Building a core Frequent network

[#Metro]

Core frequent network



Aims:
* Minimal or no infrastructure changes/expenses required
* Can be done relatively quickly
* Minimum "anywhere to anywhere" basic network
as per "spiderweb" TL Network plan.
* Minimum effort

"To/From" buses

BUZ 100 (can be introduced at Frequent corridor then upgraded) (Yippee!)
BUZ 180 (Yipee!)
BUZ 196 (Yipee!)

Western Suburbs PT Blackout Zone

BUZ 450/400 - Centenary suburbs BUZ; Major gap in BUZ network. Needs to serve Indooroopilly and Mt Ommaney.
Detail, see here ---> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=7935.0

NorthWestern Suburbs PT Blackout Zone
BUZ 375 - Justified on the basis that it is in the '1 million' club. High patronage.
BUZ 359 or 350 Eatonvale/Albany Creek- major gap in the network. Cements the arterial roads of Old Northern Rd/South Pine/Samford Rd.

Inner East Suburbs PT Blackout Zone
BUZ 245 (227 or 220) to Manly / Wynnum Road. Serving Cannon Hill. Fast arterial to Eastern/Bayside suburbs.
BUZ 230 and or 235 Bulimba & Balmoral BUZ - inner city, high density like W/End, N/Farm and Paddington.

Other
BUZ 310 Sandgate - straight down Sandgate Road - Fast Arterial, backbone for future connections
BUZ 330 - Already on TL's plans apparently, so included here.
Installed 2012
Extensions & Feeders
Extend BUZ 345 Aspley to connect with nearest rail
Extend BUZ 333 (or a Hamilton Rd Crosstown) to connect Chermside with Northgate station
Review 452 loop - break open loop, Mt Ommaney/Centenary Suburbs to Darra station via motorway (every 10-15 minutes)

"Around town" buses
BUZ GCL (Break up the GCL into 4 individual but Branded GCL routes to increase legibility and reliability)
Stafford Road Northern Cross-Town

358 Great Western Shopping Centre to Toombul via Stafford Road Installed 2012

Rail services Every 15 minutes to
Ipswich Line - all the way to Ipswich (15 min freq. to Darra currently) land uses and two-way travel all day support TUZification.
Cleveland Line- Manly
Caboolture Line -
Ferny Grove Line - Ferny Grove (Announced as LNP election committment/Announced as ALP plans)
Shorncliffe Line - Shorncliffe
Beenleigh Line -??? Yeerongpilly?

Information
15 minute Core Frequent network map (cheap and fast to do to show where SERVICES , rather than infrastructure, are)
15 minute frequent network/BUZ network map at all major busway stations, bus and ferry terminals (i.e. UQ Lakes)

Creation of "interchange bus stop" signage similar to BUZ or Rocket signs seen.
and sticker banners like on the CityGlider stops and painted kerbs.

[#Metro]

Not sure how far 15 minute frequency in both directions can extend along the Caboolture and Beenleigh Lines.
Are there any other frequent corridors? I'm sure that I've missed a few.
Should there be a BUZ level service on 325? And is there merit in having one go to, or on, the Bayside?

I'm trying to keep the numbers of these things down...

[Golliwog]

Yeah there are. Kelvin Grove Rd (has BUZ 345 and the 390 until Samford Rd. Probably other routes but I don't know them)

Gympie Rd.

Old Cleveland Rd?

Waterworks Rd?

[#Metro]

Thanks Golliwog, now added.

[O_128]

A wynnum road buz would be nice maybe a BUZ 230 the current service is terrible

[somebody]

A wynnum road buz would be nice maybe a BUZ 230 the current service is terrible

A BUZ 230 would still be terrible IMO.  You need a BUZ on the current 231 & 236 routes, perhaps using Adelaide St in the CBD instead. And a cross town route like the 232, but instead of going to the city, go to UQ Lakes instead.

Gympie Rd already has the 333 as far as Chermside shops.  Are you thinking of beyond here?

Old Cleveland Rd has the 200 BUZ and all stops 204 as far as Carindale.  But probably Otto's suggestion of a 270 extension is good.

