RAIL - Back On Track Forum

Quote from: #Metro on April 21, 2023, 11:09:27 AMReplacing BRT with LRT on the SEB would just be an exercise in swapping rubber tyre vehicles for steel wheel trams for $ billions with no real net increase in capacity.

But 1000% improvement in service quality.  I watched a person in a mobilised wheelchair the other day at a busway station.  Their concern at not getting the driver attention and then the logistics to get onboard held up following buses. Absolutely not concerned about the delays. It is not about that.  Just highlighting that instead of a single vehicle arriving and people being able to board there is a scramble on the platform that is horrible.  Is my bus due in two minutes arriving soon Can't tell till the 10 buses due in 1 min clear. Where did it go? It just disappeared? Did I miss it?  Oh now there is 3-4 busies arriving at once Which order are they. Certainly never the exact order on the screen.   Where will they stop. Is the bus stopped in the 1st bay about to leave and the bus will stop there. Hang on why is my bus overtaking the bus in the last bus bay (I am sure this against the busway usage rules).  It might claim to move large # but the station experience is just terrible for all other than the fittest and the bravest.

Quote from: #Metro on April 21, 2023, 11:09:27 AMThanks for the material Jonno.

Replacing BRT with LRT on the SEB would just be an exercise in swapping rubber tyre vehicles for steel wheel trams for $ billions with no real net increase in capacity.

The need here is to go to the next level in the capacity hierarchy - actual rail-based metro. This would require heavy rail, not light, configured as a metro. I think we can rule out a 1000-pax Sydney Metro train going across the Victoria Bridge with either OHW or electric third rail because it demands Priority A ROW with no shared intersections with traffic.

For this reason, under a ROW conversion scenario, I think a tunnel and underground metro stations would be required going from Woolloongabba into the CBD with the section Woolloongabba-Cultural Centre retained as busway.

     

I don't think anyone is wanting the Busways to be converted to heavy rail metro. That would require a whole new alignment and is completely out of the question. What is possible though, are light rail vehicles which are twice as long (or potentially more) as the 'Metro' bus which will be able to absorb more passengers, run at closer intervals, and result in a better customer experience. That is entirely possible in the current alignment. Sure, there would be the need for some changes but nothing which is unreasonable.

Quote from: RowBro on April 21, 2023, 12:46:18 PMWhat is possible though, are light rail vehicles which are twice as long (or potentially more) as the 'Metro' bus which will be able to absorb more passengers, run at closer intervals, and result in a better customer experience. That is entirely possible in the current alignment. Sure, there would be the need for some changes but nothing which is unreasonable.

So double the length of a metrobus is effectively length-of-the-platform for Mater Hill and it's half or more of most other platforms: this means one LRV on the platform at a time and precious little else: this implies full conversion of the Mater Hill section.

Presumably (since Mater Hill is fully converted) we will need to LRVs on all of the main six corridors from the start. That gets very expensive very quickly.

Quote from: aldonius on April 21, 2023, 12:58:55 PM

Quote from: RowBro on April 21, 2023, 12:46:18 PMWhat is possible though, are light rail vehicles which are twice as long (or potentially more) as the 'Metro' bus which will be able to absorb more passengers, run at closer intervals, and result in a better customer experience. That is entirely possible in the current alignment. Sure, there would be the need for some changes but nothing which is unreasonable.

So double the length of a metrobus is effectively length-of-the-platform for Mater Hill and it's half or more of most other platforms: this means one LRV on the platform at a time and precious little else: this implies full conversion of the Mater Hill section.

Presumably (since Mater Hill is fully converted) we will need to LRVs on all of the main six corridors from the start. That gets very expensive very quickly.

I would imagine initially the vehicles would be shorter with the ability to lengthen them when all stations which aren't long enough are upgraded. It would cost money but ultimately it would have a myriad of great benefits. It's entirely possible to mix LRT and Buses to allow the conversion of all branches to be undertaken in a staged approach. LRT's run at a low enough speed to allow operation with vision only.

It's possible to mix on the lower traffic branches, but I think Mater is well past it. The trams can't pull in and out of the platforms as easily as the buses do, so either they get delayed waiting for a clear run in or we have way fewer buses through the section. And if we have way fewer buses, we need the longer trams right away.

Quote from: aldonius on April 21, 2023, 13:31:51 PMIt's possible to mix on the lower traffic branches, but I think Mater is well past it. The trams can't pull in and out of the platforms as easily as the buses do, so either they get delayed waiting for a clear run in or we have way fewer buses through the section. And if we have way fewer buses, we need the longer trams right away.

