the NCL upgrade.

Allow me to frame the question in a different way.
Suppose you have a red pin and a map of the rail network. The red pin represents a bottleneck.
You have to place the pin somewhere, BUT  you have a choice of placing the pin in one of two locations - on the Merivale Bridge or
on the Sunshine Coast line.

Which bottleneck is worse - one located pretty much next to the core or one located on the SC line?

In this case we are deciding not which option is better, but which option is least worst.

None of this is to say CRR is a higher priority than NCL or vice-versa,  but I think we have to choose.
NPV will shed light on the situation. The benefits of CRR are around $9 billion. The NCL upgrade would have to generate
at least $9 billion worth of benefits to be a higher priority than the NCL in my opinion.

Sorry, but this is just another of your false dichotomies.

The NCL upgrade does not cost anything near what CRR costs.  It can easily be done without going to IA or private enterprise, simply by reprioritising some funding and driving some efficiency.

SR, apart from your incessant false dichotomy line.
If that is the only 'productive' thing you can say about the entire issue.
You have said it.
My arguments stand.

Nowhere have I said that they offer the same advantages or disadvantages, it is merely predicated upon cost or economy and advantage.
They both serve different purposes, but with common advantages.
CRR isn't needed until 2016 (and yes it would need to be resolved quickly given the timeframe), NCL is needed NOW, and has been since well before 2008.

NCL is part of a national north-south freight corridor and does come under IA jurisdiction on a number of points.

I don't think you realise the total cost of the NCL upgrade.
It was $300m (in 2009) for Beerburrum to Landsborough and around $1.8b (estimate only from 2009 report which may well have some 'space' in it) for Landsborough to Nambour.

I have no information on how many short passing loops there are between here and Cairns, but that would cost extra on top to attain 1500m trains all the way through to Cairns.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

My comment was actually directed at TT with his pin the tail on the donkey line.  If you read again I'm actually agreeing with you!

My sincere apology to you, SR, sorry.
I clearly misread it.

[Stillwater]

The constraints of the Sunshine Coast Line continue to hamper efficient passenger and freight train operations on a single track with short passing loops.  How can the freight-carrying capacity be improved?  A thought came as SES crews were observed alternating traffic flow around a flooded section of road that had been reduced to one lane.  Motorists were guided through the single lane section left open by alternating traffic flow, first one way, then the other. 

On the Brisbane-Cairns run, the passing loops limit the length of each freight train to the length of the passing loop, generally about 650m.

What if freight trains 1500m long were shuttled along the Sunshine Coast Line (and the line further north) on an alternating night basis?

Monday night, all trains south of Rockhampton flow north to south, with no opposing train movements.  On Tuesday, the flow is south to north, no opposing train movements?  And so on - no need to shunt freight trains onto passing loops.

The only safety issue is the distance between long freight trains.  The slowest freight train would govern the speed of all other trains behind, but a lot more freight could be hauled at a lower cost.

[Fares_Fair]

The constraints of the Sunshine Coast Line continue to hamper efficient passenger and freight train operations on a single track with short passing loops.  How can the freight-carrying capacity be improved?  A thought came as SES crews were observed alternating traffic flow around a flooded section of road that had been reduced to one lane.  Motorists were guided through the single lane section left open by alternating traffic flow, first one way, then the other.  

On the Brisbane-Cairns run, the passing loops limit the length of each freight train to the length of the passing loop, generally about 650m.

What if freight trains 1500m long were shuttled along the Sunshine Coast Line (and the line further north) on an alternating night basis?

Monday night, all trains south of Rockhampton flow north to south, with no opposing train movements.  On Tuesday, the flow is south to north, no opposing train movements?  And so on - no need to shunt freight trains onto passing loops.

The only safety issue is the distance between long freight trains.  The slowest freight train would govern the speed of all other trains behind, but a lot more freight could be hauled at a lower cost.

Certainly a question or procedure worth asking about.
Freight does tend to be time critical to meet supplier deadlines.
The reports I have read (ICRCS I think) indicated a speed reduction of 10km/h, from 40km/h down to 30km/h for 1500m freight trains into Brisbane.

[#Metro]

What if freight trains 1500m long were shuttled along the Sunshine Coast Line (and the line further north) on an alternating night basis?

This is what failing to have BASIC MINIMUM INFRASTRUCTURE STANDARDS does.
Would you build a freeway with one lane?

[Fares_Fair]

What if freight trains 1500m long were shuttled along the Sunshine Coast Line (and the line further north) on an alternating night basis?

