The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Has Daniel Andrews gone loopy on rail? > Comments

Has Daniel Andrews gone loopy on rail? : Comments

By Alan Davies, published 3/9/2018

The Andrews government's planned $50 billion loop rail line around outer suburban Melbourne signals Victorian Labor has joined the other parties in giving up on rational urban policy.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
It is extremely unlikely that this loop rail line proposal will ever be completed - and certainly not by the Andrews government.

Andrews reminds me of Turnbull's announcement of the $50 billion submarine scam which will be completed about the same time as Andrews' proposed rail loop. Andrews is trying one of the old tricks used by NSW Labor for years - announce something, then announce it again. And again. He might get years of announcements out of this one.

Victorian voters are the most left wing in Australia - politically and socially - and they may well be stupid enough to reelect the incompetent who has so resolutely supported such political gems as the Safe Schools scam, the global warming scam and dirty deals with unions. This is just another in the series. And if he is reelected, Victoria will get what it deserves.
Posted by calwest, Monday, 3 September 2018 7:47:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rail is the most economical and most efficient way to move volumes of passenger and freight traffic. And this project will need to be built sooner or later, ditto rapid rail. For each decade these and similar essential projects are delayed the cost effectively doubles and mostly because of activists like you Alan!?

Who invariably know all the real or imaginary inventive reasons for not proceeding with infrastructure projects, which will likely pay for themselves a dozen or more times over. As did the then unaffordable and entirely unnecessary Habour bridge!

We used to build dams and managed to build plenty once and as accelerated infrastructure project builds which peaked in the fifties and declined since then.

And rail just didn't get the upgrades which would have seen it take precedence over the ubiquitous car, and highway clogging trucks etc.

Which may have solved a few problems for personal transport/freight forwarding, while adding to the smog of large cities, which the latest science tells us may be harming our cognitive abilities and possibly explains this less than well thought out article Alan?

We need to decentralise and convert our economy to a nuclear-powered one, that will be what we need to adapt to runaway unstoppable climate change.

Putting the rail underground will at lest stop the rails from buckling under the next inevitable granny killing heatwave and bringing urban rail to a complete halt!

How do you propose all the old folk no longer able to drive our kids commute to their shops/doctors and schools Alan, as the employable adult population all have to work till they drop!?
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Monday, 3 September 2018 11:02:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Alan B.,
You seem to have based your opinion on the false assumption that Alan Davies is an anti rail activist. He's not; he's merely pointing out some valid problems with the plan. That doesn't mean they're insurmountable obstacles, but when funding is limited it makes sense to concentrate on more cost effective projects first.

Rail is indeed the most economical and efficient way to move large volumes of passengers. But in the outer suburbs, where both the origins and the destinations are dispersed, getting those large numbers of passengers onto rail isn't easy.

And like for like, there's barely and difference between the cost rise of civil engineering projects and the CPI. The cost rises are mainly the result the projects being built to higher specifications, sometimes needlessly. In the case of tunnelling, it's likely the cost will actually fall over the next few decades.

It isn't difficult to stop the rails from buckling in heatwaves without resorting to putting it all in tunnel - well constructed tracking expansion joints can see to that! But tunnels give the advantage of greatly limiting the disruption on the surface.
Posted by Aidan, Monday, 3 September 2018 3:30:28 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Adrian, you seem to have based your assumption of my take on Alan's piece on an assumption I thought Alan was anti-rail. I arrived at no such conclusion. Reading things, words or motives into other's words, your forte, not mine. Mine, on the merit of the argument, which I didn't concur with. As simple as that!

Simply put, the rail project has merit, and ought to be built underground to prevent the next heat wave from buckling the rails and as it did not all that long ago, bringing Melbourne urban rail to a complete stop. And the highways to rolling roadblocks.
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Monday, 3 September 2018 4:19:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Expansion joints were in place. Ought to know worked for Vic rail in my twenties. Still not effective with the sort of heat that accompanies heat waves.

And a place for pebbles/ballast etc. To intrude if the gap is too wide. Many rail projects are made with a single length of rail seam welded as the track is laid to prevent a rail shifting and allowing a train to de-rail when even a small movement or subsidence can move a rail out of alignment sufficiently to derail a train.

And no more important than for very rapid rail. It's like anything. do it right the first time even at greater initial cost that then prevents you having to spend nearly as much again and again on upgrades that should be unnecessary. It may be an old saying, penny wise and pound foolish.

Do it right the first time may result in a larger initial outlay? But on balance, far less over time!

But as much of a truism today as when first coined.
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Monday, 3 September 2018 4:36:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Many more commuters would use trains if adjacent parking was adequate and secure. Simply put, there are too many places where parking is extremely limited or just not available.

If we want folks in outer suburbs to use trains we need places for them to park all day and also affordable. What's the point of putting in, expensive train projects, then with parking fees, pricing them out of the commuters' reach?

Ditto traffic tunnels that are built or managed by private firms, whose toll fees are aimed only at the profit graph and not urban congestion!
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Monday, 3 September 2018 4:45:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy