-----Original Message-----
From: Roderick Smith [mailto:rodsmith@werple.net.au]
Sent: Thursday, 27 July 2017 11:37 AM
To: 'transportdownunder@yahoogroups.com'
Subject: snippets, Thurs.27.7.17
Attached:
170727Th Melbourne 'Herald Sun':
- Melbourne cbd in 1866.
- affordable electricity. with tdu.
- UK fuel-car ban. with tdu.
Roderick
Melbourne Express: Thursday, July 27, 2017.
Here's what was in The Age on this day in 1940:
On the front page was the latest on the war effort. The paper reported Nazi leaders were divided on whether Germany should attempt a full-scale invasion of Britain.
Australian workers at the Commonwealth's munitions factory in Maribyrnong were making grenades and shells for the troops.
7.32 Route 72 trams have resumed following that disruption on Malvern Road earlier.
On this day in 1940, Bugs Bunny made his first official appearance in a Merrie Melodies cartoon.
While a similar-looking character appeared in a previous Warner Bros. short, cartoon historians say this was the first cartoon in which he exhibited the laid-back Bugs Bunny attitude, uttering his "What's Up, Doc?" catchphrase for the first time.
A screenshot from the first ever Bugs Bunny short. Photo: Craig Butt.
7.16 Route 72 trams towards Melbourne University are delayed in Malvern Rd by a tram fault.
<www.theage.com.au/victoria/melbourne-express-thursday-july-27-2017-20170725-gxiim4.html>
Queensland rejects 'flawed' assessment of Cross River Rail.
26.7.17 Brisbane Times.
The benefits of Cross River Rail have been "significantly overstated" and its $5.4 billion cost is likely to exceed its benefits, Infrastructure Australia says.
That led to a rebuke from Deputy Premier and Transport Minister Jackie Trad, who slammed the assessment as flawed.
Deputy Premier Jackie Trad has slammed Infrastructure Australia's Cross River Rail assessment. Photo: Darren England/AAP .
Infrastructure Australia's latest advice keeps Cross River Rail as a high priority initiative, recognising the issue of rail capacity through the Brisbane CBD.
But IA did not include the current proposal for Cross River Rail on the infrastructure priority list.
From Infrastructure Australia's project evaluation summary of Cross River Rail. Photo: Supplied .
It said IA would welcome the opportunity to consider a revised business case which addressed its concerns with benefit estimation and clarified the estimated timeframe for the emerging capacity problem.
"A revised business case should also quantify potential benefits from land use change and urban renewal expected to result form the proposed project, and potential benefits from better integration of Brisbane's rail and bus networks," the IA project evaluation summary reads.
Infrastructure Australia also managed to invent a new suburb called "Hill Gate" in a map on the front page of its project evaluation summary - presumably it is an amalgamation of Hill End, West End and Highgate Hill.
Ms Trad said she did not know where "Hill Gate" was in Brisbane.
"Maybe it's a suburb near Malcolm Turnbull in Sydney but it certainly doesn't exist in Brisbane, so I was very curious as to why it appeared on the Infrastructure Australia map of the project," she said.
"I was also curious about why the CBD had moved to East Brisbane.
"I think Infrastructure Australia need to get some of those basic facts right."
Ms Trad said over the next 20 years, the population in south-east Queensland would grow by 1.5 million people.
Ms Trad said the Merivale Bridge currently had capacity for 24 trains, with 21 trains crossing during peak hour.
She said IA provided the Queensland government with its analysis two days ago, after having the Cross River Rail business case for 13 months.
"We have been backwards and forwards with Infrastructure Australia since they've had the business case and supplied additional information at their request," she said.
"None of that information has been included in their analysis of the business case. This is incredibly disappointing."
Ms Trad said IA's analysis was based on mistakes and assumptions that were "clearly false".
"What they are telling Queenslanders is Cross River Rail shouldn't be built until we reach a crisis on our network, until we see patronage figures increase to 150 per cent," she said.
Ms Trad accused IA of providing analysis, summaries and commentary that was consistent with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull's position not to invest in Cross River Rail.
"We don't have faith in the process that Infrastructure Australia has undertaken," she said.
IA said the patronage figures in the Cross River Rail business case were "unprecedented".
"That is untrue, Melbourne experienced them only recently and here in the south-east Queensland network, as soon as we built the Merivale Bridge and electrified the train network we saw similar growth, 6.7 per cent in public transport," Ms Trad said.
In a briefing note, Cross River Rail Delivery Authority head Graeme Newton said IA's summary contained "inherently flawed advice, with 23 instances of unsubstantiated opinions, assertions or errors".
