Australian East Coast HSR

[linkey]

Yes I know this isn't Japanese, but I do wonder would the Australian Government be happy to get some of the Japanese Shinkansen fleet to do this HSR from Melbourne - Canberra - Sydney - Brisbane?

http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/9954649/high-speed-rail-report-due-on-thursday/

Sydney to Melbourne in 3 hrs by HSR? I would like to see that done with an E5 shinkansen :D

[The_Ghan]

Hi linkey,

I hate to shatter your dreams but I first heard about HSR for Australia's east coast before I entered highschool ... I entered highschool in 1979 ... 

Cheers

The_Ghan

[westfalen]

Not again, is there an election due? If they'd actually built the thing when it was first discussed instead of endless feasibility studies the first trains would be getting retired now like the 100 and 300 series, and Jetstar and Virgin Blue would never have existed.

Maybe Julia has sussed out a good deal on some cheap Chinese trains.

[Mudkip Orange]

Achievable by 2024.

You don't say.

[disturbman]

I hate to shatter your dreams but I first heard about HSR for Australia's east coast before I entered highschool ... I entered highschool in 1979 ... 

Well, wouldn't it be nice if this was going to become true one day? 

[alpineaustralia]

Never will while she insistes "I dont want a big Auuuuustralia but a sustainable Auuuuuustralia".
Unfortunately, you need a big Australia to fund the building and ongoing use of the project which doesnt stack up for a population of 22 million people

[keitaro]

it's feasable for syd to canberra to melbourne. we wouldn't need as many services as jpn has but a few 16 car runs in the morning and afew in the arvo.

Biggest issue is they will kill the air industry for many local routes if they do it.

[The_Ghan]

it's feasable for syd to canberra to melbourne. we wouldn't need as many services as jpn has but a few 16 car runs in the morning and afew in the arvo.

Biggest issue is they will kill the air industry for many local routes if they do it.

I don't think its feasable.  We just don't have the reliable local rail infrastructure of Japan and Europe.  I'm tiring of bashing CityRail but it just isn't extensive enough and frequent enough to properly link in with HSR.  Think about your trips to Japan and Europe.  Surely, you had a short walk with your bags or short taxi ride to local station where you caught a local train to the HSR station, changed to the correct platform, seemlessly boarded your HST and did the reverse at the other end.  Here in Sydney you're just not going to do that from Blacktown, Chatswood, or Engadine.  The local trains are too infrequent, inconvenient with their double-decker design, and have nowhere to store luggage, etc.  Here in Sydney, you'll probably take a taxi all the way to the HSR station and fork out up to $50 for the fare.  If you're going to do that you may as well take a plane.

Further, when Tiger, Virgin and Jetstar all offer sub $100 fares one way what price would you accept to travel HSR?  It would want to be sub $70 ... which I think is not sustainable.  Consists would probably be limited to 8-10 cars because we just don't build long platforms and the demand would not be there for longer trains.

The Tokaido Shinkansen from Tokyo to Shin-Osaka is around 500km long and I believe has around 150 million passengers per year.  Sydney to Melbourne via Canberra and Wagga Wagga is nearly 900km  I'd be surprised if you would get more than 20 x 8-10 car consists in each direction with, say 90% occupancy, we'd be lucky to move 10 million people per year.

There are 42 Qantas / Jetstar flights each way between SYD and MEL each day.  Planes range from A320, 737-400, 737-800, and plenty of 767-300. There's another 30 or so flights between Tiger and Virgin.  Say 200 pax per flight, the annual load for the sector would be around 1.02 million per year.  So, the HSR would need to find another 9 million pax and I haven't even allowed for those fliers who have connecting flights and would therefore choose to fly instead of travel by rail.  At those sort of numbers the whole project is a pipe-dream.

The only alternative then, it to ramp up freight and put it on HSR.  Do you think the trucking industry will let that happen?  Again, we don't have the right infrastructure at either end.  HSR would need to link to Port Botany, Port Kembla, Dubbo, etc.  So, you see how complicated its getting.

That's why profitable HSR will not come to Australia in my lifetime.

Cheers

The_Ghan

[disturbman]

So first thing first, if High Speed Rail freight is on a paper sexy idea it doesn't really make sense. Because HSR is expensive and most of the item you have to move around by rail are not time sensitive and therefore of a very low value. To make it valuable you'll need to move around goods that are expensive and needs to go somewhere fast... if not, the rest, can take the longer road. The only projects of HSR freight is for premium mail (UPS, Fed Ex, EMS...) that people value enough to pay a premium for them to fly.

