RAIL - Back On Track Forum

Quote from: Derailed2 on March 04, 2024, 11:40:57 AM

Quote from: OzGamer on February 20, 2024, 09:17:54 AM

Quote from: 300LA on February 19, 2024, 22:06:10 PMI've never understood the reasoning in running the busway parallel with the NCL. It's not like Fitzgibbon is a highly dense node / university / or other trip generator.

I think it's for the Fitzgibbon state development area, but I've never understood why they don't just build a new train station there since the planned busway station will be right next to the train line. Surely one station is cheaper than several kilometres of new busway.

When the third road between Northgate and Lawnton was built the track centres between the then Up Main and third road, north of Carseldine, were widened out to allow for a future Fitzgibbon station island platform. The site is near the Roghan Rd Dorville Rd intersection. My guess is the proposed station was canned when TMR muscled in with their busway proposal.

Busway takes into account 4th track at carseldine. It was intended to be a 6 platform layout with platforms 2/3 being an insland (2 busway/3 railway - similar to Roma street). Telegraph road overpass also has provisions for this. As far as I know no rail stations between Bald Hills-Carseldine were planned. The reason for the duplication was due to a new bus only interchange, massive park and ride and layover area on telegraph road with it supposed to be acting as a local feeder hub with more emphasis on loop routes.

I believe tmr have revised their Bracken ridge plans after the MBRL went through as that and the fare boundary line changed traffic issues in the area.

Quote from: timh on March 19, 2024, 06:15:45 AM

Quote from: Habitant on March 19, 2024, 03:56:03 AMIt just occurred to me that this proposed Metro 3 line really does nothing for public transit to The Prince Charles Hospital.

This seems short sighted as that hospital precinct is expected to be redeveloped and grow massively. And it's already one of the busiest hub in the inner North.

TPCH has terrible transit access currently, forcing staff and visitors to drive.

The current proposal for "Metro 3" is extremely vague. If you read the fine print though, it always says that it is dependant on the state govt building the Northern busway, of which the original proposal went via PCH. Time will tell but I very much doubt that deviation will be built, which is a shame

Interesting, I missed this fine print in the announcement.
That Newman government decision to cancel the Northern busway extension in favour of the 'Northern Transitway' ages more poorly every year.

On the weekend I caught a bus from platform 1 at KGS and noted that the new platform screen doors were pretty flash. When they open they turn Green on the edges and when the bus is ready to leave they start flashing Red around the edges. Not sure if this is meant to be an automated prompt for the bus driver to close their doors and leave? Although I think it's likely to be integrated with metro, so that the metro bus doors and screen doors open and close simultaneously, like that of train metro doors and platform screen doors.

Just like a metro but not a Metro in so many many many ways!

Cultural Centre Platform 2 reopened yesterday. Here are some awful bus window photos:


iPhone Photo 23.04.2024 by Nathan Murray, on Flickr


iPhone Photo 23.04.2024 by Nathan Murray, on Flickr


iPhone Photo 23.04.2024 by Nathan Murray, on Flickr

Looks like half of Platform 2 at KGS is set to open within the next week or 2, with new PIDs and screen doors.

Unsurprisingly that prediction has not come true.

https://x.com/7NewsBrisbane/status/1794184047272612007

Ah 60 buses has always been the order Right?

https://x.com/crjaredcassidy/status/1795293901923979736?s=46&t=EDszjTErsxTIqAna7yuP-w

^

https://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/traffic-and-transport/public-transport/brisbane-metro/metros

Quote... As part of Brisbane Metro, Brisbane City Council is introducing a new fleet of 60 fully electric, high‑capacity metros bi-articulated buses , which will integrate seamlessly into busway operations, operating along dedicated busways, as part of a better planned network. ...

How did they arrive at 36?

111 takes 30 mins from 8mp to RS
66 takes 30 mins from UQ to RBWH

Im not sure about the specifics of charging at each end, but to maintain the 5 min peak headway, each route needs 6 buses in motion in each direction, so 24.

Or is the intent to order 60 so it can ramp up to 2-3 min frequency as needed?

The order is most definitely for 60.  Rochedale will have enough capacity for about double that eventually, although they may need more equipment on site to accommodate nearly 120.