This is what failing to have BASIC MINIMUM INFRASTRUCTURE STANDARDS does.
Would you build a freeway with one lane?

It's a sign of the desperation involved TT, we are looking for anything and any avenue to improve our lot before duplication.
It's worth pursuing, but yes, duplication will only truly resolve it.

[ozbob]

As suggested a few times before, some 'fleeting' might assist in getting a little more freight capacity, but the root cause needs to be sorted ..

[somebody]

What if freight trains 1500m long were shuttled along the Sunshine Coast Line (and the line further north) on an alternating night basis?

Monday night, all trains south of Rockhampton flow north to south, with no opposing train movements.  On Tuesday, the flow is south to north, no opposing train movements?  And so on - no need to shunt freight trains onto passing loops.

Possible, and you can still have opposing movements just limited by passing loops.  Limitation would then become yard capacity.  Acacia Ridge is good for 1500m, but not Moolabin.  Not sure about the yards up north.

[Stillwater]

Would people build a one-way freeway, TT? Well, yes.  And in Australia too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Expressway

[#Metro]

The expressway is open approximately 22.5 hours per day, one way for over 11 hours in each direction. The northbound (city-bound) direction occurs on weekday mornings (2:00am – 12:30pm) and weekend evenings (2:00pm – 12:30am), the southbound direction on weekday evenings (2:00pm – 12:30am) and weekend mornings (2:00am – 12:30pm).[3] It is closed 12:30am – 2:00am and 12:30pm – 2:00pm, except for Saturday and Monday mornings when the direction remains unchanged. Weekday public holidays also operate under the weekend's opening times to accommodate tourists travelling to the Fleureiu Peninsula. During each closure all road signs, lights and boom gates change over, and the road is inspected by a tow truck contractor for debris and car breakdowns.

^^ Funny how this looks a LOT like many bus routes - act as one way roads, or closed when we want them. And people wonder why more people don't catch PT, well DUH!

That and Adelaide is a transport freak-show...

[Fares_Fair]

No word yet on LNP policy for the Sunshine Coast rail ... 

[Stillwater]

I very much doubt there will be one.  The LNP has faceless men too and they would be sitting on candidates not to make big promises.  It's working -- silence from the local LNP candidates.  The party has calculated the SC seats are 'in the bag', so whatever money the LNP has to throw around will be directed to marginal seats.  The ALP candidates have hardly said 'boo' for the same reason.

The only prospect would be if the LNP thought it could win Nicklin from the independent and promise something like a makeover of Nambour railway station, not that that would do much to relieve congestion on the SCL.

We still have not seen the LNP 'alternative CRR' project, which will cost $$$$.  Neither party is backing down from 15 per cent fare increase, but we may see some reshuffling of the deck chairs re ticketing/fare arrangements beyond the free travel after 9/10 journeys.

[SurfRail]

No word yet on LNP policy for the Sunshine Coast rail ... 

Sad to say but I wouldn't be getting my hopes up.  We'll just have to keep slugging it out.

With a change of government at least your local MPs will be on the right side of the chamber for a change.

[Fares_Fair]

Information for the record ...

Transport and Logistics News June 2010

Up to 45 road deaths could be saved every year if just 15 per cent of 'contestable' road freight was transferred to rail. This was revealed recently in an article published on the latest issue of the Journal of the Australasian College of Road Safety.
"A simple shift to rail of the 15 per cent of road freight said to be transferable (or contestable) could save up to 45 lives annually (calculated on the basis of roughly three deaths for every 1 per cent of freight hauled)."
The article, written by independent transport and road safety researcher Peter MacKenzie, also suggests that by shifting the same amount of freight from road to freight, 275 people or more could be saved from paraplegia, quadriplegia, brain damage and other long-term serious disabilities. In economic terms, it is estimated that the potential saving to the nation would be more than 1 billion dollars.

[achiruel]

Yep, it's about time road transport stopped being subsidised by Governments and that money put into upgrading rail instead.

[Fares_Fair]

Yep, it's about time road transport stopped being subsidised by Governments and that money put into upgrading rail instead.

Hi achiruel,
That would seem a radical (to be fair, unqualified) view, there are many regions where roads are the only option.
Public transport is not sufficient to meet the expectations of communities.
It has to be a balance.

[somebody]

Yep, it's about time road transport stopped being subsidised by Governments and that money put into upgrading rail instead.

I would say that the first part is an axiom.

