News & Discussion: Monarto Transport Hub

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.

do you agree that Monarto would be a suitable place for another airport?

Yes
10
40%
No
15
60%
 
Total votes: 25

Message
Author
User avatar
AG
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 1890
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 9:44 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#46 Post by AG » Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:19 am

rhino wrote:I'm not at all surprised that these councils are jumping on the bandwagon, as they should, because it will be good for their area. But, would it really be good for South Australia as a whole? Would increasing rail freight travel time to Adelaide be a good thing in today's "just-in-time" freight market? Is the cost (both fiscally and in terms of the flow-on effect of this particular proposition) of creating employment in regional areas worth the downside of the deal? How will turning the Adelaide rail freight yard ito a dead-end yard accessible only from the north (meaning increased transport time to Victoria) affect industry in Adelaide that has to either receive or ship goods "just-in-time"? Such freight would probably end up on the roads, rather than the railway, or industries would have to re-locate or lay off staff. And all for what, really? So that the people who live along the South Line won't have to listen to wheel squeal? There are easier and cheaper ways to fix that problem.
Where did you get the idea that the southern ARTC line through the Hills would close because of a regional freight hub? A lot of the freight that uses the ARTC line through the Hills is going from Perth to Melbourne and vice versa although some of it is bound for the Regency Park Freight Terminal. The idea is great considering the expected population growth for the Adelaide Hills and Murray Bridge areas - one of the fastest growing inland regions in Australia.

User avatar
rhino
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2910
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Nairne
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 105 times

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#47 Post by rhino » Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:42 am

AG wrote: Where did you get the idea that the southern ARTC line through the Hills would close because of a regional freight hub?
Where did you think the three councils concerned got the idea for this freight hub? From the proposal to by-pass Adelaide with a new railway to Mallala. Do you think that, if that happened, the south line would remain open? How much will rail access cost on each line (the south line and the by-pass line) if all of the trains are not using the same one? The studies done previously into building the rail bypass have all assumed that the south line would be closed, for this reason.
cheers,
Rhino

User avatar
Cruise
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2209
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Bay 115, Football Park

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#48 Post by Cruise » Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:49 am

Monarto???

why stop there?

why not move it to bordertown, then its just as equally as hard for everyone to get there

User avatar
rhino
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2910
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Nairne
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 105 times

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#49 Post by rhino » Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:57 am

There's already a large, well-used (like daily) yard at Tailem Bend, but that's in Coorong Council.
cheers,
Rhino

User avatar
AG
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 1890
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 9:44 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#50 Post by AG » Mon Nov 19, 2007 2:59 pm

rhino wrote:
AG wrote: Where did you get the idea that the southern ARTC line through the Hills would close because of a regional freight hub?
Where did you think the three councils concerned got the idea for this freight hub? From the proposal to by-pass Adelaide with a new railway to Mallala. Do you think that, if that happened, the south line would remain open? How much will rail access cost on each line (the south line and the by-pass line) if all of the trains are not using the same one? The studies done previously into building the rail bypass have all assumed that the south line would be closed, for this reason.
That's all fine and well assuming no accidents would ever occur on the bypass line. The Hills line could effectively serve as backup capacity in the case of an incident such as a derailment. I wasn't aware of the assumptions of closing the Hills line.

User avatar
rhino
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2910
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Nairne
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 105 times

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#51 Post by rhino » Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:44 pm

Accidents and derailments anywhere between Port Augusta and Perth effectively block Perth off from rail access. These things are dealt with relatively quickly, when you consider the size of the task involved. There are more reasons for standard-gauging the line to Mount Gambier and Portland than for having an alternative southern route into Adelaide. There is currently an alternative route - via Parkes (yes, Melbourne to Adelaide via Parkes) - which has been put into use when needed.
cheers,
Rhino

User avatar
Cruise
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2209
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Bay 115, Football Park

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#52 Post by Cruise » Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:46 pm

rhino wrote:There is currently an alternative route - via Parkes (yes, Melbourne to Adelaide via Parkes) - which has been put into use when needed.
lol, wow talk about taking the scenic route!!!

User avatar
AG
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 1890
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 9:44 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#53 Post by AG » Mon Nov 19, 2007 4:38 pm

That's a pretty big detour. If we really want rail to be competitive with the roads in terms of freight haulage, then eventually the nationalwide system of long sections of single track with passing loops everywhere isn't going to be very reliable, particularly when there are no alternative tracks or routes. The derailments that occur do get cleared up very quickly, but often not before delays take effect to trains in other areas of the ARTC network.

