Hugging the rails on a fast track to nowhere

acotrel says:

08:13am | 05/08/11

Don’t ever expect the LNP to initiate an infrastructure project.  Our great business managing conservative politicians haven’t got the balls to ‘spend a dollar, to make a dollar’! Have a look at their record, and tell us about all the great things they’ve built in Australia? With their unhelpful attitude we were lucky to ever get the Sydney Harbour Bridge or the Snowy Scheme finished.  They’ve openly opposed the NBN.  What hope does a fast rail link have?  They’re an opportunistic, do nothing, bullshit party!

Gregg says:

08:32am | 05/08/11

@Gary
Have you been provided with any factual information to come up with
” don’t reckon it’s that bad of an idea. ” , just like the NBN which is getting enormous take up rates and the only thing that will change that is the pulling of the copper network.
You’re right in the investigation being another $20M of taxpayers money put into the pockets of other taxpayers called consultants.

Tracker says:

09:04am | 05/08/11

acotrel says: ‘spend a dollar, to make a dollar’! . Didn’t you read the article ? Given the population density of Australia it would be more like spend 10 dollars to make 1 dollar. Only the ALP and Greens would be stupid enough to do that.

Al says:

09:29am | 05/08/11

@Tracker - the populations between Paris and Lille are almost identical to Sydney and Newcastle and that is one very profitable line and transformed Lille which was formerly an industrial city.
In Spain there are populations and distances that very closely resemble our own. With the amount of passenger movement along the east coast, we could be building, long-term positive infrastructure which will bring new industries to revive our regions and ease congestion in the cities.

Tracker says:

09:57am | 05/08/11

@Al, I understand what you are saying but it would never workl here. Spain’s economy isn’t exactly too healthy at the moment so I wouldn’t use them as an example but one thing Spain (population 45 mil) and France (population 62 mil) have in their advantage is they are close to other European countries and get a considerable amount of tourism by road, rail, air and boat from other European countries (plus ease of travel between Euro countries). Australia is relatively isolated compared to Europe because of the travel expense getting here and with a small population Australia can only grow so much. You cannot compare Europe to Australia and justify the expense.

max headroom says:

10:02am | 05/08/11

acotrel this lazy $20 million of our money was on the greens whish list for labor to form government, it was never ever going anywhere and you didnt need to spend $20 million to realise that. its just more money to keep the looney green party happy! The Loco express!  More waste from the most incompetent governemnt of all time. And as the world economy goes down the drain our Nero like government plans taxes to hasten our collapse.

Gregg says:

11:11am | 05/08/11

@ Al,
And just where are you getting your Paris/Lille and Sydney/NC populations BS from for have a look at http://www.worldatlas.com/citypops.htm and then you just may also want to consider populations of France/Spain and rest of Europe plus the tourism with that of Brisbane to Melbourne.
Most travelling tourists to Australia will btw use road transport when not flying for the roads take them to places that the trains do not.

Bruce says:

11:24am | 05/08/11

I think it is good idea. I have ridden in many ‘fast trains’ in uk, europe, russia and china and have found the service fast and efficient. However, this project will be a major piece of work, will cost a bucket load, and will take many years to complete properly. There is a good chance those over the age of 40 will never see it completed.

stockinbingal roo says:

11:29am | 05/08/11

Acotrel’s comment reminded me of a letter my grandfather wrote to the government at the time that the Sydney Harbour Bridge was being built complaining that it was a waste of tax payers money, my grandfather was the head of the local conservative party at the time…

Al says:

12:44pm | 05/08/11

Sorry Gregg, you are right in regards to Paris compared to Sydney, I was comparing Lille to Newcastle.
However, our domestic flight routes are some of the most populous in the world and with take-up of high speed trains over air traffic I think the chance for the line to pay for itself is very high.
Also this is long term infrastructure, preparing for a future of high oil and low carbon. Importantly it can revive the regions and set up a high speed commuter network when people can commute 250kms in less than an hour.

Matthew says:

03:09pm | 05/08/11

“plus ease of travel between Euro countries”, tracker, you mean like the ease of travel that doesn’t exist in Australia but is being proposed?

gregg, the NBN hasn’t been built in a highly populated, modern city (melb, syd, bris or perth) yet, only some remote areas in northern TAS and northern NSW.  I know one person on Fibre to the home (provided by Telstra) and he loves it.  Just as myself and everyone I work with will when they get it.

Expat Ozzie says:

03:20pm | 05/08/11

Al: I agree with you.  The Sydney to Melbourne route is consistently in the top 5 or 6 busiest in the world so would be a good case for this. This is one project that I think is worth serious consideration.

Sharwood: You should go travel on some of Europe’s high speed rail. I found the security to be far less invasive then airport security, I didn’t even get felt up by a bored security guard! In fact in Rome there was no ridiculous security, no scanners or check points just walk into the station onto the platform and then the train. There’s plenty of police around to keep an eye on things but that’s about all. I’d take that any-day over the paranoia and time wasting at airports these day’s. Plus I had my bags in the same carriage as me so when we got to the other end we just walked off and got in bus an off to the next accommodation. Much quicker and less stuffing around especially with a 3 year old in tow.

Gregg: “just like the NBN which is getting enormous take up rates” The NBN is in a development stage at the moment that is why the take up rate is low. The last thing you need when developing a complex system is a large number of users before the system is fully functional. To use this logic against the NBN is just ridiculous.

stockinbingal roo: Nice. Conservatives don’t build they just sell stuff off.

Gregg says:

04:19pm | 05/08/11

@Matthew.
Re the ease of travel, if you have a look at a global atlas you will see a number of populous countries within Europe, all of very close proximity to oneanother thus tourist travel is so high to supplement the local traffic and that of tourists from further abroad, all being far far greater than what we have in Australia with greater distances, hence more costs and less people to fund it.
No way are we comparable with Europe and if you do not like it, there’s always seeing about immigrating to there.

As for the NBN, one of the first places connected was very close to Hobart, Armidale is hardly too remote and a large city in itself and Brunswick is a suburb of Melbourne, take up rate there also very minimal, it just not being justifiable to continue messing with the systems further.

As for Expat Ozzie
” The NBN is in a development stage at the moment that is why the take up rate is low. The last thing you need when developing a complex system is a large number of users before the system is fully functional. To use this logic against the NBN is just ridiculous.”
The NBN is a known system even if the total network program has not been detailed and all that means is we have a pie in the sky with minimal planning and what at best would have to be an adhoc construction plan.
Like we have been told that copper services would be withdrawn, thus forcing take up and so why not in areas where the NBN has been rolled out.
Have you seen any government detailed announcements to go along with button pushing PR exercises.
If it is proposed that FO will be run parallel to copper for a period, only to be pulled at a later date, should there not be a clear announcement of that.

One way or another it seems just like other programs we have a certain vagueness, probably because of a lack of thinking through the implications.
Meanwhile there is plenty of thinking of newer technology about that shows there are far cheaper options for super fast broadband speeds are rather irrelevant for many, it certainly being totally irrelevant when one is compiling data to upload or even with downloading data that needs to be worked on as that also only happens as fast as one’s mind can function.

Expat Ozzie says:

05:05pm | 05/08/11

Gregg: “The NBN is a known system even if the total network program has not been detailed and all that means is we have a pie in the sky with minimal planning and what at best would have to be an adhoc construction plan.”

No the NBN is not known system it hasn’t been built yet. It is still in the development stages that is why it is being rolled out in the areas it is, to test and validate design. This is why the take up rate is a non argument at the present time.

“Like we have been told that copper services would be withdrawn, thus forcing take up and so why not in areas where the NBN has been rolled out.”

Once again the system is in a development period. This means you do not remove existing systems whilst you are developing new systems until you are sure the system works. This is a lesson the IT community has learnt over the years in both network and software design.

“One way or another it seems just like other programs we have a certain vagueness, probably because of a lack of thinking through the implications.”

The vagueness is because all large complex projects have exactly that in them. You never quite know what is in there until you test and test again. 

“Meanwhile there is plenty of thinking of newer technology about that shows there are far cheaper options for super fast broadband speeds are rather irrelevant for many, it certainly being totally irrelevant when one is compiling data to upload or even with downloading data that needs to be worked on as that also only happens as fast as one’s mind can function.”

This is one of favorite ones. I remember when I first got on the internet in 1997 and my parents said “What will you possilbly do with that waste of money?” and my wifes mother just thought was plain evil. Well they watched and asked questions and eventually got the internet. Now they do all their banking on line, they call us overseas on Skype, use facebook etc. All these things they take for granted now and use on a daily basis but only a small number of years ago they saw no value in it. There are technologies coming on line that you will use and need the bandwidth for. A good first stop for most will probably be TV over IP and other entertainment e.g Hulu and the like as well as distance education. Just because you don’t see a particular need right now for the bandwidth my bet is in the very near future you will. There is one thing developers love it’s more room just look how the size of the Windows operating system has grown as computer technology has grown.The progress in cloud computing is a classic area and is especially relevant with the increase in mobility.