[Fares_Fair]

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House_of_Representatives_Committees?url=trs/networks/report.htm

House Standing Committee on Transport and Regional Services Committee activities (inquiries and reports)
Inquiry into the integration of regional rail and road networks and their interface with ports

Inquiry home | Terms of reference | Submissions | Public hearings | Media releases

Report
On Monday 13 August 2007, the House Standing Committee on Transport and Regional Services tabled the report on its inquiry into the integration of regional rail and road networks and their interface with ports, The Great Freight Task: Is Australia's transport network up to the challenge?
To view or print the report, you will need Adobe Acrobat® PDF Reader, which can be downloaded free of charge from Adobe.®

Report accessibility:


Single chapter version downloads
Consolidated version download (PDF 9,124KB)
Hypertext markup language - HTML
If you have difficulty accessing the report, please contact the Committee Secretariat.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This report is comprised of preliminary pages, 11 chapters and 6 appendices.


The Great Freight Task: Is Australia's transport network up to the challenge?
Preliminary pages (PDF 127KB)
Contents, Foreword, Committee Membership, Terms of Reference, List of Abbreviations and List of Recommendations

Chapter 1 (PDF 47KB)
Australia's Transport Network

Chapter 2 (PDF 306KB)
Australia's Transport Task

Chapter 3 (PDF 625KB)
The Ports

Chapter 4 (PDF 1128KB)
Rail

Chapter 5 (PDF 1635KB)
Road Infrastructure

Chapter 6 (PDF 1389KB)
Intermodal Facilities

Chapter 7 (PDF 184KB)
Coastal Shipping

Chapter 8 (PDF 191KB)
Role of the Three Tiers of Government

Chapter 9 (PDF 100KB)
Eastern States' Inland Rail Corridor

Chapter 10 (PDF 191KB)
Intelligent Tracking Technology

Chapter 11 (PDF 79KB)
Cross-border Issues

Appendix A (PDF 112KB)
Appendix A – List of submissions

Appendix B (PDF 95KB)
Appendix B – List of exhibits

Appendix C (PDF 106KB)
Appendix C - List of public hearings and witnesses

Appendix D (PDF 2160KB)
Appendix D - Maps of major infrastructure projects

Appendix E (PDF 172KB)
Appendix E - North-South Rail Corridor – DOTARS Study

Appendix F (PDF 262KB)
Appendix F - Port Infrastructure Matrix

Appendix G (PDF 53KB)
Appendix G -The Dalrymple Bay Coal Chain

[Fares_Fair]

From p103

4.62 The RTSA also indicated that there is a "demonstrable need to expedite Caboolture-Landsborough duplication and re-alignment and to start planning for other rail deviations and bridges..." on the Brisbane –Townsville route. As an example, the RTSA referred to the bridge on the Burnett River near Bundaberg "...which is now subject to a 15 km/h 'flat' speed restriction (i.e. no acceleration or braking)".43

[Fares_Fair]

Former Committee: Standing Committee on Transport and Regional Services
Committee activities (inquiries and reports)

41st Parliament (November 2004 - October 2007)
Standing Committee on Transport and Regional Services

The Great Freight Task: Is Australia's transport network up to the challenge?
Inquiry into the integration of regional rail and road networks and their interface with ports
Tabled 13 August 2007

Date of Government Response: No response to date

[Stillwater]

For all the talk from the leaders of the major political parties in the state election campaign, neither Ms Bligh or Campbell Newman have shown their faces so far on the Sunshine Coast.  The Coast might be lucky get to see one or other during the 'regions blitz' in the coming days.  That would appear to involve a fly-in rapid visit to play a game of pool (must get television coverage in Ingham or somewhere), or a quick drive along the section of the Bruce Highway, slowing to 50 km/hr through town, and giving a regal wave from the window of a bullet-proof limo.

Ms Bligh and Mr Newman know that if they step foot on the Sunshine Coast, the two issues the media will hammer them on are the Sunshine Coast University Hospital at Kawana (Labor delayed it and LNP wants to rip $400 million from its construction cost, thereby causing a scale-back) and the Sunshine Coast Line duplication to Nambour (Labor has dishonoured its promises and LNP sees it as being too hard).

At a 'meet the candidates' gathering in Nambour on Monday, virtually every candidate spoke of the need to duplicate the line asap.

In the days of the Beattie government, when Premier Peter Beattie required the support of the Nicklin Independent, Peter Wellington, to hold onto government, Mr Wellington won a concession that passenger train services would be extended to Nambour, the centre of Nicklin.  Mr Wellington continues to work effectively with the government of the day.

