From Newsgroup: aus.rail

https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/5779023/ro-2019-003_final.pdf

"In this case, one bogie on the freight train derailed, resulting in
minor track damage. However, had the bogie of train 6BM9 not derailed on
the misalignment that had formed under the train, the XPT passenger
service travelling from Sydney to Melbourne may have encountered the
track misalignment. It was expected to pass through the location about
80 minutes after the derailment, at 1650."

Sylvia
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On 16-Dec-20 11:56 am, Sylvia Else wrote:

https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/5779023/ro-2019-003_final.pdf

"In this case, one bogie on the freight train derailed, resulting in
minor track damage. However, had the bogie of train 6BM9 not derailed on
the misalignment that had formed under the train, the XPT passenger
service travelling from Sydney to Melbourne may have encountered the
track misalignment. It was expected to pass through the location about
80 minutes after the derailment, at 1650."

Sylvia

I'll expand on that. The underlying problem was a mud-hole that had been present, and was known to be present, for two years. This combined with
high temperatures to cause the track to buckle.

I find this absurd. It's not as if mud holes cure themselves. If the
ARTC cannot keep the track in order, then someone else should be given
the job.

Sylvia.

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On Wednesday, 16 December 2020 at 9:59:41 pm UTC+11, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 16-Dec-20 11:56 am, Sylvia Else wrote:
I find this absurd. It's not as if mud holes cure themselves. If the
ARTC cannot keep the track in order, then someone else should be given
the job.

ARTC is not repairing the mud holes as they don't have the money - and who controls the money ?.
Just where is this mythical 'someone else' supposed to get the money to undertake the repairs?
ARTC is also only maintaining the infrastructure for 80km/hr freight trains, not a 160km/hr passenger trains. The level of attention to detail and 'risk management' required is quite different. And with the government only grudgingly funding maintenance to the 80km/hr standard...
I was just looking at a video 'reviewing' Germany's new IC-2 double-deck trains. They are a 'slow' train, at a mere 160km/hr. 160km/hr is the slowest tier in long-distance trains in Germany. (Some regional trains are limited to 130km/hr, but even most of the regional stock is 160km/hr rated)
I've been on an IC train in Germany where we were running at 230km/hr, 14 coaches, with the locomotive at the rear. Yep, they were pushing a 14 coach train at over 200km/hr. The trains are configured for push-pull to enable quick turn around at the major city terminal stations where these trains call. Not uncommon for a train consist to change directions 4 or more times during its trip from one end of it's the route to the other, so the pushing of a 14 coach train at that speed is regular diagrammed operation.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: aus.rail

On 17-Dec-20 7:06 am, Matthew Geier wrote:

On Wednesday, 16 December 2020 at 9:59:41 pm UTC+11, Sylvia Else wrote:

On 16-Dec-20 11:56 am, Sylvia Else wrote:

I find this absurd. It's not as if mud holes cure themselves. If the
ARTC cannot keep the track in order, then someone else should be given
the job.

ARTC is not repairing the mud holes as they don't have the money - and who controls the money ?.
Just where is this mythical 'someone else' supposed to get the money to undertake the repairs?

ARTC is also only maintaining the infrastructure for 80km/hr freight trains, not a 160km/hr passenger trains. The level of attention to detail and 'risk management' required is quite different. And with the government only grudgingly funding maintenance to the 80km/hr standard...

The maximum track speed at this location as 130km/h, and the train
itself was limited to 115km/h.

Sylvia.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2