Terms of use Privacy About us Media Contact

Links

Author Topic: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals  (Read 3018 times)

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 89843
    • RAIL Back On Track
5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« on: April 05, 2011, 03:40:16 AM »
Media release 5 April 2011

SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport commuters has long argued for improved train frequency.  On the Beenleigh line this is particularly difficult due to the Gold Coast trains making it difficult to run more Beenleigh line trains.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"RAIL Back On Track members have proposed two plans for faster/more frequent services on the Beenleigh Line.  One plan involves a 15 minute service Ferny Grove-Coopers Plains. Service beyond Coopers Plains to Beenleigh would run express Park Rd-Coopers Plains.  Ideally, this should extend to the Airport to provide a 15 minute frequency service there.  This would not require the duplication on the Ferny Grove line to be completed, so could be done right now (1). Exact service patterns could not be maintained counter peak, but basic frequencies to most or all stations ought to be near enough to maintainable on different stopping patterns.  The practice of running numerous trains out of service in the counter peak direction is not a good one and needs to be reduced (2)."

"Airtrain would be more receptive to a plan that allowed the extra two trains an hour to run through rather than terminating at Roma St, however it is subject to a reasonable price being charged to Airtrain for the additional services (3).  If this could be negotiated, that would be an excellent outcome of this plan."

"Other members have suggested an alternative plan that has a full time 15 minute all stopping service to Beenleigh with an innovative method that allows for bi-directional passing moves (4).  While this is completely unmaintainable counter peak and has no operating margin on current infrastructure, it is not to be dismissed.  Something similar to this could be done with an extension of the triplication beyond what has been proposed for this decade, to Loganlea at least.  This also needs to be done with the addition of needed crossovers somewhere between Sunnybank and Runcorn, which confusingly were omitted in the Salisbury-Kuraby triplication project.  These crossovers would have allowed for a 15 minute frequency as far as Kuraby with adequate operating margin."

"RAIL Back on Track suggests that while not as urgent as Ipswich and Caboolture line upgrades, the Beenleigh line upgrade is also important and could be done without much difficulty."

References:

1.  http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=5569.msg50551#msg50551

2.  http://transporttextbook.com/?p=373

3.  http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=5202.0

4.  http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4506.0

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Bobs Blog  Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 89843
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #1 on: April 17, 2011, 01:14:16 PM »
From the Reporter 13th April 2011 page 5

Calls to add extra train lines

« Last Edit: April 17, 2011, 01:17:03 PM by ozbob »
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Bobs Blog  Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

somebody

  • Guest
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #2 on: April 17, 2011, 02:41:01 PM »
I find it interesting that the infrastructure proposals are what was picked up here.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20218
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #3 on: April 17, 2011, 02:54:04 PM »
Tunnels?  ???

Where did that come from??
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline Gazza

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5026
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #4 on: April 17, 2011, 02:55:06 PM »
They kind of slaughtered it a bit too, what was all the tunnel stuff about?

Edit, teatrain beat me to it.

Ugh hate it when journalists kind of mush stuff together so the original meaning becomes nonsense.... What was it you were saying about journalists being switched on :-r
Maybe future press releases need to be dumbed down for them ?
« Last Edit: April 17, 2011, 02:59:47 PM by Gazza »

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 89843
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #5 on: April 17, 2011, 02:57:50 PM »
It is a bit out of context in that article. As part of a long background discussion the possibility of a tunnel solution rather than attempting to upgrade the track (straightening etc.) could be a cost effective alternate.  A rail tunnel to bypass the present line for express trains would be relatively straightforward.  It would not need stations.  This idea has been around for a while.  With CRR gaining momentum it could be a part solution.
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Bobs Blog  Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 89843
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #6 on: April 17, 2011, 03:01:12 PM »
They kind of slaughtered it a bit too, what was all the tunnel stuff about?

Edit, teatrain beat me to it.

Ugh hate it when journalists kind of mush stuff together so the original meaning becomes nonsense.... What was it you were saying about journalists being switched on :-r
Maybe future press releases need to be dumbed down for them ?

We can't control, nor should we, what is published.  The value is of course in raising the issue. I much prefer live radio ...  ;)
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Bobs Blog  Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

Offline Gazza

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5026
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #7 on: April 17, 2011, 03:03:14 PM »
Has that ever been talked about on here in the past? Sounds interesting, but I thought when the triple was done provisions were made for the 4 th track anyway.

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 89843
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #8 on: April 17, 2011, 03:10:07 PM »
Has that ever been talked about on here in the past? Sounds interesting, but I thought when the triple was done provisions were made for the 4 th track anyway.

