Great summary of the 'white-elephantine' nature of much on infrastructure Australia and the numerous quangos that preceded and surround it now at State level. Think Water ( desalination, dams, recycling) and you see a mirror image of railways.

Infrastructure in Australia is driven by vested interested (Unions, big construction/development groups and politicians). We taxpayers (the people who end up paying for it) don't get what they need to make their daily grind easier, they get what the hired consultants tell us we need.

Consultants are hired guns who deliver the message, the corrupt mayors/sheriff in town employ to make dodge city profitable for them and their mates. Oh and I am a consultant by the way, who refuses jobs that are clearly intended to deliver such "window-dressing".

Government subsidies? Public transport should be funded by the public via government. Australia us public transport poor, and rail is a good way of keeping idiots off the road. Death by idiot car drivers and and bloody great semi trailers is too common.

I gave up reading a quarter of the way into the essay. I will try to finish it though later.
In my view we need a pox on economic rationalists, not the ones who actually manage various enterprise no, the ones who have absolutely no concept of future economics.
In my area they ripped up an old rail line but are kicking themselves because every single person now says "If they'd only left the line open, it'd be a great tourist venture".
Rail transport should be supported by the Nation but not by pouring in millions of Dollars but by giving it trade.
People can think what they like but I think a Mono Rail system would be a future-proof infrastructure. Points to consider are, no bridges, no huge rail yards, other services such as power, water, communication etc could all be run beneath the rail, no digging up the ground, ease of serviceability, no need for wild life corridors, no flood damage, no valuable land having to be sacrificed, no rail crossing accidents, etc etc. Such infrastructure would be an on-going project offering on-going employment & service. I'd be a massive tourism project.
It'd be a long-term economic gold mine.

Individual and tbbn, come off the clouds you are on and think users pay, bang for your buck and fair use of taxes. Weal want better transport, just not pointless infrastructure that works and is worth the money we pay in taxes. We all want things, but he/she/it that pays for it have a right to demand value for money, not something that makes noisy activists/wokes happy and feeds the fantasy ridden minds of urban "space" planners/visionaries.

As for tourism, if they want it , they pay for it. I live in a small coastal village were all the infrastructure is geared to serve their whims, while those of us who live pay rates, work here, get treated as an inconvenience who get between the tourist focused shops/food outlets (that close at 5pm) and tourist dollars.

This is not the first time an incompetent economist has demonstrated an ignorance of infrastructure economics. Nor is it the worst (that award would have to go to the blog post claiming the Sydney Harbour Bridge shouldn't have been built) and it certainly won't be the last. But the claims in this one regarding the Alice Springs to Darwin railway and the Canberra-Eden proposal do at least provide a clear picture of some of the flaws in the argument.

David Hill in the 1980s couldn't foresee the mining boom of the 21st century, and we don't know what will happen in the future, though we do have some pretty strong indicators of rising demand (population is increasing, and commodity prices generally rise substantially each time a country industrialises). The line has been open for less than twenty years, so to label it an "economic disaster" is rather premature. Brendan has done so on the basis of the lower than expected profits. But the main point of infrastructure is to enable others to be more productive - the main beneficiaries are the users, not the shareholders.

And the claim that the Canberra to Eden railway proposal "is totally crazy because current travel (passenger or freight) between the two centres is minimal, and the only obvious reason why it was dreamt up is because the remains of the old rail line between Queanbeyan and Bombala still exist" misses the point completely. The real objective is to develop the port of Eden, making Canberra less dependent on Sydney. Until the port is developed and good links with Canberra are provided, of course there will be little demand!

I find it incredulous how foresight is still so lacking despite of so much hindsight at hand ! Some will never learn that successful infrastructure is not a quick-buck show but something that develops in a chronological way !
The countless failed projects are testimony to that mentality. The user should pay argument is well placed in major infrastructure for the economic flow-ons that ensues. Future infrastructure does actually mean future, not now ! The employment such infrastructure provides will be well into this future ! Those who think they shouldn't fork out for future generations should then forfeit their Pensions !

In Brisbane the Queensland tax payer, & many other tax payers via the commonwealth contribution, are paying a large fortune on an under river rail tunnel, so they can spend another fortune subsidising the tickets of public servants who will use it for easy travel to their inner city offices.

I can't imagine a more stupid use of tax payer money, unless it is the hiring of more public servants, & the leasing of more inner city office space to house them.

