ALP leader Anthony Albanese has promised a high-speed rail network from “Sydney to Beijing” as the 2022 federal election campaign ramps up.
Albanese stated that this would be an integral part of the Belt and Road deal. The Port of Darwin, the Port of Newcastle and Chatswood have all been listed as potential sites for an EZFKA rail hub.
“High speed rail has proven an election winner and along with the NBN, this will define the ALP’s path to victory that takes us through China and beyond,” Albanese said.
“We all know that high speed rail direct to our largest trading partner will really get the economy going again and restart migration. We have to think about potential board positions in post-political careers as well, I’m sure John Holland will be most reciprocal.”
Meanwhile, $2 billion has already been set aside for unionists and bureaucrats to sit on more feasibility studies that go nowhere, with payments alleged to be made in Aldi bags post-election.
Actually if it was not ruined by idiots wanting to do maglev trains, then HS2 could actually work here and be cheaper than airlines. If they could link it to housing then I am sure it would get off the ground too.
Well, maglev is already off the ground, innit?
Years ago EmBee mov were mostly opposing any infrastructure build but were sort of soft on other spending that left nothing tangible.
My only reason for support of HS rail is that even after malversations galore, something would be left behind. Spending on military and supporting housing is wasted money. If it meant 2% extra rates for the next 5yrs to build HS rail, I’d support it.
Waste of money. By the time high speed rail is announced, every shithole 2 bit town would want a stop on the line completely destroying any comparability with air travel times.
Just let each state build a faster train network to branch out 100-200km from each major city and be done with it and use air travel to take care of intercity.
Even just modernising the XPT fleet in NSW for example and reducing the curvature of the tracks as much as possible, modernise signalling etc would surely yield substantial time benefits.
South coast line for instance is a complete joke, it looks like a snake on the map.
The only exception should maybe be Canberra to Sydney, and Melbourne to Canberra where faster rail is improved to join to another state.
Well that is the whole point of HS2, trains that run up to 200km/h, they cost a fraction of HS3 or maglev and we could use some of the existing rail corridors, and yes they would need to limit the stops, but that is entirely possible if you don’t have the 2bit towns.
Indeed. But not as a national program.
I’d set an even lower bar – just run the XPT fleet as is, add some similar trains that can do 160 km/h, and have them actually doing that speed as much as possible.
Same goes with Sydney’s intercity fleet, 130km/h isn’t super high but on various sections of track they get no where near it.
Basically I’m saying just fix the shit tracks lol
100% agree. Whenever these people spruik HSR they talk about Japan. But local rail is the backbone of their system and it is very well maintained. Compare this to Melbourne and you will find mud holes everywhere due to poor drainage, uneven balance, decayed or decaying sleepers, daily points or signal problems. Our suburban commuter rail is a death trap, but we somehow think we can run trains at 300 km/h.
The only way to fix that is to add new tracks for the fast trains. a fast train cant go faster than the slower trains in front of it on the same tracks.
QLD did a pretty good job by having the tilt train. It takes about the same time between Brisbane and Bundaberg by train as it does by car. The train tracks are used by freight trains as well, so no need to spend millions on land acquisitions to build dedicated tracks.
To be honest, this is a cheaper option, but as mentioned in another comment, Victoria’s rail assets are probably not even fit for purpose for our usual trains.
This is the major problem.
They promised us flying cars, but all we got was toilet paper shortages.
Faster rail between Melbourne and Canberra is unviable. Canberra’s population is too small to justify from Melbourne.
But agree with everything else particularly 2 but towns.
Infrastructure always pays back.
Maglev et cie trains could stop once between Mel and Albury, then Albury, Goulburn (link to Canberra) and Syd to be fast. I understand maglev would still need safety similar to planes but total travel time home-home needs to be comparable to plane to justify use, particularly if one can get up, stretch legs and enjoy the view of a barren land over clouds. Combine that with car-train for passengers and it may make it more appealing.
When I flew to BNE the time from arrival to the long term parking to the time I got out in a rental was approx 4-5 hrs. Maglev or even 200km/h train with cars and sleeping cabins would make a perfect overnight travel for most.
But thats the real problem isn;t it. There simply isn;t any space in a city to add rail infrastructure. All the rail out of sydney runs on the same land it did 120 years ago, with the same limited number of tracks that everything funnels into to get into the city..
Interesting article here
http://www.tomw.net.au/atmttrn1.html
NSW already had a tilt train in the 1990s for a test trial which cut an hour off the travel time to Canberra. Tilt trains tilt enabling faster cornering and higher top speeds.
Shame it was never put into practice like what QLD. Would be curious to see what happened there in the end.
So that’s one lazy option i suppose for faster times but not big track alignment outlays.
Acoustic coupler?😂
campbelltown is a million dollar suburb, mate. And no phone reception?!
🤣
Reminded me of another fascinating story about trains in NSW
https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/nsws-2-billion-new-trains-are-too-wide-to-get-through-tunnels/news-story/47bd2ee36f43cd3cdd2819078feb6011
The problem is penrith to the city, or hornsby to the city. You can’t speed that section up with faster trains, and that is a large portion of most of the trips people take.
Another angle this country forgets with travel time, is our road speed limits being so low.
We need to consider increasing sections of highway to 120km/h or greater on roads that are capable e.g. Hume Highway, Pacific Highway in various sections.
There are no roads in Aus that are capable of safe speeds over current speed limits 24/7.
They can be, if all the dual carriageways are fenced off, no level crossings, median barrier, appropriate cambering for bends, water evacuation…. I can go on.