During this election campaign, deliberate rumours have been circulating that 'a vote for Wellington is a vote for Labor'.  That is gutter tactics.  The latest political manoeuvring comes today with the revalation by Mr Matthew Smith, the Katter's Australian Party candidate and a local small businessman of good repute, that he had been approached by the LNP to pay for the cost of printing his 'how to vote' cards if they showed he had distributed his preferences to the LNP.

The LNP are keen to knock off Mr Wellington because they see Nicklin as a conservative seat and they want a clean sweep of all the Sunshine Coast seats from Gympie to Glass House.  They stoop to these tactics rather than some honest and robust campaigning.  This latest preferences tactic would appear to have come from the LNP 'faceless men' and not the local LNP candidate, John Connolly.

[Stillwater]

State leader of Katter's Australian Party, Aidan McLindon MP, interviewed on ABC Sunshine Coast this morning (23 March) at 9.20am, promised that his party, if elected to government, would advance the start of work on duplicating the Sunshine Coast Line and have the project completed 'within five to eight years'.  Where will the money come from?  Mr McLindon said the costs would be met from the money 'left over' after the scrapping of the $6.3 billion Cross River Rail project and the redirection of that money to the Bruce Highway and other road projects outside of Brisbane.

Mr McLindon said spending more money on transport infrastructure in Brisbane would only create gridlock.

He has certainly picked up on the topic de jour locally, but it involves spending money that isn't there and reallocating it to a project not yet assessed by Infrastructure Australia.

However, Mr McLindon's statement does raise a legitimate point.  Should we start advocating for a newly-elected LNP Government to begin the process of working up a Business Case for the Sunshine Coast Line duplication.  All the engineering assessments have been completed, the EIS has been done and the Coordinator-General has signed off with his approval, which expires in four years time.  What's left is to establish the cost, look at possible private sector involvement (such as working with developer to build a new station at Eudlo at the developer's expense in exchange for the right to establish a new housing estate, or selling space above Nambour station for offices and shops) and work out possible state-fed funding splits.  As with CRR, the process would take 4-5 years. 

Calling for a start on prepartion of the SCL duplication Business Case within the first term of an LNP would not jeopardise CRR funding, as CRR is 'ready to proceed', while the SCL is far from that, but needs to be worked up as the next cab off the rank.  Much of the work for the SCL duplication has been done.  It is less complex than CRR (no tunnels).  What needs to be decided is the sequence of works, the cost and a decision about who pays what.  The study would be less than half the cost of the CRR Business Case, say $7-8 million?

And remember, the LNP says it wants to cut down on government waste.  What better place to start than the elimination of the temporary platforms along the Sunny Coast Line.

[ozbob]

Myself and others have raised the Sunshine Coast repeatedly with the LNP opposition. 

It is new day Monday, they will be in Government. They need to stand by Newman's commitments that they will act for ALL Queenslanders, that includes the Sunshine Coast.  I am sure there will be immense momentum from here.

[Stillwater]

Actions speak louder than words, Ozbob.  Campbell Newman didn't step foot once on the Sunshine Coast during the election campaign (he was in Nambour last November).  That 'no show' during the campaign is being interpreted as a sign of his contempt for Coasters and his taking their vote for granted.

[ozbob]

I wonder how the local LNP MPs and perhaps those to about to be feel about that?  Happy campers? LOLOL

A large idle back bench is a very dangerous thing ... 

[colinw]

Hmmm.  A leader with a dictatorial style, who is the hero of an election win. There will be a honeymoon of maybe 12 to 18 monthss, but then reality will start to set in. Give it 2 or 3 years and lets see what knives are drawn behind backs.

Kevin 07 didn't even make it to the next election.

How far do you think Campbell 12 will go?  And how much support will he have from the "Nationals" faction of the LNP, or from Gold Coast or Sunshine Coast MPs who feel their needs are being ignored.

He might be a rooster tomorrow, but can just as easily be turned into a featherduster if the factional politics get nasty.

[somebody]

Hmmm.  A leader with a dictatorial style, who is the hero of an election win. There will be a honeymoon of maybe 12 to 18 monthss, but then reality will start to set in. Give it 2 or 3 years and lets see what knives are drawn behind backs.

Kevin 07 didn't even make it to the next election.

How far do you think Campbell 12 will go?

Standing in Ashgrove represents that he is only really looking for one term.

