Re: Countrylink - Canberra - Sydney

[mauried@commslab.gov.au (Maurie Daly)]

In article <01bf679f$9182e980$e64265cb@nobody> "Brendan" <nadnerb_2000@NOSPAM.com.au> writes:
>From: "Brendan" <nadnerb_2000@NOSPAM.com.au>
>Subject: Re: Countrylink - Canberra - Sydney
>Date: 26 Jan 2000 12:51:06 +1000

>Hmm well one of those crossings was a 620/720 cityrail railmotor 20 mins
>beyond Paterson, the others were freight. We usually stood for around about
>5 - 10 minutes in the loops. Where is section G?
>Still the train controller is part of the company that owns the tracks isnt
>(s)he? It would be in their interest to let the XPT through, though by
>doing that they could delay more trains and have more compensation to pay
>out.
>I think the only way they could solve this problem is by duplicating the
>north coast line. Fat chance of that ever happening!

>Brendan

The Nth Coast line is hopeless and always will be.
In addition we have seen the closure of a number of crossing loops in recent 
times, Yumbunga and Kimbriki loops have been closed ,(dont know if they still 
exist still,) and a lot of the existing loops are quite short, (less than 500 
m).
There have been a number of loops lengthened to 1500 M to cater for the long
NRC freighters but no where enough.
There will always be delays .
The Train Control issue is an interesting one in that its the responsibility 
of the Track owner ,ie RAC , but RAC have contracted out this function to the
Network control arm of the SRA.
I understand that this contracting out is compulsory, ie RAC have no choice in 
the matter.
What isnt clear is whether the Train Controllers answer to RAC or to SRA or to 
no one.
Ideally in a horizontally integrated environment the function of train control 
should be totally separated from the train operation, ie Train controllers 
should not work for any organizations that run trains themselves, simply to 
avoid the conflict of interest issue.

MD