As far as the ticket price is concerned most of the people I know (myself included) do not care so much about the price of the ticket. If it's in the range of what the airlines offer, that's okay. I usually agree to even pay a small premium (10 to 20% on a basic 100€ ticket) if I can get the commodity not to to have to go through the whole airport experience which is a real pain.

For memory the SNCF have starter price around 20€ for a Paris-Marseilles (3h, 750km or something like that) for it's normal offer and even 15€ for the "low-cost" train. In general the whole treck, back and forth is around a 100€. The only thing is, SNCF's politic is of volume and I don't think Australia can tackle the same amount of volume as the Paris to the Alpes and the Mediterranean Sea corridor (Paris - Lyon - Marseilles). But there is other thriving LGV between Paris and less populated areas of France (like Paris - Bordeaux or Paris - Rennes).

The only question is, how big is the market and how strongly are those regions economically interconnected. The air traffic is an interesting data but clearly insufficient. You have to look at the total market (air + rail + road). Because actually, all the HSR line I know of have managed to increase the size of the market (air + rail) they are serving.

Another point 900km can be done in around 4h if the stop pattern is not too dense and if the line is build for very high speed >+300kph. And 4h is highly competitive with domestic airlines (even with final treck involved). Because pardon me if I'm wrong but wherever you look, it's more difficult to get to an airport than a station. Usually stations are build around the center of a city (meaning that most of the inhabitants of the city are equally distant to it) where as an airport is most of the time outside of the city and not easily accessible for most the resident of an urban area. And if both are highly hard to get, then they are equal to start with and accessibility is not an issue.

Last but not least, the "we don't have the reliable local rail infrastructure of Japan and Europe" is the moto of some opponents to HSR in the states. It's a moot point. It's only an excuse not to get started because they actually (most of the time) don't want their state to invest in something they only see as a boondoggle. The idea being, if you don't have infrastructure to reach a station then you don't have it to reach the airport. Also, the fact that "Automobile Land" (meaning California) is moving forward toward a stade-wide system when lacking "Japanese and European style rail infrastructure" should tell you that it doesn't really matter. The ridership projections are there, there is no reason for them to fail when everybody else have only succeeded. I could go again about the killed HSR line in Florida. No rail infrastructure around and sprawling cities but a strong business case. That line was only kill for political reasons.

Same goes if you look at Amtrack Inter-city they are doing pretty fine even though they are lacking any local rail network in most of their destinations.

So no, this is not (in my opinion) a valid objection.

The real kicker is to know how much this HSR could cost and how many people will ride it and at which price. This is what will deemed the project financially viable or not and that will decide if it's going to be run. Basically, if you have some secondary interesting markets on the way I think to link a 4 million people urban area to a 5 one should be worthwhile. But to decide you need thorough research, not assumptions.

:)

[marknewton]

I agree with disturbman observations, in particular not having "reliable local rail infrastructure", which is just a lame excuse not to build high-speed rail, not a valid objection. We won't see HSR passenger or freight rail built here for three simple reasons.

No real political will or commitment, at any level of government, by any political party.

The airline industry will fight tooth and nail to prevent it happening.

The road transport industry will fight tooth and nail to prevent it happening.

As for CityRail, if I agree for a moment on your assertion that it's not extensive or frequent enough, why is that? Again, no real political will or commitment, at any level of government, by any political party. You can flog us as much as you like for our alleged failings, but the poor decisions that continually hamstring our efforts are made by the government of the day, not us.

Cheers,

Mark.

[keitaro]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-04/bligh-backs-high-speed-rail-network/2824192

another news article.

In My opinion not just because i'm a rail fan, australia should be building a hsr on the east coast. It has so many benfits for the future of australia. If we leave it too long it will be too late to do as more and more land is being used and cost will soar in the next 15 years to do these kinds of projects.

[The_Ghan]

Perhaps my last message came across the wrong way.  While I was explaining my reasoning for never seeing Australian HSR in my lifetime, I must confirm my position: I am ver pro-HSR

Disturbman's points are valid.  I didn't consider a lot of things: existing rail, bus and car volumes, for example.  I agree also that HSR can generate business that was never there.  For example: If you can get from, say, Central to Mittagong or Gosford in 30-40 minutes then those centres are suddenly opened up for residential expansion.  We saw it a decade ago when the M5 and M5 east were built opening up the south-west as far a Bowral to new residential expansion.