I have actually been quite surprised by the NBN. I was quite dubious about it at the start but the way it is being structured and rolled out it looks like one the projects this government has got fairly right. I also believe the NBN is one of the areas Oz can be a world leader in as the single best thing about the internet is it’s ability to contract distance.

Gregg says:

06:10pm | 05/08/11

@Expat Ozzie,
You can have your view and I’ll jave mine and I doubt that you’ll get any Labor politician claiming this a development exercise.\ nor needs testing and validating.
You’ll find Senator Conroy more than fixed on it and you do not need to have something constructed for it to be known and you look at all forms of infrastructure and the successful ones will have detailed design and planning and if you think otherwise you know nought of engineering and project management principles.
In this case, we just have a government backing a project without total planning or management, having something they may not want to have report progress on, a project non the less which many regard as the greatest infra structure project Australia has ever had, just something a little wrong in the total approach.

There will be many reasons why people will not be interested in taking up connection and highest amongst them will likely be the cost.

All large projects do not have a vagueness and do you think things like the Hoover Dam, the Sydney Harbour Bridge, the Snowy or major roadworks and rail networks would have been successfully completed with vague approaches?, short answer being hardly not.

So your first stop for justification is the thought of television over IP!
Heaven help Australia if there are too many with that thinking.

Using the internet for verbal communication has been about for well over a decade and modern technology applications have fared quite well with internet speeds already available to many.
Applications could continue to be developed quite rapidly without the massive expenditure that everybody will be paying for whether they like it or not.
And yes, living in a semi remote location I probably use the internet for more day to day activities than most and do very well with a satellite service.

Over a decade ago, I was already involved with digital transmission of medical information and there will always be practical limits to what kind of services you can get over the internet when it comes to the medical field.
Believe anything else and you are a bigger fool than you’ll ever not consider yourself to be.

simon says:

07:40pm | 05/08/11

with attitudes like yours we will be left in the dark ages stuck in traffic jams no public transport, I’ve moved here from the u.k I now actually really appreciate the public transport in europe I just took it for granted before . Australia is a fantastic country just so far behind the times with infrastructure it’s growing so we have to think ahead and not get left behind.It looks bleak for the future .

Rod Rye says:

08:16pm | 05/08/11

It’s not going to be viable inter-city for quite a long time. But at 500km/hr (already some trains in the world doing this), it’s quicker than a domestic flight between cities when you account for check in time, and significantly quicker if you include travel to and from airports.

However it’s really better suited to 200-400km journeys, where it can travel the distance quicker than you can check into your flight.

If they were to start building this ‘now’ I’d definitely be concerned that it was way too much money and not going to be worthwhile.

However, if they wait 10-15 years, plan out some corridors to reserve space, and have some sections say Brisbane-Gold Coast and Sydney-Newcastle, started then, it certainly will provide something aircraft can not, and likely be cheaper too.

Also flights between regional cities and capital cities, are not anything like the cheap prices between capitals, though you could argue that’s because there’s less competition due to lack of demand.

acotrel says:

09:37pm | 05/08/11

@Gregg
‘All large projects do not have a vagueness and do you think things like the Hoover Dam, the Sydney Harbour Bridge, the Snowy or major roadworks and rail networks would have been successfully completed with vague approaches?, short answer being hardly not.’

What ‘vague approaches are you referring to?  I’ve previously mentioned on this forum that many project managers in Australia are self-taught.  Your comment indicates to me that you’ve never been involved with engineering design, or scoping a project.  In the beginning the concept is always vague, the design work then develops and updates the concept.  With any project there are risks involved, these are often controlled by applica tion of relevent standards.  Fibre optic transmission is not new technology, it has proven to be effective, and its limitations are known.
The Hoover Dam was built with some techniques which hadn’t been developed previously.  Such things as freezing the concrete mix, were no more than a twinkle in a scientists eye. I suggest your comments have been tailored with only one agenda - to pillory the ALP, and while you’ve been scratching around you’ve come up with a fallacious construct.

Scot says:

12:54pm | 06/08/11

Yes one only has to look at the gross incompetence of the former NSW Labor party to see how inept they and the Unions are with vision. They are too busy destroying the Australian economy. And Labor with its new CARBON TAX ON EVERYTHING. Where will they get the power from to run even one train set. And as for Albanese he deserted the sinking ship in Sydney and went to Melbourne. He is the same Minister that wants a constipation tax in Sydney because of Clover Moore bikeways and 16 years of failed Labor infrastructure into big black rail holes.

Gregg says:

01:21pm | 06/08/11

@Simon
” with attitudes like yours we will be left in the dark ages stuck in traffic jams no public transport, I’ve moved here from the u.k I now actually really appreciate the public transport in europe I just took it for granted before . Australia is a fantastic country just so far behind the times with infrastructure it’s growing so we have to think ahead and not get left behind.It looks bleak for the future . “
Yep, Australia is a fantastic country and we need to accept some hard facts that cannot readily be changed, thus:
1. We have a population of just 20 odd Million expected to be growing towards some 30 odd million, all in an area larger than western Europe.
2. Even that in itself raises questions re our water supplies and already you may have noted the situation regarding balancing water for the environment and agricultural use, Australia being considered the driest continent and we cannot actually force more rainfall to occur.
3. The figures on how many people for what area are easy enough to do and population density multiplied by taxation should start to give you an idea of what resources are going to be available for infrastructure.

We are certainly not Europe, nor the UK and you had damm better get used to that fact and understand that smaller populations in larger countries will take a lot longer to get things built than larger populations in smaller countries where some things become far more viable.

If you do not like that, there’s always the old country.

Gregg says:

01:58pm | 06/08/11

@Acotrel
” What ‘vague approaches are you referring to? “
Maybe you’ve not read the discourse on the NBN with Expat Ozzie or otherwise you may not be asking.
” Your comment indicates to me that you’ve never been involved with engineering design, or scoping a project. “
And your comments show me your ignorance for yes, scoping a project can be a development exercise, doing another study on VFT being part of that, not that it too much is needed again.
If you have a vague concept, scoping may not be too successful and as for design work, whilst there can be some projects where processes or desired outcomes will involve development, Hoover Dam cooling of concrete to remove heat that develops during curing and to prevent cracking [ not freezing btw ] and block pours being one example of that; most design work is very fixed when it comes to matters of size, weight and strength etc. and yes sometimes things go wrong for various reasons, a couple of note being:
. The Narrows Bridge in US that self destructed because of frequency issues.
. Westgate Bridge failure
But on with the NBN that was being discussed along with the VFT concept.
” Fibre optic transmission is not new technology, it has proven to be effective, and its limitations are known. “
Exactly and the very reason why I was saying there was a certain vagueness present in the project detailing.
Better planning would have more than a few lines drawn on a map of Australia and periodic cherry picking of where next to work on and a timeline against which cost and progress could be measured.
‘’ I suggest your comments have been tailored with only one agenda - to pillory the ALP, and while you’ve been scratching around you’ve come up with a fallacious construct. “
Again, read the full discourse and by your regular commentory it is you that have the fixed political views.

An engineering course btw does or in past times did have very little in it on project management, not that all engineers go into project management and those that do, usually learn mostly on the job getting experience in more junior positions if you want to call that self taught and yes I know, having been involved in much detailed engineering design as well as projects.
Another thing a good engineer learns to do is to absorb the detail necessary, it being a specification that determines action.

Suck it up babe.

Expat Ozzie says:

07:47pm | 06/08/11

Gragg: Sorry for the late reply but we had a plane to catch. Nice weekend away without the daughter in tow, the first in the 3 years since she was born, thank god for grand parents!!!

Anyway on with it. You seem to have some engineering qualifications yourself. Myself I’m a Aircraft Tech with over 25 years experience 15 have been a project manager for large deep level aircraft maintenance and modification. I also have a degree in software engineering and have completed the Cisco CCNA certs, (this is for a career change because as I get older I hate the cold more and more!!). From both these fields I know one thing for certain the best laid plans always have vagaries in there somewhere. Aircraft generally it’s with faults found during inspection or the problems arising from integration issues during modification.  As far as software goes the engineering issues are vast and complex, that also goes for Networks.

In the aircraft industries engineers build in lots of redundancy along with margins of safety for structural designs. Over the years and with detailed accident investigation the aircraft design process has become quite well documented however there are still many variables. Checkout the problems faced by the Navy with the Seasprite and the delays with the Air-force new AWACS aircraft. Both these were victims of integration issues.

The building of such a large and complex network like the NBN is fraught with such issues. Granted fibre optic is a known tech but a system is far more then just the fibre. There is a huge array of software needed to drive it along with a very large number of routers and switches etc etc. Integrating all this into a seamless redundant fault tolerant network is a massive task.

A good program manager/engineer worth his salt is aware of the vagaries of reality verses a nice design on a piece of paper. This is why in all engineering there is generally a design cycle, test is an increadably large part of this cycle. In software it’s generally along the lines of analysis’s, design, code, test test and test some more, and back again. This cycle usually occurs through out the life of the software. One of the most useful for software is the use of Alpha and Beta releases. These are usually released to a small test group of knowledgeable end users who will use it and report any issues faced. You try to get knowledgeable people because bug finding can be some what of a black art. It helps to build a solid system before release to the masses. This is what’s happening with the NBN at the moment. It’s the fact that they are testing the system implementation in varied settings that makes have confidence in the actual project. Of course only time will tell.

