With construction of Inland Rail stalled north of Toowoomba until at least to the early 2030s, Australia faces significant challenges in freight continuity, supply chain reliability, and regional economic development. Against this backdrop, reinstating the disused Northern Rail Line between Armidale and the Queensland border presents a timely, pragmatic alternative. Rather than waiting out prolonged delays, this corridor could act as a complementary route—bringing freight and logistics benefits now, while also enhancing disaster resilience and catalysing regional growth.
Context and Issue
Inland Rail is a flagship national infrastructure initiative designed to link Melbourne and Brisbane with a faster, more efficient freight corridor. However, escalating costs and construction complexity north of Toowoomba have pushed back projected completion dates for the Queensland section. In the meantime, communities in New England—such as Armidale, Glen Innes and Tenterfield—remain disconnected from rail support, relying on road transport that is vulnerable to flood or disruption.
Reinstating the Northern Line would:
- Re‑establish direct rail freight linkage between New England and Queensland freight hubs;
- Reduce reliance on long-haul road freight over vulnerable mountain passes;
- Provide a strategic backup corridor during inland corridor disruptions;
- Support renewable energy and agriculture export supply chains emerging in the region.
Strategic Benefits
Freight & Logistics
Re‑opening the Northern Line would relieve pressure on the Bruce Highway and existing inland truck routes, diverting containerised and bulk freight to rail. This would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, lower road maintenance costs, and improve network reliability for businesses exporting via Brisbane or coastal ports. Additionally, rail can efficiently move heavy loads like timber, mineral sands, or machinery from inland New South Wales to Queensland terminals.
Defence and Disaster Resilience
Australia’s national resilience strategy emphasises dual-purpose infrastructure. The Northern Line can serve as a critical contingency route during floods, fires or other emergencies that may disrupt Inland Rail or major highways. Moreover, it offers strategic lift capacity in support of defence logistics during national emergencies or exercises.
Regional Development and Social Impact
For New England towns, rail revitalisation offers potential spill‑over benefits: increased local employment during upgrade phases, improved access to markets, and enhanced investment appeal for agribusiness and renewable energy projects—particularly in areas aligned with the New England Renewable Energy Zone. Improved rail access would also support population retention in regional centres by improving connectivity.
Cost‑Effectiveness and Phasing
Compared with constructing new track corridor north of Toowoomba, reinstating an existing—but dormant—line could be significantly quicker and lower cost. A phased roll-out (e.g., Armidale to Glen Innes initially) could demonstrate benefits early, attract state and federal buy-in, and help fund subsequent extensions.
Policy Recommendations
The author proposes:
- Commissioning a joint NSW–QLD infrastructure study to assess reinstatement costs, potential volumes and phased staging;
- Seeking seed funding under federal regional development and resilience programs to support track reinstatement and upgrade;
- Exploring infrastructure financing mechanisms, such as public-private partnerships, matched grant models or national freight corridor grants;
- Engaging Commonwealth Ministers in transport and regional development to elevate the Northern Line as a complementary infrastructure priority.
Conclusion
Reinstating the Northern Rail Line offers a clear, near‑term opportunity to buttress Inland Rail’s national freight ambitions while delivering resilience and economic development for New England communities. Rather than waiting years for Inland Rail’s Queensland extension to materialise, Australia can proactively leverage existing infrastructure to drive connectivity, strengthen logistics, and support regional prosperity.
Got something on your mind? Go on then, engage. Submit your opinion piece, letter to the editor, or Quick Word now.
I would love to see trains run north of Armidale to Wallangarra and beyond 🙏
Phill Phill- not going to happen. NSW govt has repeatedly stated it will not happen. Maybe some funding for NERI so we can run heritage trains south of Armidale?
NSW Govt has not said it will not happen. All what it says is that there are no current plans to reinstate the railway line north of Amidale. However the NSW govenment is currently preparing a Strategic Regional Integated Transpot Plan (SRITP)for New England Nothwest. Part of the focus is Rail. Check the website. Please do not spread false information.
The government has stated that there are no plans to reinstate the line north of Armidale and any development of rail will be strictly based on demonstrable benefits.
Dream whatever you want but that condition does rule out any reinstatement of it.
The old line though the New England region could never be viable for interstate transport. It is steep, having to climb all the way up the Great Dividing Range, and has curves that are too tight for modern rail services. It involves a change of gauge at Wallangarra.
There were good reasons why it was superseded by the North Coast Railway nearly a century ago and good reasons it was not chosen as part of the route for the Inland Rail project. No government is going to divert hundreds of millions of dollars from Inland Rail for this anachronism.
Nor would it be viable for either freight or passenger services for the region. There are quite simply too few people and too little industry to justify the huge expense of reinstating the railway and operating services. That is why it was closed three decades ago.
No amount of lobbying or pleading is going to change the reality that this railway will never be reinstated.
Viability of the rail line cannot be determined without a comprehensive feasibility study undertaken by government, councils, or the private sector. With Inland Rail stalled north of the border for the next 10–15 years, it is important to explore the Northern Railway Line to Queensland as a cost-effective feeder or interim alternative.
I am encouraged that there is at least private sector interest emerging now.
I am not surprised by the views expressed here, as you are a well-known supporter of rail trails. However, claims about “huge expense” are not entirely accurate. In 2024, New England Railway Inc. engaged professionals to study the condition of the line and prepare cost estimates. A summary was released showing that actual costs depend on factors such as the desired speed and axle load—not the inflated figures often circulated.
Changing the reality will require collective desire and coordinated action. The people of New England have already expressed their views clearly: a 10,740-signature petition tabled in the NSW Parliament, along with my own Change.org petition (close to 5,000 supporters), both opposing rail trail conversion by removing the existing track.
Councils already struggle to maintain existing bike paths. Establishing a rail trail in this corridor would set the region back decades, permanently cutting off the opportunity for a vital rail link to Queensland.
The “professionals” you supposedly engaged is Northern Regional Rail Company. They have never done a commercial consultation and hence are not professionals, by definition. They will not even name the authors and only supplied a worthless rudimentary summary of their ludicrously optimistic claims.
A professional rail company would boast about their staff and qualifications. This company is nothing more than rail enthusiasts who think that registering a company with “rail” in the name will buy credibility.
There is clearly nothing “vital” about a rail link to the Queensland border that hasn’t operated in more than three decades. There is noting cost effective about squandering a fortune on a steep winding railway to nowhere through a sparely populated area.
I’m not surprised by your views either. You are a well known railway obsessive with a penchant for delusional visions.
What about the track gauge of queensland.? 1067mm to New south wales 1435mm.?
There are modern solutions for gauge differences. e.g. dual tracks. Insted of two tracks unde this there are three tracks to accommodate gauge differences. Inland rail is planning to build a dual track line from Toowoomba to the intermodal terminal near Brisbane. I think at kagaru.
A well written and thought-out
vision that could easily become a reality with initial linking to the Port of Newcastle as the rail line from Tamworth to Newcastle is fully serviceable.
Coupled with high frequency passenger rail services journeys to work, sport and entertainment could connect the New England passenger network with the major passenger networks of the Hunter, Central Coast and Sydney. This massive passenger rail network will generate major Tourism opportunities and link Sydney to Brisbane for the 2032 Olympic games.
This will set a revised New England rail line into a league not even contemplated by the freight only Inland Rail plan.
The High Speed Rail from Sydney to Newcastle could connect to Brisbane via the major cities of Maitland, Tamworth and Armidale providing a clean easy route with a huge access to low-cost housing potential at a much-reduced cost to a coastal HSR route
Not “well thought out” at all. Only a tiny fraction of one percent of tourists travel by train. Sydney and Brisbane are already connected by standard gauge railway. The Olympics is a two week sporting event, hardly a good rason to squander billions o a railway.
Any existing railways in Australia would be utterly irrelevant to high speed rail. The Great Northern line with its tight curves and steep climbs isn’t even suitable for moderately fast conventional trains.
Imagining that tourism would be opened up by providing transport is completely backwards thinking. People need a reason to come to an area before caring about how they will get there. That’s where something like a rail trail would be a huge success.