Sadly, Mark's points have been demonstrated to be true time and time again.  But ironically, HSR is probably a key requirement for Sydney's second airport to go ahead and would make regions like Goulburn viable in that regard.

Unfortunately, linkey's suggestion of obtaining secondhand Japanese technology is just too logical basic for our politicians to accept.  We had the same chance with digital TV but no, we had to go and develop a unique 8-bit technology with a parity bit instead of the 7-bit version that the rest of the world uses, meaning that we get each digital innovation LAST. I can just see the Australian government doing something equally stupid with HSR and I dare say that my sarcasm is well-founded.

However, we can fantisise, if I've spelled that correctly.  I am now the world's first Trillionaire businessman and I've come to you for some planning advice.  What route would you take from Sydney to Melbourne?  I'd start with Sydney (and I believe there is some disused underground infrastructure near the mortuary platform at Central) and remain underground until the Homebush area, where there is plenty of land available to come out of the ground, and continue west to Parramatta for the first stop.  Parramatta would be flagged as a future hub for northern and western lines but the first line would then head south to Liverpool.  From there the stations would be:
Sydney
Parramatta
Liverpool
Camden
Picton
Bargo
Mittagong
Moss Vale
Bundanoon
Goulburn
Canberra
Gundagai
Wagga Wagga
Aubury/Wodonga
Wangaratta
Shepparton
Nagambie
Seymour
Broadford
Wandong
... and someone else can guide us into Melbourne  

At the rate we're going we'll have the damn thing built before the politicians even know !!!

Cheers

The_Ghan

[westfalen]

I agree with disturbman observations, in particular not having "reliable local rail infrastructure", which is just a lame excuse not to build high-speed rail, not a valid objection. We won't see HSR passenger or freight rail built here for three simple reasons.

No real political will or commitment, at any level of government, by any political party.

The airline industry will fight tooth and nail to prevent it happening.

The road transport industry will fight tooth and nail to prevent it happening.

As for CityRail, if I agree for a moment on your assertion that it's not extensive or frequent enough, why is that? Again, no real political will or commitment, at any level of government, by any political party. You can flog us as much as you like for our alleged failings, but the poor decisions that continually hamstring our efforts are made by the government of the day, not us.

Cheers,

Mark.

You've hit the nail on the head we need politicians with guts. The politicians are always talking about doing the best for the environment, what could be better than taking every airliner, truck and bus that plies its trade between Sydney and Melbourne and sending them to the scrap yard. HSR should be looked at in wider terms than the financial ones.

[Mudkip Orange]

I view Sydney-Canberra-Melbourne the same way I view the Texas Triangle - a HSR corridor so obvious, that any "studies" or "research" that ask the question of "should" are simply obfuscation.

The only legitimate use for studies in these corridors is "how."

[disturbman]

One thing, if the airlines would be a problem, it's always possible to offer them a seat on the project. Even more if the HSR is build as a PPP. It wouldn't be stupid for an airline to get associated in the operational part and even lend it's branding to such a high profile project. I could envision "Quantas Trains", red with a white kangaroo. Those trains would be a neat and I think it will give a different flavor to the modal shift. I even think it could encourage that shift (by appeal of branding and transfer of passengers).

I never understood why airlines didn't tried to join the movement (Air France was having plan to run a HST franchise with Veolia two years ago) since they could benefit a lot from HSR. I mean, it's not as if airlines were that much profitable and if they had a clear future ahead of them. They always are under the threat of rising oil-prices. HSR has a much more stable economical profile.

Another point is, in general regional air connections are not very profitable. The money is in the long distance, inter-continental. Regional routes are only interesting as a feeder system but we are now seeing a slight shift away from the traditional hubs (this is the bet behind the B787 vs A380) toward international connection on medium platforms. The feeder system can then be taken of the air on put on rails which leaves more slots in usually congested airports for more profitable routes. Anyway as France example shows, even with HSR there is still a future for airlines on such 3 to 4 hours (by HST) routes. It's not their death, just a scale down.

And last point, about our stupid politics (I can assure you they are in some way the same everywhere - France and it's Minitel is a famous failure that impeded somewhat the development of Internet in its first years), if you don't like their ideas you should become militant, create an association to spread what you think (with studies, interviews...) is good business/policies and raise consciousness about the matter in the general population and in the politic classes. But you have to act before it's too late.