The BCC website claims "under six minutes" for flash charging, so that plus a bit of recovery time gets you to almost 40 minutes per direction. At 5 minute headways that's then 8 buses per direction, so 32 total, plus a few spares which could be out at any given moment.

But at 3 minute headways that's 13 or 14 buses per direction, so 52 or 56 in motion or charging/recovery plus 4 or 8 spares.

When I visited the Metro Information Centre just before Easter they were saying that the metro services may not start as planned in December. This is due to the Adelaide st tunnel works being behind schedule. They were also saying that they may run Metro buses via QSBS in the interim.

Personally, I reckon it's quite a tight turn in there from Queen to Albert St, questioning temporary operations via that route.

Quote from: verbatim9 on May 28, 2024, 16:57:20 PM...They were also saying that they may run Metro buses via QSBS in the interim.

Personally, I reckon it's quite a tight turn in there from Queen to Albert St, questioning temporary operations via that route.

In our previous meetings with the Metro team, they've told us that the turning circle for the new bi-artics is actually *better* than the turning circle of the existing artics. Due to the nature of it being well... More articulated. So I don't think that the turn from QSBS to KGS would be an issue if anything does go wrong with the Adelaide Street tunnel.

Also re: 60 buses. Aldonius is correct. 60 is required for 3 minute headways in peak, which is the expected frequency. Absolutely cooked take from Jared Cassidy et al, I have no idea where they pulled those figures from. It's been 60 since literally the start of the project

Nothing is wrong with the Adelaide St tunnel it's just behind schedule I was told.

Yes I know about the comparative turning circle to regular articulated buses, but it's still a tight turn. 

My point about something going "wrong" with the tunnel is more general. As in, when the tunnel does open to traffic (belated or not) if for some reason it couldn't be used (broken down bus blocking the way, tunnel damage, etc), you'd think they'd have a contingency plan to allow bi artics to use the existing tunnel link, otherwise the whole Metro system would fall over in the middle. I'm sure this would have been accounted for, and therefore you'd think they would have ensured the vehicle meets the tolerance of that tunnel

To contribute further to the discussion here, I have also been on buses that have overshot the stop line on that turn. This has resulted in the buses needing to reverse to let the other buses from the other direction turn into Albert street.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/may/31/brisbane-metro-electric-bus-order

Apparently service to be only every 5 minutes?

Quote... Two dozen state-of-the art, multimillion-dollar electric buses could be left sitting idle in a shed when the Brisbane Metro service starts operations this year, because it will operate less frequently than initially planned.

The system was originally designed to operate every three minutes, but it's now planned to run every five minutes, which would require fewer vehicles.

In 2022, Brisbane city council ordered 60 all-electric HESS lighTram 25 vehicles from Switzerland to service two lines, as part of a $1.7bn capital spend. Each double-articulated rubber-tyred bus will be 24.4 metres long and have a maximum capacity of 170 passengers.

The Labor council opposition claims only 36 will be needed to operate, even at maximum frequency. ...

Interesting. Maybe they can start to run services to Chermside with the spares.

Could be peak rocket service if they don't have enough vehicles for all stops service to reach there.

The other thing this reveals is that BCC has determined and set the service frequency, not Translink. Which is further evidence of the dual transit agency setup in Brisbane.

Good that the Guardian knows they are type of bus! 

https://x.com/ozbob13/status/1796305575724376527

Quote from: ozbob on May 31, 2024, 08:21:04 AMGood that the Guardian knows they are type of bus! 

https://x.com/ozbob13/status/1796305575724376527

Seems like a result of the stoush we saw earlier this year between council and state Re: service funding. Looks like council couldn't get enough state money to fund 3 minute headways in peak (if the opposition is to be believed). This is all inferred as there is not a lot of explicit reasoning given.

Sounds like council is still trying to negotiate with state to get more funding. Not sure why they can't make up the shortfall themselves though, it's their project 

BCC is strapped for cash, partly because of general cost inflation, and partly because of a policy choice to have the lowest rates in SEQ / below inflation rates increases.

Also a policy choice to spend so much on non-recurrent new road infrastructure, meanwhile my street is disintegrating.

Elsewhere, MBRC is upgrading semi-rural streets where the temporarily ungraded surface is better than mine is normally, and GCCC is now (or very very nearly) 100% free of unsealed roads.  The point being we don't even get value for money from BCC even where it spends on the wrong things.