Waterworks Rd has the 380/381 + 379 which I don't understand.  Like Logan Rd with the 174/175, all that is needed is a full time 30 minute frequency on each route.  In the short term.  It current reduces below this in the evenings, which isn't good.

Webster Rd is similar but there needs to be a single route on the 325/335 to the CBD.

Pretty sure that both the Ipswich Line to Ipswich and the Caboolture Line to Caboolture can have 15 minute frequency without any real issues.

Add a couple of crossovers to the Beenleigh line to get 15 minute frequency to Kuraby without affecting the Gold Coast line.

What is missing from your list is Everton Park, and Wardell St.  350/359 need to improve to serve these areas far better than present.  Also missing is a BUZ 120 and 110.

[#Metro]

The idea is to use the absolute minimum number of routes.
The aim is to get the most benefit with the least amount of effort in the quickest time.
This makes it more likely for TL to implement it.

A BUZ 230 would still be terrible IMO.  You need a BUZ on the current 231 & 236 routes, perhaps using Adelaide St in the CBD instead. And a cross town route like the 232, but instead of going to the city, go to UQ Lakes instead.

There are pros and cons. IMHO only a single BUZ, if at all. There is a rail line also, so a high frequency feeder might also be possible into
the Cleveland line (pity about the rail frequency).

Gympie Rd already has the 333 as far as Chermside shops.  Are you thinking of beyond here?

A frequent corridor is an existing arterial road which has high frequency formed out of a bundle of different existing services.
So Gympie Road would qualify as a frequent corridor, as would Ipswich Road (with a few extra night services).

Old Cleveland Rd has the 200 BUZ and all stops 204 as far as Carindale.  But probably Otto's suggestion of a 270 extension is good.

Yes, Old Cleveland Rd would qualify as a frequent corridor. Now added. Is the 270 corridor 15 minutes off peak already?

Waterworks Rd has the 380/381 + 379 which I don't understand.  Like Logan Rd with the 174/175, all that is needed is a full time 30 minute frequency on each route.  In the short term.  It current reduces below this in the evenings, which isn't good.

If it is close, then it could be added.

Pretty sure that both the Ipswich Line to Ipswich and the Caboolture Line to Caboolture can have 15 minute frequency without any real issues.

All the way to Caboolture in both directions at the same time? If it is, I'll add it to the list.

Add a couple of crossovers to the Beenleigh line to get 15 minute frequency to Kuraby without affecting the Gold Coast line.

Hmm. This requires infrastructure changes. How costly/time would it take to install? Could it be planned and operational within 6 months-1 year(2012-2013)?
How far could 15 min train frequency go with zero infrastructure changes on the Beenleigh Line? Yeerongpilly?

What is missing from your list is Everton Park, and Wardell St.  350/359 need to improve to serve these areas far better than present.

Wardell St could be covered from BUZzing the GCL. Interesting re:350/359. Are you suggesting BUZing it or just gap filling/later hours?

Also missing is a BUZ 120 and 110.

120 is also interesting, it might be worth looking at. 110- probably not when 100 will be BUZzed.

[somebody]

Yes, Old Cleveland Rd would qualify as a frequent corridor. Now added. Is the 270 corridor 15 minutes off peak already?

No, it's hourly, and doesn't extend west of Capalaba off peak.  But up it to half hourly and extend it to the CBD, then it would be very helpful.  You'd have a BUZ corridor with the combined 250 & 270 service.

Pretty sure that both the Ipswich Line to Ipswich and the Caboolture Line to Caboolture can have 15 minute frequency without any real issues.

All the way to Caboolture in both directions at the same time? If it is, I'll add it to the list.

I believe so.  Would make it harder to get freight through, what is too hard?  I don't think this fits that particular bill.

Add a couple of crossovers to the Beenleigh line to get 15 minute frequency to Kuraby without affecting the Gold Coast line.

Hmm. This requires infrastructure changes. How costly/time would it take to install? Could it be planned and operational within 6 months-1 year(2012-2013)?
How far could 15 min train frequency go with zero infrastructure changes on the Beenleigh Line? Yeerongpilly?