Question, is there medium sized cities between Sydney and Melbourne that could be add to the line without too much detour?

[Mudkip Orange]

Absolutely. Seamless luggage transfer between plane and HSR is the holy grail, since there's always going to be O/D pairs that don't fit rail's profile. In my case, the Keystone is perfectly adequate for getting to Philly, but even the fastest Nozomi would take about 12 hours to get to Houston - whereas Southwest only takes 5 1/2 now - an hour to drive to BWI, an hour for security theater, 3 1/2 for the flight.

[westfalen]

One thing, if the airlines would be a problem, it's always possible to offer them a seat on the project. Even more if the HSR is build as a PPP. It wouldn't be stupid for an airline to get associated in the operational part and even lend it's branding to such a high profile project. I could envision "Quantas Trains", red with a white kangaroo. Those trains would be a neat and I think it will give a different flavor to the modal shift. I even think it could encourage that shift (by appeal of branding and transfer of passengers).

I never understood why airlines didn't tried to join the movement (Air France was having plan to run a HST franchise with Veolia two years ago) since they could benefit a lot from HSR. I mean, it's not as if airlines were that much profitable and if they had a clear future ahead of them. They always are under the threat of rising oil-prices. HSR has a much more stable economical profile.

Another point is, in general regional air connections are not very profitable. The money is in the long distance, inter-continental. Regional routes are only interesting as a feeder system but we are now seeing a slight shift away from the traditional hubs (this is the bet behind the B787 vs A380) toward international connection on medium platforms. The feeder system can then be taken of the air on put on rails which leaves more slots in usually congested airports for more profitable routes. Anyway as France example shows, even with HSR there is still a future for airlines on such 3 to 4 hours (by HST) routes. It's not their death, just a scale down.

And last point, about our stupid politics (I can assure you they are in some way the same everywhere - France and it's Minitel is a famous failure that impeded somewhat the development of Internet in its first years), if you don't like their ideas you should become militant, create an association to spread what you think (with studies, interviews...) is good business/policies and raise consciousness about the matter in the general population and in the politic classes. But you have to act before it's too late.

Question, is there medium sized cities between Sydney and Melbourne that could be add to the line without too much detour?

Maybe what we need is transportation companies rather than airlines, railways, trucking companies and so on so that one form of transport wouldn't always be seen as competing with another. Something like the old Canadian Pacific who had a hand in everything.

Your last question could be the biggest problem with HSR in Australia, once you leave the state capitals population thins out dramatically.

[keitaro]

Question, is there medium sized cities between Sydney and Melbourne that could be add to the line without too much detour?

Maybe what we need is transportation companies rather than airlines, railways, trucking companies and so on so that one form of transport wouldn't always be seen as competing with another. Something like the old Canadian Pacific who had a hand in everything.

Your last question could be the biggest problem with HSR in Australia, once you leave the state capitals population thins out dramatically.

theres canberra. if you want to call it a city....
Perhaps this is one of the main reasons there is no population out there due to lack of infrastructure out there.

I'm pretty sure if a hsr were going to newcastle and a dedicated freight line it would boost expansion same for wagga and other areas alike.

another article http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/high-speed-rail-100b-price-worth-it-federal-government-says/story-e6frf7jx-1226108440582

[The_Ghan]

Question, is there medium sized cities between Sydney and Melbourne that could be add to the line without too much detour?

disturbman, if you scroll up you will see my list of cities / towns served, in order.  I'll do an edit to indicate city/town size.  This is Australia, remember!  Nothing between Sydney and Melbourne has even 1/10th of the population of Sydney metro area.  I might even do a breakdown into what I think would equal a Nozomi, Hikari and Kodama service.  Speaking of which, I wonder what the Aussie terms would be?

Cheers

The_Ghan

[keitaro]

 

if we do it i hope we use jpn to do it. i want 500's 800's and  the E5/6 mix

[The_Ghan]

500 series, I wish!  Unfortunately the technology is now 15 years old.  The 800 series is too slow.

I don't know what capacity trains we would need, but an E5 without the Gran class, and possibly shortened to 7 or 8 cars would, I guess, fit the bill.  However, there is the N700-I - the "official" export version of the N700 series, capable of 330km/h.  It comes standard as an 8 car set.  Perfect.