Well, if the 50 cent fares are still around when M1 and M2 commence, 5 minute frequency will be insufficient is my guess.  I think there might well be an increase in frequency under these new circumstances.

 

Quote from: aldonius on May 31, 2024, 07:11:04 AMhttps://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/may/31/brisbane-metro-electric-bus-order

Apparently service to be only every 5 minutes?

Quote... Two dozen state-of-the art, multimillion-dollar electric buses could be left sitting idle in a shed when the Brisbane Metro service starts operations this year, because it will operate less frequently than initially planned.

The system was originally designed to operate every three minutes, but it's now planned to run every five minutes, which would require fewer vehicles.

In 2022, Brisbane city council ordered 60 all-electric HESS lighTram 25 vehicles from Switzerland to service two lines, as part of a $1.7bn capital spend. Each double-articulated rubber-tyred bus will be 24.4 metres long and have a maximum capacity of 170 passengers.

The Labor council opposition claims only 36 will be needed to operate, even at maximum frequency. ...

I am just ging to say it.  The frequent services can't fit onto the busway with the other 100 routes!!! This thing is a CLUSTER!!!

Quote from: JonnoI am just ging to say it.  The frequent services can't fit onto the busway with the other 100 routes!!! This thing is a CLUSTER!!!

Well, if this might be one way for the network to be forced to simplify, which is actually a good thing.

Route 555 might become an all day rocket bus, Route 160 absorbed.

Quote from: #Metro on May 31, 2024, 10:45:21 AM

Quote from: JonnoI am just ging to say it.  The frequent services can't fit onto the busway with the other 100 routes!!! This thing is a CLUSTER!!!

Well, if this might be one way for the network to be forced to simplify, which is actually a good thing.

Route 555 might become an all day rocket bus, Route 160 absorbed.

We have been over this sooooo many times. It IS being simplified. If either of you came to any of the multiple meetings we had with BCC about this you wouldn't be speculating or making ridiculous claims. There is a clearly defined bus network rejig happening.

Please just go through this link and look for yourself.
https://caportal.com.au/bcc/brisbane-metro

QuoteRoute 160 is proposed to become METRO 1 Eight Mile Plains to Roma Street in Brisbane's New Bus Network.

Please refer to the proposed network tab for route information.

Quote161 Wishart Outlook to Griffith University station
PROPOSED LOOP
 This route has proposed suburban changes in Brisbane's New Bus Network.

Type of service: Full-time all stops
This service will operate between Wishart Outlook and Griffith University station.

This service will operate seven days a week.

@Metro did you put in a submission on the proposed network changes surrounding the Metro?

Quote from: timh on May 31, 2024, 10:59:30 AM

Quote from: #Metro on May 31, 2024, 10:45:21 AM

Quote from: JonnoI am just ging to say it.  The frequent services can't fit onto the busway with the other 100 routes!!! This thing is a CLUSTER!!!

Well, if this might be one way for the network to be forced to simplify, which is actually a good thing.

Route 555 might become an all day rocket bus, Route 160 absorbed.

We have been over this sooooo many times. It IS being simplified. If either of you came to any of the multiple meetings we had with BCC about this you wouldn't be speculating or making ridiculous claims. There is a clearly defined bus network rejig happening.

Please just go through this link and look for yourself.
https://caportal.com.au/bcc/brisbane-metro

As per my submission. The Metro would not fit which was my feedback plus further changes required.  Don't assume because we think the plan won't work that we don't understand the plan.

Why not though?

111 runs at 5 min frequency in peak.
160 runs at 10 min frequency in peak.

So 18 BPH just from those two core busway routes.

And of course we know plenty of other routes are being pulled from the Busway.

Even if it were an ideal world of Metro 1 every 3 mins, that's still only 20 BPH, so at worst its 1:1 to what we already have except the vehicles are bigger and more doors.

Ditto on the 66, thats already 12 BPH, so going to Metro just means more space and doors right?

Quote from: Gazza on May 31, 2024, 11:52:34 AMWhy not though?

111 runs at 5 min frequency in peak.
160 runs at 10 min frequency in peak.

So 18 BPH just from those two core busway routes.

And of course we know plenty of other routes are being pulled from the Busway.

Even if it were an ideal world of Metro 1 every 3 mins, that's still only 20 BPH, so at worst its 1:1 to what we already have except the vehicles are bigger and more doors.