Rocklea using the siding is also a possibility.  But if you aren't upgrading infrastructure, it would probably be better to run to Corinda via Tennyson and return the Gold Coast services to stopping at Yeerongpilly.  Unless you are more interested in providing more stations with a 4tph service than connectivity.

Not sure about how long to install for the extra crossovers, but you aren't talking about a huge deal.  It would get over $1m each though, I expect.  Can't remember if the signaling is already bi-di here, but I think someone has posted that it is in the past.  That would be where the big bucks are spent.

Wardell St could be covered from BUZzing the GCL. Interesting re:350/359. Are you suggesting BUZing it or just gap filling/later hours?

But that doesn't provide CBD service without interchange.

Also missing is a BUZ 120 and 110.

120 is also interesting, it might be worth looking at. 110- probably not when 100 will be BUZzed.

Agree that 110 is lower down the list.  120 would be a bit higher up, but it does go through some less populated areas.  Main game is the 100 IMO.  There is no other service anywhere near most of its route.

As for 350/359, I don't think either needs to be BUZed, but the 359 stops about 9pm with a pretty useless extension of the 350 theoretically covering that service.  If both just ran half hourly and co-ordinated for a 15 minute frequency at Everton Park, it would be something.  And the Aspley terminus of the 350 makes little sense.  I'm not a big fan of the via Wardell St route of the 350 either.  I think this service shouldn't be provided by such a long route, but it would make some sense if the 390 ran that way.  There would be some that would lose from doing that, of course, as there would then be no all stops service along Kelvin Grove Rd/Enoggera Rd.  At a minimum, you could just upgrade the 359 to half hourly daytime (rather than hourly), and then hourly at night so that at least the common parts of the route have a decent service.  A Brendale terminus of the 350 would be more logical IMO.

[STB]

Yes, Old Cleveland Rd would qualify as a frequent corridor. Now added. Is the 270 corridor 15 minutes off peak already?

No, it's hourly, and doesn't extend west of Capalaba off peak.  But up it to half hourly and extend it to the CBD, then it would be very helpful.  You'd have a BUZ corridor with the combined 250 & 270 service.

Incorrect! It's half hourly during peak hour between Victoria Point and the City (I thought I've already mentioned this several times already in other threads?).  It returns to an hourly service in the middle of the day between Victoria Point and Capalaba, then goes half hourly again, mostly on the outbound (very few passengers use it on the inbound in the PM peak, same with the outbound in the AM peak).

[#Metro]

Rocklea using the siding is also a possibility.  But if you aren't upgrading infrastructure, it would probably be better to run to Corinda via Tennyson and return the Gold Coast services to stopping at Yeerongpilly.  Unless you are more interested in providing more stations with a 4tph service than connectivity.

Not sure about how long to install for the extra crossovers, but you aren't talking about a huge deal.  It would get over $1m each though, I expect.  Can't remember if the signaling is already bi-di here, but I think someone has posted that it is in the past.  That would be where the big bucks are spent.

Ok, this really needs to be clarified before it can be added to the list. It is low cost if it does not require signalling upgrades, but that is a big IF.
Corinda via Tennyson during off peak? I don't know how possible that is, IMHO this sort of service pattern is being phased out.
It seems like a big cloud over what the Beenleigh line is capable of, and I am surprised at just how frequency-intolerant the QR network seems to be.

But that doesn't provide CBD service without interchange.

The GCL is meant for interchange, that is its purpose, precisely to serve cross-town trips, short trips to the rail station and BUZ routes and shops, and trips that are harder to serve using CBD-direct routes. The lack of decent frequency on that route is anti-transfer and anti-integration, and completely defeats the purpose of providing that route! Both Perth and Melbourne have no problem doing frequent orbital routes, the patronage on both Perth's and Melbourne's orbitals leaves much to be desired for Brisbane.

Agree that 110 is lower down the list.  120 would be a bit higher up, but it does go through some less populated areas.  Main game is the 100 IMO.  There is no other service anywhere near most of its route.

Yes, I agree, this what I mean about gaps. IMHO 135 would be a candidate for BUZzing, but maybe not a candidate for inclusion in the 15-minute Core Frequent Network (this is up for discussion). 135 may qualify with upgrades as frequent, but non-core.