After a scathing review of the wrong assumptions in IA's report, Mr Newton recommended potentially withdrawing the CRR business case from the IA review process.
"Given the obvious lack of support from IA for the CRR Project's obvious benefits, it now seems that IA's ongoing involvement in the project serves no benefit other than to provide it an illegitimate role that it may use to undermine the CRR in the public domain," Mr Newton wrote.
The Queensland government has committed to fund the project without federal government assistance if necessary.
Ms Trad confirmed the Queensland government would still go ahead with funding Cross River Rail alone, but the IA assessment provided a "level of false analysis" around the state's number one infrastructure project.
"We do have other projects that have been submitted to Infrastructure Australia and I am hoping that they treat those projects in terms of their analysis with much more independence and impartiality," she said.
RACQ spokesman Paul Turner said it was disappointing IA said south-east Queensland needed to reach "crisis point" before Cross River Rail was funded.
But Deputy Opposition Leader Deb Frecklington said the LNP agreed with IA's assessment the business case used "dud figures" and the costs of Cross River Rail was likely to exceed its benefits.
"The LNP supports another heavy rail crossing across the Brisbane River, but we need to get the infrastructure solution right," Ms Frecklington said.
An IA spokesman said it had completed an independent evaluation of the business case, following a "rigorous assessment process".
He said IA sent a draft evaluation summary to the Queensland government on Monday asking for a fact and commercial-in-confidence check.
"The Queensland government has not provided us with any specific feedback on the evaluation summary," he said.
"Infrastructure Australia will publish the final evaluation summary on its website shortly."
<www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/queensland-rejects-flawed-assessment-of-cross-river-rail-20170726-gxj37k.html>
* I would have thought that there would be more long term benefit from duplicating the north coast line to Nambour.
This is the main freight pathway north and is mostly single track with all the adverse issues that causes.
I guess it is politics that is pushing Trad's cross river rail and not common sense and evidence based arguments.
* North Coast line will be needed at some point but Cross River Rail is more urgent due to expansion of the Gold Coast and success of the Gold Coast line. Also in order to put any more trains to Cleveland or Beenleigh CRR will be required. Additionally perhaps long term case to use the freight corridor to Jimboomba/ Beaudesert for passenger services which will need CRR.
* What about the freight going through Brisbane? I assume most freight using the Caboolture to Nambour section also run through the CBD.
* The amount of freight along the North Coast line is not an impediment to getting more trains through the inner city area. The lack of inner city train capacity is.
Duplication, realignment and other upgrades to the North Coast line as far north as Nambour are also needed but for entirely different reasons, and the capital outlay required is rather less than what is needed for CRR. This is not a case of picking one over the other, except insofar as priority is involved.
* This is just becoming another identity politics issue now, totally botched by QLD. The real problem is we have too much debt repayment now to afford our own infrastructure.
* It truly would be best if Jackie Trad was not in charge of this ministry.
Somebody else with some gravitas and understanding of the issues and an ability to cut through with the Feds and IA is needed. Trad is not that person..
* Of course there is long term value in duplicating the link to Nambour but there would be no point until the inner city blockage that is the Merivale is obviated. This bottleneck affects all rail traffic.
The opposition's approach that was called the BAT was seriously flawed and would not solve the problems in the long term.
It seems the opposition are still in denial about their loss at the last election and haven't moved on to actually develop policy.
* Qld. Labor's greatest project will be Cross River Rail which was sabotaged by Newman, Abbott and the other LNP cronies because they hate railway development for the masses.
Infrastructure Australia, with its Abbott appointees, appears to be continuing this delay and obfuscation.
The Brisbane City Council, State and Federal governments should immediately fund the CRR project.
The LNP are just hopeless at doing anything to improve public transport and particularly train travel.
Melbourne is extending their underground railway network, constructing 18kms of new track and building another 5 new CBD underground stations.
There is a major rail revival around the world, including light rail, metro rail, heavy rail, and high speed rail.
At the same time car use has peaked and is in decline in many big cities.
* Why not just automate the trains. Automated trains typically run at significantly closer spacing increasing the effective capacity of the existing infrastructure. Much, much cheaper option than CRR.
Furthermore we have a perfect opportunity to implement as new rolling stock is bought for the Redcliffe line.
* No amount of train automation will let us run trains more closely than at 2 minute headways for the kind of trains we have in SEQ, which means we would be limited to 30 trains per hour over the Merivale Bridge. The absolute world's best practice would enable trains roughly every 85 seconds apart, but that is on a brand new, purpose built, fully grade separated line with no junctions or branching whatsoever. Not in any way, shape or form possible on our system - even the Japanese couldn't implement train headways like that with the infrastructure limitations we have.
