Recent Posts by futuro

10 WORLD HSR TRAINS

RE: HSR – VFT No. 3

FUTURO CONCEPT “HSR/VFT” AUSTRALIA

RE: HSR - VFT No. 3

A) HSR and Light Freight concept. A dedicated Two Track System.

 

Sydney Melbourne, corridor generally in agreement with HSR2 2013. 

Variations to be investigated:

  • Terminal in Sydney to be in the Homebush Area (for some light freight and passengers/light freight) and/or at Prince Alfred Park final destination of the HSR-VFT. The most likely scenario to connect with state planned surface infrastructure, and direct Underground link to Central, the City Loop and/or the Airport.
  • Corridor via (generally following the Maldon to Dombarton line) Douglas Park and Albion Park to Nowra and Canberra via the Nerriga area. This maximises the capture of population, Southern Highlands, and Goulburn included. These “VARIATION” corridors could also be run with Tilt train at 260Km/hr., giving more flexibility on the corridor curves, rather than the more rigid geometry of an HSR-VFT.
  • The inclusion of the Newcastle to Sydney leg.

B) HSR and Light Freight and Bulk Freight concept. A dedicated Two-Four Track System.

The proposals in A) would be augmented with another twin track alongside it for Bulk Freight.

In Addition a Port Kembla Newcastle corridor would also connect into the Intermodals at Moorebank, Port Enfield and Botany Port

C) Feasibility Study

  1. The Feasibility Study for the Melbourne – Sydney (with Canberra Loop) will be managed by the Futuro Concept of Australia Pty Ltd and it will be a mixture of University, Engineering, Transport, Operators Companies inclusive of Federal, Regional Development and Local Government.
  • Phase 1. Term of reference for a Feasibility Study (by AACE International standard a +10% to -10% Cost Estimate or Class III).

Phase 1 - Feasibility Study would require a $65 million for a high-speed rail network linking Sydney, Canberra and Melbourne, with a particular focus on the Melbourne-Sydney The proposed study will identify corridors, estimate construction costs, undertake preliminary geotechnical investigations and utilising all existing Federal, State and Council geotechnical report of the selected corridors and the financial and economic modelling necessary to determine the project’s viability. It is expected to take about 15 months to complete.

The same process will be used in planning the inland heavy freight rail feasibility study to identify reduction of costs and develop a more reliable and fast delivery of containers and heavy and/or bulk freight, to be noted however that high speed and heavy freight WILL NOT use the same tracks.

  • Phase 2. Term of reference for a Control Study (by AACE International standard a +5% to -5% Cost Estimate) or Class II & I).

Phase 2 – Control Study would require a $250 million for a high-speed rail network linking Sydney, Canberra and Melbourne, with a particular focus on the Melbourne-Sydney The proposed study will identify corridors, estimate construction costs, undertake preliminary geotechnical investigations and utilising all existing Federal, State and Council geotechnical report of the selected corridors and the financial and economic modelling necessary to determine the project’s viability. It is expected to take about 24 months to complete.

  1. The Feasibility Study for the Wagga/Wagga - Brisbane will be managed by the Futuro Concept of Australia Pty Ltd and it will be a mixture of University, Engineering, Transport, Operators Companies inclusive of Federal, Regional Development and Local Government.
  • Phase 1. Term of reference for a Feasibility Study (by AACE International standard a +10% to -10% Cost Estimate or Class III).

Phase 1. The Feasibility Preliminary Study would require a $90 million for a high-speed rail network linking Wagga/Wagga – Brisbane (Inland Route), with a particular focus on the following towns Forbes, Parkes, Dubbo, Goondiwindi, Toowoomba and Ipswich. The proposed study will identify corridors, estimate construction costs, undertake preliminary geotechnical investigations and utilising all existing Federal, State and Council geotechnical report of the selected corridors and the financial and economic modelling necessary to determine the project’s viability. It is expected to take about 18 months to complete.

The same process will be used in planning the inland heavy freight rail feasibility study to identify reduction of costs and develop a more reliable and fast delivery of containers and heavy and/or bulk freight, to be noted however that high speed and heavy freight WILL NOT use the same tracks.

  • Phase 2. Term of reference for a Control Study (by AACE International standard a +2-5% to -2-5% Cost Estimate) or Class II & I).

Phase 2 – Control Study would require a $350 million for a high-speed rail network linking Wagga/Wagga – Brisbane (Inland Route), with a particular focus on the Forbes, Parkes, Dubbo, Goondiwindi, Toowoomba and Ipswich. The proposed study will identify corridors, estimate construction costs, undertake preliminary geotechnical investigations and utilising all existing Federal, State and Council geotechnical report of the selected corridors and the financial and economic modelling necessary to determine the project’s viability. It is expected to take about 24 months to complete.