As for 350/359, I don't think either needs to be BUZed, but the 359 stops about 9pm with a pretty useless extension of the 350 theoretically covering that service.  If both just ran half hourly and co-ordinated for a 15 minute frequency at Everton Park, it would be something.  And the Aspley terminus of the 350 makes little sense.  I'm not a big fan of the via Wardell St route of the 350 either.  I think this service shouldn't be provided by such a long route, but it would make some sense if the 390 ran that way.  There would be some that would lose from doing that, of course, as there would then be no all stops service along Kelvin Grove Rd/Enoggera Rd.  At a minimum, you could just upgrade the 359 to half hourly daytime (rather than hourly), and then hourly at night so that at least the common parts of the route have a decent service.  A Brendale terminus of the 350 would be more logical IMO.

This might be useful, but is more of a miscellaneous improvement than a core frequent network issue IMHO...

[#Metro]

Incorrect! It's half hourly during peak hour between Victoria Point and the City (I thought I've already mentioned this several times already in other threads?).  It returns to an hourly service in the middle of the day between Victoria Point and Capalaba, then goes half hourly again, mostly on the outbound (very few passengers use it on the inbound in the PM peak, same with the outbound in the AM peak).

STB, is there a frequent corridor (6am - 7 or 8pm ish weekdays) on any corridors in that area? I know Old Cleveland Road is one, are there others?

[somebody]

Incorrect! It's half hourly during peak hour between Victoria Point and the City (I thought I've already mentioned this several times already in other threads?).  It returns to an hourly service in the middle of the day between Victoria Point and Capalaba, then goes half hourly again, mostly on the outbound (very few passengers use it on the inbound in the PM peak, same with the outbound in the AM peak).

I was referring to the off peak service.  Hourly in peak would be pretty bad!

[STB]

No there's not, but people here keep forgetting that the Redlands is a split area patronage wise and is mostly semi-rural, particularly in the Southern Redlands.  Hence the only frequent corridor required is between Capalaba, Carindale and the City.  With an extension of routes 250 and 270, this will service the Redlands enough and effectively, there is no need for BUZing any long haul routes in the Redlands for the foreseeable future.  By the way, route 270 was going to be extended to the city all day originally but a lack of funding required cuts to peak services only - TL will probably extend the 270 eventually anyway.  

I have been told by a Senior Planner from TL (who I met at the QR consultations) that a package has been put together for the Eastern Region (Redlands) to implement in the near future, although I don't know what exactly it includes, I wouldn't be surprised if some trips and routes are cut, such as route 241 and some peak trips on route 255 (it's overlapping unneccessarily on route 254 and I always see it with an average of <1 pax per trip, those people can easily catch route 254 or get off the train at Wellington Point anyway so it's not a major issue if those trips on route 255 is cut).

[somebody]

Just checked the timetable for Everton Park in the journey planner.  Seems that 3bph applies weekday & weekend daytimes, but still with 30 minute gaps.  Adding 1 more 359 per hour would get it to a frequent corridor.  For a relatively small price, a far better service could be given to this largely car dependant part of town.

[#Metro]

Just checked the timetable for Everton Park in the journey planner.  Seems that 3bph applies weekday & weekend daytimes, but still with 30 minute gaps.  Adding 1 more 359 per hour would get it to a frequent corridor.  For a relatively small price, a far better service could be given to this largely car dependant part of town.

Thanks for the suggestion.  This can go down on the list. Any others?
357 seems like a route variation that only operates in the morning.

http://translink.com.au/resources/travel-information/services-and-timetables/timetables/100726_357,359.pdf

[Golliwog]

Somebody, RE: the 390, I would suggest avoiding re-routing this service to something other than Kelvin Grove Rd. Simply because IMO each BUZ should have a 2nd service that runs all stops. 385 has the 380 until it leaves Waterworks Rd then once it gets to Jubilee Tce it has the 375. It just makes sense to run 2 services, one all stops and one semi-express (ie: BUZ) so everyone gets a decent service.

