Re: Darwin Railway's new rollingstock?

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

In article <74gopm$m4u$2@news1.mpx.com.au> "Rod" <berlina@mt.bigpond.com> writes:
>From: "Rod" <berlina@mt.bigpond.com>
>Subject: Re: Darwin Railway's new rollingstock?
>Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 01:10:03 +1100


>SNIP>
>>Err, exactly just what is going to be hauled over this line?
>>Currently the total annual tonnage in and out of Alice Springs is around
>the
>>200000 tonnes per year mark, which equates to roughly 1 freight  train per
>>day in each direction.
>>Much of this freight is then transhipped from rail to road and goes on to
>>Darwin and return.
>>The rest all goes by road , all the way , and will continue to do so,simply
>>because its quicker and much cheaper.
>BIG SNIPO>
>>MD
>>
>>Yes Maurie
>                     but interested to hear your theory on why Adelaide to
>Perth has captured 90% of the freight on to Rail. Would not the same reasons
>for people using Rail to Perth cause them to leave their loading on the
>train, through to Darwin.


Adelaide to Perth has been captured by rail almost entirely because of the 
fact that the loading is highly assymetrical, ie nearly 3/4 of the total 
loading is east - west with only 1/4 coming back the other way.
Truckies hate this sort of operation in that its very hard for them to get a 
full load back ,so they leave it to trains who dont mind it seems having long 
empty west - east trains running.
 

The Darwin - Adelaide line would work if a major port was built at Darwin and 
all incoming goods and outgoing goods to Asia were shipped to Darwin and then 
railed internally everywhere else.
Whilst this is economically and from a transport perspective a sensible move 
,its politically untenable , as its means that existing ports in 
Sydney,Melbourne and Brisbane would effectively close.
Can you imagine the MUA agreeing to something like this.
It also means a net transferrance of jobs from the major Capitals to Darwin.
>  

                    Also you have forgotten Patricks and P&O.. It costs>$50000 
a day to operate these Superships between Asia?Europe and Australia.>The time 
it takes them to circumnavigate our large continent, would be>better used 
making another trip back to be reloaded. Patricks have announced>that in the 
near future, ships will go to one Port only, and they will move>it by Rail 
preferably around the Country as required.>                                    
                  Hope this helps>                                             
                    Rod


This is a sensible move , and logically it would seem that if Patricks are 
going to move all their incoming freight to one port , the logical port is 
Brisbane, as its closest currently to most of our Asian neighbours with 
existing rail access.
.The sad thing about building AP to Darwin now,or ever  ,is the amount of 
money its going to consume , around $1.4 billion of which $300 M is Govt 
money,contributed by the Govts of SA,NT and the Feds.
If this amount of money was spent in upgrading the existing SG line from 
Brisbane to Perth,we could have 60kg rail on concrete all the way , with a 
uniform safeworking system and comms system ,and there would still be a heap 
left over.
AP to Darwin makes sense if there is some major mineral deposits 
along the line which need to be railed to the nearest port,or alternatively if 
Australia becomes the worlds Nuclear Toxic waste dumping ground.

Eventually Darwin , like other mainland capitals needs to become connected to 
the rest of the rail network, but currently with the extreme shortages of 
funding for rail one wonders whether this sort of project is really the best 
utilization of this amount of money.
Unfortunately pollies like spending heaps on new infrastructure projects,but 
dont like fixing up existing infrastructure.

cheers
MD