  1. The Feasibility Study for the Sydney – Newcastle - Narrabri will be managed by the Futuro Concept of Australia Pty Ltd and it will be a mixture of University, Engineering, Transport, Operators Companies inclusive of Federal, Regional Development and Local Government.
  • Phase 1. Term of reference for a Feasibility Study (by AACE International standard a +10% to -10% Cost Estimate or Class III).

Phase 1. The Feasibility Preliminary Study would require a $75 million for a high-speed rail network linking Sydney – Newcastle - Narrabri (Inland Route Connection), with a particular focus on the following towns Forbes, Parkes, Dubbo, Goondiwindi, Toowoomba and Ipswich. The proposed study will identify corridors, estimate construction costs, undertake preliminary geotechnical investigations and utilising all existing Federal, State and Council geotechnical report of the selected corridors and the financial and economic modelling necessary to determine the project’s viability. It is expected to take about 12 months to complete.

The same process will be used in planning the inland heavy freight rail feasibility study to identify reduction of costs and develop a more reliable and fast delivery of containers and heavy and/or bulk freight, to be noted however that high speed and heavy freight WILL NOT use the same tracks.

  • Phase 2. Term of reference for a Control Study (by AACE International standard a +2-5% to -2-5% Cost Estimate) or Class II & I)

Phase 2 – Control Study would require a $210 million for a high-speed rail network linking Wagga/Wagga – Brisbane (Inland Route), with a particular focus on the Newcastle and Narrabri. The proposed study will identify corridors, estimate construction costs, undertake preliminary geotechnical investigations and utilising all existing Federal, State and Council geotechnical report of the selected corridors and the financial and economic modelling necessary to determine the project’s viability. It is expected to take about 22 months to complete.

This second, Control Study (Phase 2. In all three sections) will determine an optimum route alignment, identify patronage levels, develop cost estimates and investigate financing options.  Will developed and include for the required cost of IOMT and include land and buildings acquisition, for which a preliminary figure has been derived at $A10.5B for the entire route of 3,000 km dual tracks HSR-VFT

Final Design will be administered through an Integrated Owner Management Team (IOMT)

A  At 4 years engineering, design and land/building acquisition

The IOMT is the total cost for 3000Km of dual rail HSR/VFT, in our first leg Melbourne, Canberra, Sydney and Newcastle, the time is around is around 30 months study with a costs of $A6.3B.

Scope of the Study; Futuro Concept of Australia Pty Ltd is able to release a full terms of reference for the Feasibility Study and design.

A  Closing Note

I am sure there has been some great persons in the pass (eg. Bradfield, Hudson), with grandiose schemes that exemplified the thinking that can transform Australia’s future. In those cases Government has taken the lead.

As many of you know we are endeavouring to push through with the Concept via the Consortia of our Group, which include importantly a mixture of the international companies in HSR technologies. In discussions the financing of the project, to some of these appears not to be a problem, and I have had it said that there is some preliminary interest from private institution to invest in our project and we would like very much to hear from any Financial entity if they would like to discuss this project further.   We believe our group has the right mix for the high speed model by the inclusion of freight and possibly Light and Bulk, and the integration of it with the regional areas which allows in itself a revalue on land uses.

I can’t think of anything better for any political and financial persuasion, to galvanise and give outright confidence to the Australian people at this time. Reforming the Rail Network.  We need funding for Feasibility Studies (FS) and we estimate $65M for the first leg Melbourne – Sydney (with Canberra Loop included), it has to to have Federal and States Government support. It could come from the internationals within in our group but in that case there must be a license for the project in place. Either way the Australian Government must take the lead.

We would like to put in place a license for quasi Authority to administer our Concept.

For and on behalf of

FUTURO CONCEPT HSR/VFT AUSTRALIA

PAOLO GIAMMARCO (Director)

GIANCARLO VIMERCATI (Director)

 

HSR BULK FREIGHT

FUTURO CONCEPT “HSR/VFT” AUSTRALIA

 

HSR BULK FREIGHT

RE: HSR BULK FREIGHT No. 2  Newcastle –  Sydney – Melbourne

 We do appreciate any support for the Inland Rail Melbourne to Brisbane, bypassing Sydney.    However as you might agree:

  1. That relatively minute investment $2.5B, you say has increased to $4B, involves old Technology and filling in all the missing rails for continuous line status.
  2. It would allow to bypass the congested Sydney Freight rail network.

Though we did not start our mission involving the Bulk Freight, its becoming increasingly evident that an opportunity exists here to marry the Futuro HSR Concept with High Speed Bulk Freight along the same completely new dedicated corridor that would then bypass/eliminate the congested Sydney network. This is borne out in our presentation. On this basis, within the Futuro Concept we have identified the rail link between Wagga Wagga and Narrabri, common with our concept, as having very low priority and would be kept at existing technology upgrade but integrated with the Futuro network to the South of Wagga Wagga and to the North of Narrabri, and Wagga Sydney Narrabri in between.