[colinw]

Maybe, however it is worth reflecting on the fact that the council wards & Federal seat covered by Ashgrove are all long term conservative.  Ashgrove being a Labor seat at State level has been something of an anomaly.

[Stillwater]

ABC Local radio on the Sunshine Coast examined the issue of the SCL temporary platforms just before 7.30am today.  The report focussed on the Pomona station, which had to be built after big floods in late February.  A replacement temporary platform was completed last Thursday.  There are seven such temporary platforms on the SCL, at Mooloolah, Eudlo, Palmwoods, Woombye, Eumundi, Pomona and Cooran.  The interviewer asked how 'permanent' the temporary platforms were, given that they were first installed in late 2009.  Interestingly, given the LNP local members' loud vocal criticism of Labor for installing the platforms without committing to track duplication north of Beerburrum, the ABC reported it was having difficulty finding a government politician or minister to comment on the situation.  Glass House Mountains MP, Andrew Powell, was contacted, but referred the ABC to the transport minister, Scott Emerson.  As Opposition transport spokesperson, Mr Emerson, toured the SCL to learn of its inadequacies first hand.

A QR spokesperson, a Mr John Pistark, was asked why QR had not taken the opportunity to replace Pomona's temporary platform with a more permanent one, or had plans for more permanent stations at Pomona and the six other locations.  At Pomona, he said the issues were money and expediency -- the need to get a new temporary platform in place as quickly as possible.  In the wider context of all seven temporay platform stations, the spokesperson said replacement with permanent platforms was "subject to the process that we are working through with Translink."  In another thread here, it was reported that these talks have been ongoing for two years.  New permanent platforms would cost millions of dollars.

Robert Dow, of Rail Back On Track, outlined the operational difficulties of the SCL and again emphasised the need for duplication Beerburrum to Landsborough initially, to be followed by extension of crossing loops further north.  He also proposed construction of more permanent temporary railway stations at the seven locations, involving concrete blocks (as opposed to scaffolding and plywood) that could be dismantled, moved and reused once the SCL is realigned and duplicated to Nambour.

On current planning, Beerburrum-Landsborough will be duplicated by 2021, extending to Nambour by 2031.

[Fares_Fair]

I contacted the Department of Defence in July 2011 asking if they had any plans or requirements for the North Coast Line.
I can confirm for the record here, via email correspondence, that the Department of Defence have no plans for the North Coast rail line.


July 2011

Our office is unable to assist you with your enquiry.
I have received advice from Defence Support Group and the Directorate of Infrastructure Business Support that they are unable to provide any assistance with your enquiry as Defence do not have any plans in relation to the North Coast Rail Line in support of Defence activities.

It would be interesting to know if there was a reason for this, since rail was a major mover of both men and materiel during wartime.
Perhaps it's because of the single line track.
Bear in mind that any threat is currently perceived as coming fom the north to north west of Australia, however a sneak attack over the south pole is not out of the question.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

Further to the above correspondence, I came across this interesting piece in
The Australian dated Thursday 5 April, 2012, p5 The Nation;
Headline was Lift ADF spending or 'shelve build-up'
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/lift-adf-spending-or-shelve-build-up/story-e6frg8yo-1226319056932

Referring to our future force posture in north and northwestern Australia, it says;
"Airport, port and rail facilities, which are being used by our forces, or might be needed in the future, are being used heavily by the energy and resources sector, and demand for them is certain to increase,"

Noted.

Lift ADF spending or 'shelve build-up'

by: Mark Dodd
From:The Australian
April 05, 201212:00AM

CAUGHT by the two-speed economy, the Gillard government faces the stark choice of increasing defence spending or abandoning some of its ambitious plans to strengthen the military presence across the resource-rich northwest and Top End.

The stark warning is contained in a progress report on the Force Posture Review, which was released yesterday by Defence Minister Stephen Smith.

Military deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan have consumed much of Defence's recent attention, resulting in a lack of focus on the defence of the nation.

"Strategic judgments to date have emphasised our relatively benign region, leading to a somewhat reduced emphasis on defence of Australia doctrine," the report says.

"Significant investments will be required, particularly in northern Australia, to ensure that the ADF is appropriately positioned geographically to meet Australia's long-term strategic and security interests."

Written by two former Defence Department secretaries, Ric Smith and Allan Hawke, the review, commissioned in June last year, aims to address a range of strategic and security challenges facing the Australian Defence Force and will feed into the 2014 defence white paper.