Cross River Rail if built will enable 48 trains per hour per direction (24 trains per hour over both routes), without the need to spend billions more on the infrastructure needed to automate the system.
We need to build a brand new line, because we need to accommodate well over 40 trains per hour not only from the Cleveland, Beenleigh and Gold Coast lines in their current form, but also any extension towards Flagstone, any additional Gold Coast extensions and the need to tier services between all-stations and express services full-time to improve journey times.
This is one of the most truly idiotic things I have seen out of Canberra in a long time. They are going the right way about losing their one-seat majority next election.
* You got no clue, automation won't increase capacity trains already run at maximum capacity in peak times, also FYI NGR was no bought for Redcliffe but to operate on the whole network
* Smoke and mirrors from an incompetent minister, release the business case to the public instead of making the response to it public.
Get the existing network running properly.
Stop hiring public servants who add nothing to the state, maybe then comment on deficiencies in a report pointing out the deficiencies in your report.
It's a joke.
Trad is a clown.
* succinct and to the point. Trad is a pure politician and no amount of facts or logic should ever get in the way of her savagely patriotic Labor heart
* It wouldn't surprise me if this is what Jackie Trad submitted to IA.
* Scrap it and fix rural roads.
* Or we could just cash in the funding for $5 bills and set it on fire. That would be a more effective use of the funds than spending millions of dollars on roads that see fewer vehicles in a week than the average cul-de-sac in Brisbane sees each day. At least it would be good for a laugh.
* LNP wouldn't know a 'infrastructure solution' if it hit them in the face.
This is the party that shelved the original CRR for their crazy BaT which was an idea dreamed up on the back of the napkin up by Newman simply because he couldn't fathom continuing with a ALP idea. A common thread by the LNP in state politics & by the Federal Coalition.
* The idea of the BAT was to improve the train AND bus services, remove the buses from the Captain Cook bridge, and have new stations at the Uni/Tower of Power and Casino. But oh no Anna 2.0 will spend $5+ BILLION dollars to run a few extra trains with a station in Albert St phhhh
* Good. Regional Queensland needs better roads more than inner city Brisbane needs a new tunnel that duplicates an existing rail line.
* Please elaborate. Which rural road are you referring to and how many vehicles travel on it each day?
I have just completed an 8700 km trip through 4 states towing a 1.7 tonne camper trailer and the 2500 km of Queensland roads that I travelled were not in urgent need of an upgrade where the volume of traffic warranted it.
* What is the population growth predicted for your area?
How many extra vehicles are you expecting in your area?
How much extra freight do you expect to see?
What is the benefit to the Queensland economy?
What was that? I can't hear you for the crickets...
* When even the RACQ says a rail line is needed, the car-centric LNP ought to listen!
* What the hell would Trad know; she can't even get the current train system going.
Those sheds full of new trains are a disgrace - how can she live with herself?
* Which government ordered those trains?
* Here's a funny thing. I have no qualifications as a structural engineer or in urban planning. What I don't know about forward infrastructure projections could fill a stadium, presumably. I don't know anything about stadiums either. But when I saw the header and the opening line about the proposed cross river rail's cost exceeding its likely benefit, I thought, "Well yeah, I could have told them THAT..."
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
* If we need more trains across the river, why not switch to double deckers like Sydney.??
Save building another line.
* No, it wouldn't - as would be immediately obvious to anybody with even a skerrick of expertise in railway design and construction, whose opinions are the only ones of any real relevance here.
Double deck trains cannot be operated as frequently as single deck trains because the internal stairs create excessive dwell times on platforms. Our trains only have 2 doors per carriage, but there is no structural reason that could not be 3 or 4 in future. A Sydney double deck can only have 2, and a French RER style double deck can only have 3 with very little seating. No double-deck trains in the world run above 24 trains per hour - the French tried, but cannot reliably get anything above 25 (and they manage 25 with numerous problems). Single decks can get up to 36 with the right technology and door layout.
Even Sydney is abandoning double deck trains - new cross-harbour tunnel which they signed the contracts on the other week is for the single-deck rollingstock being procured for the North West Rail Link to Rouse Hill. They have realised it offers better throughput and can achieve better operational performance, which lowers the capital costs (eg better power to weight ratio meaning tunnels can have steeper gradients).
* really double deckers? You would need different tunnels through the CBD to fit dble deckers. You would need to lift almost every bridge xing over the existing lines and reinforce every bridge that carries the trains. All that money and time and it would give you maybe a 30% bump in capacity. A second xing gives you double at least and more robustness in the system thus better reliability.