As for the High Speed rail I think it has significant potential. In particular the Sydney to Melbourne route, constantly in the top 6 most busy in the world.  Total country population has little to do with the routes viability rather the it’s how many of the aircraft industries passengers you can get to switch. After my recent trip through Italy by high speed rail I’d take rail over air but only if they don’t put ridiculous security on it.

As for the politics behind everything I really don’t give a rats about it. My personal views of politicians is rather low and I believe they are a major impediment to having real great Oz. There little more then overhead in the system, that goes for all of them.

Gregg says:

06:43am | 07/08/11

@Expat Ozzie,
Yep, I have an appreciation for what aircraft development would involve, even development of mods and then what that can mean re integration and installation, why they even still have test pilots for new aircraft.

Aircraft and NBN are not even close to Apples and Oranges though when it comes to the NBN installation program that if available could be released for sure whilst there will be various physical hurdles re installation, that and even any switch gear development should have all been thought through well before commitment to however many $$$billions it’ll be.
In reality, I think you’ll find there is no switch gear/routing technology to be developed for otherwise they would not already be doing specific areas and as you and the likes of Acotrel say, it is proven technology.

My beef, other than the question of whether it is justifiable, is there is no reason for there not to be a declared master plan for the installation and what is the decision thinking behind the trunk runs and connecting different locations quite remote from oneanother.

I am by no means a computer boffin but if you have the city of Armidale for instance all wired up with FO, unless you have a service provider right in Armidale, it would seem to be that you could not be connected to them by FO and whereas most server companies probably have their servers in capital cities, how will your FO connection in Armidale be linked to the server away from Armidale.
And then you have a server in Armidale and how is it linked to the rest of the internet, there already having been much comment I have seen re whatever Australia has, there could be bottle necking when it comes to information flow out of and into Australia.

As for the VFT and
” As for the High Speed rail I think it has significant potential. In particular the Sydney to Melbourne route, constantly in the top 6 most busy in the world.  Total country population has little to do with the routes viability rather the it’s how many of the aircraft industries passengers you can get to switch. After my recent trip through Italy by high speed rail I’d take rail over air but only if they don’t put ridiculous security on it. “

Sure traffic on a particular air route will have something to do with the viability of a VFT and then you’ll also have the question of whether all the air travellers will convert to rail and that is unlikely unless governments do an it’s NBN or no copper dictatorship in as much as banning the air travel option.

And then there’ll be the issue of just how many trains will be needed all throughout the day and developing turnaround management.
I reckon to move the number of people that are moved by planes and the ammount of time embarking and disembarking, you would need a massive station because you’ll either have more trains of smaller capacity and yet disembark/embark overlap or humungously long fewer trains and that in itself would introduce other significant issues.

As much as people may not appreciate the concept, it’ll probably be far easier from a constructional aspect to make the VFT train terminals out of the CBDs, even putting them at domestic airports to make use of existing feeder travel means unless as some one has suggested, there becomes a whole lot of new tunnelling to provide for the VFT right into the CBDs.
Whichever way you go, you can expect costs to skyrocket and you only have to have a look at the Japanese Bullet trains development over much shorter distances to see the financial and bankruptcy issues.

Thirty years down the track, if construction was finished by then ( which I doubt ) along with a few enroute power stations, traffic between Sydney and Melbourne may have trebled and the aircraft will still be flying, fuel permitting and who knows, the bans on night flights may even be less stringent.
The concept of the VFT bringing life to regional areas is also a bit of a furphy for you can ask yourself just how lively commuters will be after a few hours travelling each way and as for the regional cities it is what is needed to make them able to work there and not just live there and commute that will determine how they develop.

Lezza says:

07:00pm | 08/08/11

I live in Albury and I’d use it at every opportunity - getting on and off planes is a struggle.

Gregg says:

08:49am | 05/08/11

More and more people may use the internet even if not everyone will need it in ten years and as for necessary infrastructure, we need the NBN like a hole in the head.
Seen latest take up rates and when will this government realise they are creating such a lead weight around the necks of all Australians.

centurion48 says:

09:01am | 05/08/11

@Mahhrat: We don’t need the NBN. I, and millions of others, already have the internet. It works just fine using existing infrastructure. 99.9% of people don’t need faster connections unless they are downloading movies or P2P transfers and why should I have to stump up for that. The NBN will be good for government departments, education, health services, large businesses but that’s about it. Everybody else can satisfy their needs with fibre to the node and wireless (where there are real advances being made).
The HST is another distraction that will cost millions in feasibility studies and never get built (thank goodness) because it will never pay its way. If it was an economic proposition then private enterprise would have it running already.

andye says:

10:23am | 05/08/11

@Gregg - You people are going to cost us all a lot of money in the end. I dread how much it will cost to get any kind of decent speed under the Liberals new plan. Services then are developed based on what most people will have (obsolete speeds) and we fall even further behind… our tech sector will suffer as well.

by the time people realise we do need better infrastructure we will have to make the investment, and fibre is extremely likely to still be the best option, even in ten years.

Tim the Toolman says:

11:16am | 05/08/11

“we need the NBN like a hole in the head.”

Yes, we get the “internet” via magic, and there’s absolutely no reason why copper or wireless can’t just keep increasing forever!

Charlie says:

12:36pm | 05/08/11

“The NBN will be good for government departments, education, health services, large businesses but that’s about it.”

So education and health services do not effect the vast majority of people?? and i do think “government departments” and large businesses may in some way impact on the “everybody elese” which is i’m assuming 20 hermits living out of reach of everything in a battered up combie.

This notion that we dont need it because we’re doing just fine as we are is garbage, the benefits are as plaina nd clear to see as building nuclear reactors, the NBN or god forbide a hospital.

Mattb says:

01:08pm | 05/08/11

@centurion48

“99.9% of people don’t need faster connections unless they are downloading movies or P2P transfers and why should I have to stump up for that. The NBN will be good for government departments, education, health services, large businesses but that’s about it.”

Gee centurion48, I never knew the people that use, work within or benefit from government departments, education, health services and large businesses only made up 0.1% of the population.

I’m confused, what do the the rest of the population, the 99.9% you speak of, do when they need government departments, education, health services etc?.

Oh, wait a second, sorry, how silly of me, you’ve explained that in your post. These 99.9 percenters are simply ‘downloading movies or P2P transfers’, they don’t need government departments, education, health services etc. I should’ve known….

Brett says:

02:45pm | 05/08/11

@centurion48 - You almost had my attention until you said wirless was a viable solution. Physics says no…

Plus recent tests in the USA found that sufficient wireless coverage and bandwidth caused navigation problems with planes and caused all ground based GPS to fail… nice work wireless.

Tom says:

04:09pm | 05/08/11

@andye, we have already had the Kevin Costner “build it and they will come” visionary rhetoric. It is a lame duck argument because technology has always emerged rather than moved towards a known position.

Only geeks use terms like “decent speed”. Speeds have always kept pace with software and hardware. More’s Law has always prevailed. When the software and hardware are ready the speeds will be there.

@Mattb, delightfully witty stuff. It must be a wall to wall crack-up being such a master of riposte. However, your point is?

@Brett, wireless is used by submarines, wifi, 3G etc all technologies which would not have been thought possible. It isn’t all bad. BTW: Barrack likes it.

Gregg says:

04:30pm | 05/08/11

@andye
” You people are going to cost us all a lot of money in the end. I dread how much it will cost to get any kind of decent speed under the Liberals new plan. “
If you cannot afford to run a Rolls Royce, you can hardly afford to own one unless you’re looking at an oldie on eBay.

As for the super duper rail system, have a look at bankruptcy and privatisation of the VFT systems in Japan - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinkansen , a much smaller country and considerably greater population.
Pull out drawer sleeper compartments buildings ain’t there for nothing, population density and keeping costs down having a lot to do with it.

There are many people who are quite happy with speeds they already have for the internet and those same people are most likely more acceptive of reality than yourself.

KayFabe says:

08:16pm | 05/08/11

The people arguing against the need for higher Internet speeds are hilarious - you can imagine them arguing against the introduction of TV in Australia if they were around in the 1950s - “What do you need that newfangled nonsense for? You’re better off listening to the wireless!”

Tom says:

06:09pm | 06/08/11

KayFabe, no-one is arguing that. Some honesty, .... please!

KayFabe says:

12:50pm | 10/08/11

Actually, Tom, people commenting above have argued against the need for faster Internet, including centurion48, who says “99.9% of people don’t need faster connections “.  Some reading comprehension ... please!

Macca says:

07:40am | 05/08/11

Mono… D’oh!

Bravo sir.

TimB says:

07:53am | 05/08/11

“So then, “mono” means “one”. And ”rail” means “rail”. And that concludes our intensive three-week course.”

And this one seems appropriate :

“We’re twice as smart as the people of Shelbyville.
  Just tell us your idea, and we’ll vote for it!”

Phil says:

08:18am | 05/08/11

Monorail!!!!