Ditto on the 66, thats already 12 BPH, so going to Metro just means more space and doors right?

But they take up half the station and move as single unit.  So other buses will need to fit around them. If other buses have 3/4 of platform filled it can't open doors on remaining 1/4 of the station.   I guess only time will tell.

If the BCC cannot deliver on the 3 minute frequency (which they knew that could never deliver on), then what is the purpose of this entire project?

How many of their new shiny electric bendy boi's do they currently have?

Are they are going to operate them on the 66 & 111 routes exclusively, as opposed to operating them with the existing buses, can they reach '3 minute' frequencies?

It would also help if they would released the final design report and an updated patronage and business case reports too. This project has had more changes than David Bowie's wardrobe.

QuoteBut they take up half the station and move as single unit.  So other buses will need to fit around them. If other buses have 3/4 of platform filled it can't open doors on remaining 1/4 of the station.   I guess only time will tell.

But the stations have been extended where needed (Hence the works at Okfee St) and the intent is that Metroand traditional busway services use different parts of the platform.

Quote from: Gazza on May 31, 2024, 14:07:02 PM

QuoteBut they take up half the station and move as single unit.  So other buses will need to fit around them. If other buses have 3/4 of platform filled it can't open doors on remaining 1/4 of the station.   I guess only time will tell.

But the stations have been extended where needed (Hence the works at Okfee St) and the intent is that Metroand traditional busway services use different parts of the platform.

it's very messy in my books. I think it might work on paper Real life I am not so sure.

By minimising the traditional bus routes to BUZ routes and the 555 + couple of cross city routes that run on busway for short periods ) would have make this simpler system to use.

I would also have run the 222 to UQ and have people transfer at Buranda onto Busway Routes.

QuoteI think it might work on paper Real life I am not so sure.

How is it functionally any different to how KGS works in real life?
At that station, buses have their own dedicated stands for certain routes.

So for the busway, stand 1 is for Metro, Stand 2 is for everything else.

As I understand it, there has been a moderate amount of rationalization. Not as much as I would have liked, but probably sufficient to allow it to operate as intended.

I hate KGS!! Never use it Can never work out which gate has first bus!!

Ok, so obviously people aren't bothering to read the BCC proposal, so I'll summarise.

In addition the 30bph removed from the inner CBD core by consolidation of the 66, 111 and 160 into the M1 and M2 routes, the following busway routes will see the following changes in morning peak:

• Route 124 will be merged into 125 and effectively deleted, saving 3bph (125 will be diverted over CCB)
• Route 125 will be diverted over the Captain Cook Bridge, saving 3bph
• Route 135 will terminate at Griffith, saving 2.5bph
• Route 151 will be deleted, saving 2bph
• Route 155 will terminate at Griffith, saving 1.5bph
• Route 161 will terminate at Griffith, saving 3bph
• Route 172 will terminate at Greenslopes, saving 2bph
• Route 174 will be merged into 175 and effectively deleted, saving 3bph (175 will be diverted over CCB)
• Route 175 will be diverted over the Captain Cook Bridge, saving 3.5bph (while also being raised to 4bph off peak and 6ph in peak)

This is not even an exhaustive list of changes but you can see that just with the aforementioned 30bph, the routes I've mentioned will free up a further 16bph between Mater Hill and KGS/QSBS, arguably the most congested part of the busway network.
Buranda is rightfully being extended (as has UQ Lakes) to keep up with the additional buses. As for your problem with KGS, idk what to tell you man it seems like it works pretty well for most commuters.

Time will only tell.  Much more to be done to make the bus network legible, direct, frequent and fast. PT is at 6% and simply making a handful of changes is not going to get us to 25-30%.

I look at most of the routes remaining on the map and scratch my head as to why they exist. I can only assume to meet a coverage target. Very little cross-town or direct connections.  I can see why the BUZ are popular.

We all know what needs to be done. Just run more services during off-peak and weekends. Simpler network, BUZ down main arterials and BRT metro on the main axes and busways.

PT is provided for about 20 hours per day. Peak hours are only about 4 hours of those, or about 20%.

The majority of trips, both car and PT are happening *outside* of peak and so that growth needs to come from off-peak, evenings and weekends where there isn't a congestion-based case.

That's where you're going to get mode shift.