... unless it is the hiring of more public servants ...
Hasbeen,
there's no shortage of funding to invest in votes, particularly for Labor.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, the shift back to urban light rail (400 cities worldwide) and fast intercity rail has been on for 30 years. Seeing that China has stolen a march, even Joe Biden's trying to climb on board by 2035.

Our Brendan O'Reillys particularly hate Canberra light rail, despite its electorate mandate, competent build, and firm popularity. Even now, they run along behind the trams, waving their cost-benefit studies, ordering punters back onto the buses.

... waving their cost-benefit studies...
Steve S,
Well, they can't wave their own can they. They aren't of any benefit themselves !

If the various State Governments in the 19th Century had waited for positive cost-benitit analysis of railways, none would have ever been built.

In SA, conman Keating talked the local political morons into digging up railway lines that would have now been a boom for local tourism. Even suburban trains go in one direction only. The rest is all traffic jams and a busway on concrete tracks that is not used even in the country where it was invented.

Is Mise,
That would depend on the assumptions those studies used.
Most of Australia's railways were built under the assumption that the rural population would be a lot higher than it turned out to be in reality.

.... than it turned out to be in reality.
Aidan,
You have to think future get it ? Future, not now ! There won't be a more reliable form of transport than rail in the next decades. Mono rail would be even better as it would free up much needed parking space & other land as I mentioned earlier.
Again, think future !

individual,
I do think future, hence my debunking of a couple of Brendan's more obvious mistakes.

That doesn't mean I should ignore the past.

.. while those of us who live pay rates, work here, get treated as an inconvenience ...
Alison Jane,
I have experienced very similar where I grew up. I went back over 30 years later & found that not be so anymore, the locals have become aware that mere hyping up the place is not enough, you have to back up the hype with fact & then the rewards come into play.
Look at NZ for example. They promote it as an adventure destination. Guess what ! It is !
Look at the advertising in Australia & tell us what you find. Take your time.

Alison Jane,
When you find what's really happening start counting the "prohibited" signs, most of which point to anything to do with people trying to have fun !

Again, think future! individual. Yes mate think future. Bigger & better agricultural machinery equals even less people in the bush.

Bigger & better migration equals more basically unnecessary people flooding into the major cities.

Even higher wages for unskilled wages equals ever higher costs for trans shipping from truck to rail at source, & back to truck at the destination. Trans shipping costs higher than sending the stuff on a truck all the way.

In the US they ship fully loaded semi trailers on rail cars as it is cheaper than doing the trip on their own wheels. Here we pay such ridiculous wages for labor, it is just not viable to trans ship to rail, or load the whole truck.

With our costs rail is a dead loss for anything that is not bulk loaded & unloaded.

Here it is cheaper to fly interstate than go by train. Could that have something to do with government run rail, & private airlines?

Again, think future!
Hasbeen,
Yep ! All Australians need to work out now is who's future. At this stage we're not allowed to say but just wait till it's too late !
I think anyone who can think agrees with the Labour costs, they need to be competitive otherwise what's the point ?
High salaries need to come down & blue collar wages frozen & only then will building infrastructure for the future make sense !
We need to plan for the future of Australians first & only then can we afford to think about being a Welfare provider for those with no interest regarding Australians.

Interesting article. The high speed train has always failed on paper
because our "small" cities are so far apart.
The fast enough train project is a good possibility, by straightening
the track which was built using horses and scoops we could have a
200 km/hr service everywhere at fairly low cost.
The track would need to be rebuilt to a higher standard.
Note the difference in the ride on British rail to ours.

The article however does not take into account that in the not too
distant time the oil companies will be exiting the transport oil industry.
Long distance trucks may not electrify economically.
Oil will be too expensive to burn for transport and will be reserved
for other purposes.
That could signal the end of long distance road transport.
The very much lower energy needed for a steel wheel on a steel rail
will signal the change.

I can't believe some of the rationalisations for dud railway shemes.

How many of the apologists for wasteful rail projects would use these facilities, if they had to pay the full costs?

Would Aidan subscribe to a share float to build the $6.3 billion Canberra to Eden railway (he seemingly supports) that has zero chance of ever being commercial and would generate huge losses and minimal patronage? He also thinks that the Alice Springs to Darwin line "has been open for less than twenty years, so to label it an "economic disaster" is rather premature". Nobody in the commercial world believes this, which it why it was sold off for a song, resulting in massive losses for its owners, including the taxpayer!