That’s completely illogical. How will bike riders get to the rail trail ? Also you need to provide some evidence other than anecdotes from other rail trails, on how many prospective rail trail riders there will be. What of prospective tourists who are not bike riders?
How attractive will the rail trail be in the middle of a Northern Tablelands winter, or at the height of summer?
I would hazard a guess that the ratio of bike tourists to other kinds of tourists would be pretty small, and the ratio of tourists to travellers for reasons other than tourism would also be small.
As a fairly frequent train traveller I have observed that far from being unused, the train is used for a variety of purposes not associated with tourism – not only to travel between Armidale and Sydney, but also to travel to and from the towns and villages in between. Coaches are not an adequate substitute – they don’t hold as many passengers as trains do, and are responsible for more accidents and deaths than the trains, especially given the state of the roads. Furthermore if coaches were seen to be a viable business in New England, why aren’t there more of them now?
I have a better idea than the rail trail as a drawcard for bike tourism : why not build a world class indoor velodrome in Armidale? That would bring tourists all year round and they could bring their bikes on the train.
Riders will get to the trail the same ways most tourists travel today. In a car.
About thirty percent of trail users complete their journey on foot.
Trains holding more passengers than a coach is of no advantage when the coach cannot be filled. If they were filled, then increasing the number of services would be the sensible solution.
Nobody is going to pay the enormous cost of resurrecting a railway for tiny numbers of passengers with one service per day.
Trains and buses are both very safe. Buses do many more passenger kilometres than trains and their fatality record is as good as trains.
People are not interested in riding around a velodrome.
Not everybody has a car. I and many others use the train precisely because we do not drive, for whatever reason, and/ or, own a car.
To sacrifice a railway line to satisfy a relatively small hobby lobby group who happen to have bikes AND cars is completely inequitable. Why not be content with the existing bike trails in the region, and leave the railway line for those who NEED it?
A train would only be useful to those who live near and need to travel to places near the railway. As such it would be an extremely inequitable indulgence of a tiny fraction of the people at huge cost to everyone.
Nobody is going to fund it so demanding the return of the train is a total waste of time. Why not campaign for more regular bus services which might get funded?
Rail trails have minimal gradients which is why they are always going to attract a lot more users than the mythical bike trails you claim should be enough.
Why always think of tourism as dragging people in from far away places. Tourism can be as simple as Armidale to deepwater or Glen Innes to Tenterfield, by increasing regional tourism travel opportunities, or better connections to populations in southern downs and new England.
Tourism is as much about a day out as it is a weekend or a week away.
With disability making up around 20% of populations and high percentages of ever aging populations having our villages and towns with better connections to city via public transport makes perfect sense. Not just for tourism purposes also for the need to connect to medical and shopping and business.
Yes. Tourists will be able to walk or ride the trail from Armidale to Guyra and Glen Innes, and eventually Tenterfield and Wallangarra when the council there becomes more progressive.
Tourists can ride bikes beside a rail line and after they exhaust themselves riding 40km up hill they can catch the train, along with all the other residents and tourists that don’t ride bikes going for a day out shopping, exploring or enjoying an event or function.
Win win for all types, abilities, ages and everyone inbetween. Win for events on the new England.
More and more councils are rejecting rail trails as the sums are not adding up. Some councils are actually concerned about budgets and their ratepayers. It’s called not being wreckless.
Did you know that in new Zealand, councils that have rail trails and trails, that their rates have risen up to 18% and that some trails are now falling into rack and ruin and are risking closure over safety because they can not squeeze any more fundings out of the ratepayers. NZ councils have been pretty angry at the government’s for quite a few long years that the governments aren’t giving enough support to keep the trails maintained. It’s been an ongoing battle and argument for them to squeeze blood out of a stone.
Since we are modelling rail trails on NZ and all, I find that’s a really fun fact.
Trail users plan their journeys to match their abilities. It would be a very long wait for a train.
While many councils are initially reticent, due largely to the misinformation campaigns by railway advocates such as yourself, they often come around eventually. This has just happened with the Wagga to Ladysmith trail where the council voted against it in May but last week set up a committee to investigate it further.
A similar thing happened in Armidale but unfortunately the delay while they had vacillated led to the loss of the available grant.
You claims about New Zealand are again reflections of your prejudices and have no basis in fact. The popularity of trails in New Zealand continue to grow and governments continue to invest in them.They are so popular that Queenstown is no longer mainly a winter destination for snow tourists. The summer season with trail tourists is now as large as the winter. The year round employment opportunities has made a huge difference to workers who previously came in only for the winter.
Wether a trail is popular in NZ or not (and not all trails are popular just some, and some of those trails that are popular, are not all rail trails, some of the popular ‘trails’ go to key tourism features and post card opportunities, they are well serviced along the way and well maintained) which brings you to the council picking up the bills to maintain, to repair after weather, to maintain garbage along the trails, service the toilets, fix things! Things when bills mount up, councils can’t always afford. The council has admitted nert will be grant dependant, grants are not guaranteed, they are not always available, and as they should have learnt grants can also be not granted and pulled away when criteria or dollar for dollar matching can’t be met. It costs time and money to apply for grants. Many hours of admin get chewed up, reports cost money, as we know how much councils have already spent hundreds of thousands to try to get these grants.
Many councils have had controversy over affordability, and many councils have rejected the idea before even debating the issue, knowing multiple millions of dollars are needed and hundreds of thousands of dollars there after.
There’s alot to be learned from existing rail trails and councils who have had to endure the financial burdens of them.
Successful or not, rail trails are costly. And to be successful, your going to need good weather, (it’s too cold here in winter for outdoor sports, enough to keep most away who think anything under 15 degrees is too cold, mild weather the rt group says, our winters are extreme, Greg you say our line is too steep for trains, yet think the average Joe out for a weekend ride could happily ride 40km up a constant climb, Greg you just don’t make sense.
Luckily for some towns the at have raised the rail trail debate, their councils have been sensible.
More vague hand waving about “some” trails not being popular. How about you stop indulging your prejudices and name the trails where the councils are upset about them.
You clearly don’t know much about trains. Their steel wheels on steel tracks have traction problems at quite small gradients that are not a problem for cyclists.
Everything you have said about costs of trails can be multiplied many, many times for trains. Nobody is going to fund a railway for a sparsely populated area.
It should never have been closed. But that seems to be the trend with governments abrogating the responsibilities. Open up the line and run the trains again.
Governments have a responsibility to use taxpayer funds on investments that can demonstrate a positive return. NSW already has more than $100 billion of public debt. Loading our grand children with more to be repaid by squandering hundreds of millions of dollars to indulge the greedy aspirations of those living in a sparsely populated area is neither fiscally nor morally responsible.
The NSW Government is investing billions of dollars in transport infrastructure projects in Sydney, often with little concern about overlapping services. Our region deserves at least a billion-dollar investment to restore the line north of Armidale, beginning with a proper feasibility study.
Across the border in Queensland, there are more than 4 million people. If the line were restored, the New England visitor economy would benefit significantly. It is both morally responsible and socially just for regional residents to have access to reliable public transport—just as those in Sydney do. Equity between city and region matters.
Spending public funds to create a rail trail for short-term benefits, while denying a critical rail link to Queensland, would be a mistake. When the NSW Government duplicates transport options in Sydney, it does not hesitate despite the state carrying over $100 billion in debt. Why, then, should it hesitate to invest in the regions—where the return would be long-term growth, resilience, and fairness?
More than eighty percent of the NSW population lives and works in the region serviced by Sydney Trains. They carry a million passengers per day.
Claiming that the tiny populations north of Armidale “deserves at least a billion-dollar investment” cannot be substantiated by any form of logic or fairness.
Fairness? Are we third world citizens out here on the border region that don’t deserve decent public transport options like every where else.
As for Sydney no one can afford the rent or the house prices, if rail was bought back here workers could have affordable transport options, we could expand housing growth from village to town to larger city and play a major part in solving the housing crisis dilemma Australia is faced with. Grow jobs and business. Have alternatives when the airport isn’t flying planes because of weather or whatever reasons the planes always seem to get cancelled. When Rez begins FIFO workers can have transport to the region. Air fares are also out of reach for alot of budgets. We need transport networks. Otherwise we will just stay stagnent old tired historical towns with no money no economy no jobs.