* Save building another line and rebuild the whole network and discard existing fleet including the new rollingstock, you are very clever
* Of course they would reject it - their political future and the coffers of their union pals depend on it being built. They should instead release all the rail corridors for development, reap the billions, delete 10000 public servants at a saving of $1Bn a year, get rid of the Rail unions hold on QR, balance their books, and once the dust has settled have an objective look at the real business case.
* Still can't understand why the first step to increasing capacity wouldn't be building an additional rail line next to the existing from South Brisbane to Roma Street. This would double the capacity over the bridge because you could have 2 lines heading north in the morning and two south in the afternoon. Could get the trains back the other way by running 2 joined together with only one picking up passengers.
* Campbell Newman proposed something like this. Then someone pointed out that it can't be done, because, physics. There is nowhere for it to go.
I suggest you go and have a look sometime. It will be immediately obvious why it can't be done when you see it in person.
* It's funny when Public Servants are criticised by elected officials. And I note that the great defenders of the Public Service are all MIA in defending them. Must only defend their decisions when it appears with their politics.
* Surprised that LNP Qld would be in boots and all with Turnbull on this. Trying to claim that IA's rejection is based on Qld govt incompetence is now made laughable by IA's supplied map.
More cronyism endorsed by our apparently more principled current PM. The only infrastructure that matters to him is in Sydney, where it is resulting in developers filling govt coffers with stamp duty.
It doesn't matter that it is all being done in such adhoc fashion, that every project so far has been under capacitated when completed. Lived there 20 years in inner city, and any lifestyle quality the city had has been rapidly decimated by developer's rape of the city.
South East Qld is a growth challenge definitely. If fed govt can't recognise this and be more supportive, then Qld labour have a much greater chance to survive, more than I would have given them 12 months ago.
* Infrastructure Australia sounds impressive, but it doesn't have any infrastructure or transport people. It is loaded with financial people. Historically, such people have always hated spending money on public transport, and have nobbled those projects which did reach construction stage.
Re double-deck trains for Brisbane: feasible, despite the cramped loading gauge. As ever, people bring out dwell-time myths without bothering to obtain real figures. The loss of time is trivial compared with the capacity increase. Sydney's change was for political 'kill the unions' reasons, not for transport capacity. In an age with wheelchair access for trains, dwell times are very much the same for both styles.
July 26 2017 Why Sydney's new light rail trams won't carry passengers on inner west line .
Different standards for Sydney's inner west light rail line and a new $2.1 billion line from the central city to the south east mean trams carrying passengers won't be able to switch between the two.
The standards differ on a range of measures including gaps between platforms and carriages, height and width of the actual track, clearances between the track corridor and its surrounds, and distance between the back wheels of the trams.
More videos Sydney light rail fails to connect dots.
Differing track standards on Sydney's inner west light rail line and the south east line mean trams carrying passengers won't be able to switch between the two.
The lack of "interoperability" between the two lines will limit the ability to introduce new routes across a broader network, such as one from Randwick to Pyrmont.
Trams running on the 12.8-kilometre inner west line, for example, will not be able to carry passengers the entire way from Dulwich Hill to Moore Park for large sporting events. Instead, passengers will have to switch to trams on the new line at Central Station.
Tram expert and former ministerial adviser Greg Sutherland said the differences had occurred because Transport for NSW had gone to the market for the new light rail project before drawing up the same standards for all light rail lines.
"They are limiting themselves because they have applied different standards.. The one standard should apply to every light rail track in Sydney," he said.
While the trams for the new line will be able to run on the inner west tracks to a maintenance depot at Lilyfield, Mr Sutherland said they could not carry passengers on the latter because of the different standards such as gaps between platforms and carriages.
"They are completely stopping their ability to make better use of light rail technology in the future because they haven't developed appropriate standards," he said.
An artist's impression of the light rail line on George Street in Sydney's CBD.
Mr Sutherland said the differences between the two lines in Sydney was in contrast to Australia's original tramways early last century, which had the same standards across Sydney, Newcastle, Melbourne, Brisbane and Adelaide.
"Transport for NSW never drew up a set of standards to apply to the new light rail trams in Sydney," he said.
The standards for the new line differ to those for the existing inner west light rail line. Photo: AAP .
"They should have embraced the Victorian standard and made it an Australian standard. If you bought a toaster it has to be run on a standard voltage. The same thing should apply to any infrastructure."
But Transport for NSW said operating the new line as a "linked but independent network allowed us to procure the best light rail vehicles and build the line with the most up-to-date advancements".
