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
>
>
> .
>
>
>
>