I'm a big fan of shelf products but just watch some idiot here decide that we need to design our own.  Someone will dust off an old motor rail and weld on a pair of batman wings or something ... and paint the doors yellow!

Cheers

The_Ghan

[westfalen]

I'm a big fan of shelf products but just watch some idiot here decide that we need to design our own.  Someone will dust off an old motor rail and weld on a pair of batman wings or something ... and paint the doors yellow!

Cheers

The_Ghan

That should be good for another ten years of studies and a few more committees.   I'll offer my services as a consultant to decide on the shade of yellow.

[disturbman]

With what I've heard about the 500 Series in this forum I wouldn't want them to have them as rolling-stock on a new HSR. Plus, as the Ghan noted they are outdated.

For shelf HSR, you have:
- Siemens' Velaro
- Alstom's AGV and/or TGV
- Bombardier's Zephiro
- N700-I
- Hyundai-Rotem's KTX II

And I think Talgo and CAF might have some offerings too.

That's plenty to choose from. ;)

[marknewton]

I might even do a breakdown into what I think would equal a Nozomi, Hikari and Kodama service.  Speaking of which, I wonder what the Aussie terms would be?

Late, Very Late, and Cancelled. 

Cheers,

Mark.

[The_Ghan]

Mark,

Ahhh, now it's YOU bagging out the railways.  I didn't want to be the one to make the suggestion.

Cheers

The_Ghan

BTW, when The Ghan runs late it does so with style and people turn out to applaud the late arrival!

[marknewton]

I'm happy enough to pay out on a non-existent railway. As I wrote earlier, we'll never see HSR in Australia, but that doesn't really bother me. I'm quite ambivalent about the whole idea. I'd rather see money spent on maintaining or even improving the existing network.

FWIW, I'd be happy for really simple, cheap things to be done, like finally commissioning the bi-di signalling between Oatley and Sutherland. That way when another one of PacNat's shitty, no-maintenance-in-living-memory coal trains fails going up Como bank, we can run around the stupid thing, and not have to wear 90 minute delays, like last night. Or like tonight, when there's a fatality, also at Como, we can run around the so-called "crime scene", and the dimwitted constabulary.

Cheers,

Mark.

(who is tired and cranky...)

[bikkuri bahn]

PacNat's shitty, no-maintenance-in-living-memory coal trains fails going up Como bank

Ah, looks like they follow the American model of railway operation- run as many heavy freight trains with as little maintenance as possible, and occasional derailments are just par for the course.

[marknewton]

That's pretty much the way PacNat operates, although fortunately it wasn't a derailment. The grade up through Como is 1 in 36, the train was right on the load for 4 locos, and one of them shut down.

What pisses me off is that this happens regularly, yet no-one seems to have kicked PacNat's arse about it. Their trains keep delaying ours, but when you're trying to explain to a trainload of justifiably angry passengers why they're going to be late home, they're not interested in the distinction between CityRail and a private operator who is merely a guest on our network.

Cheers,

Mark.

[bikkuri bahn]

Their trains keep delaying ours, but when you're trying to explain to a trainload of justifiably angry passengers why they're going to be late home, they're not interested in the distinction between CityRail and a private operator who is merely a guest on our network.

Oh, the beauties of open access on the railways.

[The_Ghan]

... when another one of PacNat's shitty, no-maintenance-in-living-memory coal trains fails going up Como bank, we can run around the stupid thing, and not have to wear 90 minute delays, like last night. Or like tonight, when there's a fatality, also at Como, ...

I'm just across the river, with a view of Como.  Slept through the PacNat failure, apparently.  There was a helicopter in the air around 19:10 tonight.  Was that to do with the fatality?

Cheers

The_Ghan

[disturbman]

To stir back the conversation toward the original subject. I've been reading (not in depth) the HSR study. Interesting piece and as it seems quite neutral.

So, to correct the Ghan's assumption about air traffic between Melbourne and Sydney, it's not around a million but 7.88 million in 2010. That's more than enough to justify HSR.

Actually, covering the whole East Coast (from Brisbane to Melbourne) seems financially possible and viable... depending of the real price of the infrastructure. But clearly, the starter leg should be Sydney to Canberra or maybe Canberra to Melbourne. But since it's obviously going to be built in sections, I'm afraid there is no possibilities for continuous journeys until the whole infrastructure is going to be built. That would be impairing.