With airfares between capital cities now so low (often below $200) how would a bullet train ever get enough patronage to justify its $100 billion price tag? It still has its looney supporters though.

I (again say) a pox on all these train fanatics that want us poor taxpayers to fund their fantasies and pet train projects.

Bren,
>Would Aidan subscribe to a share float to build the $6.3 billion Canberra to Eden railway
No, right now I can't afford to buy shares in anything.

> that has zero chance of ever being commercial and would generate huge losses and minimal patronage?
Those conclusions rest on assumptions about the cost of construction, the cost of finance, the cost of operations, the population of Canberra and southeastern NSW, and the capacity and competitiveness of Port Botany (among other things). What makes you think your assumptions will prove correct?

>Nobody in the commercial world believes [it's premature to label the Alice to Darwin
>railway an economic disaster] which it why it was sold off for a song,
What is commercial and what is economic are two different things. The latter depends on the benefits to customers rather than just the owners. Also commerce tends to prefer short term investments over long term ones.

>resulting in massive losses for its owners, including the taxpayer!
It would have been sensible for the government to buy it, but they chose not to.

>With airfares between capital cities now so low (often below $200) how would a
>bullet train ever get enough patronage to justify its $100 billion price tag?
For a start, the cost of airfares varies widely, and most of them are above $200. Expect there to be similar variation in rail fares. Also there would be high speed trains serving intermediate destinations that don't have any flights to capital cities, let alone cheap ones. And trains wouldn't be restricted by airport curfews.

Who needs a Bullet train ?

Bren said;
With airfares between capital cities now so low (often below $200)

How long will that last ?
Remember oil will not run out, it has just become too expensive to
search and develop new oil fields.
As the oil companies withdraw from the transport fuel business fares
will rise as aviation slowly declines. The whole situation will be
complicated by co2 legislation. The greenies may close the airlines
even before the oil industry pulls the bowser hose.
To sum up my guess;
The price of fuel will rise significantly; Governments will tax CO2;
Airlines will effectively be out of the picture;
Interstate travel will be rail or by ships.
What funds that are available will be used to improve conventional
rail systems as they will be the only electrical fueled transport.
Nuclear energy will force itself onto the discussion table.

The Canberra light-rail was entirely political. No party supported it, but the election was hung, and the ALP bought the support of the sole independent by agreeing to build the useless and costly light rail.

Until new technology can redesign Aircraft engines & fuel, air travel will draw the shorter straw.
Throw a little virus into the basket & air travel will stop. Remember COVID-19 ?
Overseas travel will go back to ships because the time spent at sea will help isolate passengers infected before they're half-way to here.
Various Decks can be used for isolation & treatment. So, no more RUBY PRINCESS scenario.
Bon Voyage !

But, but, but Individual, going by previous experience surely that
will mean a shipload of virus infected passengers ?
I think the ventilation system of ships came under deep suspicion.

Hopefully by the time it all comes to a head covid19 will be like
another influenza.

the ventilation system of ships came under deep suspicion.
Bazz,
Yes, that WAS the case. However, with a few alterations the ventilation can be modified for selected Decks.
One section of Deck could easily be made an islolation Deck & so on. After several days at sea they will find who is + & who is not & accommodate them in the relevant Deck.
Perhaps Air Ships could be re-introduced ? What it really all boils down to is that airplane travel is now too fast & willy nilly hence the fast spreading of COVID-19.

Going back to Rail, a Mono rail system would probably be the most practical & economic of all.
As I said earlier & many times before that, being overhead, much industrial real estate would become available within city limits. Forget large areas for boarding platforms & stations. A Monorail could easily stop at 2nd floor shopping centres etc. Forget ticketing, we all just pay an extra Dollar a week to cover the passenger side & freight can be charged as per normal.
Cleaning of the carriages could be part of a National Service or for those who have a fear of that word, for those filling in a Gap year !
For the cost of one single overpass & one bridge we could probably get 150 km of Mono Rail !
Scenic routes would attract sightseers. Imagine a Mono Rail crossing Lake Eyre to new settlements on the other shore once it is flooded permanently ? Opportunities are literally begging for people with foresight & patience.

Regarding monorails:
Why did they dismantle the one at Sydney and the one at Jupiter's Casino, Broadbeach.
I enjoyed being on them but they just disappeared.

The monorails were slow, inefficient people carriers and all required
stairs to get up to them and have low passenger counts.
They needed support structures along the streets which were in the way of everything.

