Page 26 of 48
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 7:52 pm
by Heardy_101
Good evening everyone. It's been a while but my associates and I have been working on a few things behind the scenes. So here it is. As part of a much larger plan to ramp things up and hopefully place some pressure on the Government and other political parties, we (SARRA - South Australian Regional Rail Alliance) are pleased to announce a new logo and webpage - we encourage everyone to take a look and tell us what you think!
We would also like to thank everyone for their support and encourage everyone to keep sharing this page with their friends, family and local communities.
www.facebook.com/SARegionalRailAlliance
www.saregionaltrainscampaign.com
Kind Regards
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:04 pm
by EBG
You should start an urgent campaign to restore services to the Barossa valley before the line is totally over grown. There are already baby pine trees growing within the existing timber sleepers.
If The Barossa Valley was in NSW it would have an hourly service. It is a national disgrace that this line has been allowed to quietly rot away.
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:18 am
by omada
Agreed re: Barossa Valley line, how handy would it be?
This line is privately owned isn't it?
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:16 am
by Goodsy
omada wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:18 am
Agreed re: Barossa Valley line, how handy would it be?
This line is privately owned isn't it?
That might just be the spur to the Penrice Quarry, which isn't in operation anymore
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 2:03 pm
by rhino
I'm pretty sure it's privately owned by ARG, as I believe all the state's broad gauge lines outside the metro area were handed over. ARG then appeared to defer (ignore) maintenance, and when the lines became too unsafe they closed them rather than allow another operator to step in. Hence the amount of grain carted on local council roads these days. Sad.
In the case of the Barossa line, when Penrice no longer required a daily train, I don't know if ARG went looking for other customers or not. I guess not, but that's just an opinion.
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 6:31 pm
by claybro
Just a question on those pushing for rail to Barossa, I thought the growth of the Barossa towns was strictly limited, and therefore not much further growth possible? Regional rail could only really be viable for commuter use to near areas with populations in the 10's of thousands surely. I know a tourist train used to run from Adelaide, but that was not deemed viable, and surely the current population could not support a regular commuter train. Wouldn't it be more feasible running twice daily fast trains to/from Whyalla, including stops at places like Two wells, Virginia, Mallala etc,- towns which surely aren't restricted by growth boundaries.
Fast trains from the Iron Triangle would also be well patronised on football days especially if trains could go directly to Adelaide station.
Similarly if the Overland was redirected through an upgraded SE Mt Gambier line and joined the Portland/Warrnambool/Geelong route, this would enable fast and frequent trains servicing those larger population centres. Connecting Mt Gambier to Western Victoria with a fast train would also be a boon for the South East.
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 6:39 pm
by Goodsy
claybro wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 6:31 pm
Just a question on those pushing for rail to Barossa, I thought the growth of the Barossa towns was strictly limited, and therefore not much further growth possible? Regional rail could only really be viable for commuter use to near areas with populations in the 10's of thousands surely. I know a tourist train used to run from Adelaide, but that was not deemed viable, and surely the current population could not support a regular commuter train. Wouldn't it be more feasible running twice daily fast trains to/from Whyalla, including stops at places like Two wells, Virginia, Mallala etc,- towns which surely aren't restricted by growth boundaries.
Fast trains from the Iron Triangle would also be well patronised on football days especially if trains could go directly to Adelaide station.
Similarly if the Overland was redirected through an upgraded SE Mt Gambier line and joined the Portland/Warrnambool/Geelong route, this would enable fast and frequent trains servicing those larger population centres. Connecting Mt Gambier to Western Victoria with a fast train would also be a boon for the South East.
Lyndoch, Tanunda, Nuriootpa and Angaston are about 15,000 and there's already an unused railway. going to Whyalla means either building a new line or dealing with freight trains which would have right of way
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 8:35 pm
by Heardy_101
EBG wrote: ↑Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:04 pm
You should start an urgent campaign to restore services to the Barossa valley before the line is totally over grown. There are already baby pine trees growing within the existing timber sleepers.
If The Barossa Valley was in NSW it would have an hourly service. It is a national disgrace that this line has been allowed to quietly rot away.