(but seriously its a joke, dont waste our money on it)

Kel says:

01:58pm | 05/08/11

I call the big one, Bitey.

AliceC says:

04:39pm | 05/08/11

Donuts, is there anything they can’t do?

Granny Neese says:

12:01pm | 06/08/11

Also check today’s Border Mail on the track there and the mess and Mr Albanese’s non reply to urgent questions.

David Cronk says:

12:22pm | 07/08/11

@Shane - yeah and a website called locoexpress is going to give an unbiased commentary on this issue.

Tubesteak says:

09:04am | 05/08/11

The other thing about plane fares is the associated costs.

It’s a $25 cab ride from my place to the Sydney Domestic Terminal. Then from Melbourne/Brisbane terminals to their CBD it’s more like $50 by cab. Just in taxis alone it’s more expensive by plane and you haven’t bought a plane ticket yet.

Take a train from Tullamarine to Melbourne CBD….???? No. A train from Brisbane Airport to Brisbane CBD is admittedly viable. A trai to Sydney Domestic Terminal is twice as expensive as normal trains and still leaves you with a 30min walk to the terminal.

But that’s only if I’m going to Melbourne or Brisbane. I can’t take a plane from Sydney to Newcastle. The train takes almost 3 hours to do that journey. It’s 1.5 hours by car. Our current train system is a joke.

If this country continuies to persist with the notion that spending money on infrastructure is bad we’ll continue to be a dead lifeless country with no vision.

High speed rail could open up many new areas (you could commute to work from the Central Coast and not spend 2 hours one way doing so and this would relieve the pressures on living costs).

When penny-pinching misers stop running this country like a bunch of accountants it might be able to go somewhere.

Of course, no comment on the irony of people who use population size as a reason not to do anything and then decry anything that would increase population size…...

ZSRenn says:

09:30am | 05/08/11

@ Tubesteak How far out of the major cities will this monolith have to be for it to be built? I can imagine the uproar when hundreds to thousands of homes need to be destroyed so that it can pass through to central in Sydney. Or if like China they put it on stilts and people realise just how noisy these things are at 350kph as they are whizzing past your door.

The taxi ride and the parking will be the same or even worse when it stops at Camden and you have to then get into Sydney.

It’s a distraction. It will never be built and it is a waste of another $20 million by this farce that calls itself a government.

Jack says:

09:48am | 05/08/11

‘A train to Sydney Domestic Terminal is twice as expensive as normal trains and still leaves you with a 30min walk to the terminal.’

What the hell are you talking about? The station is right under the terminal. If it takes you 30 minutes to take two escalators and walk a hundred metres, you probably need to lay off the pies.

And it takes 15 minutes to the city, as opposed to the hour in morning peak traffic thanks to terrible road planning.

And ‘twice as expensive’ is still only $15, which is half the cost of a taxi from the city (if you are lucky). And from almost everywhere else in Sydney, significantly cheaper (thanks, Government sponsored market inefficiencies!).

The real timesink with taking a flight is checking in an hour beforehand, getting through the faux-cops intent on grabbing your balls at every opportunity (sorry, ‘security’), wasting another twenty minutes on the ground, another twenty minutes at the other end while fatties cram the aisle in front of you and possibly waiting for bags.

Whereas on a train, you walk through security (if it exists at all - only really on the Eurostar), sit on the train and off it goes. Luggage and all. Obviously, there is a point where you would be indifferent between the two, and after which the speed of air travel makes up for the lost time screwing around on the ground.

DM says:

09:58am | 05/08/11

@ tubesteak….“When penny-pinching misers stop running this country like a bunch of accountants it might be able to go somewhere”.  Those same accountants are what stops us going broke as a country.  There must be a cost benefit analysis performed on all infrastructure.  If the vost far outweighs the benefits, then it should not be built.  By your comments we should just build anyhting sounds like a good idea to someone.  Hope you dont manage your houshold buget the same way.
One of the biggest problems with uildin infrastrucutre in this country are the insane pay demands from the unions.  If they were reasonable we would be able to afford to buld more.

Tim says:

10:38am | 05/08/11

ZSRenn,
Tunnels. Perhaps you’ve heard of them?

Tubesteak says:

10:44am | 05/08/11

ZSRenn
It’s always proposed that the train goes into the CBD. We have an underground rail network in most of the CBD and the new line from Chatswood to Epping is underground. It’s not like it’s difficult to do. That is the significant advantage of a high speed trian line = goes directly to the CBD.

DM
Countries are not households. Hopefully, you’ve seen the more intelligent commenters on here explain that governments are meant to operate counter-cyclically. Nor should countries operate like a business. They are meant to operate to provide benefits to the people, not dividends. Moreover, there are some things that you simply can’t measure, such as the freeing up of areas close to Sydney for people to live and commute to work with a high speed rail link. I wouldn’t have to live within a 15min walk to the CBD if we had a decent public transport system. You cannot measure this sort of stuff in a CBA. CBAs are fine for businesses, but virtually useless and too simplistic for a country.

AdamC says:

10:50am | 05/08/11

“Based on a an absurd over-estimate of the cost. Much more likely to be down at about $60-70bn.”

According to whom, Jeremy? (I mean, of course, aside from your own mere number-plucking?) It would be a very rare government project whose cost surprises materially on the downside.

Tubesteak says:

10:52am | 05/08/11

Jack
I took the train years ago to the Virgin terminal and it was a huge hike. Maybe it’s different now, but I haven’t bothered with it since as it was a huge waste of time.
Moreover, I’m not going to give MacBank my money to use their train line. $15 is too much in my opinion for a crappy ShittyRail train to take 4 stops (Town Hall, Central, Green Square, Domestic) and that doesn’t include the time I have to spend walking to the train station from home with luggage in hand.
But you’re right about the rest of the time wastage with planes.

Rob says:

11:04am | 05/08/11

@Tubesteak: You can take a plane from Sydney to Newcastle. Aeropelican make about half a dozen flights daily from Mascot to Williamtown; Sydney Seaplanes make three daily flights from Rose Bay to Honeysuckle Wharf. The seaplane is cheaper and faster and there’s no security or 60-minute checkin, but it can only go in nice weather. The Aeropelican services are code-shared with Qantas, so you can book one with frequent flyer points and have your bags connected to your next flight.

Of course, both options, door-to-door, end up taking longer than the existing Cityrail train service, Central to Civic, which runs around the clock for $25.

Tim the Toolman says:

11:21am | 05/08/11

Excellent posts Tubesteak.  A pity we’re a country that only pays attention to things for five seconds before we forget infrastructure so that we can go and complain about what some footy player said.

Tubesteak says:

01:15pm | 05/08/11

Rob
You’d also need to consider the $50 cab ride from WIlliamtown to Newcastle. Not exactly practical.

These days I find it’s easier just to rent a car for $30 per day and drive up.

ZSRenn says:

03:33pm | 05/08/11

@ Tubesteak thanks for your sarcasm and yes I have heard of tunnels but it would take the construction of new tunnels and or at least a recomissioning of old tunnels to run these things.

They run on tracks that have to be millimeter perfect to be able to meet the speeds. I had ruled tunnels out because of cost. I did not think anybody would be stupid enough to suggest it.

Andrew says:

09:39pm | 05/08/11

Tubesteak, the station is IN the Virgin terminal. (You have to cross a car park for QANTAS.) You probably got out at Mascot (Suburban) you dolt! Half hour walk from Mascot station to Mascot Airport is about right LOL!

ILoveAudi says:

09:16am | 05/08/11

Woo Hoo! Bring on an Australian Autobahn

Trent says:

10:02am | 05/08/11

I’m sure we’d get a discount on volume too!

RemoveBlinkers says:

10:29am | 05/08/11

But if everyone had a Porsche the roads would be like Melbourne’s south-eastern parking lot (aka Monash Freeway) in peak time. No use having a Porsche if it’s quicker to walk.

In Perth, both the line to Clarkson and the one to Mandurah were touted by opponents as being white elephants, but they’re now used so much it’s hard to get on at times even with as little as 5 minutes between trains.

Balance is the clue, and the atmosphere needs to be considered too.

jeffb says:

10:43am | 05/08/11

How many hundred billion would it take to build the roads and maintain them to allow every Australian to use their new Porsche?..

Andrew says:

11:18am | 05/08/11

Assuming that you give out just 5 million of the things (assuming an average australian family of 2.4 kids divided by 22million people) and
I doubt you’d find a fast one for the $22,000 each family would get.

Stephen says:

11:32am | 05/08/11

Every Australian family ‘right now’.
What does every Australian family for the next 300 years get?

jf says:

12:44pm | 05/08/11

Andrew says:11:18am | 05/08/11

I refer you to Trent’s comment in relation to the obvious volume discount we’d get. That’s in addition to the waiver of the various government charges levied on European cars.

Everyone should have their choice of colour although only government officials allowed the traditional black.

Shifter says:

01:04pm | 05/08/11

@Blinkers - part of the reason the lines are so packed is they didn’t buy enough cars to have all 6 car trains every 5 minutes. Needless to say they’ve also underestimated the need for parking at each station.

@Jeffb - but think how much cooler we’d be as a country if we all had Porsches.