You live in a sparsely populated area. Expecting metropolitan level facilities is ridiculously greedy.
You deserve appropriate public transport in the form of subsidised coaches but not the luxury of trains at the enormous expense to NSW taxpayers. You would get more services if more people used the coaches that already run.
People need to live close to where they work. Claiming that it would be practical for them to commute hundreds of kilometres to work on a train as a justification for a billion dollar reinstatement of a derelict railway is complete nonsense.
Absolute waste of money. The rail trail will
deliver so much more tourism and benefit to the region rather than delivering a few passengers and non existent freight to the border and back on a truck. The line out lived its usefulness in the 80s. This is just unicorn pipe dreams written by a rail tragic that has been flogging this dead horse for years.
Steve, considering how much damage was done recently to the New England Hwy and alternative connective roads between the Pacific and the New England when the coast flooded alone having the rail line would be beneficial.
Further, if you don’t have a vehicle nor the extortionist amounts to fly regionally to Brisbane it shouldn’t take a trip to the coast and then up the train line as well as an estimated day to get up to Brisbane or surrounds, or going north via Sydney. Not everyone can or should have a drivers licence nor a vehicle but do need to head north for various reasons and the coach companies which used to service these areas haven’t done so since the Covid years.
Thirdly, it would be beneficial to access a number of support services to move animals and produce to the northern markets and ports without the expense of trucking it all the way – giving diversification for the regions along the line.
The economics of tourism can also be tapped into as well with good campaigns and such aimed at both domestic and international tourists for the entire length of the line.
It could be a huge win to the Armidale through to Brisbane link and much better than a bike trail that is limited to a subset of the tourist market and only that as I has itemised here.
Melissa G Medina – the rail line wont transfer freight as it goes from
nowhere to nowhere. Siri Gamage is a dreamer. Should we spend billions so you catch one train a day to the border and then pray for a Qld bus? Much more practical and sensible for the govt to subsidise a coach service on a regular basis to Qld. Remember too the flexibility that comes with a coach. Able to go into the centre of town and not the station outside town as some of the stations on the line are. No animals are moved on trains in NSW so if you want that go back to the 1960s. Your arguments are flawed and the subject of romantic dreams. Move on.
Steve Hodgesthe economic history of rail, and what is happening with rail in other parts of the state, suggest you are wrong. Freight and the logistics hubs connenecting industries is a year round proposition in contrast to 6 months of marginal income generation from bike riding at best. If I were a bike tiler, an I’m not, tho trails around the northern coastline would seem more attractive and better equipped for tourism. Another is the southern highlands. Their hospitaliy businesses leave ours for dead -which is sad.
Michael Hargreaves – wrong on all counts and some basic research will show you that. Go back to
the drawing board.
Melissa G Medina agree, however the trucks see road damage as ‘someone else’s problem’
Thanks for these very positive comments Melissa.
I am interested to talk with you if possible about these ideas futher. Please contact me via New England Times.
Steve Hodges having studied the economic history of rail, I know I am on solid ground. Also when was the lady time you tried to book a restaurant (they’re open) on a weekend in the southern highlands? Last, I can also back my knowledge with my own money. Can you? As an airbnb owner, I’m yet to see a visitor ask about bike trails or bring a bike. Most come here to work and fill holes in our local workforce. They are generating income and spending money in town.
Visitors who are into cycling already know where the trails are located. If New England had a substantial rail trail they would arrive in droves. There is a whole separate set of potential tourists that are being ignored by not developing the trail.
Camper vans have become much more conspicuous around Murwillumbah since that section of the Northern Rivers Rail Trail opened in 2023.
An independent professional study found that the trail contributed $3.7 million to the local economy in its first year. And that is with just 24 km of trail which is is mostly patronised by day visitors.
A longer trail will bring a much higher proportion of multi-day visitors who will spend a lot more money in the region.
New England already has thousands of cycling opportunities and mapped cycling routes and trails and paths.
Where are all the cyclists?
At a guess,
Most likely the small percentage of cycling enthusiasts have gone riding on the millions of other mapped cycling opportunities closer to home.
If they’re not cycling here now on the wonderful opportunities that already exist, there’s a pretty great chance another bike path won’t change the numbers of cyclists coming to the region.
Rail enthusiasts repeatedly speak of the incredible mythology of the thousands of cycling opportunities but nobody will itemise any of them.
Rail trails are hugely attractive because they are nearly level compared to most roads and are separated from dangerous vehicles.
Your post is merely an expression of your prejudices and has no rational basis.
Greg the tourism websites and council websites will show you exactly where the existing cycling opportunities are. If you can’t find what your looking for there and are a cycling enthusiast wanting a bit more then you’ll know there’s many apps with cycling routes mapped with plenty of info on where and how and ability ratings, distance, time ECT.
There’s also many cycling events on the new England that draw tourists and allow them to ride safely and be catered for.
And again you claim there are thousands of cycling opportunities but fail to name even one.
And none of them would provide an experience even remotely like a rail trail.
Steve Hodgesstill obsessed with what goes on in the New England area when you live in Sydney.
Michele Zbudowski – My daughter goes to Uni in Armidale, I have business interests in the New England and are a regular visitor. Not an obsession but just putting in my 2c worth. I think it is interesting however to see that your democratically elected local councils are not advocating for the rail line but rather a trail.
Steve Hodges Steve the Rail is built for far more heavy weight than roads you have noticed the damage in the roads in the past 30years .
Again your pessimistic views about the rail line are well known. With the expansion of REZ it is inevitable that the Renewable Energy companies have to utilise the rail line from Newcastle port to Queensland for transpoting equipment and othe materials.
Upon what evidence do you base this claim?
There are no realistic expectations that such a train would be available, yet plans progress. Many renewable energy projects have gone ahead without any need for trains.
People who advocate for a return to rail have no idea of modern construction costs, ongoing infrastructure maintenance costs and that companies who operate railways tend to want to make a profit.
No government will want to fund a dead end niche rail line.
The ongoing tourist potential of a rail trail as demonstrated in every other country that they operate in as well as in Australia, should be enough incentive alone for the New England to get behind it. Tenterfield alresdy has significant funding to turn it into a mountain biking destination to rival parts of Tasmania, and we can only imagine the spin off benefits for small ex rail towns if councils got behind a rail trail from Armdiale to Tamworth
James Austen Have a look at how successful Southern Downs Steam is in Qld. Tap it up. Very successful. It runs to Wallangarra. QG maintains the track.
Steve Hodges Read all the trips – Goondiwindi, Toowoomba, Clifton, Miles and Wallangarra. If you want it do it. Check the steam train out of Gympie. 2 trips a day at Kuranda and Barron Falls. The Savannah Lander. Plenty happening up here. Your loss of you don’t do it.
Gympie”s Mary Valley Rattler runs on 23 km of track and has never operated at break even, let alone make enough to sustain ongoing maintenance.
The Queensland government put in ten million dollars to get it going again after the original project on 40 km of line failed through being declared unsafe due to multiple derailments cause by inadequate maintenance of the track.
Gympie Council put in something like eight million to get it going then picked up the tab for the losses every year and “loaned” them another million dollars, eventually reaching more than $10,000,000 of ratepayer funds injected. Every fare was being subsidised about $40 by ratepayers on top of the $62 paid by passengers.
Last year, in response to ratepayer outrage, the council sold its stake in the rattler for one dollar, including walking away from the loan where not one cent had been repaid. It is questionable how long the project will continue. They are currently removing the tracks beyond the operating section to extend a rail trail to that point in the hope of bringing in more patrons with the trail.
The Kuranda train is run by the Queensland Government and every trip loses several thousand dollars.
With very few exceptions, the only way to successfully run heritage trains is to use working tracks because the cost of maintaining a heritage track is prohibitive. Those that do succeed such as Bellarine and Puffing Billy are on tracks where the preservation of the line began immediately after commercial service ceased, or in the case of Bellarine, two years before the commercial operation ceased.
The idea that hundreds of kilometres of track that have not been maintained in more than thirty years could be a viable heritage railway is ludicrous.