We have been quitely doing this as well however the main focus at the moment is the state of the lines which are disgraceful.
If you check out the webpage and facebook page, you'll see why.
We have plenty of support for passenger services, however.
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 8:36 pm
by Heardy_101
omada wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:18 am
Agreed re: Barossa Valley line, how handy would it be?
This line is privately owned isn't it?
Leased by Genesee Wyoming Australia.
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 8:42 pm
by Heardy_101
rhino wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 2:03 pm
I'm pretty sure it's privately owned by ARG, as I believe all the state's broad gauge lines outside the metro area were handed over. ARG then appeared to defer (ignore) maintenance, and when the lines became too unsafe they closed them rather than allow another operator to step in. Hence the amount of grain carted on local council roads these days. Sad.
In the case of the Barossa line, when Penrice no longer required a daily train, I don't know if ARG went looking for other customers or not. I guess not, but that's just an opinion.
Yes, GWA (formerly ARG) currently have the lease on the non metro Broad gauge lines (Burra, Balaklava, Kapunda, Barossa) and the Eyre Peninsula. Plus some ex railway corridors.
As a part of this lease there is an agreement in place which states they are supposed to maintain the lines and infrastructure (eg buildings) in clean and good condition, as well as maintaining them in such a way a train can run at two weeks' notice. That's currently not the case and has not been the case for years.
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:02 pm
by claybro
GoodSmackUp wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 6:39 pm
claybro wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 6:31 pm
Just a question on those pushing for rail to Barossa, I thought the growth of the Barossa towns was strictly limited, and therefore not much further growth possible? Regional rail could only really be viable for commuter use to near areas with populations in the 10's of thousands surely. I know a tourist train used to run from Adelaide, but that was not deemed viable, and surely the current population could not support a regular commuter train. Wouldn't it be more feasible running twice daily fast trains to/from Whyalla, including stops at places like Two wells, Virginia, Mallala etc,- towns which surely aren't restricted by growth boundaries.
Fast trains from the Iron Triangle would also be well patronised on football days especially if trains could go directly to Adelaide station.
Similarly if the Overland was redirected through an upgraded SE Mt Gambier line and joined the Portland/Warrnambool/Geelong route, this would enable fast and frequent trains servicing those larger population centres. Connecting Mt Gambier to Western Victoria with a fast train would also be a boon for the South East.
Lyndoch, Tanunda, Nuriootpa and Angaston are about 15,000 and there's already an unused railway. going to Whyalla means either building a new line or dealing with freight trains which would have right of way
15000 scattered over 3 or four towns is nowhere near enough population to warrant a regular train even if the line had been maintained. Re the Whyalla service, I wasn't suggesting that upgrades or duplication would not be required for the track. But a lot of the infrastructure already exists in a corridor that is in good. condition, unlike the Barossa line.
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 12:35 am
by SBD
claybro wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:02 pm
GoodSmackUp wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 6:39 pm
claybro wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 6:31 pm
Just a question on those pushing for rail to Barossa, I thought the growth of the Barossa towns was strictly limited, and therefore not much further growth possible? Regional rail could only really be viable for commuter use to near areas with populations in the 10's of thousands surely. I know a tourist train used to run from Adelaide, but that was not deemed viable, and surely the current population could not support a regular commuter train. Wouldn't it be more feasible running twice daily fast trains to/from Whyalla, including stops at places like Two wells, Virginia, Mallala etc,- towns which surely aren't restricted by growth boundaries.
Fast trains from the Iron Triangle would also be well patronised on football days especially if trains could go directly to Adelaide station.
Similarly if the Overland was redirected through an upgraded SE Mt Gambier line and joined the Portland/Warrnambool/Geelong route, this would enable fast and frequent trains servicing those larger population centres. Connecting Mt Gambier to Western Victoria with a fast train would also be a boon for the South East.
Lyndoch, Tanunda, Nuriootpa and Angaston are about 15,000 and there's already an unused railway. going to Whyalla means either building a new line or dealing with freight trains which would have right of way
15000 scattered over 3 or four towns is nowhere near enough population to warrant a regular train even if the line had been maintained. Re the Whyalla service, I wasn't suggesting that upgrades or duplication would not be required for the track. But a lot of the infrastructure already exists in a corridor that is in good. condition, unlike the Barossa line.
