Re: Interstate Platform at Seymour

["David" <valley123@xtra.co.nz>]

David D Wrote in  article

It would be so easy to do but people always find problems with everything
that is suggested. 
When you think about it, this theory has already been done with the
crossing of the 
BG over the standard gauge and in to loco and S.R.H.S  ( note they are even
dual gauge) so I cant see the problem. It is highly unlikely that three
passenger trains will want to use the two platforms at the one time. If
there is then you just hold one for a matter of minutes, not long at all.
The other main line will still be there for passing traffic, only the XPT
and specials need use the platform road.

This could help Seymour so much but no one wants to do anything.

Look at Perth.  Dual gauge for miles, no problem there!
Reg
David

David Proctor <daproc@spam_this.umpires.com> wrote in article
<7fkfdj$oib$1@news.mel.aone.net.au>...
Hi Maurie - who said anything about having the platform as the ONLY way
through seymour?

Why not have it as a standard gauge crossing loop type situation, to be
used
only if a train wishes to use the platform? There would then be no way that
a standard gauge train could delay a braod gauge train, as a standard gauge
train would be in and out reasonably quickly.

DaveP

Maurie Daly wrote in message ...
>In article <01be8bbe$96ecc8e0$9f6760cb@pentium> "David"
<valley123@xtra.co.nz> writes:
>>From: "David" <valley123@xtra.co.nz>
>>Subject: Re: Interstate Platform at Geelong?
>>Date: 21 Apr 1999 05:30:05 GMT
>
>>If there is such a large problem with trains stopping at Seymour, then an
>>easy alternative would be to dual the platform closest to the platform at
>>Seymour.
>>All that is required is two sets of points, one stretch of line etc.
>>This would be so much cheaper and stop all the problems.
>
>>Anyone agree?
>
>>David D
>
>
>In theory yes , a simple solution.
>From a safeworking / signalling administrative perspective , an absolute
>nightmare.
>Dual guaging the platform means a section of track in the middle of the
>Seymour Loop - Tall Loop section which is BG and could be occupied for
long
>periods of time whilst the BG train is in the station.
>The dual guage track would have to be operated as a SG / BG grade crossing
>with interlocking on the BG signals ultimately controlled from Adelaide .
>Whilst all this can be done , Im sure ARTC wont want to pay for it , VF
>certainly wont as they dont get any benefit and Countrylink who would be
the
>only possible beneficiary wouldnt either .
>There is the potential for endless disputes , ie who pays if an NRC
freighter
>is delayed by a late running Seymour pass which is sitting in the dual
guage
>platform,when the freighter comes thru.
>
>With totally separate operators running the SG and BG networks , having
common
>bits is just a recipe for trouble.
>If its absolutely necessary , then a better solution would be to rip up
the
BG
>track on the up platform and just make it SG, of course this wont suit the
>owner of VLP.
>
>MD
>