Steve Hodges That line is a gold mine. It gives so many opportunities. A run up with stops overnight, esp overnite at Glen Innes and Tenterfield. Ben Lomond highest station. Last time we had lunch at Wallangarra, 320 ppl for lunch!! Coordinated bus and train legs. Recently we had a week on a property at Deepwater. What a great visitors centre in Glen Innes!! We easily filled in 1/2 a day. QR has just resleepered the passing loop at Ballandean as the train stops there for wine tours. I know the New England area well having roots there since 1836. The trick is to use the train as the spine for tourism. It has worked very well in Qld in so many places. Anyway, what you folk do is your business but it is crying out for vaction and is loaded with potential.
Don’t let the bean counters try and run a profit and loss account: go strategic.
Lance Lyon QR is repairing the several very small bridges that were burnt out. The current trips go to Ballandean where the engine is repositioned to pull the train back to Warwick. I was there 7 days ago talking to the QR crews and track guys. I have ridden the rails to Wallangarra several times before the fires. It is not correct to say it was burnt out. Only several small bridges are out. Time to be positive for tourism. Get behind doing something positive for NSW rural communities.
James Austen New England Railway Inc together with Northern Railway Company conducted a degradation study of the line and bridges etc. They provided a summary of costs estimated by professionals who actually walked the line. According to NERi and NRRC estimates, the cost depends on the purpose, AXL load and the speed. For heritage trains, per km cost is under $500,000. No where like the “modern construction costs” you talk about. However to run coal trains, the cost is 1.2m per km. There is no justification in wanting to remove the rail line to build a rail trail.
Siri Gamage but you aren’t advocating for just heritage trains? People are reading this and expecting passenger trains to run to Brisbane, or heavy freight and livestock trains stopping to pick up their cows and sheep at various spots and take them to Sydney like it was 1915!
At least the rail trail advocates have a simple singular message that has real world examples and costings
James, We are advocating for the return of modern train services to connect New England with Queensland. The benefits far outweigh the costs. This is not about recreating the livestock trains of 1916—it is about building a future-ready transport link.
Toowoomba now has an international airport exporting products across the world, while Tamworth has an intermodal freight terminal (Qube) serving a similar role. Why should New England be denied the opportunity for a modern rail connection that supports both freight and passengers?
There are also exciting opportunities locally. New England Railway Inc. has a well-developed plan to operate heritage trains north and south, boosting tourism. At the same time, the University of New England is establishing a campus in Tamworth, creating a clear case for a regular shuttle service between Armidale and Tamworth to support parents, students, and staff.
The problem with the current rail trail proposals is that they are destructive to any future rail return north of Armidale. Once the line is removed, the opportunity for a vital transport corridor will be lost for generations.
The notion of privately operated rail services through a sparsely populated area is utterly ludicrous.
There is no future for the railway north of Armidale whether the tracks are removed or left in place. You keep using the word “vital” without any substantiation. The last service ran over three decades ago and the sky hasn’t fallen.
There simply isn’t the population in the region to justify a mass transit system. It isn’t going to happen.
Siri Gamage Absolutely.You guys have a gold mine there in tourist terms.
James Austen You know it all so let us see the total costings as well as the planned maintenance costings and who will be paying for the maintenance. If you are so keen on a rail trail why not support a rail trail adjacent to the train line.
Railway tracks are laid on a fully formed, properly drained formations. The ballast makes an excellent foundation for a trail.
Building a trail anywhere else on the corridor requires the construction of a second formation at great expense. Draining the second formation is complex because of the adjacent original formation.
Building a second formation requires the movement and stabilisation of large amounts of soil. It can lead to significant problems controlling erosion until the new work has been fully settled and vegetated. It is an oportuntiy for invasive species to become a problem.
Maintaining two formations is obviously going to be more expensive than maintianing one.
Railway tracks typically do not run consistently in the middle or one side of the corridor but move back and forth across the corridor to ease the curves. Hence it is not always possible to build a second formation entirely within the corridor.
The bottom line is the railway services are not going to be reinstated. There is nothing to be gained by spending a whole lot of money to retain the tracks. Governments will not fund these pointless extra costs of construction.
Considering the steep mounds where the rail line has been built upon to overcome the many low lying areas, and align with bridges, the rail trail once these mounds are flattened will suffer severely with washouts and problems in crossing the many creeks and gullys or if the steep mounds are left in place, it will require many safety features or left as is might become a great spectator sport to watch as it keeps emergency services busy retrieving bodies that fall down the edges.
Building a tourist attracting rail trail will need a bit more work then just ripping up rails and offloading them as scrap. There’s probably more construction dollars needed to build a safe enticing welcoming rail trail that will bring return visitors (if there’s such a thing as return visitors, most just tick and flick the been there done that took a photo of my bike against a post, as we’ve seen with the declining numbers on other trails) ) then there is to rebuild the rail line. Rail seems like the more competitive business case, that will bring more jobs and more economic benefits that will spread further and wider across the region. There will need to be alot of money spent to create the new England rail trail if the project is done in its full original 200km planned project. At current bidding of around $500k+ per kilometre for a rt to be constructed to complete the project, and make it world class and be as big as Brisbane valley, , that would amount to, $100 million on most calculators.
The rail trail project has changed scope that many times it’s got lost.
The “formation” (not “mounds”) isn’t flattened for trails. The Northern Rivers Rail Trail (NRRT) has been built on the formation. Thousands use it and falling off has not been a problem.
Usage surveys have been conducted and eighty percent of visitors say they will return.
Numbers of users on trails are not declining. Figures for trails in Victoria and the Brisbane Valley Rail Trail continue to climb.
Of course the initial surge of a users on a new trail as everyone checks it out is not sustained but nobody expects that. Usage on the NRRT has settled to about four times the original projections and numbers for the past two years, excluding the surge of the first few months are seasonally quite similar.
James Austen I’m advocating all type of trains. That is our future. How long do we want to be isolated when our neighbouring regions are moving forward? If you want to remove the rail line communities between Armidale and Glen Innes will be the lower for your stupidity. People living along the rail line wat trains not a bike trail for professional bike riders. They can build it somewhere else.
Rail Trail users are not “professional bike riders”. They are ordinary mums, dad, kids, grandparents. They are open to anybody and typically about one third of users are on foot, not a bicycle.
Rail trails are popular because they are very nearly level and isolated from the dangers of the road traffic. There isn’t an option to “build it somewhere else”.
The railway will not be reopened and having it sit there unused forever is pointless and a wasted opportunity.
Surely your use of the phrase “your stupidity” would be contravening the edict of the page to “Engage respectfully”? In any case, insults are made by those incapable of presenting a rational argument.
It’s a long walk to walk a 20 km to 40km rail trail can’t imagine too many doing that, just as I can’t imagine too many kids riding a bike 20/40 or 100km even with an electric bike. Seriously 2 to 5 km pulls up the average Bob and Jane.
Your lack of imagination is just a reflection of your prejudices.
I will be 66 next month and have done 50 km bike (not ebike) rides on the trail many times, including several at night. This is possible because the trail is relatively flat. Even the long “steep” sections have a two percent grade. Not hard to ride up and a lot of fun riding down them,
I would not dream of riding on the road over the Burringbar Range, which is the only alternative, in the daytime, let alone at night.
Plenty of people have walked the whole length of much larger trails
New England Railway Inc and Northern [Regional] Rail Company are not “professionals”, by definition. They have never undertaken a commercial contract. They are nothing more than companies registered by rail enthusiasts who think that having a company with “rail” in the name will buy them credibility.
All requests for the detail of the degradation study to be made public have been denied. They won’t even name the authors. A real company boasts about its staff and their experience.
The companies and their degradation study are farcical amateur nonsense or they would publish it and defend any criticism. They won’t because they know the study would be demolished in seconds by anyone with real experience and knowledge.
James Austen Tenterfield mount bike tracks is a very successful one and setting an example. It does not require the removal of rail line. It will be integrated with the rail line instead. How good is that?
A Mountain Bike Track is an entirely different type of facility from a rail trail and attracts very different visitors. The key to the difference is in the word, “mountain”.