The day I attended the Moss Vale seminar on the HSR in 2013. I asked a question about the validity of having a high speed bulk freight network to which a answer was given back that for bulk freight the high speed was not warranted.  Since then I have attended other Rail conferences eg. Moree in March 2014, where the industry in fact has been calling for a high standard network be built which in fact would see bulk freight trains travel at much higher speeds than the 80km/hr  and in fact be in the order of 190 - 200 km/hr.

Recently, I attended an EOI meeting in Wollongong, by the NSW government, for the completion and operation of the Maldon to Dombarton Railway. The overall feeling of the participants was that it would not be able to operate on its own and needed integration and upgrading of interconnecting components , like Port Kembla end , the Sydney and Sydney SW network and possibly the Newcastle network. This is, indeed, evidence of the Sydney congestion you mentioned, at our meeting, and a sincere requirement by industry for it to be resolved for better productivity.

It became obvious to us after the EOI meeting that a marriage of the MBIR inland rail and the high speed rail for the SE and east coast is definitely something to consider.

What’s happening in Europe and also the US?

The Bulk rail process is becoming more and more a suitable option in the European system, if we look at the next step on the Lyon–Turin HSR there is a slotted night time were Heavy freight will be allowed on the rail line to alleviate the burden of the road and also to reduce the CO2 emission, the report states the following;

The bulk/heavy freight transportation;

LTF (Lyon-Turin Freight) estimates that the historical line saturation will occur between 2015 and 2020, about 3 million trucks will cross the Alps, while the new line will allow:

  • To transfer 1 million trucks per year to rail, which correspond to null the traffic at the Frejus motorway tunnel.
  • To transport 40Mt freights in the 2030. Promoter estimation made on 1991.
  • To transport 20Mt freights in 2020. Promoter estimation made in 1997.
  • The joint SNCF-RFF-FS study of March 2000 estimated via a conservative formula a capacity of 20Mt/year, corresponding to 185 freight plus 66 passengers’ trains daily (251 trains in total).
  • The study performed by Polinomia on May 2004, shown a capacity of 27Mt/year, corresponding to 150 freight plus 70 passengers trains daily, assuming improvement of the line and the electrical power stations.

We are not about asking the Federal Government reversing its program on the MBIR apparently now increased from the 2.5B to $4B.  This capitalisation however only allows the missing links to be built, but does nothing towards raising the level of standards being built.  The motto of the Moree conference was "do it once and do it right". There is an industry call for the Inland rail be built to high standards. These high standards are also harmonious with standards of the HSR. ie. Gradient and Geometry. In discussion with accredited participants a new word description was born "General" HSR rail concept.

Some of this $4B should be redirected to at least fund feasibilities of our concept.

RE: HSR VFT PRIORITY No. 1 Sydney – Melbourne

FUTURO CONCEPT “HSR/VFT” AUSTRALIA

RE: HSR VFT PRIORITY No. 1 Sydney – Melbourne

 HSR/VFT CONCEPT WITH LIGHT FREIGHT

As most of people appreciate the task head for the HSR-VFT, our group is passionately pushing forward with this concept for the value it will bring to this great country. Our group currently encompasses representation from Australian engineers, involved in both the consulting and construction aspects and all have similar passion as evident of mine and I am sure yours.

This project is on parity to previous Australian projects that have become Icons for this country, the Kalgoorlie Water Pipeline, The Sydney Harbour Bridge, the Sydney Opera House, but none more so than the great Snowy Scheme of the forties and 50-60's.  You can rest assured that such a feat as these were brought about by one thing and one thing only, a mastery of public relations and resulting public support. The Snowy Scheme, to me represents a vision for the hinterland, valour in engineering, and the foundations of the comradely of international physical constituent effort.  It was a New Deal and equivalent of the Americans Lake Mead by President Roosevelt, after the depression of the 30's.

I see no difference with what is in front of us now. The need for a mastery of public relations and tapping of the already existing public support. A New Deal, a Vision for the hinterland, Valour in Engineering. Our group represents a comradely of international constituents.

The copy of presentation, left with you, mentioned above endeavours to convey the message that HSR VFT Futuro Concept Priority No. 1 for the Sydney Melbourne leg, over the time period of the project 35 years on from its operation date:

  1. That based on conservative patronage and light freight volumes is economic and financeable in our opinion.
  2. It recognises the value of regional development it will bring and the ability to tap onto land usages revaluation.

Few people have mentioned and I agree that the only way it will be financed is through a land revaluation model along the corridor. But as I related to few investors, politician and engineering companies, the two must go hand in hand, for you need the operation cash flow whilst the land revaluation increases can take hold. It’s suggested that land valuation increases will not occur, as a rule overnight, and it is therefore important that the whole package of patronage, light freight and land usage revaluation should be looked at as complementing each other and not land valuation model dominate the operations value.

Recent Comments by futuro

    No comments by futuro yet.