Part of the progress report includes a study by Deloitte Access Economics on future economic and demographic trends focusing on northern Australia.

The report warns of a looming competition between the ADF and the booming resources sector over the use of airport, port and rail facilities.

The progress review also notes that there is an "increasingly competitive environment" over options for the ADF's future force posture in north and northwestern Australia.

"Airport, port and rail facilities, which are being used by our forces, or might be needed in the future, are being used heavily by the energy and resources sector, and demand for them is certain to increase," it says.

"Our clear impression is that in this competitive environment the resources sector has deeper pockets and much quicker decision-making processes than Defence, government or indeed other sectors of the economy.

"This pressure is likely to add to the cost of some of the proposals that might emerge from our review," the report says.

"The DAE study highlights the risk that Defence might find itself on the 'wrong side' of the two-speed economy."

The Force Posture Review contains a range of options for reinforcing the remote Top End and northwest.

It warns of potential "significant weaknesses and risks" relating to the ADF's ability to sustain its northern bases, high-tempo operations in northern Australia, and control of maritime approaches, including the immediate neighbourhood.

"Some of these weaknesses and risks present challenges in the short to medium term, while others could be addressed in the longer term out to the 2030s, although planning options to address them would need to begin in the short term," the progress report says.

The release of the progress report coincides with the arrival of the first US marines in Darwin, a deployment announced last year during US President Barack Obama's visit.

[Stillwater]

Sixth picture down, second soldier from the right - my uncle, a member of the railway anbulance brigade.  Their job was to load wounded from Cairns and Townsville on board hospital trains and keep them alive on the journey south to Brisbane.  Operations were carried out on board - imagine a scapel held near your vitals on a ricketty QR train hurtling to Brisbane.
http://www.awm.gov.au/exhibitions/underattack/mobilise/rail.asp

[Fares_Fair]

I contacted the Department of Defence in July 2011 asking if they had any plans or requirements for the North Coast Line.
I can confirm for the record here, via email correspondence, that the Department of Defence have no plans for the North Coast rail line.


July 2011

Our office is unable to assist you with your enquiry.
I have received advice from Defence Support Group and the Directorate of Infrastructure Business Support that they are unable to provide any assistance with your enquiry as Defence do not have any plans in relation to the North Coast Rail Line in support of Defence activities.

It would be interesting to know if there was a reason for this, since rail was a major mover of both men and materiel during wartime.
Perhaps it's because of the single line track.
Bear in mind that any threat is currently perceived as coming fom the north to north west of Australia, however a sneak attack over the south pole is not out of the question.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

Hi
None of the above, its 2012 not 1940's when rail was more efficent at doing this task. Also the same era as low use of planes for mass transport, trains still delivered local milk and mail and were barely 300m long.

Also as they found out in WW2, rail is extremely sensitive to air attack and with today's guided missiles able to enter your bathroom window and take you out while sitting on the dunny leaving the lounge room untouched it would be even worse. Any attack would be preceeded with wipeout of any and all major bridges. Yes road still suffers, but far more bridges and easier to by-pass with off-road miltary vehicles.

ANyway despite teh above, the Qld NCL needs duplication and realignment from current duplication terminus to Gympie Nth as a matter or priority for far more valid reasons, such as freight and commuter rail.

regards
Shane

Hi rtt,

I note your point.
I'm no strategic expert of course.
Defence of our country is a pretty valid reason IMHO, probably one of the strongest.

Whether our un/expected foes have the capability you raise is a moot point.
Our aircraft capable of moving massive loads, men & materiel can literally be counted on the one hand.

AFAIAConcerned, it is a strategic asset that can be utilised - and in time of war, it would have to be utilised.
One advantage of rail is that it can be repaired fairly quickly.

Knocking out bridges is what a defending force would do to slow an advance, an attacking force needs them along their primary invasion route.

Certainly agree with you 100% on the need for duplication of this line. 

[somebody]

Not impressed by the military argument at all.  I think it is remarkably stupid.

[somebody]

I think rtt spelled it out.  Armies don't use trains any more.  WWII they did on the eastern front, but Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, all ignored the rail systems.

Who would load a tank onto a train today?  It could too easily get bombed.

[SurfRail]

Not in time of war.  Main use of the railways nowadays would be for prepositioning equipment and stores, in which case the military could be given the appropriate priority.

Leopard tanks could previously be carried on the Adelaide-Darwin line - I am not certain if the current M1 Abrams models could be, given their weight.  (They certainly wouldn't fit the NCL!)