[VIS] Interstate Trains at Adelaide Railway Station

[Eurostar]

Will the Gawler line electrification include laying gauge convertible sleepers? If so, that means the three major railway lines are pretty much ready to go for gauge conversion. What will hold it back?

Mike Rann proposed the Outer Harbor Line would have standard gauge dual voltage tram-trains hence why all metro network had gauge convertible sleepers. "Coast to Coast" was proposed to run to West Lakes and Semaphore. Coast to Coast was shelved.

[dbl96]

We should demand that all suburban lines be standardised as promised in 2007 to be completed by 2013 then we not be worrying about different gauges and trains could return to Bridge Water and extend to Mt Barker.

Is standardisation of the suburban network really that big a priority, or necessary? Standardising the Belair Line isn't going to magically restore double track operation, the ARTC freight line would continue to run on its own line regardless which benefits both freight and passenger trains; freight trains don't need to be timetabled around stopping passenger trains, and a broken down freight train won't stop passenger trains from running. Passenger trains won't return to Bridgewater along the current alignment either, the journey time is just too slow. Same case with Mount Barker.

A better way would be to realign the Adelaide-Wolseley line out of the inner hills. The map below is a hastily made simple version of maps I've already made, but the idealised bypass in pink (tunnel and viaduct combo, obviously won't be a straight line) will run Mitcham to Crafers, then follow SEF from Crafers to Bridgewater (orange line). From there, there's two options:

• Option 1: Rejoin the current alignment (blue) - cheaper than realigning the entire line, but doesn't include Mount Barker on the main line

• Option 2: Continue through to Monarto South (lime green) - more expensive, but faster and more direct route, and includes Mount Barker on the main line

The best option for freight rail would be to send it west of the hills. This would avoid the gradient problems of a direct hills route, problems with traffic and amenity created by routing freight trains through residential areas, and allow for increased efficiencies through higher speeds and double stacking.

With freight removed from the Belair/Hills line, it could be rebuilt as a higher-speed dedicated passenger line following a similar alignment to the one you describe above. The winding Belair line would be separated out as a branch line, forking from the hills passenger mainline at Mitcham. The mainline would run in a tunnel from Mitcham to the Brownhill Creek Valley, which it would use to ascend gradually into the hills. The line would travel from the head of the valley in a tunnel under the ridge at Crafers and Stirling, re-emerging on the existing rail alignment at Aldgate. The mainline would follow the Freeway alignment from Bridgewater, past Handorf to Totness. At Totness, a branch line would connect Littlehampton and Nairne, using a both the existing rail alignment and tunnels. The mainline would follow the existing rail alignment into Mount Barker.

From Mount Barker the line could continue east as a higher-speed regional/interstate passenger line along the lines of that proposed by Blandy and Michell in InDaily (https://indaily.com.au/news/analysis/20 ... australia/). The line would leave Mount Barker through the Laratinga Valley/Springs Road corridor. East of Mount Barker the line would fork, with a southern branch to Strathalbyn, Goolwa and Victor Harbor, and an eastern branch to Murray Bridge and beyond. The eastern branch would travel under the Mount Barker ridge and over the Freeway, rejoining the existing rail corridor at Petwood. The rail alignment would be significantly straightened through Callington, Monarto and Murray Bridge. The passenger line would rejoin the freight bypass just west of Murray Bridge.

(Black is the existing line, red is the new line)

These lines would be built to standard gauge, allowing higher-speed interstate and regional passenger trains to reach Adelaide directly, and allowing dual-track operation to resume on the Belair line. A short segment of dual gauge track would connect the line at Mile End through the Adelaide Yard to Adelaide Railway Station.

[rhino]

The best option for freight rail would be to send it west of the hills.

You lost me here. /\ /\

The rest of it?
Pie...In...The...Sky.

Hope you had fun with it though

[1NEEDS2POST]

Without building a tunnel or anything else, just moving the goods trains to the Hills bypass will make a big difference.