Other observations:
1/ there is real need to look if it's possible to include stations at airports for people transferring inter-continental flights.
2/ the Sydney to Newcastle stretch could also be a nice starter line if it wasn't so short and expensive.
3/ I kind of like the possibility to connect Canberra by a spur. I have the impression this wouldn't be so much time consuming for trains stopping there and advantageous for the most express train allowing them to stay at high speed without crossing an urban area. You can imagine a driver change at Canberra to minimize rotation time at that station.

[westfalen]

When asked about the report, the Prime Minister was quoted as saying she'd need much public feedback to decide whether HSR would be desirable and needed, public feedback hasn't played much of a part in other decisions she's made. In other words, another round of studies and committees so that it looks like they are in favour of doing something without actually having to do anything. And of course if you ask Joe Public, who has never ridden a Shinkansen, ICE or TGV and who's rail travel experience is the 7:30 to Town Hall or Flinders Street if he'd rather catch a train or fly between Sydney and Melbourne you know his answer already. Politicians have a knack for asking questions in a way that they get the answer they want.

[The_Ghan]

...
So, to correct the Ghan's assumption about air traffic between Melbourne and Sydney, it's not around a million but 7.88 million in 2010. That's more than enough to justify HSR.
...

so I redid my math ...  ... it actually adds up to 10.2m, not 1.02m as I first said.  So I'll happily accept the 7.88m in the report as I'm counting seats available, not seats sold.  I feel like a goose ... !

disturbman, does the report talk about tourism on the QLD coast in relation to HSR?  I thought Cairns - Sydney (or the opposite direction) is the most popular route for international tourists.

Cheers

The_Ghan

[disturbman]

No, the study doesn't mention Cairns. And I can understand why, Cairns is small (around 100k) and far away from everything (1.700 km from Brisbane!). I don't think HSR would be ever profitable on that stretch. Anyway, the study only covers the following corridor: Melbourne - Canberra - Sydney - Newcastle - Brisbane. Which makes sens in terms of distance and density of population serves.

I don't think you'll ever see any project build for anything else. Cairns like Perth, is too far away, a continent away (for me European). With the distances involved the only possibility for Cairns is a slow touristic train. But if the infrastructure doesn't exist or is not required for something else I don't see that happening. If it's for international tourist then my guess is that Cairns is something like a beach resort and for that it doesn't need to be connected to the rest of Australia more than by road or air. From there what would be the destination anyway?

Back to the report. I have only read it quickly, I haven't read every line of it. But it's quite complete. It speaks a lot about commuters (from Newcastle to Sydney) but I don't remember anything about Tourism. But I'm sure it must raises those questions somewhere. It's a nice piece even if some issues needs to be  studied further (like definitive corridors, more precise cost and ridership projections). You should read it.

[linkey]

If the project goes ahead there might be a service from Melbourne to Perth cause at the moment you would need to board more than two trains to do so unless you go from Melbourne to Sydney then Sydney to Perth rather than Melbourne to Adelaide, Adelaide to Port Augusta change over for Perth.

In which the HSR would take less than 6 hours to get there! :P

[disturbman]

It's normally admitted that HSR is suited for trips up until 4 hours. For Perth to Melbourne we are speaking about a 2.700km long HSR line. Which would take around 8 or so hours at 350kph... Way too much people would prefer to fly than to take the train, even more when the train cost at least the same price as the plane. The time incentive of HSR over flying is here lost.

Plus, I'm not sure that a Perth to Melbourne HSR line would ever attract enough ridership to justify to build it. I mean the predictable tag price for that is around 100 billion € if Australia is subject to normal European costs and not crazy inflated USA type costs.

It would be different if the country was more densely populated on the corridor but it's already an issue on the most populated part. So at such low density of population Intercontinental HSR doesn't make sense in the actual and predictable situation.

Here HSR would be a luxury that a few people that have time and money can take. But then, if they have, why should have to go that fast?

[keitaro]

This is true Disturbman. However plane prices are only going to keep going up. Tighter air security and rising fuel and saftey requirements are going to push this up.

While for the business man the flight is definately going to be the choice I feel it will be a 50 - 50 for those going on a holiday. Relaxing on the train and enjoying the view.

Not to mention the lack of lining up to check in, going through security, waiting for the plane, In theory less chance of cancelled train only the possible delay (See last comment), quicker access to the city and hotels than from the airport.

Volcanoes are a good example of why it's good to have a hsr. While the planes will be cancelled a HSR is not affected by such circumstances and there for can keep at least the traffic going within Australia.