Yes, on and off though not for a while.  It is an idea that has been around for a long time.  It is actually very sensible when you consider the nature of the surface line. Straightening it is an extensive task, with lots of potential NIMBY like and political resistance I would expect.  A tunnel avoids all that and it would be relatively cheap as no stations would be needed.  Still run your surface all stoppers but the expresses by pass the slow surface line and zoom through ...  even  tunnels under the worst sections would work.
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Bobs Blog  Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

somebody

  • Guest
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #9 on: April 17, 2011, 03:27:04 PM »
Has that ever been talked about on here in the past? Sounds interesting, but I thought when the triple was done provisions were made for the 4 th track anyway.

Yes, on and off though not for a while.  It is an idea that has been around for a long time.  It is actually very sensible when you consider the nature of the surface line. Straightening it is an extensive task, with lots of potential NIMBY like and political resistance I would expect.  A tunnel avoids all that and it would be relatively cheap as no stations would be needed.  Still run your surface all stoppers but the expresses by pass the slow surface line and zoom through ...  even  tunnels under the worst sections would work.
So it doesn't come from my rant thread.  Wouldn't the Salisbury-Kuraby triple have been an ideal time to implement such a thing???
(Gazza, rant thread here: http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=5725.0)

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 89843
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #10 on: April 17, 2011, 03:40:50 PM »
Quote
Wouldn't the Salisbury-Kuraby triple have been an ideal time to implement such a thing???

Possibly, but it probably didn't occur to them.  I think someone had a tunnel going under Ipswich Highway somewhere here recently as well ..

You know, as land acquisitions and the like become more and more expensive, tunnelling has got its advantages ..
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Bobs Blog  Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 89843
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #11 on: April 17, 2011, 04:32:10 PM »
Slightly OT, but illustrates a good point.  Caulfield to Oakleigh is another place where a rail tunnel would be a smart move.  It would allow express running to bypass the surface nightmare level crossings, and if you know the general lie of the suburbs track amplification is going to be very expensive and disruptive.  The surface lines would then be a lot more manageable in terms of crossing delays.
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Bobs Blog  Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

somebody

  • Guest
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #12 on: April 17, 2011, 04:55:33 PM »
Caulfield to Oakleigh is another place where a rail tunnel would be a smart move.  It would allow express running to bypass the surface nightmare level crossings, and if you know the general lie of the suburbs track amplification is going to be very expensive and disruptive.  The surface lines would then be a lot more manageable in terms of crossing delays.
Significantly less percentage with this one.  The VIC surface track is straight and presumably fast and also already quadded.  A Runcorn to Dual Gauge tunnel would allow 140+km/h running as compared to I'm guessing 80km/h or less in the via Altandi surface route.  It could also cut out 1-2km of actual rail distance, so it would really have sped things up.  Three platforms at Runcorn would have allowed 15 minute frequency to there, perhaps with 30 minute express for Runcorn-Beenleigh.  Would have saved roughly 5mins to Coopers Plains and 9mins due to express Coopers Plains-Park Rd.  About the same as the saving due to 4tph vs 2tph.  Maybe best would be a double track tunnel so the benefit can be preserved in peak.

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 89843
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #13 on: April 17, 2011, 05:19:20 PM »
Quote
The VIC surface track is straight and presumably fast and also already quadded

No it is double line Caulfield to Oakleigh.  It is straight but you would think it would be fast but it isn't; combination of the crossings and sheer train density and variety of patterns. Express and all station subs and VLine stuff all together.  The VLine stuff is often crawling along these sections. There are a number of very difficult level crossings which is hard to see a solution.  The line is struggling at peak, crossings can be down for 30 minutes or more.  I recall Murrumbeena road had one period of around 50 minutes one peak.  Nothing wrong just trains ..
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Bobs Blog  Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

somebody

  • Guest
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #14 on: April 17, 2011, 05:28:18 PM »
Ah Ok.

Caulfield East is quadded, must have assumed that it extended to Oakleigh.

So the idea would be the V/Line trains would be put into the tunnel then.  Will V/Line get electrics?  Thought they were an all diesel outfit.

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 89843
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #15 on: April 17, 2011, 05:39:41 PM »
Quad in from Caulfield to South Yarra, and the quad is used very effectively as well.

VLine is DMU and some DEL hauled services, I don't think they would be running electrics for a very long time if at all.  A tunnel would work well even if only for the trains that run in express under the wires, there is a lot and potentially a lot more.  Ex Dandenong, Pakenham, Cranbourne East.

But we digress, the tunnel option is something that may come into play in future planning in metro Brisbane, where as up to now has largely been dismissed outside the CBD as too expensive.
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Bobs Blog  Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

somebody

  • Guest
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #16 on: April 21, 2011, 12:19:03 PM »
From the Reporter 13th April 2011 page 5

Calls to add extra train lines


So, who cares about faster or more frequent services, give us more tracks!

Offline Stillwater

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6389
Re: 5 Apr 2011: SEQ: Beenleigh line upgrade proposals
« Reply #17 on: April 21, 2011, 12:51:51 PM »
Look at the stern face ... you don't wanna mess with this guy!  ;D

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 


“You can't understand a city without using its public transportation system.” -- Erol Ozan