Re: Lets Standardise instead!

[arthur marsh <marsh@ties.itu.int>]

Why would a double track line have double the maintenance costs of a
single track line carrying the same tonnage? Wouldn't the wear and tear on
the track be proportional to tonnage, given the same running speeds?

Arthur.

On Sat, 13 Mar 1999, Maurie Daly wrote:

> In article <DAmG2.11$eB6.432107@news0.optus.net.au> dbromage@fang.omni.com.au (David Bromage) writes:
> >From: dbromage@fang.omni.com.au (David Bromage)
> >Subject: Re: Lets Standardise instead!
> >Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 05:20:35 GMT
> 
> >Maurie Daly (mauried@commslab.gov.au) wrote:
> >> North of Seymour , its easy to simply close the BG line completely.
> 
> >Why? Regauge it and the Up line south of Seymour and you've almost got
> >double track from Melbourne to Sydney. Just add a second track from Albury
> >to Junee. :)
> 
> But we dont need a double track line from Melb to Sydney.
> We dont even need double track south of Goulburn , in fact 
> prior to the creation of RAC , the old SRA seriously looked at closing the 
> double track and converting back to single track.
> 
> The costs of maintaining a double track line is double that of a single track 
> line , thats why the SRA converted  the double track between Wallerawang & 
> Tarana and between Gresham and Newbridge to single track. (simply not enuf 
> trains )
> When we have around 100 trains per day between Melb and Sydney then we 
> could look at building a double track line , but until then its sheer 
> extravagance.
> Since the SG line was built in 1962 between Melb and Albury , the 
> number of trains running today , is significantly less than when the line was 
> first built , and as NRC move to running heavier and longer trains , the 
> numbers of trains will fall again.
> 
> Rather than spend what little money rail has building or guage converting 
> unnecessary tracks , lets put the money into improving what will give an 
> immediate return to Rail operators.
> 
> MD
> 
> 
> 
>