Matthew says:

03:28pm | 05/08/11

How much are we spending on the extra wear and tear on the roads?  The additional petrol stations?

Imagine the carbon tax required for all those cars…

jf says:

04:49pm | 05/08/11

Matthew says:03:28pm | 05/08/11

“How much are we spending on the extra wear and tear on the roads?  The additional petrol stations?”

“Imagine the carbon tax required for all those cars… “

I refer you to Shifter’s comment. Irrefutable.

Al says:

08:39am | 05/08/11

well said, i live up near lake macquarie within reach of a HSR stop on the central coast (warnervale would be perfect for me) ... provided they can get straight enough sections between here and sydney it’d be great. Some challenges there for sure.

Certainly a better option than a second sydney airport which has been mooted for up here and west sydney. Relieves stress on mascot, perfect!

Kika says:

08:56am | 05/08/11

I agree. I think this is a fantastic idea. I wouldn’t care how long it takes, our country needs a decent rail system. It’s ridiculous we rely so much on flying.

Gary says:

09:05am | 05/08/11

I completely agree. I live in the Illawarra and run a business which means working in Sydney, and sometimes Melbourne/Canberra. A flight from here to Melbourne takes me nearly half a day all up and costs a fortune once you factor in cabs and flights, with no ability to work. I’d pay for a fast train service with wifi in a shot.

marley says:

09:10am | 05/08/11

I can see the economic value of a high-speed train along the coastal strips to the north and south of Sydney, and between Canberra and Sydney, but I’m not as convinced by the idea of a train running from Melbourne to Sydney.  That’s a lot of real estate to buy, and a lot of rail to maintain - would the income generated ever cover the cost?  The high speed trains running in Europe and Japan run comparatively short distances through highly populated areas but Aussie trains wouldn’t, so the success of those trains abroad doesn’t, to my mind, necessarily ensure their success here.

I guess I’m on the fence on this one - I much prefer trains to planes, but I’m not convinced about this.  I’d prefer to see rail infrastructure to facilitate goods transport, myself.

centurion48 says:

09:13am | 05/08/11

@Al: If the high speed rail has to stop every 50 kms then it won’t be a high speed rail. It would be too expensive to operate as a dedicated inter-capital express and all these towns wanting to jump on board along the route would destroy the possibility of high speed travel. That is exactly the same reason we have flights direct from Sydney to Melbourne and Sydney to Canberra instead of stopping at every country airport on the way.

Dominic Feenan says:

09:16am | 05/08/11

I agree completely with Dave. People in Canberra will love this idea and have been waiting for it for ages. I’m sure people in Newcastle are the same.

I can drive from Gunghalin in Canberra to North Sydney in the same amount of time it takes to catch a cab to Canberra airport ($50), check-in, board, fly, get off, line up for the cab/train from Sydney airport ($20-$60) to go to city or North Sydney.

The transport overseas is significantly better and we can learn here. I take the point of Anthony Sharwood about not recovering costs easily. However, if the service was relibale, comfortable, had wi-fi, food (and a bar of course) people would flock to it. Provide a good service and people will use it.

How many people use cabs getting to the airport becuase it’s convenient. They don’t to it becuase it’s the cheapest option. If fast-train travel was convenient too people would be lining up to get a seat.

Bring it on.

The fast train would get my vote and I would definitely use it.

AdamC says:

09:41am | 05/08/11

I agree, Marley. What we actually need are genuine rapid rail links between state capitals and regional centres (Newcastle, Wollongong to Sydney; Geelong, Bendigo, Ballarat to Melbourne, etc). This idea of a fast rail line between Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane is so nonsensical it takes my breath away. It just goes to show how powerful ‘group think’ is when naked emperor ideas like this repeatedly come up for discussion.

Even when they basically make up lies the thing is still not compelling. Repeat after me - “There is no way that it will take only three hours to go from Melbourne to Sydney. That is an absolute fantasy”.

Al says:

09:50am | 05/08/11

@ Centurion ... there’s a balance there, i think the central coast would no doubt get one stop on a sydney to newy run, wyong is an option also though warnervale is less built up so easier to place ... i guess they could schedule some direct, some not. The issue in this area i think will be the topography in the lower central coast not be conducive to straight sections required for fast rail. Unless they somehow utilise some segments of the F3 corridor.

Willie Mac says:

10:53am | 05/08/11

@AdamC, go look up Regional Fast Rail. Your idea is already being implemented. What is not being implemented, however, is more infrastructure to take pressure off the 4th most trafficked air route in the world. Nobody said anything about a 3 hour travel time, so stop constructing straw man arguments.

Nell says:

11:39am | 05/08/11

Dave I TOTALLY agree!  I’ve lived in Paris and traveled to other countries in Europe for long weekends, the only time I took a plane was when I went to Scotland!  Every other time was a high speed train and yes, wifi was AWESOME!  I had downloaded some of my fav Aussie tv shows and watched them on the train, before I knew it, i was at my destination.  I traveled in first class, was extremely comfortable and the trains all went straight to the CBD of each country.  It was stress free, comfortable and much cheaper than flying.

This is something that I have been saying we should have here for ages!  It will allow better commerce between the capital cities and the more regional areas, we can expand further inland without drama, people not only from Newcastle, Canberra or the Illawara would benefits, but also people from the Blue Mountains, Southern Highlands and even the mid north coast! 
I recall one time I took the train from Paris to Montpellier in the south of France, it was a 749km journey, think about it, in a car, that’s over 7 hours of driving, in a plane it’s about an hour, but travel times to & from airports plus waiting times, it’s easily 3 hours, and stressful hours too!  But this trip, I was there in 3h 20 minutes.  And it was comfortable too!

Gets my vote no question!

PTom says:

12:01pm | 05/08/11

AL,

Under parts of the freeway or down the middle of freeway, there are plenty of those between Melbourne and Brsbane

Oliver says:

12:42pm | 05/08/11

Anyone who has used the high-speed rail link between London and Paris, instead of the plane knows there is absolutely no comparison - argument over. City centre to city centre with no delays and queuing for security, taxi-fares to out of city airports etc., comfortable seats and tables and able to work on the train instead of cramped cattle-class, and in the end, actually faster.  I understand the argument about population density, but why do you think Europe is continuing to expand its network - when fuel prices make flying impossibly expensive, electric (by nuclear) trains will be the only option for high-speed long distance travel!

AdamC says:

01:01pm | 05/08/11

Willie Mac,

http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-news/100-ticket-to-ride-the-highspeed-rail-to-sydney-20110803-1ibp8.html

The three hour figure has been widely reported. Even if you hadn’t noticed the media coverage, it doesn’t take a genuis to realise the travel time would have to be three hours to be remotely competitive with air travel.

Mr Real says:

09:59am | 05/08/11

They say they want. But they won’t when it blasts its way through Marrickville.

Further out in the countryside, there will be endangered species. And outraged landholders.

Noise. Pollution. Danger. Capitalists will make money by selling tickets. The Greens will be against it. Watch…

Spit'n'shine says:

01:40pm | 05/08/11

Until they realise that it needs iron ore & coal to make the steel, lots of electricity to run it that could not be fed from two solar panels and a car battery and a whole heap of other stuff that isn’t “sit in a circle and hold hands” friendly.

Not to mention the spotted hairy nosed tree frog habitat that would have to be diverted around. But they would have a workable Green solution to put forward along the lines of “Everyone gets off the train and worships the great wombat spirit and walks 20 km past the hairy nosed tree frog sanctuary and gets back on the train on the other side”

As for women…..

Sorry, for a moment I turned Erick,

Ruby says:

02:31pm | 05/08/11

The bullet train is supported by all three major parties.

Al says:

08:41am | 05/08/11

This is an important factor, decentralising population on the eastern seaboard. Good for regions, and those who choose to stick around in the cities. A real big vision type project, which is why its never happened so far with our dire standard of elected representative.

HappyCynic says:

09:18am | 05/08/11

Funny but that’ll never happen.

First of all who’s actually qualified to build a high speed rail link?  Only overseas owned corporations.  Second of all why would towns pop up near the track?  A high speed train is only high speed if it doesn’t stop.

Kika says:

12:34pm | 05/08/11

Happy Cynic - Overseas companies have already shown interest

Matthew says:

03:56pm | 05/08/11

HappyCynic, owning and building are 2 different things.  Source the overseas company to come train our workers, and let the government pay and own it (until they decide to sell it to the public).  There will be some foreign investment to get it started but after it’s built we’ll be our own experts.

stephen says:

05:16pm | 05/08/11

I heard a 200 metre wide corridor will be necessary for this train, and I suspect that a freight rail line will be constructed 50 metres away and running consecutive to it.
With freight comes depots, people, loading stations and more transport…and more people, and towns.
A freight rail line should connect all eastern seaboard cities and deposit our exports to Darwin then to Asian nations.
(Out-of-work truckies, of course, can be re-trained as sleeper maintenance-men..which of course means that in these new towns, there’ll be 3 pubs to every man, woman and child.)