Mountain biking is for very fit riders. Rail trails attract a wide demographic precisely because they are nearly level, providing for people of all ages and levels of fitness from little children to the very old as well as people with physical handicaps.
Tweed Valley Rail Trail is frequented by people on mobility scooters, people in wheelchairs use it, and a man walking with a zimmer frame has been seen on it. I’ve seen little children riding what are essentially toy bicycles, at great distances from the nearest access. They love it.
I well remember walking past a quite overweight teenage boy in the car park, looking like he had worked very hard, proudly saying to the adults accompanying him, “I did it!”.
The social and health benefits of rail trails are profound. Nobody is going to reinstate the railway. Persisting with this fanciful nonsense is a huge wasted opportunity.
Exercise and mental health comes also from not being isolated, not taking the car from door to door, from being able to travel, walking to and from public transport, walking around markets and getting out and about, putting your bike on a train and going to ride in other towns, for the man with the mobility scooter to be able to go out and explore the world outside his 3km around the same old town walk, along with the lady in the wheelchair. Public transport is about people maintaining indepence and being free to travel, roam, explore, shop, enjoy life and connect and interact socially.
The social aspects of the Northern Rivers Rail Trail have proven to be one of the most profound benefits.
Public transport does not require a train.
Far from being able to “roam”, a train would only be of benefit to those who live near a station and need to travel to places near other stations. A bus can go anywhere.
It does not have any involvement with the lines. It’s a MTB track
James Austen so what are these “modern construction costs” you speak of? Most of the cost for building a railway comes from land acquisition and heavy earth works. This line already exists and is capable of running at up to 145km/h in many sections. In fact, the cost the reopen this line is less than the cost to rip it up and turn it into a rail trail. It’s also not a niche railway. Currently there is freight going by rail from Perth and Melbourne to Brisbane to then be transferred to trucks to bring them back to Glen Innes and surrounds.
Stephen JJ and that freight being back loaded to these centers in question would be absolutely minimal. Believe me, I’d love nothing more than to see it reopened 💯 but it’s is an extremely uneconomical corridor. And the gauge change and the alignment beyond the QlD border is even worse for long haul rail freight. And then it’s still got to get over the mountains to get to Brisbane
“Modern construction costs” include the lower gradients and long curve radii mandated for modern railways , but not met by the old corridor.
They also include boom gates on all level crossings and modern signalling systems. This equipment is surprisingly expensive.
David you are quite wrong and ill-informed. the 161km BVRT (brisbane Valley rail trail) has been hugely successful in usage and financial benefit to the areas it goes through, and has become the benchmark that many other rail trail projects have based their own plans on. Lots of reports available there to the right people, that support success of rail trails wherever they are placed.
Getting ahead of yourself there buddy, the line from Armidale to Tamworth is currently operational.
Some people who advocate for a rail trail seem to be unaware of the cost of their e-bike ($3000*), their discretionary spending (usually retired) or their health as factors versus the elderly who cannot get a train to Brisbane/Sydney. Nor do they care about Climate change. They are part of the throw-away society. Seniors are VERY aware of the cost of putting in a new line…it’s far less than that spruiked by the naysayers…Selfish, entitled narcissists.
Narcissist ms? Tgat is the definition of people who want to spend upwards of a billion dollars to play choo choo trains. Regular coach services to Qld and Armidale are the answer for the few who need the public transport.
There is no evidence that running trains in a sparsely populated area provide any benefits towards mitigating climate change.
Your comments about cyclists being “part of the throw away society” and “selfish, entitled narcissists” are ridiculous expressions of you prejudices and have no basis in fact.
People resort to name calling when they know they cannot defend their arguments.
There are plenty of users on rail trails riding cheap bikes. I’ve seen little kids on what are essentially toy bikes, miles from the nearest access.
It does not require a $3000 e-bike to use a rail trail. The gentle gradients make ordinary bikes quite appropriate even for people who are not particularly fit. I’m almost 66 and ride trails on an ordinary bike.
James Austen This week has marked a landmark moment for Australia’s rail future with infrastructure and Transport Ministers agreeing to bring the country’s national rail system under one digital signally technology – the European Train Control Sydtem (ETCS). Having a single technology pathway will boost productivity, improve safety, and deliver more seamless freight and passenger connections between our cities, regions and ports. At their meeting last Monday, the Ministers also agreed to: a) a new governance model to drive the development and implementation of national rail standards, and b) progress a national pathway for streamlining rolling stock approvals, making it easier to introduce efficient, safer and low-emission trains onto our networks.
This is all part of the National Rail Action Plan working in partnership to make Australia’s rail system simpler, safer and better.
James, 50 million Frenchman can’t be wrong. Not only is this addressing Climate Change, but it also addresses road maintenance, truck drivers’ health and a myriad of other problems.
Deni Mckenzie we’re not talking about an existing functioning and profitable national rail network, we’re talking about a niche, non functioning and disconnected small regional line where people are suggesting everything from the occasional tourist train, steam trains, a regular passenger service and also high speed freight. Obviously all with very different costs and requirements. Personally I’m pro train, but a realist when it comes to the practicalities of reestablishing a rail line for the occasional use by pensioners in Guyra and Glen Innes
“No government will want to fund a dead end niche rail line”.
Why is it then the NSW government and TFNSW are asking New England residents views about their transpot needs including rail to prepae a regional transport plan by 2026? Should we believe the government or you?
https://www.haveyoursay.nsw.gov.au/sritp/new-england-and-north-west
The people of this sparsely populated region can plead to the government all they want about their desires to be indulged with rail services but it isn’t going to happen.
A fine example (again) of literature from Siri wordsmithing his dreams, that lack evidence, credentials, business case, and misleading local communities on passage/tourist/freight transport.
All governments have written to Siri and his numerous outfits, confirming no intention to rebuild a dead end branch line with very little opportunity/investment.
Siri received this response back in 2022, before Labor removed funding and before government rail contractors delayed opportunities….
Dear Siri,
Thank you for your correspondence to the Premier, which was referred to the Minister for Transport about the rail line north of Armidale. I have been asked to respond to you.
I note your comments and appreciate the reasons which prompted you to write.
I am advised a number of rail lines had their services withdrawn in the 1980s due to low demand. It is uneconomic to retain operational rail lines in these circumstances and Transport for NSW is not aware of any changes in circumstances that would make a reopened main rail line north of Armidale or Moree to the Inverell rail line viable.
The rail line north of Armidale is not in Transport for NSW’s future strategy for reinstatement, and there are no current or near-term proposals to recommence passenger or freight services on this line.
However, Transport for NSW recognises the need to preserve the rail corridor for potential passenger/freight/transport use in the long term, and applies this thinking to all decisions relating to the line. If a rail corridor is repurposed for other uses, Transport for NSW can return it to passenger or freight use if strategic needs change.
The NSW Government continues to support Glen Innes Severn Council and Armidale Regional Council to develop the rail trail. Repurposing non-operational rail lines for recreational purposes can deliver positive impacts to local economies, social infrastructure, tourism, community identity and health.
I am further advised plans for the first 35.5km phase of the rail trail, between Glen Innes and Ben Lomond, are well advanced and Glen Innes Severn Council has been successful in receiving funding for the project. Plans for the second 67.5km phase, between Ben Lomond and Armidale, are being progressed by Armidale Council who is seeking funding from the Commonwealth Government.
An amendment to the Transport Administration Act is currently required to facilitate the construction of rail trails. Rail trails often require existing railway track and other works to be removed and an Act of Parliament is required to enable removal of the railway track and other works.
I trust this information is of assistance.
Yours sincerely,
………………………………….
Transport for NSW
I find it rather sad (and amusing) that this bias online masthead continues to do zero research on the topic, and enjoys the easy target.
Hello David,
I see you are still circulating misinformation. No one from the govenments has written to me “confirming no intention to rebuild a dead end branch line with very little opportunity/investment” . All what the NSW govt says is that there are no current plans. It has not excluded future plans. In fact tfnsw is open to poposals by any private sector company. Since the letter you copied (not one I personally received though ), I have received several letters from the Minister for Regional Transport and Roads clarifying the NSW Government’s position regarding the future use of the rail corridor north of Armidale, requiements etc. You will appreciate that I will not be sharing the contents with you under any cicumstance. What is clear, however, is that the corridor remains open for future projects—whether that be rail trail, renewed train services, or other transport uses.