User avatar
rhino
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2910
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Nairne
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 105 times

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#54 Post by rhino » Tue Nov 20, 2007 10:38 am

The problem is that rail is very expensive to lay - by that I mean the buying of the land if it's freehold, the earthworks, the sleepers and rail, and the safeworking requirements - they add up to about $1million per km in leasehold country, more in freehold country. And the distances are so long - think Port August to Perth or Darwin - double-tracking is cost prohibitive. There is double track from Sydney to Albury, and there is talk about finally double-tracking Albury-Melbourne (in standard gauge - it already exists in broad gauge).

If the Vics would standardise the rest of their network we would have an alternative Tailem Bend - Ballarat route via Pinnaroo and Ouyen.
cheers,
Rhino

User avatar
bmw boy
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 469
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 1:45 am

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#55 Post by bmw boy » Tue Nov 20, 2007 5:37 pm

since when was the Govt population target 2mill by 2020 ... wasnt it for 2050?

User avatar
Cruise
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2209
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Bay 115, Football Park

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#56 Post by Cruise » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:37 am

rhino wrote:The problem is that rail is very expensive to lay - by that I mean the buying of the land if it's freehold, the earthworks, the sleepers and rail, and the safeworking requirements - they add up to about $1million per km in leasehold country, more in freehold country. And the distances are so long - think Port August to Perth or Darwin - double-tracking is cost prohibitive. There is double track from Sydney to Albury, and there is talk about finally double-tracking Albury-Melbourne (in standard gauge - it already exists in broad gauge).

If the Vics would standardise the rest of their network we would have an alternative Tailem Bend - Ballarat route via Pinnaroo and Ouyen.
Correct me if im wrong but thats still cheaper than a road

User avatar
rhino
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2910
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Nairne
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 105 times

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#57 Post by rhino » Wed Nov 21, 2007 10:57 am

Cruise wrote:
rhino wrote:The problem is that rail is very expensive to lay - by that I mean the buying of the land if it's freehold, the earthworks, the sleepers and rail, and the safeworking requirements - they add up to about $1million per km in leasehold country, more in freehold country. And the distances are so long - think Port August to Perth or Darwin - double-tracking is cost prohibitive. There is double track from Sydney to Albury, and there is talk about finally double-tracking Albury-Melbourne (in standard gauge - it already exists in broad gauge).

If the Vics would standardise the rest of their network we would have an alternative Tailem Bend - Ballarat route via Pinnaroo and Ouyen.
Correct me if im wrong but thats still cheaper than a road
That may be, but it's a public perception thing. A road is there for anybody to use, and the response is usually "Oh, at last! A sealed road to (where ever)". Rail is funded differently, it's a user-pays scenario if it's owned by ARTC, (which an Adelaide by-pass would be, because it would be part of the inter-capital network) and the charter is to supply and maintain a rail network between the 5 major capital cities. Anything beyond that has to be able to pay it's way. With regard to double-tracking across the Nullarbor or up to Darwin - well, you're not going to see a dual-lane freeway across the deserts any time soon, are you?
cheers,
Rhino

urban
Legendary Member!
Posts: 574
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 10:59 am
Location: City of Unley
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 14 times

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#58 Post by urban » Wed Nov 21, 2007 11:45 am

rhino wrote:With regard to double-tracking across the Nullarbor or up to Darwin - well, you're not going to see a dual-lane freeway across the deserts any time soon, are you?
They wouldn't make it one lane for both directions either.

User avatar
AG
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 1890
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 9:44 am
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#59 Post by AG » Wed Nov 21, 2007 11:56 am

I don't think double tracking across the Nullabor or to Darwin would be feasible, but where there's a lot more freight movement across the eastern seaboard east from Adelaide, there needs to be some serious consideration of increasing capacity by either new routes (like the proposed Melbourne to Brisbane corridor) or by duplicating existing track in some corridors. Victoria is basically the pivoting point of the ARTC network.

User avatar
ynotsfables
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:15 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: #Article: Transport hub plan east of city

#60 Post by ynotsfables » Wed Nov 21, 2007 12:42 pm

Forget all the little intricacies of what line runs where or what road would disadvantage what route. Can't you see what this is. The key word was Monarto. I've always believed that a labour government would one day bring the idea back to life, and what great timing too. With Mount Barkers population evidently increasing as well as that of the Flerieu Peninsula to build infrastructure of this sort including a possible airport to me is the building of a sattelite city. This is very good, plan it well and bring it on. Dunston was right why live like sardines when our population grows build another city we have alot of land in South Australia why put infrastructure pressures on Adelaide.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests