Future of Northland Rail

[Jonthekiwi]

OK I know you guys enjoy going off on tangents..but let's keep this thread to the issue. If the current Govt gets in again then you can kiss good bye to about 700kms of the rail network (which costs around 10 million to leave open). But will get 12 billion worth of roads on not key routes of NZ.

[john-ston]

OK I know you guys enjoy going off on tangents..but let's keep this thread to the issue. If the current Govt gets in again then you can kiss good bye to about 700kms of the rail network (which costs around 10 million to leave open). But will get 12 billion worth of roads on not key routes of NZ.

Jon, only one of the four railway lines earmarked for closure would have an impact on the roads that are being built. When you do the analysis as well, it is clear that those rail lines are going to struggle to be viable in any circumstance.

The North Auckland Line is built on the wrong alignment and thus a truck can ship freight between Auckland and Whangarei in half the time the train does - and that line only has a chance of being viable if the Marsden Point Branch is built and if Marsden Point becomes the port of choice.

The Stratford to Okahukura Line parallels a road that does not carry much freight traffic anyway - The last time I checked, State Highway 3 between New Plymouth and Te Kuiti at its quietest point had only 350 trucks a day. Since you love pointing out that it includes everything from 3.5 tonne upwards, I would question how many of those trucks would be rail suitable. Fonterra doesn't seem to mind the status quo either.

The Masterton to Woodville Line has been mothballed in the past (1988-1995) and has not seen any line specific freight for over twenty years. It is pretty clear that the Masterton to Woodville Line isn't worth keeping either, and again, the road it parallels is relatively quiet.

Gisborne to Napier has faced closure threats in the past (first time in 1988, second time in 2000), and has been marginal since then. Its only chance would be if Hikurangi Forest decides to use it to ship its logs down to whichever port it chooses.

Of course, the primary thing is that if the lines are shut, it must be ensured that the lines are not ripped out - so long as they are mothballed, then they can be reopened in the event that a sudden surge in freight occurred.

Also, taking a look at the Roads of National Significance, given that they are busy roads at the moment, would that not make them key routes? If they aren't key routes, then which routes are?

[robincole]

Can we assume you are all for mothballing them, John-ston?

[kos]

What are they likely to close?
Kauri-Otiria
Dargaville branch.

What do these lines carry now? Only logs?
They would be loss making. What else could they carry- JNL from Kaitaia-rail has screwed that up in the past.

How do these lines make money? Carry more freight? What extra freight could they carry.......nothing really comes to mind.
The meat works at Moerewa would generate some containers but rail has probably pulled up the lines and the plant is now geared to just in time road transport.

I guess a problem for the Kauri-Auckland line is if logs carried to Kinleith and the BOP are dragged out of Otiria it reduces revenues for the Kauri-Auckland line...and reduces that lines financial viability.

Reality is these lines will closes unless they can carry more freight........does anyone know of other freight traffic these lines could carry?

[john-ston]

Can we assume you are all for mothballing them, John-ston?

Yes, I am in favour of mothballing. One of the biggest mistakes that past governments made was not only closing the branch line network but also ripping up the tracks. Some of those branch lines could have well been re-opened had the tracks been left in place.

Reality is these lines will closes unless they can carry more freight........does anyone know of other freight traffic these lines could carry?

To be honest, the only freight that the North Auckland Line could potentially carry quite easily would be Marsden Point freight, but that is of course assuming that vessels start stopping there instead of Auckland. It is a Mexican stand-off of sorts.

[robincole]

Yes I prefer mothballing to ripping up the tracks.But with Auckland-Whangarei at the very least, theres a case for keeping it open with four (sometimes more) freights a day.It's never going to compete with road for the very time-sensitive stuff,but with some curvature easement and sorting the Makarau tunnel it could be viable.The fact that its longer than by road isnt a big deal, look at the busy Auckland-Tauranga route via Hamilton.

[Rail-it]

Can we assume you are all for mothballing them, John-ston?

Yes, I am in favour of mothballing. One of the biggest mistakes that past governments made was not only closing the branch line network but also ripping up the tracks. Some of those branch lines could have well been re-opened had the tracks been left in place.

Given the state of the southern/eastern line on the NIMT, they should just rip that up too.

[Rolls-Royce]

The NAL will most likely remain open between Auckland and Whangarei (Kauri). More freight could be hauled on this section of line if a line to Marsden Point were to be built in the near future. The money saved from not operating and maintaining the Dargaville and Kauri-Otiria sections could perhaps go towards building the Marsden Point link which would be more beneficial and create more traffic and business opportunities for KiwiRail?

With regards to dealing with the Makarau tunnel, there is already a fully surveyed deviation - it just needs to be funded and built.

[duddley]

are there any estimates on the cost of the deviation?.

[Andrew]

Question: Does anyone know how much of an effect on the financial viability (profitability) of the Northland group of lines, all the line closures for metro upgrades and associated disruption that the "West line" in Auckland has caused?

[geoff_184]

The North Auckland Line is built on the wrong alignment and thus a truck can ship freight between Auckland and Whangarei in half the time the train does

Yet railway lines on direct routes fare no better, and some are worse.

Having a shorter route would save dollars in terms of operating costs and track maintenance, but wouldn't actually attract much additional freight. What extra freight it does attract, it will do by passing on those savings, not by offering faster times. Of course this scenario would only apply on the basis that the new line construction doesn't have to be paid back. If it did, the burden would kill off KiwiRail.

What we need is for KiwiRail to get back the NAL customers that Tranz Rail told to piss off.

[john-ston]

Yet railway lines on direct routes fare no better, and some are worse.

Such as? Remember, an increase in journey times by a mere few hours saw the share of freight on rail on the Auckland to Christchurch route take a sharp nosedive.

Having a shorter route would save dollars in terms of operating costs and track maintenance, but wouldn't actually attract much additional freight. What extra freight it does attract, it will do by passing on those savings, not by offering faster times. Of course this scenario would only apply on the basis that the new line construction doesn't have to be paid back. If it did, the burden would kill off KiwiRail.

And it would attract more customers as they would get their freight much faster. If speed didn't matter, then Kiwi Rail shouldn't be bothered trying to upgrade the Auckland to Christchurch route to allow for faster trip times.

[geoff_184]

Remember, an increase in journey times by a mere few hours saw the share of freight on rail on the Auckland to Christchurch route take a sharp nosedive.

Auckland-Christchurch is greater than overnight delivery, so every minute counts. Time only becomes an issue beyond overnight delivery.

[Daniel]

This line wont be closed. The Labour government had an abysmal ability to negotiate with big commercial interests . That is why the taxpayers paid so much for something that Toll wanted to get rid of . They could have got a bargain at a fraction of the price.

National have only been in 5 minutes and so far the network continues to be improved.

What a load of absolute poppycock. You're either a liar, in delusion or completely clueless.
And before you start, no I am NOT a member of the Labour party.

Look at our new navy bathtubs. The army Lav and the job they did to get rid of the Sky hawks and MAC trainers.

None of this has anything to do with anything not even whether the last Labour were good at negotiating with big commercial interests.
If you have any military or economic knowledge you'd be over the moon about the LAV purchase and the decision to scrap the useless old Skyhawks.

[john-ston]

Auckland-Christchurch is greater than overnight delivery, so every minute counts. Time only becomes an issue beyond overnight delivery.

In this day and age with Just in Time, and the like, every minute counts no matter what the delivery window.

[geoff_184]

In this day and age with Just in Time, and the like, every minute counts no matter what the delivery window.

Internal supply chains are not relevant to rail or linehaul trucking. Rail and linehaul trucking focus on fixed schedules, primarily overnight.

As I've pointed out before, the trucking companies all offer overnight delivery between Auckland and Whangarei. None of them offer anything less than 12 hours, and in fact they advise that you should allow for two to three days. Rail isn't any slower no matter how much you insist that it is.

But as I said, there would be savings from a more direct route in terms of less track to maintain, less fuel used, and less wear and tear on rolling stock. But those savings would be more than wiped out by the burden of recovering the construction costs.

[john-ston]

Internal supply chains are not relevant to rail or linehaul trucking. Rail and linehaul trucking focus on fixed schedules, primarily overnight.

Internal supply chains are very relevant to rail and linehaul trucking. If a plant requires particular items of material at a particular time, then they will go with the option that will provide for that particular time.

As I've pointed out before, the trucking companies all offer overnight delivery between Auckland and Whangarei. None of them offer anything less than 12 hours, and in fact they advise that you should allow for two to three days. Rail isn't any slower no matter how much you insist that it is.

Again, a truck does Whangarei to Auckland in three hours. Rail takes seven. The only reason why the trucking companies advise you should allow for two to three days is that we effectively have a duopoly or triopoly (i.e. service provision is allowed to be crap because there is no-one else to turn to).

[geoff_184]

Again, a truck does Whangarei to Auckland in three hours. Rail takes seven.

Truck = 3 hour journey time, roughly 12 hours from drop off to pick up.
Rail = 5-6 hour journey time, roughly 12 hours from drop off to pick up.

And let's not forget that for large bulk contracts, road will be much slower, taking a number of days to move what the train will do in 5-6 hours.

The reason the NAL isn't full of smaller contracts is the same reason every other line in New Zealand isn't full of smaller contracts - KiwiRail isn't interested unless the customer pays through the nose.

[geoff_184]

A further thought to this, the NAL route between Auckland and Whangarei is 22% further than the main road route, and would be only 17% further if the SAL was built. By comparison, one of the most successful rail routes in the country, Auckland-Tauranga, is 15% further than the main road route.

[john-ston]

By comparison, one of the most successful rail routes in the country, Auckland-Tauranga, is 15% further than the main road route.

Would that route have been as successful had the old very indirect route through Waihi been kept? I doubt it. The North Auckland Line now is like the East Coast Main Trunk was back in the 1960s, slow and indirect.