The fundamental reason your proposal for a rail trail is flawed is the requirement to remove the rail line in order to proceed. This design choice is at the heart of community opposition. Both Armidale Regional Council and Glen Innes Severn Council passed motions last year directing that alternative options for the rail trail be explored.
You should also recognise the extent of local opposition: a petition with nearly 5,000 supporters via change.org is one example. Last year NSW paliament debated a petition seeking train sevices to Jennings/Wallangara. It has 10740 signatues, 7000 from Northern tablelands alone. The message from the community is clear—people do not want to see the permanent loss of this strategic rail corridor.
It is time to acknowledge these realities and consider a compromise solution that does not pit rail and trail against each other, but instead looks for options that respect both community aspirations and long-term transport needs.
There is no official government support nor commitment to a rail trail. There is no commitment or official support for a rail trail by transport for NSW for that matter either. There’s been a few random best wishes for a rail trail and councilors as well as politicians are as divided over the idea of a rail trail as divided as the community is, wether it should have trains, trails, trains with trails or just left completely alone as the project can’t find solid financial foundations and long term commitment
Can Siri please update where his business friend he supported, David Peters is. He was going to start a business and fund the re build of the railway line north of Armidale and in doing so negating the proposed rail trail. After the public appearances organised by Siri, an update as to the progress of the proposal would be appreciated.
It will never come back ,to much work and cost .
It will never happen, costs would be astronomical, there is no government desire to help regional areas, not enough votes and labor will now be in power for the next 9 years.
Dig it out if the ground, sell it to China, that’s it, no other interests in anything.
Simon Cross you are misinformed if you think it is Labour’s fault there is no inland rail when it has been successive Coalition governments that have failed to further this piece of infrastructure.
Robin Thomas actually it was the labour government that put the stoppers on the inland rail spend!!
Kellie Hyland would it have been better just to run at a loss back then?
April Worley even the bus service runs at a loss
By reopening the north main to both freight and passenger rail traffic it would allow for the reduction of long haul freight, allowing an increase in local freight services, with centralised freight depots. This would allow for more cost effective freight solutions pane could lead to greater regional manufacturing.
The ability for passenger services to return, allows for greater public transport options for all, this is especially required for the elderly and disabled. It would also allow specialty and heritage trains to return to the region bringing more tourists.
Chelsea Kersh no “local freight” travels by rail – it’s all long distance bulk freight – that moves via the North Coast line and will largely travel on the Inland Rail when it opens. No freight will travel on the Main North – firstly it’s longer and more costlier tha the other two rail options and secondly, the break of guage at Wallangarra is a huge stopper (apart from the fact the the QLD govt is not going to repair the line). There’s nothing stopping heritage trains using the line as it is now – do you support the ones that do ?
Lance Lyon look at the refridgerated freight that is transported BY RAIL from the The Hub at Tamworth NSW. Usually about 40 containers 3 times a week. I suppose that would not be good enough for you.
Populations of Urban Areas
Tamworth: 43,000.
Armidale: 23,000
Guyra: 2,000
Glen Innes: 6,000
Tenterfield: 4,000
Wallangarra: 450
Frances Saville and Tamworth is it. There is no business case that would show small freight anywhere else on the line is cost effective.
Lance Lyon heritage trains cost an enormous amount to operate
Frances Saville except it’s going in the wrong direction
Frances Saville Exactly. There is already a hub in Tamworth. Governments arebt going to spend billions to extend the rail beyond that , at and need to hundreds of millions more for another hub North,juat to save a relatively small number of kms of trucking distance.
Lance Lyon it’s hard for “local freight” to travel by rail when there is no rail for it to travel on.
The freight industry, particularly truck driving, is an industry that is in demand and has a shortage, it is one of the easier visa application industries. The government is building a whole train line (the inland rail) to allow for more effective freight movement. Reopening a line isn’t out of the question, especially since it does not require purchasing of land.
Stephen Cooke ” up to two billion ” was reported by SMH when Armidale Regional Council considered the matter in 2024. And that’s just the rail in NSW . It doesn’t include the rail to the nearest grain and other port – Brisbane – nor any further multi modal transfer facility.
Stephen Cooke In the ARC April 2924 Agenda council staff advised the estimates for restoring the service varied and were up to $2.08b. Even at the highly unlikely lowest estimate of $300m council was advised the rate of return was only. 5.
Chelsea Kersh It’s not going to happen as governments repeatedly advise. It would cost billions to reduce farm and other freight journeys by a small part of the journey to Sydney. And it would make no difference to the freight to the nearest port, Brisbane. Similarly it would make little difference to passenger journeys to Sydney and do nothing for transport to Brisbane, the nearest capital city and major health destination. A pointless waste of billions.
Chelsea Kersh well said Chelsea!👏👏
It would be great to get it going again. Freight would bring so much more money to the region compared to the niche market that is bicycle riders on a rail trail.
Just look at what the past 2 flood events on the coast have done to the New England highway. There’s still patches of road that are in terrible condition.
I see the government has 2 serious options: reinstate the rail or upgrade the New England highway to a freeway much like the Newcastle Express way
Anita Manuel – the New England Highway should be upgraded. Tahat would benefit individuals and businesses alike.
Anita Manuel out of curiosity, what southbound freight originates between Armidale and the border?
You won’t be able to rail product from Queensland that uses the New England Highway due to (a) break of gauge at Wallangarra, and (b) the QR line to Wallangarra isn’t operating.
In a similar vein, how well-patronised is the bus north of Armidale?
Anita Manuel you nailed it!👏👏
I’ve got a novel idea, let’s improve the existing line to Newcastle/Sydney:
1) It exists for starters
2) It would serve far more people than this pie in the sky route to the Queensland border where the track gauge changes and the travel would be disrupted and delayed.
3) Far bigger commercial market, even though that’s a moot point as ever since the highway has improved, 99% of businesses will continue to use road transport.
4) Recognises that the northern rail closed for valid reasons that haven’t changed.
I don’t think anyone realises the cost of reinstating the line to current high-speed standards.
Isn’t the inland route through Narrabri being done?
Unfortunately it wont happen
The actions of past governments in closing down vital rail infrastructure is now coming back to bite them. What were claimed as economic decisions failed to consider all of the relevant factors, of that, I’m sure. The ongoing costs of every aspect of road transport outweighs the costs of rail. Road transport has always been a false economy compared to rail. Road certainly does have its place though.
Which closed down “vital” rail infrastructure is “now coming back to bite them”. Vague hand waving about costs of maintaining roads compared to rail is not a valid argument.It certainly doesn’t involve the line to Wallangarra.
The fact is rail transport is available in some places and despite this road freight is what people choose to use. You will not be able to make any kind of a case until you address the reasons for that reality.
The historic railway bridge at woolbrook needs attention first then the line from Armidale to Newcastle could be used now until they sort out the problem in qld a reassessment of the line could be done and any defects rectified at a cheaper cost than building a new one and waiting another 4_5 years
With more people not affording things and harder to live. Sometimes the train is the only way to get out of town. And go somewhere. Specially if you have kids. I think all railway lines should of been kept open. Public transportation is the only way for a lot of us now. A railway line would be less costly than upgrading roads all the time in some areas. With new modern components such as steel, concrete, and plastic sleepers instead of traditional wooden types. All industrial factories areas should be near railway lines. And I don’t think just having a bus service In and out of town. Is a way to make people want to move to the country. I left a town that only had bus services in and out of town.
Reinstating the railway system north of Armidale, through to Wallangara and beyond into Queensland, makes good sense but, are government officials intelligent enough to see this and make it a reality .. That’s the question …
Ken Fuller it’s appalling to think that if you live in Tenterfield you have to go by car to Toowoomba. All those people south of Tamworth are wanting to visit Brisbane for the Games. How will they get there?👎🏼😢
Tenterfield has a population of 4000.
