RAIL - Back On Track Forum

Quote from: Redrient on October 04, 2024, 08:10:46 AM

Quote from: HappyTrainGuy on October 03, 2024, 23:29:38 PMTo be honest nothing is going to happen for 10-15 years

Given the weight of history, I of course have low-to-no expectations of anything really materialising for a real Toowoomba public transport connection unless Inland Rail exists. As you say, one would have to be delusional to seriously think such a thing would happen  .

4,000 passengers/day does sound a bit low to me, when considering the population of Toowoomba, volume of daily traffic on the Warrego, increasing population catchment around Laidley (albeit north of the highway) and a university that could become commutable from the Ipswich region. Maybe they think everyone will just keep driving; which is probably a fair assumption when both major sides of the political fence are focused on roads, roads and more roads.

Well this is the assumption-based "Predict and Provide "planning that has us at 90% of trips by motor vehicle.  What they should do it identify the # they wnat to be travelling and plan form there.

Just having a read of the summary report.

QuoteKey benefits of Option 2: allows for the entire journey between Toowoomba and Brisbane to be completed by rail with a travel time comparable to travel by car.

This is a good outcome. 18 services per day suggests that it might be an hourly train with perhaps a few extras put on during AM or PM peak periods. If the journey time is comparable to car it probably won't be rapid though.

QuoteThe forecast demand for all options assessed is modest, which reflects the lower population levels in the corridor between Toowoomba and Ipswich. The study found that all options assessed had a very high capital cost with a relatively low benefit-to-cost ratio. Improving the economic case for the project, along with wider benefits, would require further exploration in the future.

Again we need to decide in the short to medium term, whether we can use a Translink-subsidised coach option which has a much less intense capital cost. TMR has subsidised Airtrain and planes, so we should not accept the argument that they don't fund private/commercial coach operators. Toowoomba Regional Council could also contribute to the service.

 

Quote from: #Metro on October 04, 2024, 14:54:23 PMJust having a read of the summary report.

QuoteKey benefits of Option 2: allows for the entire journey between Toowoomba and Brisbane to be completed by rail with a travel time comparable to travel by car.

This is a good outcome. 18 services per day suggests that it might be an hourly train with perhaps a few extras put on during AM or PM peak periods. If the journey time is comparable to car it probably won't be rapid though.

Sorry but it's nothing other than a fancy puff piece that will fade into the abyss. "Oh but they said..." so what. Plenty of "studies" have said similar things in the past. The best example of this is the quad 160kph alignment Caboolture to Gympie. How's that working out... Kawana used to have signs up in the 90's advertising how many daily trains there would be. The only thing that has changed was the signs were taken down and a hospital built there The above study/report/whatever you want to call it is so vague and full of holes you can't take it seriously especially when a large section is still dependent on another provider who may delay their project for another decade or change their own alignment due to federal funding at that time. Who knows double stacking my end at Toowoomba by the time the line is under construction.

Quote from: #Metro on October 04, 2024, 14:54:23 PMJust having a read of the summary report.

QuoteKey benefits of Option 2: allows for the entire journey between Toowoomba and Brisbane to be completed by rail with a travel time comparable to travel by car.

This is a good outcome. 18 services per day suggests that it might be an hourly train with perhaps a few extras put on during AM or PM peak periods. If the journey time is comparable to car it probably won't be rapid though.

QuoteThe forecast demand for all options assessed is modest, which reflects the lower population levels in the corridor between Toowoomba and Ipswich. The study found that all options assessed had a very high capital cost with a relatively low benefit-to-cost ratio. Improving the economic case for the project, along with wider benefits, would require further exploration in the future.

Again we need to decide in the short to medium term, whether we can use a Translink-subsidised coach option which has a much less intense capital cost. TMR has subsidised Airtrain and planes, so we should not accept the argument that they don't fund private/commercial coach operators. Toowoomba Regional Council could also contribute to the service.

 

As the inland rail design is going back to the drawing board, it may be worth investigating new twin tunnels rather than single track sharing tunnels as previously proposed. Especially when they are proposing up 18 services a day, it could conflict with freight movements, being built as one single track. I also think patronage would be a lot higher than 4000 passengers a day, due to rapid urban expansion West of Ipswich.

And there is the conundrum. No one knows anything. Too many variables. Double stacking to the port? Double stacked to AR? Double stacked to Ebezener is now the plan which begs the question why would southern operators bother running any double stacking such as PN? SCT has operations to the east of Ebezener on the existing line so they need a second facility? Why not have ARTC divert inland rail and all funding Toowoomba-BNE to a new link and double stacking to Gladstone where existing operators could be enticed to link up their own network?? If you want to get freight to BNE transfer at Toowoomba. And no need for expensive tunnels either. That then screws over your passenger network design.