[somebody]

Somebody, RE: the 390, I would suggest avoiding re-routing this service to something other than Kelvin Grove Rd. Simply because IMO each BUZ should have a 2nd service that runs all stops. 385 has the 380 until it leaves Waterworks Rd then once it gets to Jubilee Tce it has the 375. It just makes sense to run 2 services, one all stops and one semi-express (ie: BUZ) so everyone gets a decent service.

And many may agree with you there.  Although the 385 does leave Coopers Camp Rd without an all stopping service, 345 leaves much of its route without an all stopping service, 444 doesn't have a all stopping service after Marshal Lane, Kenmore.  I'm also unsure about the all stopping service on the 130/140/150 routes.  Might be limited to the 132 and 152 milk runs, which only cover small portions of their routes.

But I would agree that such a thing as re-routing the 390 isn't likely to happen.

[johnnigh]

It's all very well kicking ideas back and forth, and lots of goods ones I'm sure. Not knowing whether any of you are professionally involved with PT planning or operations in SEQ I cannot judge how close any ideas are to what thinking is going on within the PT bureaucracy, operations management or unions. So the significance of what's discussed here is an unknown. At worst, one can hope that the decision makers and their offsiders keep an eye on these discussions just in case something comes up that they might use.

What one wishes for is a mole in the system who can leak useful information so we can get an insight into what is actually going on within the arcane and mysterious planning bureaucracies and their opponents (as there surely must be - change always engenders resistance).

Some SEQ PT version of Pvte Manning to slide our Assange the disks full of relevant stuff so we can critically examine the ideas that are, in fact, under consideration, would be wonderful.

[somebody]

Why's the thinking a secret?  I guess its as much the residents fault as anything.  All positive change seems to be resisted.

[#Metro]

I've got a better idea, how about TL publish a proper Network Plan, rather than that glossy "brochure" that had a lot of speculative vague ideas and not much specific.

[Golliwog]

Why's the thinking a secret?  I guess its as much the residents fault as anything.  All positive change seems to be resisted.

Because every change has someone that loses out, who are always the most vocal. Those who get a benefit don't see a real need to go forward and say "Yep, that there is a great idea" so all you ever hear is how bad this change is going to be.

[#Metro]

There is a nice big fare rise come 17th January, IMO a good background to propose more frequent services and
put forward the core frequent network.

Introduction of a core frequent network can be done relatively cheaply and quickly (rail might be a bit slower because
of the timetables need to be changed etc) and doesn't involve cutting
services (people seem to complain more when there is a cut involved even though it might be a net improvement).

[somebody]

There is a nice big fare rise come 17th January, IMO a good background to propose more frequent services and
put forward the core frequent network.

Introduction of a core frequent network can be done relatively cheaply and quickly (rail might be a bit slower because
of the timetables need to be changed etc) and doesn't involve cutting
services (people seem to complain more when there is a cut involved even though it might be a net improvement).

Good point.  It's a good opportunity to say a few things.

[ghostryder]

things that might bring the 15 minute frequency unstuck west of Darra are speedzones and lengths and weights of any freighters running that location. I am not sure how many of you are familiar with the way the railway speedboard system works. If a train is currently in a 60km/h zone and the next zone is 80km/h the driver cannot adjust his speed until the very last wagon or car of his train has cleared the new speed board. But if the speedzone is 60km/h and the next speedzone is 25km/h the train has to reduce its speed to 25km/h before the lead car or loco passes the speed board.

So what does this have to do with 15 minute frequency you might ask.

A six car set is shorter and lighter than a freighter and as such brakes quicker speed up quicker. a Double headed Coal train of between 30-38 hoppers weighing in around 2000t or more will not handle the same. To test the theory i used a railway simulator i have.