True. Although even without a LRT conversion, it's clear that Mater Hill is in dire need for a platform expansion.

Rail vehicles have a wider interval than buses because they are heavier and their safe stopping distance is longer.

The interval would be worse not better for this reason.

Secondly, during peak hour half the busway volume escapes the busway using the captain cook bridge.

Unless light rail is also going to branch over the Captain Cook bridge, you are going to be faced with funneling 12,000 - 18,000 pphd though Cultural Centre and on Priority B ROW.

This would already be pushing the upper bound of what LRT can do. E.g. no room for growth.

If you want light metro with rubber tyres- which BCC already investigated in MkI of Brisbane Metro - this will require Priority A ROW. That means no ground level running over Victoria Bridge - assuming it doesn't collapse...

This is old ground. Any additional major capacity expansion will require Priority A ROW only and a capacity of a genuine metro.

The busway already carries daily volumes above that of Sydney Metro and either of the Perth Mandurah or Joondalup lines.

Thus I would advise against replacing it with LRT.

Quote from: #Metro on April 21, 2023, 13:42:21 PMRail vehicles have a wider interval than buses because they are heavier and their safe stopping distance is longer.

Secondly, during peak hour half the busway volume escapes the busway using the captain cook bridge.

The busway already carries daily volumes above that of Sydney Metro and either of the Perth Mandurah or Joondalup lines.

Rail vehicles have a wider interval than buses because they carry significantly more people than buses.  Plenty rail system have minimal headways too.  I actually don't enjoy the acceleration and stopping of busses.  It feels unmanaged.  I am sure it is safe but it not comfortable. 

The fact buses have to divert onto Captain Cook Bridge  (not actually shown in route maps) is a sign the busway is inefficient and creating its own bottleneck. Legibility be damned.

The busway already carries daily volumes (only in theory above) that Sydney Metro (which is only 1 section of a line and supper heavily used so I would question that too) and either of the Perth Mandurah or Joondalup lines (again in theory). 

I personally would go for Light Metro.  Still interested in the question if any gradients are greater than 6% for that reason.

Quote from: aldonius on April 21, 2023, 12:58:55 PM

Quote from: RowBro on April 21, 2023, 12:46:18 PMWhat is possible though, are light rail vehicles which are twice as long (or potentially more) as the 'Metro' bus which will be able to absorb more passengers, run at closer intervals, and result in a better customer experience. That is entirely possible in the current alignment. Sure, there would be the need for some changes but nothing which is unreasonable.

So double the length of a metrobus is effectively length-of-the-platform for Mater Hill and it's half or more of most other platforms: this means one LRV on the platform at a time and precious little else: this implies full conversion of the Mater Hill section.

Presumably (since Mater Hill is fully converted) we will need to LRVs on all of the main six corridors from the start. That gets very expensive very quickly.

is it 6 corridors or is it 2?

Connecting SEQ 2031 - T, M, L & B - Full Colour

is it 6 corridors or is it 2?

SEB, INB, UQ, Chermside, Carindale, Calamvale.

Though I suppose you could make arguments for combining Chermside and INB, and the others are all SEB branches.

Quote from: aldonius on April 21, 2023, 16:21:10 PMis it 6 corridors or is it 2?

SEB, INB, UQ, Chermside, Carindale, Calamvale.

Though I suppose you could make arguments for combining Chermside and INB, and the others are all SEB branches.

Chermside, INB to SEB is 1. Carindale to UQ should bypass/be separated from SEB to avoid conflict eventually.  My Second is Albany Creek to Browns Plains vis SEB

Proposed TOD for the new Brisbane Metro Station at Woolloongabba--->https://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=1451.msg270312#msg270312

Got your TOD Jonno 
Congrats 🎉

Quote from: #Metro on April 26, 2023, 18:49:36 PMGot your TOD Jonno 
Congrats 🎉

TOD with a walkway over a STROAD....try again.