Mr T says:

12:59pm | 05/08/11

You might want to talk to a pilot about bird strike before you make such statements. The masses are irrelevent, it’s where the energy goes that matters. Many planes have been damaged and even brought down by birds weighing far less and built far less solidly than a roo, even at landing and takeoff speeds. When you hit 50kg of mass that is effectively stationary with respect to your movement, at 350km/h (or even half that) the impact is not inconsiderable. Ask anyone who has hit a roo in a car at 100km/h, it can do enormous damage. At higher speeds, the front of the train would have to be very solid to withstand such an impact, but for the sake of lightness, high speed trains are usually quite lightweight. There’s a great image of the results of a bird strike on a helicopter at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IAF_UH-60_after_birds_strike_outside.jpg, considerable damage even at those speeds, and this was just a bird. A roo really is in a whole different ballpark. Sure, you can beef up the front of the train to withstand it, but with so many roos around these trains are going to be hitting them regularly, so you would want to get it right.

marley says:

04:01pm | 05/08/11

Remember the miracle on the Hudson - no competition between a flock of geese and a modern jetliner.  The jetliner lost.

bananabender says:

07:10pm | 05/08/11

You are a moron.
 
The result would be almost certain death for the drivers and derailment of the train.

At 400km/h the kinetic energy is 16x as high as at 100km/h. A kangaroo will pretty will much destroy the front of a car at 100km/h.
I have seen the result of a 6kg pelican strike on an RAAF F-111. The canopy was smashed to pieces and both crew killed.

jeffb says:

11:39pm | 05/08/11

Difference between a train and a plane is a train isn’t going to suck birds into its engines… There is very little in common between bird strikes on planes & trains.

A kangaroo hitting the side of the train would do nothing.

A kangaroo hitting the front of a train, designed to deflect that sort of impact, would still do significant damage but it is never going to derail the train unless you apply Tony Abbott’s Laws of Physics. You may have to replace the reinforced glass and the drivers pants but thats about it.

People have actually done real research and tests on this instead of just putting together some “common sense” posts on the internet.

Albert says:

07:42pm | 06/08/11

Mr T… Marley… Banananana..

We are talking about a train. Tee.. Arr.. Ay.. Eye.. Enn. Made of steel (not aluminium like planes). Doesn’t have massive turbine engines full of jet fuel that explode when you throw pelicans in it..Built with the likelihood of animal impact PROBABLY considered by the engineers.
Bigger than a car. Bigger than even a big car. Made without front crumple zones..

T - you said force location. The ‘point’ of the train is egg-shaped for a reason (look it up). And.. it is made of steel.

Marley - Are you really gambling a flock of geese against a train? You’re an Alan Jones listener aren’t you… I’ll give you a flock of any animal you can find in Australia, then I’ll drive at you in a 400km/h train… feel safe behind your animal wall? In fact I’ll generously give you 2 more animals than the minimum you think you’ll need to stop a train.. cos you can line water buffalo up from the start of the journey to the end and that train is NOT stopping unless the driver hits the brakes.

Bananananana
No. The result would not be certain death and derailment.. the result would be a dismembered dead kangaroo, and a mildly surprised driver.
BUT - IF the kangaroo jumped directly into the windshield of the train and curled itself into a ball… and… was wearing shoulder pads… and steel-capped boots.. and a helmet… IT WOULD STILL BE FUCKING DEAD and the train would not stop.

I spose the upside is that people who think kangaroos can stop trains will probably not buy a ticket cos its too risky… which means I wont have to deal with their stupidity when I’m on board.
Actually that should be a voter registration question.. ‘can a kangaroo stop a train?’ - if you answer yes you’re delisted from the rolls and castrated/hysterectomied

Tim says:

09:31am | 05/08/11

Or the more likely alternative,
your V6 Commodore or Falcon.

Debbie says:

11:52am | 05/08/11

A330’s don’t run on AvGas ... even i know that

Readit says:

12:32pm | 05/08/11

Well gregg, $20m gets you a preliminary report that answers about two-thirds of your questions and tells you where to point your consultants to get to a business case level in the secondary, more detailed report.

Gregg says:

01:30pm | 05/08/11

@Readitt,
As Sammy would no doubt say ” Ooh really! “
Do you really need consultants and $20M wasted when you have plenty of government departments, probably more than a few with finges in the pie of the Australian Infrastructure Fund management unless that has been shelved because of Rudd blowing all the dough.

Like, any donkey knows that you look at where our existing population centres are and what the potential may be for the future, given that a VFT will certainly lose some advantage the more often it slows to a stop.
Government department infrastructure bods ought to also be able to get some modelling up between centre to centre alone and intermediate stops or shorter run network comparisons on what it means re costs, routing and the actual build for unless people have forgotten, heading to Canberra means quite some hilly terrain along the way.
Some people reckon it would be great for Newcastle - Sydney - Canberra and if so, let NSW do their thing but last time I heard they were close to being bankrupt already.

The costs are far likely to more astronomical than even any consultants can dream up and have a read of the financial implications in Japan to get some idea - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinkansen , bankruptcy and privatisation the go.

Gregg says:

10:25am | 05/08/11

@Mitch
” People would pay the fares the government is touting “
If only fares were to be so.
What makes you think that the fares would be lower than what they already are at the moment and then go and do some very fast train travel or not so VFT in Europe and you would have an idea of costs.

As for a corridor and opportunity, it would be far better to have a compromise of vft to an outer hub and then a reduced speed express service along existing routing to CBDs.

cck says:

01:35pm | 05/08/11

urgh it’s still going..

wireless. will. not. supercede. optic. fibre.

respect physics, not Abbott.

Ruby says:

02:35pm | 05/08/11

Definitely a good point. I’d even consider moving to Newcastle if I could get to Sydney in 40 minutes.

jf says:

10:19am | 07/08/11

Get the NSW Government to build one then.

makes sense says:

10:06am | 05/08/11

Actually removing much of the air traffic on the 4th busiest air route in the world might even mean that a 2nd airport isn’t needed at all for some time to come.

Gregg says:

01:04pm | 06/08/11

@makes sense
And how many decades of construction fo you reckon will be needed to get a high speed train up and running.
Hint: Have a look at what the Japanese have done.

Kika says:

09:39am | 05/08/11

We do video conferencing all the time with our team down in Sydney. But of course, the managers and senior leaders find an excuse to fly backwards and forwards. Not us, of course.

Bomb78 says:

09:59am | 05/08/11

John: the business I work in spend a bucket of money of video conferencing a couple of years back, but has gone back to flying peoeple around for meetings. Why? Cheap airfares in one reason, but sometimes nothing beats actually being in the same room. And for all the wank over video conferencing, for me it did no better than a phone conference, at that didn’t require billions worth of new network infrastructure, just a decent handset on my desk.

Willie Mac says:

10:49am | 05/08/11

But see, if every comapny wants instant videoconferencing and the ability to send holograms, it will require very fast data transfer speeds. Enter the NBN.

Willie Mac says:

10:55am | 05/08/11

Another benefit is that road maintenance costs would be reduced too. Nothing chews up a road worse than frequent use by trucks and roadtrains.

Sean says:

11:09am | 05/08/11

Kirsty, I think you’re the first to hit on this: HSR for passengers may not be a viable option, but for goods, absolutely?! There’s not a real need to have goods trains reach 350kph, 200-250kph would be more manageable, and still be significantly quicker that a truck limited to 70 or so tonnes..

Gregg says:

07:16am | 07/08/11

@Willie and Sean,
Freight by rail is a fine theory and there is already considerable ammounts of that occurring and not just with coal either but the bigger issue is to develop the interchange hubs and there really needs to be something like a flat car/semi trailer slide on slide off concept developed such that a truck can bring its trailer, slide it on like as in a shipping container and then that be reversed at the other end, for as many railways as you have, it’ll never be enough to get to all commercial locations.
And then you have the unionisation power issues as soon as you centralise some activities and you only need to recall what had to be gone through on the docks re container traffic movement productivity to have an idea of that.

Then you get to the loading issues and if you wonder why the trucks can scoot along at a good pace on open flat stretches of motorway or highway, it’s because they have plenty of grunt for getting their loads up hills.
Same deal for trains but even more so and the greater load and faster you want it to go, you’‘re going to need much more grunt in the form of more engines to get the whole train up inclines.
More grunt = more diesel locos or more electricity and thus more power stations.
And then off course, tracks need to be built for heavier loading and maintained just as roads do and we’re having problems even keeping the existing Sydney to Melbourne railway line maintained right now.

ibast says:

11:27am | 05/08/11

He’s off the mark with plane fairs too.  You might be able to get a cheaper plane fair if you book 6 months ahead and you are online at the right time of night, but most beusiness people are booking the week before or even the day before.  That’s a $300 fair each way, without flexibility.

The biggest fault of the article is it only thinks within the current living/transport structure.  HSR would change where people can live and work.  It would relive housing and traffic congestion in Sydney and Melbourne and simtulate regional economies in places like Newcastle and Wollongong, over the longer term.

The build process would also be a stimulant to the economy.  Sure foreign companies are the only ones providing HSR, but the track, civil and signal work is done here at least and it wouldn’t be hard to encourage the foreign companies to fabricate the train sets here either.

This is a no-brainer.  What we don’t need is another 30 years of debate about this.  The government should just show some backbone and get on with it.