How far can single-track running be extended to provide frequent services? It would make sense to extend the Gawler Central services to another station near where the track crosses Lndoch Road at Kalbeeba, but not if that meant the service frequency needed to be halved.
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 6:01 am
by Heardy_101
claybro wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:02 pm
GoodSmackUp wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 6:39 pm
claybro wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 6:31 pm
Just a question on those pushing for rail to Barossa, I thought the growth of the Barossa towns was strictly limited, and therefore not much further growth possible? Regional rail could only really be viable for commuter use to near areas with populations in the 10's of thousands surely. I know a tourist train used to run from Adelaide, but that was not deemed viable, and surely the current population could not support a regular commuter train. Wouldn't it be more feasible running twice daily fast trains to/from Whyalla, including stops at places like Two wells, Virginia, Mallala etc,- towns which surely aren't restricted by growth boundaries.
Fast trains from the Iron Triangle would also be well patronised on football days especially if trains could go directly to Adelaide station.
Similarly if the Overland was redirected through an upgraded SE Mt Gambier line and joined the Portland/Warrnambool/Geelong route, this would enable fast and frequent trains servicing those larger population centres. Connecting Mt Gambier to Western Victoria with a fast train would also be a boon for the South East.
Lyndoch, Tanunda, Nuriootpa and Angaston are about 15,000 and there's already an unused railway. going to Whyalla means either building a new line or dealing with freight trains which would have right of way
15000 scattered over 3 or four towns is nowhere near enough population to warrant a regular train even if the line had been maintained. Re the Whyalla service, I wasn't suggesting that upgrades or duplication would not be required for the track. But a lot of the infrastructure already exists in a corridor that is in good. condition, unlike the Barossa line.
14 years ago when the Government did 13 surveys and reports (12 of which haven't been released to the public). We spent ages trying to pry just one of those with an FOI request - given it's contents, not surprising.
The one report we got our hands on from around 2003/2004 reccomends an interim Barossa service with 2 trains (one AM, one PM) a day, with further reccomendations that such a service be extended after six months.
Go figure.
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 10:25 am
by rev
claybro wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:02 pm
GoodSmackUp wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 6:39 pm
claybro wrote: ↑Tue Nov 07, 2017 6:31 pm
Just a question on those pushing for rail to Barossa, I thought the growth of the Barossa towns was strictly limited, and therefore not much further growth possible? Regional rail could only really be viable for commuter use to near areas with populations in the 10's of thousands surely. I know a tourist train used to run from Adelaide, but that was not deemed viable, and surely the current population could not support a regular commuter train. Wouldn't it be more feasible running twice daily fast trains to/from Whyalla, including stops at places like Two wells, Virginia, Mallala etc,- towns which surely aren't restricted by growth boundaries.
Fast trains from the Iron Triangle would also be well patronised on football days especially if trains could go directly to Adelaide station.
Similarly if the Overland was redirected through an upgraded SE Mt Gambier line and joined the Portland/Warrnambool/Geelong route, this would enable fast and frequent trains servicing those larger population centres. Connecting Mt Gambier to Western Victoria with a fast train would also be a boon for the South East.
Lyndoch, Tanunda, Nuriootpa and Angaston are about 15,000 and there's already an unused railway. going to Whyalla means either building a new line or dealing with freight trains which would have right of way
15000 scattered over 3 or four towns is nowhere near enough population to warrant a regular train even if the line had been maintained. Re the Whyalla service, I wasn't suggesting that upgrades or duplication would not be required for the track. But a lot of the infrastructure already exists in a corridor that is in good. condition, unlike the Barossa line.
There's 20,000 residents in the Barossa region. It's not just about how many people live there, but making it more accessible to tourists and day visitors.
Re: News & Discussion: Regional Rail Transport & Infrastructure
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2017 7:16 pm
by north of gepps cross
Would love to see 160 km or 200 km traind goin to iron triangle riverland mount gambier it would open up investment in these rural towns in my opinion tourism yes might cost a bit but at least infrastructure is there then . poiticians have no vision sadly lol . just a opinion .