"This is also best suited to the route conditions and service levels of the new network, without constraints from existing light rail infrastructure," it said.
The transport authority said passengers would be able to "easily interchange" between the two light rail lines at stops at Chinatown-Capitol Theatre and Central Station.
The 67-metre long trams destined to run on the new line would carry up to 450 people, giving initial capacity to move up to 13,500 commuters an hour during peak periods, it said.
Mehreen Faruqi, the Greens' transport spokeswoman who has a PhD in engineering, said the inner west light rail line was already suffering from overcrowding and to " further limit integration and flexibility on the same mode of transport defies all logic".
"While other nations have achieved interoperability between different rail systems such as high speed and conventional rail, or light rail and trams, this government is going out of its way to make sure that even the few kilometres of light rail we have in Sydney are not compatible with each other," she said.
Dr Faruqi said the government had failed to learn from the historical short-sightedness of different rail gauge systems in Australia.
Transport for NSW declined to say what standards would be used for its multi-billion-dollar Parramatta light rail project, which construction is due to start on in 2018.
Related Articles:
More delays dog Sydney's $2.1 billion light rail line .
Audit report reveals public misled on Sydney's light rail cost blowout .
<www.smh.com.au/nsw/why-sydneys-new-light-rail-trams-wont-carry-passengers-on-inner-west-line-20170725-gxida4.html> 143 comments, very mixed.
SA Government promises to cut power bill for 180,000 low income households after bulk buy deal. with tdu.
Adelaide 'Advertiser' July 26, 2017.
<www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/sa-government-promises-to-cut-power-bill-for-180000-low-income-households-after-bulk-buy-deal/news-story/6dd16da1f94e821fab1ad41d1fe2577b>
Victoria energy supply concerns not just hot air: report. with tdu.
Herald Sun July 26, 2017.
<www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/victoria-energy-supply-concerns-not-just-hot-air-report/news-story/3b853148aecb5967947f0d5c8626604a>
Melbourne rail project: Archaeological digs expected to find up to one million artefacts.
Herald Sun July 27, 2017.
UP to one million artefacts are expected to be unearthed during archaeological digs, due to take place once buildings are demolished to build the city’s Metro Rail tunnel.
The new CBD South station will be located 30m under Swanston St, between Flinders and Collins streets, while CBD North will be built below underground between La Trobe and Franklin streets.
Archaeological digs will be carried out at both worksites before construction next year.
Artefacts are likely to be found reflecting the sites’ early history in the mid-1850s, when they were home to hotels, warehouses, foundries, offices and shops.
Heritage Victoria’s principal archaeologist, Jeremy Smith, said archaeologists expected to find building foundations under Swanston St plus artefacts associated with their early use.
“It might be as simple as little coins, buttons and beads that fall through the cracks in the floorboards,” he said.
“A recent dig at the Carlton brewery turned up a gold sovereign — Melbourne does seem to be a site where artefacts survive quite well.
“Remember in the 19th century there were no rubbish removals, so everything that came on site stayed on site.
“The finds at the two sites will be different because the nature of those sites was different — the southern end was pubs and small-scale shops while the northern end was more industrial.”
Mr Smith said the only discovery that would surprise archaeologists was human remains, which had the potential to delay tunnelling work.
“It is highly unlikely we would find intact Aboriginal human remains along the Swanston St corridor and there’s no reason to believe there will be historic human remains,” he said. “It would be different if we were digging at Queen Vic Market which was an early cemetery site where we think there’s still thousands of burials.”
Melbourne Metro Rail Authority spokesman Reid Sexton said it would work with Heritage Victoria to ensure all archaeological finds are appropriately managed.
“These archaeological digs are an important part of the Metro Tunnel project and will help tell previously unknown stories about Melbourne’s past,” Mr Sexton said.
“Once complete, we can start building.”
<www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/melbourne-metro-rail-project-archaeological-digs-expected-to-find-up-to-one-million-artefacts/news-story/511f2fd9eefb8377e5fad2fdc63ed515>
Man ‘shot by police’ at Central Station. with tdu.
Sydney 'Daily Telegraph' Thurs.27.7.17.
<www.heraldsun.com.au/news/man-shot-by-police-at-central-station/news-story/f607f3f73ecc2041d9d1090ad7372ff9>
July 27 2017 Central Station shooting: Florist Emmanuel Theoharis says he 'feels sorry' for his attacker . with tdu.
<www.theage.com.au/nsw/central-station-shooting-florist-emmanuel-theoharis-says-he-feels-sorry-for-his-attacker-20170726-gxjjfy.html>