Willie Mac says:

10:59am | 05/08/11

That third point of yours is definitely the most important. I can see the merits of putting a station in Canberra, to provide Sydney with a second airport, but there are plenty of people who advocate stops in Albury and Goulburn, which is simply nonsensical for passenger travel (but no necessarily for freight, however)

Steve says:

11:10am | 05/08/11

Thats a good point Henry, and one that’s often overlooked - the PLEASURE of rail travel.  Not taking into account all the other inconveniences of flying (taxi fares, queuing time, security clearance etc etc etc), it’s actually just MUCH NICER to travel on a train.  You can work throughout the entire trip, get up and down as much as you like and there’s more room, plus you get to watch the landscape roll by.  It’s just a more pleasant experience than flying.

I think this would be a great investment for Australia and would definitely to assist with the urban chokage that Melbourne and Sydney experience.

Sean says:

12:24pm | 05/08/11

@ Steve 11:10am | 05/08/11
Couldn’t agree more!  GOOD train travel is a delight.  For business travellers, it’s productive travel.  For families, not nearly as painful for children as a “1 hr” Syd-Mel flight is: family can be seated facing each other, often a small table in the middle to eat, play games, whatever.  It’s just a more relaxing and enjoyable journey for all.

My wife and took a 500km detour when we toured Italy last year, purely because we enjoyed the trains and watching the scenery roll on by.  Would we have had that pleasure at 30,000 feet?  Doubt it.

Anna C says:

09:47am | 05/08/11

I totally agree with you Felix. Your suggestion for fast rail between Newcastle, the Central Coast and Sydney would be excellent as it would encourage people to move out of Sydney and release the pressure on Sydney’s housing market. It would hopefully also give the government the impetus needed to improve services and infrastructure outside of Sydney, with so many people leaving the city for places further afield.

Gregg says:

06:22pm | 05/08/11

@Sam,
Couple of problems for you Sammy and that’s
1. the VFT ain’t going to go past Brisbane even if one ever gets that far
2. the ticket costs could be anything and with the cost of build, you might do between the capitals for more like a couple of hundred $$$ or more and be looking at more like a four/five hour trip if nothing goes wrong, perhaps even being stranded if the wind ain’t blowing for the wind generators.
Japanese original developers went bankrupt.

Anna C says:

09:53am | 05/08/11

To quote Ray Liotta in “Field of Dreams”, “If you build it, they will come.” Well hopefully.

Michael R says:

10:50am | 05/08/11

nope. hate planes. being stuck in a small tin being flung across the sky full of smelly fatties is no way preferable to a fast train where you can actually stretch your legs. i am holidaying in china next month and have actually chosen routes where we can catch the new high speed rail specifically to avoid the airport and flight stress.

BJA says:

11:46am | 05/08/11

That would be a State Government project champ.

MarK says:

02:06pm | 05/08/11

No BJA.

That would be your error son.

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/labors-rail-blueprint-all-aboard-the-bullshit-express/

I guess it was only Gillard promising it so it really doesn’t count eh….champ.

Anna C says:

12:56pm | 05/08/11

I agree. We’ve wasted lots of money on useless crap already, so why not invest in some actual infrastructure that will provide jobs and has the potential to open up our country for further development. 

We can’t keep going the way that we are trying to cram new immigrants into increasingly overcrowded cities like Sydney and Melbourne. If Governments insist on bringing new people in to this country then I think it is our duty to provide them with the necessary infrastructure, housing, services and jobs.

Who knows maybe this project has the potential to be like another Snowy Mountains project which apart from giving people new opportunities and promote nation building, will be also be good for our national psyche.

Justin says:

09:20am | 08/08/11

Actually I completely agree.  I’m all for not wasting money, however the problem is the coalition considers infrastructure spending a waste of money and I consider handing cash to people to win votes a waste of money. 

Oh and today lookil at how much money has been wasted on aboriginal programs by both parties.  I bet if we look at other programs, its will be just as bad and soon $40 billion for the NBN and $110 Billion for fast rail will look tiny compared to the wastage.

Oh by the way I’m all for helping people, but handing cash out doesn’t help.  The world has handed cash to Africa and it hasn’t helped.

It seems anyone who has used rail in Europe or Japan understands the benefits.  Hey even a staged approach would work here. Build a Newcastle-sydney link and or a Sydney-Canberra link.

Kebabpete says:

10:23am | 05/08/11

“Some Australians are dreamers and very naiive.”

Kind of just sumed up your own argument there really.

jeffb says:

10:53am | 05/08/11

You are wrong with regards to operating profit, they don’t operate at a loss and are sustainable once built. The issue is making enough profit to recover the initial expenditure, which won’t likely happen in our lifetime for most of the projects.

The trains usually run on electricity and as such are only as dirty as the power station supplying the grid. If those power stations become cleaner or more efficient over time then so does the train infrastructure.

The trains will only likely make 2 or 3 stops on their routes, something like Melbourne, Albury, Canberra, Sydney. There is potential to have other trains running on the same tracks without affecting the express service.

Dreamers built this country.

Willie Mac says:

11:49am | 05/08/11

“There is not one high speed railway that is making a profit”

Totally false. The Japanese, French, Taiwanese and Russian HSR lines, and the Acela Express (if you consider that HSR) all make profits. The planned Florida HSR line (which was scrapped by the Tea Party when they won government) would have made a profit too if it had been built.

EG: http://www.economist.com/node/10717999,
http://republicans.transportation.house.gov/Media/File/Testimony/Rail/4-19-07-Matsumoto.pdf

“Australia has very long distances between customer bases.”

Note that Russia is like Australia, population clumped in cities separated by open spaces. Their HSR system goes between St Petersburg, Moscow and Novgorod, which have separation distances comparable to that between Sydney, Melbourne and Canberra. If they can make it work, so can we.

Links:
http://www.distancefromto.net/between/Moscow/St+Petersburg
http://www.distancefromto.net/between/Melbourne/Australian+Capital+Territory

“Australia has only about 25 million people tops”

It also has the world’s 4th busiest passenger air route, and relies on inefficient trucking to move goods around. HSR can assist with both issues.

“This issue is a diversion.”

And the real issue is what exactly? Having to pay a little more to do your bit for the planet? Boat people, who make up 2% of the population increase in this country?

bananabender says:

02:33pm | 06/08/11

In every case the VFTs are massively cross-subsidised by conventional rail services. The Japanese and French charge the same price for conventional or high speed travel despite the vastly higher per passenger cost to provide the VFTs. 

The Tokyo to Osaka line services 98 million people over a distance of only 515km.

Willie Mac says:

11:52am | 05/08/11

Compare that debt to every other rich nation, and we are one of the least indebted.

jeffb says:

10:41am | 05/08/11

What is with peoples fear of one time debt to fund large infrastructure projects which will boost our productivity in the long-term? We aren’t talking about structural deficit here, we’re talking about one time deals not recurring spending, it has nothing to do with health or education other than boosting our GDP in the long-term.

Some Australians may be dreamers, they are the one that made this a lucky country through their ingenuity and hard work, others are just trying to profit off their work pretending they know better than anyone who tries to take a stand.

“with our debt levels”... oh please… actually look at the numbers. You acting if our relatively small debt is some reason to halt all economic growth, its not. Consider the size of our economy for a second and compare that to our debt, perhaps look at other nations debt levels around the world…

What is with people using their blind ignorance as a basis to argue against the future of Australia?

Laurie says:

10:51am | 05/08/11

Completely agree, a rail line is a good idea that we can’t afford.  Swanny keeps telling us how he’ll return the budget to surplus by 2014 but he doesn’t talk about how long it will take to pay back the debt they have already created.  We can’t afford this train line at present we need to be paying off government debt not creating more.

Shane From Melbourne says:

10:58am | 05/08/11

Yeah, infrastructure projects in Australia get shit canned, but Liberals and Labor can spend billions of dollars on the middle class welfare binges and pork barrelling. Anyone who gripes about deficits, while not addressing the huge Australian welfare addiction are kidding themselves

Big Jay says:

11:19am | 05/08/11

@Jeffb - Australia in total has the highest debt (Govt + Personal + Business) to GDP ratio in the world, the govt harps on about the the lowest public debt in the OECD or whatever, but never talks about total national debt which is the problem.

I’m with Maddmike, I don’t mind going into debt for big ticket infrastucture as long as we get value for money (not like Mike Kaiser and his $450K job at NBN) and there is a decent return directly (usage charges) and indirectly (productivity increases) to the govt and society in general. With a $110b price I can’t see that rail line doing that

jeffb says:

12:22pm | 05/08/11

Australia does not have the highest external debt in the world by any terms. Thanks for proving my point I guess?

Looks like everything is going pretty well if thats the real problem…

Craig says:

08:19am | 08/08/11

Totally full of Lib party propaganda, I see.

We do not have the highest level of debt in the world, in fact, we are close to the middle, or the bottom. There are many sources done both on internet and print media that’s proven this point to death about it.

While no avid fan of Gillard, I am positively sick to death of the bleating obsession with the word “surplus” by the Liberal party faithful, you lot sound like a pre-teen male jerking off to themselves every time you use “surplus”, “debt”, “waste of taxpayer’s money’ and phrases like that.