Also i have a railway simulator and one of the maps i have installed is the Ipswich line, i used it as the basis of a test of the 15 minute running. I set up a three freighters and three EMUs i set the EMUs to run 15 minutes apart, the three freighters ranged from abou 900t to 2100t. The freighters were set up to come in from Wulkuraka, the EMUs were set to start from Ipswich station. When the EMU reached Bundamba Creek i let the first freighter go. The result was the freighter had caught the EMU and was brought to a standing halt at Goodna, as the EMU was at Gailles making a stop. I let the second EMU go and it followed the same process as before this time the freighter weighed about 1100t and was a couple of wagons longer it delayed the third EMU by about 5 minutes, like the first freighter ahead off it it was brought to a halt at Goodna as the EMU was at Gailles making a stop. On the third EMU it was 5 minutes down Again it was allowed to get to Bundamba Creek before the 38 wagon coal train was let loose the coal train was much slower through Ipswich was brought to a standing halt at Wacol as the Third EMU was in the next section heading for Darra.
these simulations do not cover the Rosewood shuttles which woudl have its part to play as well in services and paths from or to the west.

just thought i would give you all something to ponder.

scott

[#Metro]

Wow, thanks for this, this is interesting. Can trains switch lines in the simulation?

Out of curiosity where do these freight services originate from and go to? Are they using Tennyson to get to the port?

[somebody]

Darra-Ipswich is 22.6km by rail and under the leisurely proposed timetable it takes 30mins to run Darra-Ipswich, for a 45.2km/h average speed.  Are there any boards below 50km/h on the run facing freighters?  If a freighter has to stop because a pax train's normal stopping to pick up passengers, isn't it being driven seriously wrongly?  Perhaps some others can elaborate, but I expect that the goal is to have the signal turn green shortly before you pass it.  If it is green as soon as you see it, then speed up unless you are fast enough already, and if medium (double yellow) then coast.  If caution (single yellow), then brake, except when already going slow.

I expect the grades on this section aren't really an issue, even for a coalie.  Can someone confirm/deny this?

[mufreight]

things that might bring the 15 minute frequency unstuck west of Darra are speedzones and lengths and weights of any freighters running that location. I am not sure how many of you are familiar with the way the railway speedboard system works. If a train is currently in a 60km/h zone and the next zone is 80km/h the driver cannot adjust his speed until the very last wagon or car of his train has cleared the new speed board. But if the speedzone is 60km/h and the next speedzone is 25km/h the train has to reduce its speed to 25km/h before the lead car or loco passes the speed board.

So what does this have to do with 15 minute frequency you might ask.

A six car set is shorter and lighter than a freighter and as such brakes quicker speed up quicker. a Double headed Coal train of between 30-38 hoppers weighing in around 2000t or more will not handle the same. To test the theory i used a railway simulator i have.

Also i have a railway simulator and one of the maps i have installed is the Ipswich line, i used it as the basis of a test of the 15 minute running. I set up a three freighters and three EMUs i set the EMUs to run 15 minutes apart, the three freighters ranged from abou 900t to 2100t. The freighters were set up to come in from Wulkuraka, the EMUs were set to start from Ipswich station. When the EMU reached Bundamba Creek i let the first freighter go. The result was the freighter had caught the EMU and was brought to a standing halt at Goodna, as the EMU was at Gailles making a stop. I let the second EMU go and it followed the same process as before this time the freighter weighed about 1100t and was a couple of wagons longer it delayed the third EMU by about 5 minutes, like the first freighter ahead off it it was brought to a halt at Goodna as the EMU was at Gailles making a stop. On the third EMU it was 5 minutes down Again it was allowed to get to Bundamba Creek before the 38 wagon coal train was let loose the coal train was much slower through Ipswich was brought to a standing halt at Wacol as the Third EMU was in the next section heading for Darra.
these simulations do not cover the Rosewood shuttles which woudl have its part to play as well in services and paths from or to the west.

just thought i would give you all something to ponder.

scott

Im glad you are neither a train driver operating a freighter/coal train or a train controller as for the timetable expert you have refered to from experience I would qiockly come to the opinion that he had no operational experience and came from the lets cover my butt in case something goes pear shaped and as such is a major part of the problems restriction train capacity.
The driver operating either a freight or coal service is aware of the location of any preceeding service and regulates his train sopeed accordingly based on the information avaliable from the signals and the radio and his experience accumulated over his years as a train driver..

Nothing in your post to ponder just another illinformed red herring.

Frequently during the peaks coal services are operated between passenger services without difficulty between Corinda and Ipswich which debunke the argument of capacity restriction over that section.