Thanks Bazz
Despite being 'a sardine' , we travelled on monorail in Kuala Lumpur, pre covid of course. We often had to wait for next one, so realise old types not ideal for busy commuters due to limited passengers and only a few carriages.

The monorails were slow, inefficient people carriers and all required
stairs
RunninRib,

Any of you ever heard of technological advancement ? Aeroplanes used to be slow & required stairs !
Cars used to be inefficient, all things of the past were improved. Mono Rail can not be ??
It appears the only thing that can not be improved is the mentality of some people !
How about thinking future investment rather than instant profit ?

Indi; have you ever been on a monorail ?
There are other techniques such as the magnetic lift systems but they
are not monorail but some I have seen videos of are elevated.
As far as I can see, the only advantage monorails possess are very sharp curves.

individual: The construction of monorail lines is more expensive than surface trains. To build a surface train line*, for most of its length, you just have to push dirt around then lay track, but for a suspended monorail line the whole thing is a complex engineered construction. However, one area where monorails do have a advantage is that if they are built over existing public land (such as roads/foothpaths or waterways) you don't need to buy the land. An underground train shares this advantage of monorail (ie: often you don't have to pay for the ground it runs through).

Regarding the cost of monorail rolling stock (ie, the monorail carriages), they are more expensive than trains because trains are a well developed technology. Many companies around the world can produce trains and many parts (such as bogies/suspension & wheelset, brakes, couplings, etc..) are commonly produced to standard specifications, but monorail vehicles on the other hand are completely bespoke and require uniquely specialized ground-up design.

[* I'm talking about surface trains that run along the ground here, there do exist quite a few completely/or/mostly elevated train lines around the world: lines with two tracks and not monorail]

There is a major divide in rail transport.
Commuter and intercity.
There is also another divide passenger and freight.
I have seen statements that Very High Speed (VHS) passenger cannot be
mixed on the same track as freight.
That appears to be one reason VHS is uneconomic in Australia.
However Fast Enough passenger and freight are mixed on the same track.
Fast Enough about 200km/hr on straightened, regraded and built to
higher standards would enable a six hour Sydney to Melbourne and
similar times to Brisbane.
Those times are city to city not home to home.
Likewise you must compare with home to airport, wait time, airport
to airport, to home and air will still be quicker but not by that much.
However either because of the greenies, or as I believe because of
the oil companies, air travel will not be an option, either for
political or economic reasons.

Outside of this argument one of the reasons the VFT proposal Sydney
Brisbane failed was the land form north of Sydney, it required a
high level bridge across the Hawkebury river and tunnels that
would cost more that the Sydney Harbour Bridge would cost today.
Also the tunneling required to enter Sydney would add a lot of time
to the trip time from both north and south.
I believe the 2nd airport at Badgeries Creek could be converted into
a VFT rail terminal.

I once lived in a little hamlet called Burrum. It was once the northern end of the Queensland railway line, built to there for the coal they had found.

Howard became the largest town in the district, with 7 coal mines & a power house. In the 40s & 50s 7 passenger trains a day stopped at Howard, & rail lines ran to each of the coal mines.

There is still plenty of coal in the Howard, Burrum district, but it's not mined. It is much more economical to dig it out of huge open cut mines, with drag lines rather than men with shovels.

Today there is only one passenger train a day, despite huge increases in populations in the north, & you have to be booked on or off, or it doesn't stop. It is difficult to book onto that one train, as it is today full of pensioners using their free rail trip. The governments gave free trips to pensioners as it was embarrassing having empty trains thundering along the tracks.

Just because something was once useful, eve a critical necessity, does not mean it will continue to be useful.

Continued

Continued

I went to Bathurst a while back for a car club event. Bathurst was very run down from when we lived there in the early 50s. I drove across to Young, where we had an orchard after Bathurst. Blaney, Cowra, & the villages along the way were also depressing in their fading. With mechanisation farm labor jobs have disappeared, & there is no reason for the existence of these once thriving towns & villages. Schools & shops have gone, as have all younger folk.

Young is doing OK, due to a large increase in the cherry growing industry. This creates a lot of work for locals, if only mostly the cash in hand type for the welfare crowd. It is only special high profit small scale agriculture like this that helps fund country towns today. Pity there aren't more opportunities for such development.