Perhaps parts can be made safe for 130-150kmh 2hrs after dawn until 2hrs before dawn on clear skies days with minimal investment but major hubs are distant enough to preference of other modes of transport as time saving would be minimal.
Combine that with poor-driver-teaches-poor-learner-driver system and it is a disaster half unfolded – as is. For comparison purposes, krauts have 6m RWC test on powerful cars ant 12m on rest, rwc is pedantic and in such great details some brand new cars would not pass, proper education of drivers, good driving etiquette, health checks for those with age and powerfull cars and their autobahns are fully compatible with high speeds (plus 0 wildlife to enter roads). They still fly.
Most new highway sections are pretty good and again Hume and Pac Highway are getting really good now. You would only run sections at 120 that are safe enough and sections still getting up to speed can stay at 110, I think you’d find at least half of both motorways suitable for 120km/h.
120km/h is completely do able, most drivers are already doing 113-114km/h anyway as it is.
Completely agree on driver training being inadequate however but to my understanding Canada and the US aren’t radically better with their training with limits of 120km/h+
No one is raising speed limits when the bureaucracy has been brought up on a lifetime of speed kills propaganda. The only way speed limits are going is down.
Completely agree.
My statement was a wishful what should happen, rather than what will happen.
I agree with you from a perspective of safe cars like many will have.
Focus on the usual driver of a run-down never thoroughly inspected, on as cheap plastic-y tyres as they can be and poor brakes Hyundai Getz. For them, speed above 80 k’s is suicide attempt on any road.
A lot has to be done to bring it cars, roads and drivers up to standards particularly for the base requirement for cars older than 2-3yr to travel faster and to be safe for every driver/car combo. Mind you, this is said by someone whom agrees that all this is because traffic fines business would not thrive,
I remember a banter with a character name DrSmithy few years ago about cbd speed limits down to 40k’s supposedly to protect the pedestrians. She never made any allowances for the pedestrians/cyclists flaws and apparent disregards for rules. E.g. my proposal was that crossing the street anywhere with headphones on/in ears should have 4 demerit points and a hefty money fine. In a recent article on EmBee She changed that tune 180degrees
What’s the point of driving Melb>Syd>Bris fast for private cars, anyway?
even for freight, there would seem to be little point, although I concede that you could squeeze out a bit more tonnage capacity out of the same number of trucks & drivers. But seems marginal to me.
eah no faster speeds on roads pls, aus drivers are so bad and the roads here are mostly bad. its night and day compared to american highways. i never drive when i need to go somewhere far away anyway i take the bus or the train.
Yes higher speed limits please – newer motorways only. 100 is fine on most of our rubbish A and B roads.
Cars have become dramatically better in every regard since the 1980s yet the limits stay the same.
drivers and cars after the first set of tyres and brakes are replaced are unmitigated risks at the moment.
Though, raising speeds up by up to 20% does not take much to implement in terms of legislation.
Not a question of legislation. Question of sight distances, horizontal and vertical road geometry, and other standards.
By that logic, you could also easily argue highway speed limits should go down to 100 or 80 because if you frame anything as what’s the point, you can make an argument for anything.
Obviously the point is to get from point A to B as fast as is safely possible.
And they may well go down.
because to bring them up will need someone to change “what works” and take responsibility for increased risks.
that’s not happening
Or, alternatively, a $50b “upgrade” spend in order for someone to say that the roads can now be run at 120kmh with the same level of risk that 100kmh previously attracts.
that’s not happening
Indeed on both points – ii’s what will actually happen.
I’m just in ‘what ought to happen’ mode here 🙂
Only in Australia, one of the largest countries, can we have such low speed limits.
Yeah, ii is a possibility, because it will create serious opportunities for porkbarelling and ticket clipping and jobs/contracts for mates.
first need to create a more desperate “need” for it, by pumping the population.
Freight answer is not higher speed, but longer combination vehicles. Upgrades of roads rated for 27.5m to take 36.5m or even 53.5m road trains are way faster and more cost-effective, than upgrading the same road for a higher design/posted speed limit. Australian Standards and such.
Ah, that’s an interesting perspective.
are roads currently limited in relation to length of vehicle they can convey or the mass of the vehicle?
Both length and mass, really. Heavier vehicles tend to require longer distances to stop, which requires longer sight distances. Longer vehicles tend to require more real estate for turning movements. Quality of pavement is also a consideration, as heavier combinations tend to chew up pavement faster, especially when turning. But on a straight run, it does not take that much more fuel, etc. to move significantly more freight with longer combinations.
Gotcha. And presumably the limit on any road is set by reference to its shittiest bit?
eg if there is a 200km stretch of road between A and B which can take a 36m road train but there’s a shhitty 10km patch in the middle that can’t , then trains would be banned from the whole road?
Usually, the short stretches of poor quality can be controlled by reducing the speed limit for that stretch of the road for road trains only. Usually, the roads away from the large population centres that carry predominantly freight traffic are of poor quality for looooooooong sections.
Yet these are the roads that road trains are allowed on….
Very few roads are allowed to carry road trains and they are all in the country
https://roads-waterways.transport.nsw.gov.au/business-industry/heavy-vehicles/maps/road-train-map/index.html
The rules for b doubles are less strict but still much stricter than for a single trailer truck. https://roads-waterways.transport.nsw.gov.au/business-industry/heavy-vehicles/maps/restricted-access-vehicles-map/map/index.html
The reality is anything bigger than a B double is not going through any major city because they are literally too big to turn around if you need to and virtually impossible to reverse without disassembly.