[petey3801]

Darra-Ipswich is 22.6km by rail and under the leisurely proposed timetable it takes 30mins to run Darra-Ipswich, for a 45.2km/h average speed.  Are there any boards below 50km/h on the run facing freighters?  If a freighter has to stop because a pax train's normal stopping to pick up passengers, isn't it being driven seriously wrongly?  Perhaps some others can elaborate, but I expect that the goal is to have the signal turn green shortly before you pass it.  If it is green as soon as you see it, then speed up unless you are fast enough already, and if medium (double yellow) then coast.  If caution (single yellow), then brake, except when already going slow.

I expect the grades on this section aren't really an issue, even for a coalie.  Can someone confirm/deny this?

The new timetable is going to give much needed reliability to the line. It may be a little too much in places, but we will soon see when it starts. The current timetable is, quite simply, unrealistic. By memory, there are no <50km/h boards between East Ipswich and Darra, however there are a few 60km/h boards.

An all-stations EMU will average approx. 40km/h on most runs. Gold Coast, north of Petrie and Ipswich-Rosewood excepted, as all are quite high speed (nothing less than 80km/h across most of it).

Between Ipswich and Wacol/Darra section, signals are all 3-aspect signals. Therefore, trains will only get one signal warning before a red signal. This means slower running for freighters following suburbans, however, as you have said, drivers know the route and drive according to the conditions they face. If they know there is an all-stopper service in front of them, they will drive accordingly so as to not face a red signal.

There are some decent grades on the Ipswich line, however most are no real problem for coalies and others have procedures in place to prevent stalling (ie: Tonnage signals).

[#Metro]

petey3801, would you have any comments about how far down the Beenleigh line 15 minute rail frequency (both directions) in the off peak, might be possible?

[somebody]

The new timetable is going to give much needed reliability to the line. It may be a little too much in places, but we will soon see when it starts.

Services from Ipswich are usually running a few minutes late when they reach Indooroopilly, but they usually make up most or all of the time by the time they reach Central.  I really can't support padding out the whole timetable to prevent trains maybe arriving at a few stations a little late, if the overall time is close to right.  IMO.

[SteelPan]

I see a number of very "doable" items that you have proposed.  I wouldn't let Translink off so eaily though - many of the items you raised are also covered in something I recently mentioned regards Brisbane Bus Services in general - the timetables are lllooonnnggg overdue for an update!  The 375's timetable, as just one example, must be theoretically set at 3am on Monday morning    9 out of 10 times the bus is always seriously late arriving at CBD stops - and yes, it reached BUZ sustainable levels a few years back!

[#Metro]

The problem with 375 is congestion from both cars and other buses.
The time I spent in the bus as it tried to exit Adelaide Street was unbelievable.
It took forever! In the Valley there can be more delays.

Agreed, BUZ it. It would be nice if the route extended to touch Stafford Road to allow interconnections, but the current station's location and design is very unhelpful for that.

[somebody]

The problem with 375 is congestion from both cars and other buses.
The time I spent in the bus as it tried to exit Adelaide Street was unbelievable.
It took forever! In the Valley there can be more delays.

Really?  If you are talking about heading east it is a left hand turn which shouldn't be too hard.  I suppose a lot of other buses all trying to run that route.

[petey3801]

petey3801, would you have any comments about how far down the Beenleigh line 15 minute rail frequency (both directions) in the off peak, might be possible?

Kuraby might be possible, however the Gold Coast express services might be a problem. At the moment, Coopers Plains has a 15-minute service, as the All Stoppers and Express services are 15mins apart at that point. With some creative timetabling and positioning of Gold Coasters, it may be possible using the crossovers between Salisbury and Coopers Plains and having coasties using 3rd road from Kuraby to the City. Might be a bit tight, will have a fiddle with some numbers later and see if I could come up with something usable..

Services from Ipswich are usually running a few minutes late when they reach Indooroopilly, but they usually make up most or all of the time by the time they reach Central.  I really can't support padding out the whole timetable to prevent trains maybe arriving at a few stations a little late, if the overall time is close to right.  IMO.

That is in part due to the 2mins in the timetable at both Roma Street and Central, as well as a very small amount of padding in the timetable between Indooroopilly and Milton. I'm not saying all-over padding should happen, more just padding in the right places so the trains can be ontime through the whole journey (without needing to wait for the timetable to catch up either!). Whether or not they have got that part right in the new timetable is yet to be seen, but at least they're looking at it. Might take some tweaks before being perfect though.