A two week sporting event is not a reason to spend billions on a railway through a sparsely populated area,
Actually Greg, your incorrect
The population of Tenterfield, Australia is 6,810. This figure is based on the 2021 census data
It is you who is incorrect. That is the population of the whole Tenterfield Shire and is still trivial compared to the numbers necessary to justify railway services.
Many years ago when first mooted to reopen the railway line to Wallangara it was said to cost around $20 million. Now that cost would be around $20 billion or more as all the wooden tressel bridges would have to be replaced. However most of the old railway track lies dormant.
David Good travel the road from Armidale to Wallangara and and count the bridges and viaducts to be replaced and the complete railway line with concrete sleepers and $20 billion is a conservative estimate. If you can do it for less go for it.
David Good yes probably twice that much. Would have to rip up all the old line, stabilise base, put down sleepers and new line. New bridges and culverts. Arse cheap.
Stan Man NSW government has just committed $13m to build a 1800m siding, so a figure of $10m per km isn’t out of contention.
There is very little of the old Northern line that is salvageable and, because it was originally built by hand, it winds around hills to minimise the amount of manual excavation. Major earthworks required to get track speeds to an acceptable level.
Cavanna Farm so a conservative estimate of not much change from $50 billion.
Stan Man your original $20 would probably do the job. It doesn’t need to be duplicated, or electrified.
But the unresolved question remains – “who would use it?”.
Small population centres; unworkable for interstate freight (north of the border is 3’6” gauge); one heritage train each way on the weekend won’t justify that much money.
Inland Freight Line is currently bogged in southern Queensland
The rail line is never coming back and there is no chance of it – the economics do not stack up. Subsidised flights would have a bigger impact on tourism and new industry such as abattoirs, batteries and renewable recycling would see the New England boom. The rail trail would pull more economic value than passenger rail. Why not put this effort into ensuring the passenger rail that does exist is well supported and improved.
Alexandra Hall how does one fly from Glen Innes to Newcastle?
Rail from glen innes to Newcastle is not viable. Neither is flying. But good roads and reliable train and plane services between Sydney and Armidale need to be expanded, improved and preserved to ensure a strong regional network effect. Any changes to the XPT daily service to Armidale and the connecting buses would have a more profound impact on Glen Innes than arguing for a hypothetical that does not exist, hasn’t for decades and won’t.
Alexandra Hall it’s not about passenger rail, freight is far more economical transported by rail as one train could take 50+ trucks off the roads. That alone is a win. Trouble is they have been talking about putting more freight on rail since the 70’s and what did they do, yes the exact opposite.
I was a driver on the freight on the railway that ran to Werris creek and all freight depots in Sydney.
It was all given to road transport they need to put it back on rail where it makes economic sense.
The inland rail is a step in the right direction
A lovely fantasy that will never happen! Replacing the old railway bridges alone would cost hundreds of millions of dollars.
William Carroll inland rail is only for freight o get trucks off highways. Also electric
it takes the councils decades to fix roads, sadly restoring a train line with so many bridges is just a fantasy…
Jason Tilgals but councils wouldn’t be undertaking any railway reopening works…
David Good the works is in their shire , they have the responsibility of looking after everything else while the works happen, also the lines go through the shire. That brings the council in directly for planning , railways only do the track.
Jason Tilgals, it’s an existing railway that never ceased to officially be a railway. Council involvement in planning would be minimal.
David Good Not going to argue but my partner works for a rural council that has rail running thru, the council has a lot to do , like i said railways dont own the land , just the line.
Jason Tilgals, the rail corridor is owned by Transport for NSW.
Oh I so hope this is true!
The reopening of any line requires a demand for a vibrant freight service. A passenger service alone cannot justify a rural train line. The Northern line has no such guarantees and the population centres it services have small populations
Ian Mackechnie may help decentralisation by getting people out of the cities
Micheal Starr I think too far from cities. A car or bus to Armadale may be sufficent. These rail links were built before there were decent roads and modern road transportation. The tyranny of distance has been subdued through road transportation.
Ian Mackechnie decent roads? People constantly complain about potholes, congestion, and the number of B-doubles.
Ian Mackechnie try getting a seat on the train to Sydney from Armidale with 1-2 days notice! It’s a fabulous service and amazing visual journey. Leave at 8:30 am arrive Sydney CBD 5.30pm for $70
No wonder it’s so popular. No fuel, no fines, no parking, stress free travel.
Fares cost $70 because they are massively subsidised by the public purse. Trains use diesel fuel.
So what freight exactly is going to be carried. To be economical any freight has to to be loaded and unloaded once only. Trains don’t go to farms so straight away forget about farm produce or farm inputs. Let’s see the details of where the promoters think the freight is coming from and going to.
James King where are the facilities to load and unload the freight, most have been closed for many years
This should never have been removed it should have had a similar gauge track implemented to allow cross state service just imagine if there was fast magnetic service
And not forgetting that the narrow gauge line north of Wallangarra has in more recent times been closed by Queensland Railways.
Regretfully, one passenger train a few times a year and no(?) freight service doesn’t pay the bridge restoration costs, regular inspections and track maintenance.
Yes. Do it. It’s one of 2 lines that should never have closed.
All the way to Brisbane heavy vehicles need to be reduced on our highways especially with the massive population increase
Yes bring back the steam engines and there carriages
Gerard Thomas Odonnell Nah, electrify the line.
Stephen Cooke – not worth spending a cent rebuilding this line, electric or not. It has been looked at and rejected numerous times. Putting in a rail trail would at least achieve an increase in tourism. Combined with the Angry Bull mountain bike park at Tenterfield, the New England could become a new cycling mecca.
About as credible as those thousands of bike trails that you claim exist in the New England Rick. Still waiting for a map
of those trails…
Your pretty good with the keyboard Steve, look the bike trails up on council and tourism websites or download one of the many cycling apps and you’ll find them all, well documented.
David Good as a rail fan I’d like to see it reopened but the reality is the only people interested in seeing it reopened are those that live along it. They need to pull their fingers out and get the inland rail up and running. It’s the best economical route
Great idea 💡 👍
Jay Dee tfNSW did no such thing. And stop claiming that LGAs are blocking lines, they have no responsibility for them – that’s state government.
UNE and its students need a rail link to Brisbane. UNE has been in decline since it was stopped
Ray Cotton nah load up at Coffs Harbour, reopen the Dorrigo branch and complete it to Guyra – as much chance of happening as the Main North re-opens.
The cost of replacing the many old timber bridges and repairing the line makes it an expensive fantasy. What happens when the trains get to Wallangarra?
I did the last Tenterfield mail in 1988 and understand the passion for the line. It comes down to how much State taxes are you prepared to pay to reopen disused railway corridors.
Get Trucks, off the Road, through out AUSTRALIA. Have better Roads,not damaged. Bring back Freight to the RAILWAYS. Then better PASSENGER Trains. Open up the RAILWAYS again.
Get to Tenterfield and a big stop. The lines there are heritage listed and can’t be touched. The rail museum at Tenterfield can’t even move a carriage 12 inches , without approval from three different govt departments. Bad enough getting two to agree, let alone three.
A great way to get trucks off our roads
Watch out they dont tear it up for a rail trail. There were many voices against the northern rivers trail but they went unheard
David John Burrowes – Hilarious! The rail line in the Northern Rivers was closed for 20 years before it became a trail. The trail has been a spectacular success despite what the few naysayers said.
There was some voices against the Northern Rivers Rail Trail but they were telling lies and some people believed them until the trail opened and the opposition collapsed with many former opponents becoming enthusiastic supporters.
The most spectacular turnaround was that of Tweed Shire mayor, Chris Cherry who was a leader of the anti-trail movement, having voted against every motion to progress the trail since she was elected to the council. Even when it became clear that the trail would be built, she continued to advocate for it to be built beside the formation, a prospect that anyone who was familiar with the corridor already knew was impossible.
Cr Cherry rode the trail soon after it was opened and immediately publicly acknowledged that it would have been impossible to build it beside the railway “due to the terrain”. Not long afterward, she acknowledged that she had not realised just how important the trail would be to the area. Now you will not find a more enthusiastic supporter of the trail than Cr Cherry.