I really fear for this country, I really do.

One party with a record of “although” building large projects, the outcome is ......different than the stated goals.

One party with the attitude of not even bothering, instead hand in pants pleasuring themselves over the word “surplus”.

Don’t delude yourselves into thinking the Libs are actually “better” economic managers either. Does anyone remember The Baby Bonus either? Sounded (and still does due to Labor continuing it) more like a Condom Buy Back scheme, really. I’m sure this was a great show of “fiscal discipline” as well.

Waste is still waste, anyway.

That’s how “useful” the “Parliament” is.

Tim the Toolman says:

11:50am | 05/08/11

I think both are needed and sensible, actually.

Gregg says:

12:06pm | 05/08/11

@Dan,
Nope Dan, there are a lot of unknowns with both the NBN and a VFT that leave a lot of questioning desired.
Just a read of Wiki on Japanease Bullet trains for starters is an indication of a VFT not being a walk in the park.

For questioning desired, you can also throw in CC, CT and BER, not to mention border protection and there is one woman who is a common factor in all.

There aint no monorail and there never was!! says:

12:59pm | 05/08/11

Can it go through Eden via Parkes as well? As logical as Albion Park after “Camberra”. Perhaps also a quick detour through Alice springs. No sorry, forget Alice Springs, how about TASMANIA!!!!!!

Kika says:

12:37pm | 05/08/11

Stop thinking old school. They should make the rail 100% privatised so that many companies can run trains on the same lines - and cater all different regional towns and cities. Like in the UK.

Graham S says:

11:58am | 05/08/11

Lets see Tim, I’m booked on QF next Wednesday MEL-SYD -MEL for $396.00 return, park off airport $14.00 & 80k to & from Tulla incl. tolls about $20.00, train Mascot to Central & return $24.00, Central to St Leonards and back, less than $10.00. hand luggage only, brekky and snacks in QF Club. Total less than $500. Mate, change travel agents and give cabs a miss but your point of view is sound.

Tim the Toolman says:

01:50pm | 05/08/11

It’s not really a big deal for me…I don’t pay for anything except coffee’s and lunch, but this is the second time those kind of fees have come up, first time Qantas (last wednesday), second time Virgin.  I don’t know how far ahead you’ve booked, but I agree, you can definitely get cheaper that what has been organised for me (I’m booked for personal travel to Syd in early September and the costs are around $500 return for both my wife and I).

Andrew says:

02:10pm | 05/08/11

It will never happen because some flog politician will point to a delay or cost over run as proof that the then current government can not do infrastructure. Menzies opposed the Snowy Mountain Scheme and Abbott opposes the NBN. Says it all really.

Graham says:

03:19pm | 05/08/11

“Let’s have legislation where the opposition (whoever it may be at the time)has to approve such a study.”

They are(will be) in opposition because they could not get a majority of members to support their stance they have no right to block anything

Anna C says:

02:12pm | 05/08/11

“The ALP will consult experts and then build it but will stuff it up.”

Shooter, I really doubt that this proposal will ever get off the ground, regardless of its merits. I certainly wouldn’t hold my breath if I was you.  We have been here many times before.  Forty years have passed and where the hell is Sydney’s second airport?????????

james hunter says:

01:32pm | 05/08/11

If we had a consensus government run by Gillard and Turnbull then we could do this and have it before trains are a forgotten species.
The chances with this country full to the brim with NIMBYS I could not see anything but years of political posturing.

Gregg says:

02:41pm | 05/08/11

How abouta Jack Pack from Hungries!

Tim the Toolman says:

02:12pm | 05/08/11

There are other ways, as long as you have a decent amount of processing power.  Check out what the Japanese are prototyping.

marley says:

03:54pm | 05/08/11

Out of curiosity, do any of Australia’s existing railroads make money? 

China has a high-speed railway, sure (and we all know how well that’s working for them) but it’s a country with a slightly larger land mass than Australia and with a billion more people.  Do you think it, and most of Europe, which has a population of about 300 million in a similar land mass, might just possibly benefit from higher volumes of traffic than Australia?

I’m still inclined to think high speed rail would work in the high traffic coastal corridors around Melbourne and Sydney, but I just cannot envisage a line from Melbourne to Sydney ever paying for itself.

Tim the Toolman says:

04:47pm | 05/08/11

Stop talking sense Tim!

TheRealDave says:

07:16pm | 05/08/11

Exactly Tim. Agree 100%.

This preoccupation with ‘making it profitable’ is crap. We stand to make more money in the long term from infrastructure improvements than we ever could from the actual infrastructure.

Lets just get it done.

So, NBN - check

HSR - studies being done

If someone throws in a national water grid that drought proofs this country I’ll dead set carry their placards and hand out their How to Vote cards tomorrow.

bananabender says:

08:36pm | 05/08/11

You have no idea what you are talking about.

The claim that you travelled Melbourne-Sydney is 35 minutes is total BS unless you were flying an F-111 or F-18.  The direct distance is 712km. You would have to have been breaking the sound barrier all the way and averaging almsot1400km/h.

Passenger jet aircraft quickly climb to an altitude of around 11,000metres and cruise at around 900km/h until they descend. 

Passenger planes, unlike cars, are designed to travel at one optimal speed/altitude combination. Planes can’t fly slower at high altitudes to save fuel because they lose lift.

Very Fast Trains typically use more energy per passenger kilometre than aircraft because they travel in the much denser air at ground level. This massively increases drag.

TheRealDave says:

07:19pm | 05/08/11

Chris, how many tonnes of freight do you reckon a plane can carry compared to rail networks daily?

There’s your REAL profit on the rail network right there Passenger traffic is just gravy.

Jon says:

04:09pm | 06/08/11

Agreed! Extreme short sightedness is the fuel of get rich quick policies of governments, banks and corporations and the opinions of the person who wrote this. Did the author of this article forget to consider the various crisis the world is in? Or even finnish high school? Sure, a relatively small population. But why is the Sydney-Melbourne route one of the busiest in the world!? What’s better, more planes, more cars? A truly and pathetically biased article without any journalistic merit!

stephen says:

05:25pm | 06/08/11

Who will come… ?

marley says:

08:34am | 07/08/11

Well, no a fast train wouldn’t make driving between cities obsolete.  The train isn’t going to stop in the intermediate cities is it?  If it does, it won’t be a fast train.  .As outlined, it might make driving between Sydney and Melbourne obsolete, but if you want to go to Albury-Wadonga or Bendigo from either, you’ll be on a highway.

As I’ve said above, I think it makes a lot more sense to run the train up and down the east coast (Newcastle - Sydney - Wollongong) for example, and from places like Geelong to Melbourne -  that would take a huge number of cars of the road, and you’d have the passenger traffic to support the service.  Then, if that works, thing about the longer-haul routes.

Gregg says:

05:47am | 07/08/11

@Phil,
Your population and area comparison is rubbish.
Go and get yourself some real facts and also include proximity to about a billion people and millions more in tourism and put your thinking cap on if you have one.

bananabender says:

02:41pm | 07/08/11

The UK is smaller than Victoria.

The population is three times larger than Australia.

Greater London has a population greater than Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane combined.

marley says:

10:53am | 07/08/11

Australian tourism is suffering for a whole lot of reasons - the high Aussie dollar, the expense of getting here in the first place, and the cost of hotels and meals, combined with the less than overwhelming service levels, all play their part.  I don’t honestly see a high speed train having a huge impact on that.  I see it’s real value more in the commuter belt - allowing people to live in Newcastle and work in Sydney, that sort of thing. 

And, if memory serves, the presence of high speed trains in Europe didn’t prevent total chaos when that Icelandic volcano erupted.

David says:

12:39pm | 07/08/11

If you want to face facts why is giving money for child support to families making over $100,000 pa a smart thing while building infastucture for the future a bad thing? Sydney - Melbourne is a very busy plane route and a fast rail link will save having to build one and possibly 2 new airports in the future.

marley says:

07:51pm | 07/08/11

Yes, Australian public transport is mediocre.  But I’m sitting down on the south coast of NSW, where the roads are crap, we still have one-lane bridges, and there isn’t even slow rail, and I’m damned if I see why my tax dollars should go to supporting a loss-making railway system that allows Sydney and Melbourne business people to go back and forth, subsidized by yours truly.

Most of the comments here are about the wonders of the European rail system - and it’s great - big numbers of passengers, small distances, all nicely subsidized.  Well, dammit, if I’m going to have to subsidize something, I’d prefer it to be a local hospital or just a regular old-fashioned normal train. 

I’m all in favour of building high speed rail that will improve productivity and perhaps reduce the population pressures on the big cities. That is Newcastle to Sydney to Wollongong, Geelong to Melbourne to Mornington or Wonthaggi - it’s not Melbourne to Sydney.

marley says:

09:10am | 08/08/11

@James - one of the great railway projects of all time - the Canadian Pacific -was built by a conservative government.  All those Japanese high-speed trains were built while the Liberal Democrats, a conservative party, was in power there.  So your argument is more than a bit simplistic.