34 % of curves on this stretch have a radius of 400 m or less. Let's look at the maximum speed we can run through a 400 m radius curve on a mixed passenger/freight line. These are the recommended limits set by ARTC: https://extranet.artc.com.au/docs/eng/t ... ction5.pdf

Max applied superelevation: 150 mm
Max superelevation deficiency: 110 mm

This gives us a maximum speed of 96 km/h.

Let's get rid of goods trains, bump up the superelevation and use tilt trains. Tilting trains can run at up to 300 mm superelevation deficiency.

Max applied superelevation: 200 mm
Max superelevation deficiency: 300 mm

This gives us a maximum speed of 133 km/h. If applied superelevation is increased to 300 mm (which would result in a long transition curve), then maximum speed is 146 km/h.

My point is, without freight, the track can be designed for higher speed running. The next thing slowing it down is the Ararat line in Victoria. Once Victoria converts that to standard gauge, it will provide a shorter route into Melbourne than the current Victorian Western standard gauge line.

[dbl96]

The best option for freight rail would be to send it west of the hills.

You lost me here. /\ /\

The rest of it?
Pie...In...The...Sky.

Hope you had fun with it though

The western hills bypass is established policy. A detailed corridor was identified in the 2010 Adelaide Rail Freight Movements Study. The current state government plans to build it as part of their GlobeLink proposal.

The Brownhill Creek corridor has been identified previously on this forum and elsewhere as an ideal route for restoring passenger rail to Mount Barker and the hills, because it minimises the need for long, expensive tunnels, whilst allowing for a acceptable gradient on the ascent into the hills, and considerably speeds up the journey by removing the circuitous route through Belair.

The idea of a Y shaped higher-speed line connecting Adelaide to Murray Bridge and the south coast via Mount Barker was examined in some detail in the InDaily article above. It is a modest proposal even when compared to proposals for high-speed rail in Australia's eastern states.

On the whole, the route I identified above is not particularly outlandish or demanding from an engineering perspective. Most of it would run above ground. Large sections could share existing road alignments. It is nothing very technical when you compare it to the massive railway projects currently being constructed in the mountainous areas of China and elsewhere in the world. It would require significantly less major earthworks than the Southern Option considered by the Adelaide Rail Freight Movements Study.

I understand your cynicism, but it says something sad about the state of political willpower to complete major infrastructure projects in Australia today. Projects which could be built without much fanfare in many parts of the world cannot even be seriously considered in Australia because we don't seem to have the capability to plan large, important nation-building projects and see them through to completion. Any suggestion beyond mundane road resurfacing seems, as you say, like pie-in-the-sky thinking to an Australian population so used to nothing ever happening. This is despite Australia having the wealth and technical capabilities to complete many such projects.

[Norman]

I think the sheer cost of building infrastructure is turning many state governments, especially ours, off unless they can get majority federal funding and a huge benefit for a large proportion of the population. The labour costs and costs of construction are far greater here than in other countries.

The Melbourne Metro costs $10b, which will deliver huge advantages and benefits for Melbourne commuters from all parts of the city. The NorthConnex project will deliver huge travel time savings for drivers coming from the northern cities of New South Wales. The North South Motorway will have huge benefits for commuters and freight bypassing the city on a North to South axis.

A train to Mount Barker will have a good amount of benefits for the people living in the hills, but the amount of people that would use it would be far less than comparable projects in Adelaide, especially for a project that would cost billions.

The vision is there. The benefits and users... Not so much.

[[Shuz]]

I think one of the severely underestimated benefits is tourists looking to go on a day trip to the Hills without having to take the car (or the Barossa). I count myself in this category. If there was a passenger rail service available, which improves accessibility and a different means of getting there - that would be hugely advantageous.

[Nort]

I think one of the severely underestimated benefits is tourists looking to go on a day trip to the Hills without having to take the car (or the Barossa). I count myself in this category. If there was a passenger rail service available, which improves accessibility and a different means of getting there - that would be hugely advantageous.

Exactly this. A train link to the Barossa would be fantastic for tourism.

We should be building lots of infrastructure now. Interest rates are at record lows and construction stimulates the economy.

[Spotto]

I think one of the severely underestimated benefits is tourists looking to go on a day trip to the Hills without having to take the car (or the Barossa). I count myself in this category. If there was a passenger rail service available, which improves accessibility and a different means of getting there - that would be hugely advantageous.