Quote from: Jonno on April 21, 2023, 10:35:34 AM

Quote from: timh on 20/4/2023, 8:33:09 pmQuote from: RowBro on 20/4/2023, 6:03:14 pmQuote from: #Metro on 20/4/2023, 5:19:11 pmJonno, I also think a two mode, two phase strategy has advantages that are nothing to do with technical or operational aspects.A BRT-first project might be more politically acceptable to the community than an LRT-first project. Once the BRT volumes start going up, transition is incremental - you would just add the poles, wires and track to the BRT ROW to get your LRT.      Clearly something went wrong with the Busways in Brisbane.Correct. While the first ever built section from Mater Hill to Wooloongabba was built to standards for an upgrade to light rail in mind (turn radii, grades), the rest of the busway was not. You would need substantial work, particularly on the inner city sections, to make the grades appropriate for a light rail vehicle. Hence why the choice of the Metro BRT vehicle is a sensible solution given the prohibitively expensive alternative Humour me here.GradientLight

Railhttps://www.lightrailnow.org/myths/m_mythlog001.htm"Rubber-tired vehicles such as buses have incrementally better traction on dry pavement, but significantly lower traction in wet, icy, or snowy conditions. Furthermore, electric light rail transit (LRT) railcars – including streetcars (trams) – are capable of negotiating much steeper grades than is commonly assumed and included in system designs.In general, it advisable to minimize grades on any new transit system as much as possible. However, where necessary (to access critical sections of a city, to contain costs, or for other reasons), LRT can handle grades as steep as 12% (depending on vehicle design, motor power, and other technical capabilities). Here are some examples:Europe

• • Sheffield – short section on 10% grade, and others at 9%. Articulated tramcars operate without any problem on these grades, on a daily basis. All axles on the cars are powered to enable operation on such gradients.
  • Würzburg – operation on approximately 10.8% grade.
  • Nordhausen – the tramway, located in this small city on the south side of the Harz hills range, negotiates a 9.8% grade in Stolberger Strasse for about 500 meters.

USA

• • Boston – C-Commonwealth Avenue streetcar line has a gradient of more than 8%.
  • Portland – MAX LRT system has a 7% grade on the ramp leading from Second Avenue onto the Steel Bridge.
  • Little Rock – River Rail streetcar line between Little Rock and North Little Rock climbs a gradient of 7.8% on the approach to the Main St. bridge over the Arkansas River.
  • San Francisco – grades of 9% on the J-Church and L-Taraval streetcar lines of the Municipal Railway.
  • Pittsburgh – Route 52-Arlington has a grade of 10%, routinely negotiated by modern Siemens and CAF articulated interurban-type railcars."

Light Metrohttps://www.railjournal.com/passenger/metros/alstom-launches-low-cost-metro-system/"Axonis is able to cope with 45m-radius curves and 6% gradients".Question? Is there a gradient greater than 6%  (1m in 16.67m) on the Busway route?  I would have to say I doubt it. CurvesLight Rail https://bathtrams.uk/arguments-for-trams/5531-2/"Bendibuses have a minimum turning radius of 22m. So if a bendibus can get around corners in Bath, a City Class benditram able to turn around 15m radius, certainly can".Metrosee aboveThe only "route curves" that come to mind as challenging would be the

• • Melbourne Street portal (which should be replaced anyway as its a massive choke point).
  • turn to the east at Buranda onto the eastern busway.
  • curve west of Boggo Road Bus Station into the tunnel.

First 2 could be treated in any conversion. I'll ignore turn arounds and other portals as in both a Light Rail or Metro system they become no longer required.[/li][/list]

Yes stations are a separate discussion but the curve and curve raidii regularly used as a "can't be done".

Am I missing something?

Hi Jonno,
For memory the SEB between Southbank to Mater isn't possible to be converted to Light Rail due to the vertical gradients. IIRC the original designs even included a tunnel portal to spit the trams out onto vulture street because of this.

No doubt there are examples worldwide where light rail has been installed on 'steep' gradients. But just because you can doesn't mean you should. These examples may have sandboxes (or similar) to help them in localised areas, but they then introduce their own maintenance issues. #1

No matter how you slice and dice it, the coefficient of friction for a steel-rail vehicle is an order of magnitude smaller than a similar rubber tyred vehicle. #2
Simply regrading these sections isn't an option unless you were to completely remove and replace them. And even then you may end up chasing your tail with longer and longer alignment modifications.

Consider all the works going on as part of Brisbane Metro, yet Mater, one of the shortest stations, isn't being touched. Why? $$$, because it's so constrained.

I personally would love to have seen the SEB as rail. The straight-ish alignment and wide station spacing practically demands it. Sadly I think that horse has bolted.

#1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandbox_(locomotive)
  #2. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_resistance

Even if the technical challenges could be overcome, LRT conversion would not make sense on capacity grounds, especially when you consider Captain Cook Bridge wouldn't be available, forcing 12,000-18,000 pphd to go all via Cultural Centre.

This alignment doesn't make sense for LRT.

