Thanks for this Greg.

I have just re-read this, and can only comment on the CSELR as being constructed, "Fail, fail, fail, fail, fail ........."

Regards

Dudley Horscroft
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Sutherlandgregsutherland@... [TramsDownUnder]" TramsDownUnder@...>
To: "Trams Down Under" TramsDownUnder@...>
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 9:51 AM
Subject: [TramsDownUnder] Re: Adelaide extension

> Hi Tony

>

> I note your comment re 'getting into line with other Australian systems'.

>

> Does this apply to Sydney and other NSW 'systems' (Parramatta,

> Newcastle)? I would suspect that looking at the current state of and

> approach to standards by TfNSW, see

> http://www.asa.transport.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/asa/asa-standards/tn-078-2016.pdf

> this is unlikely to be the case.

>

> I did provide the following input to the CSELR EIS process on

> 16/12/2013. Needless to say it was totally ignored.

>

> "That it be a condition of the approval of the CSELR that TfNSW be

> required to draw up and issue basic standards for the CSELR prior to the

> commencement of the design and construction phase. This would include,

> but be not limited to, kinematic envelope,structure clearances, minimum

> structure gauge, maximum load gauge, permanent way structure gauge,

> maximum system gradients and permitted track vertical and horizontal

> curvature radii. This information be placed on the public record prior

> to the letting of any design and construct contracts."

>

> That a condition attached to the approval of the CSELR proposal be that

> track construction:

>

> (i) is based on proven Melbourne techniques.

>

> (ii) is based on cost effective, operationally practical light rail

> standards rather than Sydney Trains heavy rail practice.

>

>

> Detailed comment in support of this matter was provided at page 25 of

> this document

> https://majorprojects.affinitylive.com/public/323dea219a4c678aa246a32eef4b43f0/GS-EIS%20ResponseFinal.pdf

>

>

>

> Greg

>

>

> .

>

>

>

>