Exactly this. A train link to the Barossa would be fantastic for tourism.

We should be building lots of infrastructure now. Interest rates are at record lows and construction stimulates the economy.

A train link to the Barossa would probably be the cheapest rail extension on the table. The corridor is clear (no land acquisition necessary), track will obviously need to be renewed but there’s no expensive bridges or viaducts to build, once the Gawler Line is electrified we’ll have excess diesel stock, the station yards are large enough for decent-sized Park’n’Rides and bus interchanges with LinkSA coaches.

A shuttle from Gawler to Nuriootpa timetabled to meet the electric train to Adelaide would be fantastic for tourism. I’d certainly be inclined to journey up for a day out.

Local populations are decent, add tourists and people from Adelaide and we’re cruising:
Lyndoch - 1.7k
Tanunda - 4.3k
Nuriootpa - 5.7k
Angaston - 2k (no station but 6-8min drive to Nuriootpa, can include)

[rhino]

The western hills bypass is established policy.

Except it isn't. And it would be pointless. Think about it.

[rhino]

I think one of the severely underestimated benefits is tourists looking to go on a day trip to the Hills without having to take the car (or the Barossa). I count myself in this category. If there was a passenger rail service available, which improves accessibility and a different means of getting there - that would be hugely advantageous.

Sorry Shuz, but Tourism is never going to pay for a railway in South Australia. In fact, I doubt it would pay for a railway anywhere in Australia without volunteers working it or huge government subsidies and grants. You need regular everyday commuters in large numbers, or it just will not stack up.

If you think it will, please supply an example (where volunteer labour and/or government grants/subsidies are not included).

[Nort]

I think one of the severely underestimated benefits is tourists looking to go on a day trip to the Hills without having to take the car (or the Barossa). I count myself in this category. If there was a passenger rail service available, which improves accessibility and a different means of getting there - that would be hugely advantageous.

Sorry Shuz, but Tourism is never going to pay for a railway in South Australia. In fact, I doubt it would pay for a railway anywhere in Australia without volunteers working it or huge government subsidies and grants. You need regular everyday commuters in large numbers, or it just will not stack up.

If you think it will, please supply an example (where volunteer labour and/or government grants/subsidies are not included).

Can you point to the roads in South Australia that have been built and maintained without government grants/subsidies?

[rhino]

Can you point to the roads in South Australia that have been built and maintained without government grants/subsidies?

Nice comeback, but not really valid. Roads get made because there is a need to supply access, and a road is the cheapest form of access. As the road gets more use, when the upkeep of the road starts to cost too much, the road gets sealed. Then dual-carriagewayed. When demand for use gets too much, a railway might be considered (or a freeway). In this day and age, the need, or at least forseeable need, has to justify the cost of building it. This foreseeable need, in the case of rail, involves everyday commuters in large numbers (or freight in great tonnages). Otherwise a road is better value for money. And safety is not a big enough factor (vide the demise of Eyre Peninsula rail).

Please understand that I am pro-rail. But I am a realist. And not cashed-up enough to build it myself

[[Shuz]]

I think one of the severely underestimated benefits is tourists looking to go on a day trip to the Hills without having to take the car (or the Barossa). I count myself in this category. If there was a passenger rail service available, which improves accessibility and a different means of getting there - that would be hugely advantageous.

Sorry Shuz, but Tourism is never going to pay for a railway in South Australia. In fact, I doubt it would pay for a railway anywhere in Australia without volunteers working it or huge government subsidies and grants. You need regular everyday commuters in large numbers, or it just will not stack up.

If you think it will, please supply an example (where volunteer labour and/or government grants/subsidies are not included).

Rhino, you need to re-read my post. I never said tourism would pay for a railway. I just said that I think potential patronage from tourists is underestimated. Don't put words in my mouth.

[rhino]

Rhino, you need to re-read my post. I never said tourism would pay for a railway. I just said that I think potential patronage from tourists is underestimated. Don't put words in my mouth.

Sorry Shuz, I did miss-read your post.