This depopulation of the bush will continue as agriculture becomes even more corporate, & smaller family farms diminish. Rail will have to invent new ways or goods handling if it is to compete with trucks. And don't worry about electrification, & zero emissions. The idiots pushing this stuff have no idea. Without a huge nuclear development of our power system, there is no way coal, gas & petroleum is not going to be around driving civilisation a very long time, if civilisation itself is to survive.

oops, in the last post when I said "suspended monorail line", I meant elevated monorails in general.
Suspended monorails are a subset of general elevated monorails. Here's an example of one of the first suspended monorails ever built and amazingly it is still in use today: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuppertal_Schwebebahn.

construction of monorail lines is more expensive than surface trains.
thinkabit,
That would be off-set by the gain of useable land & gradually stabilising reduced on-going costs overall.
Plus, there's no need to build the whole network in one hit. It has to be an on-going project that pays for itself as it economically snowballs.
Again, the magic term "future investment" ! Just think of the hundreds of thousands of permanent jobs that'd help create thousands of Trade apprenticeships & careers.
The environmental pressures could be taken away from the coats by establishing inland communities, away from the severe weather experienced on the coast.
Also, because it would be a future orientated infrastructure for new communities, many of us should just start the project & then let the next generation get on with it. They'd more than likely do a much better job than the self-centred gits we've had lately ! Hell, they may even have the sense to permanently flood Lake Eyre ! I'm certain that the next generation will not be as stupid as the past three !

Hi Hasbeen, and I'm one of the auld pensioners enjoying the $50 return twice a year Maryborough West/Townsville. Sorry off topic but between the QR staff (nice galley), hotel accommodation 10 days twice, local attractions, pubs and restaurants, we are helping regional areas with employment. Hope you can enjoy it someday too.

Hasbeen, well there is some hope for the regions in that the real
estate people report that there has been a large increase in people
selling up in the cities and buying houses in country towns.
I do not know how they are going for employment but I presume they
are not moving without looking for a job first.
I notice that NSW Planning Dept has moved to Nowra.
Another large Dept, Lands, I think it might be, is in Bathurst.

As far as freight handling most now is in standard containers.
I see them going through here, miles long, at something like 100km/hr.
After Parkes they are double stacked but east of Parkes there are too
many low bridges and tunnels to make double stacking feasible.
In Brisbane I believe they have an automatic unload/load to trucks
system which speeds things up no end.
Trains going to Broken Hill, Sth Australia and West Australia are
double stacked.

As far as nuclear is concerned I am afraid this will be the scene
before too long. When the next two power stations are closed and
blackouts commence in earnest an enormous horde of housewives with
cold dinners and unemployed workers will demand nuclear power tomorrow morning !

Why do they always make small towns bigger instead of starting new ones ? Don't these planners realise that the bigger the town the more costly to Taxpayers in every which way ?
Society is already paying far too high a price for rabbit warren existence !

individual: This is how new ground level train lines are laid down in a modern western country- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccPj6QspRR

sorry, link in last post was copied incorrectly, it should have been this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccPj6QspRRI

Absolutely amazing, those that design and build such machines deserve
a good reward.

Bazz my son has been doing some work for a local trucking company. They have regular runs to Cairns Melbourne, & most places in between. They carry a lot of small to pretty large boats, caravans, horse floats & similar & bring hay back from the north.

Evidently they kill the rail in freight rates.

When I was in Wide Bay area we had a couple of bad years. We were bringing hay in from Eidsvold & Monto, at first by rail. However rail became just too expensive. It cost more for freight than the hay.

We were all busy people, but decided to share the work of driving out in a 6 tonner once each a month to get the hay. The saving was so great it was the only sensible thing to do.

thinkabit,
Yes, that's amazing. All we need now is machinery like that to build Mono Rails. Imagine the money & land & time saved not having to build bridges, over-passes, etc etc.
Gap Year servers could go ahead & whipper snip the patches for the pylons !

ps. Do you think Australian Unions could be persuaded not to sabotage efforts to start infrastructure development ?

individual,
Building the whole thing as a bridge does not equate to not building bridges!

Hasbeen, the type of cargo you described would be difficult to handle
by rail and so the cost would be up. Hay might be different and OK.
If oil fuel becomes too expensive the electric semi may become OK.
There have been some work done in that direction. Either Mercedes or
another German company experimented with electric semis and on the
autobahn had overhead wires and pantagraphs on the trucks.
That could give them power for large parts of the trip and charge the
batteries when entering the autobahn.
Tesla has a semi in the works and says they will put it on the market.
I think that oil based fuels will be withdrawn from the market.
It may not happen in the next 20 years but it will happen.