Adelaide Street Tunnel Video

Very interesting this - shallow mined tunnel technique without TBM. Avoided the need for cut and cover construction and disruption.

I'm really pleased that Superbuses Brisbane Metro BRT bi-articulated buses are coming to Brisbane.   

Can't wait for more lines to be added and the bus network simplified even further.

An actual rail-based metro train service will come in time, some times you just have to wait.





 



Photos: RBOT Member Metro. April 2023.

Quote from: #Metro on April 27, 2023, 19:47:15 PMAdelaide Street Tunnel Video

Very interesting this - shallow mined tunnel technique without TBM. Avoided the need for cut and cover construction and disruption.

Hope this is not indicative of the speed through tunnel!! This is a white elephant costing us billions of rates and taxes!! No capacity increase!!

Why is this branded BCC? They are just a service provider to TransLink? This makes legibility so much worse! BCC - Caring for just themselves at everyone's expense!

I detest the term ' super-buses ' they are bi-articulated buses.

Please describe PT vehicles correctly on this forum.

Couriermail --> Blueprint for future Brisbane revealed $

QuoteA blueprint for Brisbane's inner-city transformation over the coming years has been released by the Brisbane City Council, with a focus on unlocking more housing, green space, jobs and river tourism.

With the Brisbane 2032 Games under a decade away, the council has released an Inner City Strategy highlighting the need to create strong cultural experiences, celebrate the city's subtropical lifestyle, create inner-city neighbourhoods and ensure they are well connected.

The delivery of the fully electric Brisbane Metro along with green bridges would be key, with the strategy also committing to work with government and the private sector to improve river-based infrastructure and unlock new river tourism activities. ...

 

Quotesome times you just have to wait.

In the case of Qld, you wait every time.

Quote from: Gazza on April 28, 2023, 10:56:01 AM

Quotesome times you just have to wait.

In the case of Qld, you wait every time.

But we have lots of plans!!!!

Quote from: Jonno on April 28, 2023, 13:15:22 PM

Quote from: Gazza on April 28, 2023, 10:56:01 AM

Quotesome times you just have to wait.

In the case of Qld, you wait every time.

But we have lots of plans!!!!

We have so many plans that, if we stacked them head to tail, we'd be all the way to Maroochydore by now!

QuoteWe have so many plans that, if we stacked them head to tail, we'd be all the way to Maroochydore by now!

^     

Great line RowBro !

Quote from: ozbob on April 28, 2023, 13:19:31 PM

QuoteWe have so many plans that, if we stacked them head to tail, we'd be all the way to Maroochydore by now!

^     

Great line RowBro !

I would say All the way to Noosa if not to Byron Bay as well.

https://twitter.com/scottemerson/status/1666161228547526657

1. It is a Translink electric bi-articulated bus being forced upon them by BCC.

2. KSD is the perfect place for them not the Busway. Busway needs to be a Metro.

3. This is BRT not a Metro!

Quote from: Jonno on June 07, 2023, 07:51:36 AM1. It is a Translink electric bi-articulated bus being forced upon them by BCC.

It's not really a "Translink" vehicle if it is being procured (or "forced upon them") by BCC. In fact, I don't think there's a single piece of Translink branding on them.

Quote from: Jonno on June 07, 2023, 07:51:36 AM2. KSD is the perfect place for them not the Busway. Busway needs to be a Metro.

That might debatable going by a lot of the back and forward further above.

Quote from: Jonno on June 07, 2023, 07:51:36 AM3. This is BRT not a Metro!

Credit to Scott Emerson for accurately describing it accurately in his post:

"The @brisbanecityqld's high-frequency bus rapid transit system Brisbane Metro"

Quote from: nathandavid88 on June 07, 2023, 12:55:11 PMIn fact, I don't think there's a single piece of Translink branding on them.

I'm quite sure this is the case too. Hopefully Translink stoops to the same level and forces their branding onto the BCC bus fleet (both the bi-artics and the current fleet).

Quote from: RowBro on June 07, 2023, 14:02:57 PM

Quote from: nathandavid88 on June 07, 2023, 12:55:11 PMIn fact, I don't think there's a single piece of Translink branding on them.

I'm quite sure this is the case too. Hopefully Translink stoops to the same level and forces their branding onto the BCC bus fleet (both the bi-artics and the current fleet).

It must be Translink Branded!!!

Brand it correctly or contract terminated!! Goes for all providers. Any supplier logo is minimal and in same location (e.g. just above the front door)

Quote from: JonnoBrand it correctly or contract terminated!!