On top of this theres always going to be the overseas traveller who lands in Sydney and after some time might catch hsr to qld or melbourne to ride the train and see the scenery etc. for example.

Hopefully we choose japan to build and get that 99.9% of services on time including natural disasters. 

[disturbman]

Are you actually saying that what is nowadays true for roughly 1.000km trip could become true for 2.000 to 4.000km trips?

[keitaro]

4000km might be going to far but a 2000km trip for up to 7 hours of travel really is not "that bad".

I say 7 hours because we all know australia wouldn't run at 350 if if they claimed they would be able too.

plus you need to add stops in etc.

Also a trip from melbourne to brisbane the 2000 roughly km trip is for a average flight at this time today 1 way with www.virginblue.com.au is at cheapest $230 opposed to what maybe $150 (although must of the news articles reffer to from $90 area) for the HSR.
The flight is 2hr 10 mins, you need to get there 30 minutes before flight absoloute minimum and then need to pay for parking etc. This already is for most people 3hrs 10 minutes, let me mention the airport is annoying to get in in sydney not sure about melbourne. But if you're flight is for example at 8am peak hour traffic is a bitch and the train takes along time to get there as well.

A HSR you could arrive as little as 5 - 10 minutes before and one would hope it is positioned in an area easy to get to via other train services as in japan.

To me already i have saved $200 for a family of 4 to spend an extra 3 and a half hours travelling via HSR

[Mudkip Orange]

Not only is Perth-Sydney via HSR crazy, but it actually becomes more crazy if you build HSR up the whole east coast from Geelong to Byron Bay.

Because having that HSR in place (i) frees up your airport capacity, and with less demand for landing spots the airports can't charge as much (so the prices come down), and (ii) having trains in place acts as a natural "check" on the growth of how much random crap American TSA-style security they can put in airports. If you're dependent on planes there's nothing to stop that, if you've got trains in place then the airlines have a non-air competitor and are thus incentivized to fight against the increasing security. Less security theater = lower airport wait times = faster trip times via plane.

[marknewton]

Oh, the beauties of open access on the railways.

LOL! You're not wrong, bb!

Cheers,

Mark.

[marknewton]

I'm just across the river, with a view of Como.  Slept through the PacNat failure, apparently.  There was a helicopter in the air around 19:10 tonight.  Was that to do with the fatality?

Yes, the victims were airlifted to St George Hospital.

Cheers,

Mark.

[marknewton]

You've hit the nail on the head we need politicians with guts.

We can't even get politicians with brains, so getting ones with guts may be a long way off. And I include ALL the current crop in that assessment - ALP, Liberal, Nationals, Greens, Independents. I wouldn't piss on any of them.

The politicians are always talking about doing the best for the environment, what could be better than taking every airliner, truck and bus that plies its trade between Sydney and Melbourne and sending them to the scrap yard. HSR should be looked at in wider terms than the financial ones.

I agree, it should, but our pollies can't look beyond the next election, and sucking up to the likes of Moody's/Standard & Poors - as if those wankers knew anything.

Mark, now sick, tired and cranky...

[marknewton]

One thing, if the airlines would be a problem, it's always possible to offer them a seat on the project. Even more if the HSR is build as a PPP. It wouldn't be stupid for an airline to get associated in the operational part and even lend it's branding to such a high profile project. I could envision "Quantas Trains", red with a white kangaroo. Those trains would be a neat and I think it will give a different flavor to the modal shift. I even think it could encourage that shift (by appeal of branding and transfer of passengers).

An interesting suggestion, but I think maybe counter-productive at the moment. The gloss has gone right off airlines here lately. Qantas has done a marvellous job of trashing it's own good reputation, Jetstar never had a good repututation to begin with, and Tiger are currently grounded for safety breaches. The only mob worth considering as partners would be VirginBlue.

And last point, about our stupid politics, if you don't like their ideas you should become militant, create an association to spread what you think (with studies, interviews...) is good business/policies and raise consciousness about the matter in the general population and in the politic classes. But you have to act before it's too late.

There was a time when I was politically motivated and active, but that's long ago. I reached a point where I felt dirty just being in the same room as some of our so-called leaders, so I gave it away. Sadly, there are no good policies to be found in this country, at any level of government. All we have is a bunch of shysters, mendicants and testicle-squeezers lining their pockets.

Cheers,

Mark.