A railway surveyor friend told me the line will not open because the line is too steep, the tunnels too small, the cuttings too narrow, all bridges would require replacement, the curves are too tight and the demand would not warrant the outlay.
Lance Lyon then why are they building a new line from Qld to Adelaide not far from the original alignment. Why then did Labor close the North line? If your head is still in 1933 standards our country remains trapped in small thinking. Thankyou.
Couldn’t agree more, the line from Armidale north should be reactuated asap as a national priority. We must not let this valuable public asset become a bicycle track. Rail transport will bring significant benefits to our region.
What really annoys me, is that these ” experts” close rail lines and put passengers on buses to travel on crumbling inadequate roads , reducing the safety of passengers.
The bridges should have been replaced years ago instead of closing the line
By repairing the superstructure, they could double the volume of freight out of Brisbane, serving the city’s west of the divide.
By repairing the bridges and upgrading the sleepers and rails on the Narrandera to Tocumwal line they could connect to inland rail to increase the amount of freight bypassing major city’s and servicing inland districts.
I’m all for it. I’d love to see the rail line into QLD reopen giving access to for freight and passengers to access this service. And to see it boost tourism and support our region financially opening Northern NSW up to the world.
More railways and less road trains. Get the road train on to the rails where trains belong.
Railways do some re- thinking how railways can learn from Road trains. Shorter but more frequent trains that a less heavy and do little damage to the railway.
Road trains are heavy on roads, very destructive and dangerous to road users and also rail trains when RTs want to argue with real trains.
Your thinking is completely backwards. Inland Rail is being built to carry double stacked containers so that trains can carry more with less rolling stock. Smaller trains are less efficient and each one still needs a locomotive and the associated maintenance and staffing.
Trains can’t go everywhere and the multiple handling required for them kills speed and efficiency.
Will never run again. Barnaby Joyce saw to it, he hates train’s
Should never have closed the Armidale to Wallangarra section. Moving freight to trains in Australia would be the best move for the future.
Freight is already carried on the North Coast Line, yet the vast majority of freight is carried on the Pacific Highway that runs parallel to it. Why would a longer steeper slower railway north of Armidale make any significant difference to the freight carried on the New England Highway?
Passenger trains have right of passage over freight trains. This causes limited opportunity to move freight, delays and bottle necks on the busy coast line.
Opening the new England line between the major cities of Toowoomba to Tamworth will improve options to move freight upon rail lines between these points.
Our line on the new England helps to improve supply chains and to reduce traffic on the highways in and around CBD areas. Less truck movements improves national diesel consumption, air quality, and benefits states and country by supplying alternative options for freight movements. Not all freight is time sensitive so trains are the perfect economic and economical choice for heavier loads or less urgent loads. By enabling trains to take on a bigger percentage of freight this also helps free the trucking industry which is often choked and back logged and also suffers from severe driver shortages. It also gives business greater freedom to have more options and choices between costs and delivery time frames. Without trucks Australia stops with trains we keep the country moving and the freight coming into and out of ports, which makes us competitive in world markets. With containerised freight revolutionising the modern world, intermodal transport hubs, Trains are now much easier and quicker to load and unload, as well as being great to get those empty containers back to places to be reloaded again. The line between Toowoomba, Warwick, Glen, Armidale, Tamworth and onto new castle and Sydney is perfect for intermodal transport options. Trains will help speed up delivery.
Freight has priority. That is one of the reasons that some services on the North Coast Line terminate at Casino and continue by coach via Murwillumbah and the Gold Coast.
Trains are notoriously slow for delivery because they need to be held until fully loaded and fit into a schedule. Trucks come and go at any time which is why it is possible to get freight interstate overnight.
The New England line is not “perfect for intermodal transport options”. It is to long, too steep and doesn’t have the headroom for double stacked containers. That is why it was not chosen to be part of Inland Rail.
BTW. If the projected Inland Rail traffic came that way, the towns would be seeing and hearing train more than a kilometre long at intervals of about twenty minutes twenty-four hours per day. How do you think that would affect the amenity and how popular do you envisage it would be?
Much the same as the big trucks that rumble rattle roar all day and all night, especially in the quiet of the night. Crashing, breaking down, catching on fire and swearing at the caravans and grey nomads that also travel the region.
Freight trains won’t run 24hours a day through town. Your exaggerating.
And yes, passenger trains have right of way over freight. So that stuffs the busy city lines.
The new England going through Warwick to Toowoomba and all the way to Sydney is the perfect line to compliment the inland rail. Especially when the inland gets closed because many various reasons that can close a line through maintenance, repairs or weather events.
Time to get this country moving like it should. Governments know trains need to take on a bigger share of transport, as do the logistics big game players, but without tracks and locomotives that won’t happen. A rail trail will only be a spanner in the works to get things going like they should be to keep up with the rest of the world.
If you think I am exaggerating you need to look up the anticipated amount of freight planned for Inland Rail. Way, way more than the trucks on the highway.
Inland Rail is pivoted on double stacked containers. There isn’t the clearance on the old railway for this so trains would all need to be reconfigured to use it and the trains doubled in length.
Anyway you needn’t worry, because nobody is going to reinstate the railway.
Yet again the peddle pushers come out to destroy the rail line for their own small group of users personal use to turn the argument into trains v trails.
The argument isn’t train line v bike path.
The argument is can small councils that struggle with what’s already on their plate and trying to make ends meet afford a bike path – no, do rate payers want a rate rise so councils can afford a massive bike path – no.
All paths lead to NO.
Should the rail line be restored? Arguments can’t be based on fifty years ago. Times have changed. Restoring rail isn’t about living in the past it’s about the future. Restoring the rail line preferably all the way to Qld and beyond, can be done easily with modern equipment and technology. Tick. Yes there’s many ways to overcome the change of gauge. Tick.
Will people use the train? Fairly safe to say a bigger number of users will use a train, compared to who might ride a bike, even the bike riders can use a train. Will a train bring economic benefits? Of course it will, will these economic benefits be greater then what a bike path can bring? Of course they will. Trains can also move freight as well as people. So when we decide to dissect the train line into sections of bike path, we are taking opportunities away for not only regional growth but for better outcomes for state and country. The benefits of trains are large and wide and the list is long. It’s really an easy decision. Bring back the trains!
It is the railway advocates who push the line of an argument between trains and trails.
The alternatives are the trail or a derelict railway sitting there doing nothing. The cost of reinstating the railway and operating services at substantial losses means it will not happen.
The cost of the rail trail at 500k per km for basic entry level construction is crazy spending. To complete the new England rail trail would be well over 100 million. Then add all the add ons, fix bridges, add toilets, water, picnic and play areas, fencing.
Then pay to maintain that in pristine condition to keep the tourists coming and talking good about it. The dollars just keep burning. To complete the nert project the spending is extremely questionable for a bike path that won’t get used for the six cold or wet months of the year or if the wind is blowing too hard on the ranges or it’s covered in snow or hail or storm damage. Very limited days of usage. And just crazy to spend that much on a bike path when councils struggle and governments are in debt and taxes keep rising. Greg the argument isn’t trains v trails, it’s simply a case of silly spending on a ridiculous project that’s not needed and is not a priority. When money can be more broadly invested and spread out for greater benefit and return.
You want cycling tourism, put on an event, use the roads and gravel we already have. It’s so much cheaper. Spend the money more wisely on other things.
At least while the rail line is doing nothing it’s costing the ratepayers nothing. There’s been enough rate rises and water security and garbage are more important issues as are the potholes on the roads.
It’s not trains v trails.
It’s trails v the ratepayers and budgets. And there’s just no room in that for a frivolous bike path that’s just not necessary when we have plenty of green space to already enjoy our here in the sticks. Wether the rail does or dosnt return is completely irrelevant. The councils can’t afford a 200km rail trail, and the projects they’re proposing are just glorified cut up sections of bike paths. They keep cutting it shorter and shorter hoping to pull it off.
It will take decades of councils begging and borrowing and robbing Peter to pay Paul to build their fantasy project of a bike path. It’s just not achievable nor affordable.
The trains aren’t even in competition with it, reality is. Wake up.