Are you spruiking privatisation / private contacting there Jonno?

 

Quote from: #Metro on June 07, 2023, 19:16:09 PM

Quote from: JonnoBrand it correctly or contract terminated!!

Are you spruiking privatisation / private contacting there Jonno?

 

Aren't all the bus routes delivered by service providers to Translink...irrespective of ownership?

QuoteAren't all the bus routes delivered by service providers to Translink...irrespective of ownership?

If you rip up a BCC contract, who would deliver the service then?

Quote from: #Metro on June 07, 2023, 20:04:27 PM

QuoteAren't all the bus routes delivered by service providers to Translink...irrespective of ownership?

If you rip up a BCC contract, who would deliver the service then?

Theoretically speaking they are a contractor. Who actually owns the busses, because it should really be Translink who actually owns the busses under the service contractor model, otherwise it doesn't work for that exact reason.

Quote from: RowBro on June 07, 2023, 21:12:19 PM

Quote from: #Metro on June 07, 2023, 20:04:27 PM

QuoteAren't all the bus routes delivered by service providers to Translink...irrespective of ownership?

If you rip up a BCC contract, who would deliver the service then?

Theoretically speaking they are a contractor. Who actually owns the busses, because it should really be Translink who actually owns the busses under the service contractor model, otherwise it doesn't work for that exact reason.

I tend to agree it should be a state run!

Quote from: RowBro on June 07, 2023, 21:12:19 PM

Quote from: #Metro on June 07, 2023, 20:04:27 PM

QuoteAren't all the bus routes delivered by service providers to Translink...irrespective of ownership?

If you rip up a BCC contract, who would deliver the service then?

Theoretically speaking they are a contractor. Who actually owns the busses, because it should really be Translink who actually owns the busses under the service contractor model, otherwise it doesn't work for that exact reason.

Feel free to correct me, but isn't it generally the case that the buses decked out in a service providers' branding are usually owned by the service operator, while buses supplied by the State Government are the ones with the more prominent Translink branding (eg. white buses with green front and back panels, or fully green for the new electric buses)?

Quote from: nathandavid88 on June 08, 2023, 14:42:42 PM

Quote from: RowBro on June 07, 2023, 21:12:19 PM

Quote from: #Metro on June 07, 2023, 20:04:27 PM

QuoteAren't all the bus routes delivered by service providers to Translink...irrespective of ownership?

If you rip up a BCC contract, who would deliver the service then?

Theoretically speaking they are a contractor. Who actually owns the busses, because it should really be Translink who actually owns the busses under the service contractor model, otherwise it doesn't work for that exact reason.

Feel free to correct me, but isn't it generally the case that the buses decked out in a service providers' branding are usually owned by the service operator, while buses supplied by the State Government are the ones with the more prominent Translink branding (eg. white buses with green front and back panels, or fully green for the new electric buses)?

I'm not sure personally. It is notable that (almost?) all new busses throughout the state (for a good while now) have the Translink livery: the exception to this being BCC. If this is the case that would imply all new busses are actually owned by Translink. That or Translink is finally beginning to enforce its standard livery on operators & their busses.

Quote from: RowBro on June 08, 2023, 14:47:37 PM

Quote from: nathandavid88 on June 08, 2023, 14:42:42 PMFeel free to correct me, but isn't it generally the case that the buses decked out in a service providers' branding are usually owned by the service operator, while buses supplied by the State Government are the ones with the more prominent Translink branding (eg. white buses with green front and back panels, or fully green for the new electric buses)?

I'm not sure personally. It is notable that (almost?) all new busses throughout the state (for a good while now) have the Translink livery: the exception to this being BCC. If this is the case that would imply all new busses are actually owned by Translink. That or Translink is finally beginning to enforce its standard livery on operators & their busses.

We might be getting off topic here, but if Translink does decide to get stricter with enforcing liveries it would be great if they could pick a better one! Surely they can do better than green and white with their new design being rolled out

Here is hoping for standard livery either way.  They are a service providers whether they own the bus or not is a contractual arrangement.  GLink should also be in Translink Livery .... and Trains (controversial I know).

SEQ Trains
SEQ Buses
SEQ Light Rail
SEQ Ferries

or

QLD Trains
QLD Buses
QLD Light Rail
QLD Ferries

and maybe 1 day

QLD Metro

I even accept

Translink Trains
Translink Buses
Translink Light Rail
Translink Ferries
Translink Metro

https://transportnsw.info/contact-us/social-media/twitter