[disturbman]

a trip from Melbourne to Brisbane

Ah... but that's not what I was speaking about. I was debating about (and against) extending the HSR line to Perth. Project that I don't think will make sense financially before long.

An interesting suggestion, but I think maybe counter-productive at the moment. The gloss has gone right off airlines here lately. Qantas has done a marvellous job of trashing it's own good reputation, Jetstar never had a good repututation to begin with, and Tiger are currently grounded for safety breaches. The only mob worth considering as partners would be VirginBlue.

True, Airlines have lost their glamour. But still, it will always be better to have them on-board than battling against such projects.

[linkey]

a trip from Melbourne to Brisbane

Ah... but that's not what I was speaking about. I was debating about (and against) extending the HSR line to Perth. Project that I don't think will make sense financially before long.

An interesting suggestion, but I think maybe counter-productive at the moment. The gloss has gone right off airlines here lately. Qantas has done a marvellous job of trashing it's own good reputation, Jetstar never had a good repututation to begin with, and Tiger are currently grounded for safety breaches. The only mob worth considering as partners would be VirginBlue.

True, Airlines have lost their glamour. But still, it will always be better to have them on-board than battling against such projects.

It was a theretical question of would they be thinking of such as the IP (Indian Pacific) takes 5-7 days (correct me if I am wrong as I haven't travelled on it) while the HSR would reduce the time frame by a big margin, it would then go by demand vs. effectiveness.


At the moment it takes nearly a 1 and a half to get from Melbourne to Brisbane via XPT and that is if you didn't swap over at Strathfield Station and I've done that and no way would I want to do that again, flights at the moment is 2hr 10mins but as stated you need to add time before you leave the departure point. With fuel costs be expected for higher ticket prices on any Australian airline carrier.

Maybe it was my mistake of even placing this on the forums? But this is something that Australian people have been asking for a long time and can't wait for pen pushing, backchatting pollies to get this started.

I have been at Airports all along the East coast of Australia and the better way to take away their customer service is by having this HSR operational and fully running.

[keitaro]

hsr just has so much benefits for Aus. especially for those rural areas listed previously.

I hope they decide to have a high speed dedicated freight linealong side the hsr. They are always whining about wanting to get trucks off roads especially interstate ones. would make a big difference IMO.

I really want to see this happen !!!!!!!!!!!!

[marknewton]

It was a theretical question of would they be thinking of such as the IP (Indian Pacific) takes 5-7 days (correct me if I am wrong as I haven't travelled on it)

Three nights from Sydney to Perth. The IP leaves here at 1455 on Wednesday arvo, and arrives in Perth at 0915 or thereabouts on Saturday morning.

Cheers,

Mark.

[keitaro]

with perth to bris or syd or melbourne. I could only really see this being a 1 run each way a day. I my self would love to do a 8 hour trip from sydney to perth would be awesome views along the way.


But as it stands the IP is not really to save money but more for the scenic views trip. It's $369 one way for basic travel and up to $2000 in gold travel. A flight is cheaper than that last i checked.

[disturbman]

Maybe it was my mistake of even placing this on the forums?

Why are you speaking about mistake? I'm only saying that extending the future HSR network to Perth doesn't look sound financially speaking to me considering:
- the price tag, that's going to be around the same price as the Melbourne to Brisbane (60 to 100 billion)
- the size of the market, which is around 1.5 million people (I could add Adelaide but I think it's out of the scope of the conversation)

So extending the HSR network to Perth will double the price of the investment for a fraction of the population.

I believe the plane will remain more competitive and maybe even more efficient than HST on that corridor. A quick calculation will put at least Perth 9 hours away from Melbourne and around half a day away from Sydney. That's a lot, with access we are speaking about a day long trip. As long as flying remains as expensive or cheaper than taking the train I just don't see people riding that thing massively. Which means building a very expensive piece of infrastructure for a handful of trains... this is not something going to happen anytime soon.

Keitaro, HSR Freight also doesn't make sense economically. Most of the goods moved by rail are bulk freight, products that in general don't need to go fast and that the market price won't allow to go fast. To have HSR Freight you need to move around commodities that have a high price tag. Meaning that the shipping, even at HS, will only represent a small fraction of the good's price. And even then, you don't need to go to real HS. Most of the time, a 160kph corridor should be enough to move freight around. Higher speeds only means higher maintenance cost and in Australia freight railways are managed like in the States, minimum upkeep.