Fast, faster, farce? SEQ train spin goes off the rails

Is it not just a little odd that the government’s Logan and Gold Coast Faster Rail website does not address among its maps, graphics or 1500 glorifying words the project’s most tantalising promise?

We can mosey online to learn any number of virtues, including the 20 kilometres of new track, the station upgrades, and the removal of five level-crossings. Indeed, the $2.6 billion mega-build, funded by the Queensland and federal governments, has been welcomed by rail advocates.

Sometimes, Faster Rail means faster rail. Other times, it means Faster Rail. Got it? Credit: Michelle Smith

But what, exactly, do the bureaucrats mean by “Faster Rail”?

The capitalised title suggests something formal, or a widely accepted benchmark. Like how “Fast Rail” generally signifies speeds of 160-250km/h (depending on who you ask). Or how “High-Speed Rail” – the kind Japan has enjoyed for almost 60 years but which continues to elude this country – means anything beyond 250km/h.

“Faster Rail” is more murky – but it sounds so very shiny.

A Commonwealth parliamentary committee report looking at rail matters in 2020 settled at a “faster rail” definition of 130-160km/h, but this came with a caveat: “The report refers to faster rail in general terms unless otherwise specified.”

In other words, “faster rail” just means “faster” than the previous train speeds, unless they mean “Faster Rail”. Simple enough?

It is hardly surprising that the terms fast, faster and high-speed are sometimes used interchangeably – and incorrectly – when referring to the same projects – even by governments. The jumble also creates the perfect conditions for befuddling spin.

As usual, the Queensland government refuses to release details of the $8 million Logan-Gold Coast business case. Thankfully, Infrastructure Australia is not so secretive.

The federal body’s publicly available evaluation of the business case says trains will average 50km/h for all-station services and 73km/h for express. While this includes time spent at stations, it doesn’t sound particularly fast(er) at all.

“The business case estimates that these speed increases will only deliver minor journey time savings,” the Infrastructure Australia report notes.

Forget the fantasy of new-age trains whizzing passengers along in a hurtling blur.Credit: iStock

Forget the image of new-age trains whizzing passengers through one of our most congested transport corridors in a hurtling blur. The reality is that most of the time, cars will be going quicker on the M1.

“The Faster Rail name was a bit of a way of fooling people,” says Robert Dow, from advocacy group Rail Back on Track.

“And in the case of the Logan-Gold Coast Faster Rail, it certainly fooled a lot. They’re not getting anything like 160km/h.

“But they are getting a little bit faster because a lot of [the track] will be straighter, and there will be four tracks instead of two. The trains will be able to run a little bit more reliably and a little bit more frequently, but not necessarily any great deal faster.”

At a stretch, Dow believes trains on the new 20-kilometre section may reach speeds of about 120km/h, but only in tiny bursts.

“I don’t think people are going to get the big bang that they think they’re going to get,” he says.

Even the place names “Logan-Gold Coast” in the title are a tad misleading: the upgrades stop short of downtown Gold Coast by almost 50 kilometres. Finding a way around this, the government sometimes adds in brackets “Kuraby to Beenleigh”.

Worryingly, Infrastructure Australia’s analysis notes, “the cost of the project significantly exceeds the quantifiable benefits”, and it is possible that, “the scope is beyond what is required to address the service need”.

But Dow says the project – assuming it survives a Commonwealth infrastructure razor gang – will be worthwhile. Removing level-crossings (Kuraby, Woodridge, Bethania, Holmview and Beenleigh) will improve safety and ease vehicle congestion, he says.

Doubling the number of tracks to four, meanwhile, will ease a nasty train bottleneck, enabling more express services and less time waiting on platforms.

All of this is important for accommodating south-east Queensland’s rapid population growth.

Brisbane Times asked the government to provide its working definitions of Fast Rail, Faster Rail and High-Speed Rail. It declined.

It also declined to release any modelling quantifying time savings. It did, however, say the express services would be “several minutes” faster.

Dow finds it all quite amusing.

“If a train takes one minute less after the upgrade, they’ve achieved their aim of faster rail, haven’t they?”