Re: Second rate Alice - Darwin line?

["Stephen Devenish" <JohnnyR@bigpond.com>]

Maurie has it

Why use 60kg rail on a line that will not be seeing more than a couple of
trains a day?  You have to look at the amount of traffic.  Maurie might be
able to tell us what the current usage of the track is now and I wouldn't
see it increasing 10 to 20 fold.

47kg rail on concrete sleepers is a good track structure and if managed
correctly will provide service for the foreseeable future, if Australia
started rail profile grinding like in the states then the rail would last
even longer, add to this a little bit of tamping when required and you
should be OK for a long while.  If traffic increases and heavier axle loads
are required the go ahead and re rail, but why pay out more money initially
just for the future if the project is very tight?  Who knows this could end
up being the Number one line in Australia and may have to be upgraded sooner
rather than later.

I don't know whats happening with the other proposal to run the line via the
inland eastern seaboard to Darwin via VIC, NSW , QLD & NT, but if this got
off the ground it could make the Darwin to Alice line redundant?


Stephen Devenish



Maurie Daly wrote in message ...
>In article <D=EgON3Z=4xUyUmEVrJVT2jhfatp@4ax.com> "< Tell >"
<telljb@OZozemail.com.au> writes:
>>From: "< Tell >" <telljb@OZozemail.com.au>
>>Subject: Re: Second rate Alice - Darwin line?
>>Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 12:06:03 +0930
>
>>dbromage@fang.omni.com.au (David Bromage) wrote:
>>>
>>> The Australian (29/10, p1) reports that 155,000 t of rail will be needed
>>> to build the Alice - Darwin line. This doesn't quite tally. 1410km of
main
>>> line * 2 rails * 60kg/m = 169,200 t. 155,000 t of 60km/h rail only gets
>>> you 1291km of track.
>>>
>>> Add 16km for 10 loops, plus 10 sidings of the same length and you need
>>> 2,884,000 m of rail. This comes out to just under 54kg/m.
>
>
>>The majority of rail on the TAS is 47kg/m. ANR intended
>>to use the same on their proposed Alice to Darwin line.
>
>
>
>Currently , Tarcoola to AP is only 47 kg/m on concrete.
>No point using heavier rail than this on the northern end , unless you
>completely relay Tarcoola to AP.
>Even doing this doesnt make much sense as Adelaide to Tarcoola is also
>only 47 kg/m on concrete.
>47 kg/m on concrete allows full mainline speed with 23 tonne axle load
locos.
>(At least it does on ex AN rails, (ELs are allowed 135 km/h).
>As its very unlikely that we will see heavier than 23 tonne locos on the
new
>line,whats the point of using 60 kg/m rail.
>Whilst it would be nice ,lets not forget that this project is economically
>extremely marginal.
>
>MD
>
>
>