[petey3801]

petey3801, would you have any comments about how far down the Beenleigh line 15 minute rail frequency (both directions) in the off peak, might be possible?

Kuraby might be possible, however the Gold Coast express services might be a problem. At the moment, Coopers Plains has a 15-minute service, as the All Stoppers and Express services are 15mins apart at that point. With some creative timetabling and positioning of Gold Coasters, it may be possible using the crossovers between Salisbury and Coopers Plains and having coasties using 3rd road from Kuraby to the City. Might be a bit tight, will have a fiddle with some numbers later and see if I could come up with something usable..

Having had a quick play with the current timetable, it would be possible to add in an extra two trains an hour to Kuraby, but there wouldn't be a lot of room to play with. Gold Coast trains would run DG (no stop at Park Road) from South Bank to Salisbury, passing the Kuraby train (on the Up Main) at around Rocklea.. a small amount of padding would be added to the Kuraby bound trains compared to Beenleigh trains) and cross back to the Up Main before Coopers Plains and continue on to Beenleigh and the Gold Coast. Kuraby trains would follow Coastie into Coopers Plains, running about 2mins behind at that point. Coastie would get away pretty quick allowing Kuraby train to run on greens again by Banoon quite easily.
Airport trains would take the 3rd Road/Dual Gauge from Kuraby to South Brisbane with the Coastie crossing from the DG to UM about 3 mins before Airport train arrives at Coopers Plains, so shouldn't get held up if all is on time. Ex-Kuraby train would depart Juraby after 7 min turnaround (would arrive/depart on Pl2 Kuraby) and hit Coopers Plains at the same time as the Airport train, so shouldn't be held up by the Coastie crossing over.

At South Bank, the Airport would be clear of the Dual Gauge platform with about 4 or 5 mins to spare for the Coastie to cross over to the DG platform, with no conflicting movement from Juraby or Beenleigh trains at this point. This is not counting Cleveland trains, however they should be able to fit in pretty easily.

Therefore, it is doable with the current timetable, however there wouldn't be much room at all for a freighter to run on the DG from Yeerongpilly to Fish Is or down to the Ridge (from Yeerongpilly or South Bris) or PN trains South Bris to Yeerongpilly. It would also need 100% ontime running, so not very practible in the real world without a major re-write of the timetable.

[somebody]

Hate to say it, but such a plan is likely to have a pretty negative effect on reliability.  Therefore, I don't think we should put it forward.  The other issue is not being able to serve Park Rd where the bus interchange is in one direction.

[petey3801]

Hate to say it, but such a plan is likely to have a pretty negative effect on reliability.  Therefore, I don't think we should put it forward.  The other issue is not being able to serve Park Rd where the bus interchange is in one direction.

Forgot to add that the Airport trains would not stop at Park Road either, so no connection at all... Unless, of course, they upgraded platform 4.

As for the reliability, that's exactly why it shouldn't be implemented without a full re-write of the timetable to allow more of a buffer, as I said earlier. In a perfect world...

My calculations were working purely with the current timetable, just adding in 2xKuraby trains per hour. So with a full re-write, things might be able to work a bit better, however we'll have to wait and see what comes out of the new timetable later this year. Personally, I can see the Beenleigh line not getting 15-min frequency until after CRR has been built, but we can always live in hope...

[somebody]

My calculations were working purely with the current timetable, just adding in 2xKuraby trains per hour. So with a full re-write, things might be able to work a bit better, however we'll have to wait and see what comes out of the new timetable later this year.

I really don't understand why it is so difficult for QR to do a timetable re-write.

Personally, I can see the Beenleigh line not getting 15-min frequency until after CRR has been built, but we can always live in hope...

RailBoT exists to try to make these things happen.

[#Metro]

Forgot to add that the Airport trains would not stop at Park Road either, so no connection at all... Unless, of course, they upgraded platform 4.

Regarding platform 4 at Park Road, I have almost never seen it used.
Why is this?

[ozbob]

It has a big gap ...