Am i correct in saying that there are only 8 bridges that need to be modified between Acacia Ridge and POB?
Surely doing rail trenches that drop a couple of meters to get under each bridge is cheaper than some crazy 60km long freight tunnel?

Forget the bridges. You have to get under the ohle before you even get to Dutton Park. To scale back costs double stacking now ends at Ebezener instead of AR.

Quote from: verbatim9 on October 04, 2024, 17:33:08 PM

Quote from: #Metro on October 04, 2024, 14:54:23 PMJust having a read of the summary report.

QuoteKey benefits of Option 2: allows for the entire journey between Toowoomba and Brisbane to be completed by rail with a travel time comparable to travel by car.

This is a good outcome. 18 services per day suggests that it might be an hourly train with perhaps a few extras put on during AM or PM peak periods. If the journey time is comparable to car it probably won't be rapid though.

QuoteThe forecast demand for all options assessed is modest, which reflects the lower population levels in the corridor between Toowoomba and Ipswich. The study found that all options assessed had a very high capital cost with a relatively low benefit-to-cost ratio. Improving the economic case for the project, along with wider benefits, would require further exploration in the future.

Again we need to decide in the short to medium term, whether we can use a Translink-subsidised coach option which has a much less intense capital cost. TMR has subsidised Airtrain and planes, so we should not accept the argument that they don't fund private/commercial coach operators. Toowoomba Regional Council could also contribute to the service.

 

As the inland rail design is going back to the drawing board, it may be worth investigating new twin tunnels rather than single track sharing tunnels as previously proposed. Especially when they are proposing up 18 services a day, it could conflict with freight movements, being built as one single track. I also think patronage would be a lot higher than 4000 passengers a day, due to rapid urban expansion West of Ipswich.

I also believe they will need to build an interchange terminal around Toowoomba on the new line to reconfigure the double stacked freight trains single stack trains and have them electrically hauled to the Port of Brisbane. This is in line with industry insiders, residents enroute, and political advocacy.

Quote from: verbatim9 on October 04, 2024, 20:05:58 PM

Quote from: verbatim9 on October 04, 2024, 17:33:08 PM

Quote from: #Metro on October 04, 2024, 14:54:23 PMJust having a read of the summary report.

QuoteKey benefits of Option 2: allows for the entire journey between Toowoomba and Brisbane to be completed by rail with a travel time comparable to travel by car.

This is a good outcome. 18 services per day suggests that it might be an hourly train with perhaps a few extras put on during AM or PM peak periods. If the journey time is comparable to car it probably won't be rapid though.

QuoteThe forecast demand for all options assessed is modest, which reflects the lower population levels in the corridor between Toowoomba and Ipswich. The study found that all options assessed had a very high capital cost with a relatively low benefit-to-cost ratio. Improving the economic case for the project, along with wider benefits, would require further exploration in the future.

Again we need to decide in the short to medium term, whether we can use a Translink-subsidised coach option which has a much less intense capital cost. TMR has subsidised Airtrain and planes, so we should not accept the argument that they don't fund private/commercial coach operators. Toowoomba Regional Council could also contribute to the service.

 

As the inland rail design is going back to the drawing board, it may be worth investigating new twin tunnels rather than single track sharing tunnels as previously proposed. Especially when they are proposing up 18 services a day, it could conflict with freight movements, being built as one single track. I also think patronage would be a lot higher than 4000 passengers a day, due to rapid urban expansion West of Ipswich.

I also believe they will need to build an interchange terminal around Toowoomba on the new line to reconfigure the double stacked freight trains single stack trains and have them electrically hauled to the Port of Brisbane. This is in line with industry insiders, residents enroute, and political advocacy.

Urgh. None of that is true so please stop with the bullsh%t.

Double stacking is now planned to terminate at Ebenezer instead of Acacia Ridge. That gives the ARTC 2 options. One. Continue via Kagaru to the existing interstate line (this allows a direct connection to Aurizon/SCT/PN facilities). Two. Cut funding and have freight continue via existing tracks/Corinda. This means new facilities must be built for all operators regardless of what existing facilities they have on either gauge network. This is a deterrent to every operator and those wishing to break into the market.

PN has shown intention for building a facility in Toowoomba but it's dependent on what industry insiders actually want. And that's a Gladstone connection. Not a POB connection. However that's not what political insiders want. If there is no Kagaru connection it's unlikely PN will set up shop in Toowoomba. Everyone is walking on egg shells all because of the feds/ARTC.

Changing from double stack to single stack is also another deterrent mostly from time constraints and additional staff.

Electrification is not and has not been a part of it simply because it makes no economical sense to do so. Interstate trains won't be coming from electrified territory so why would they be electric trains. Same with Queensland trains. No real insider would agree that electrification was in line.

Quote from: RowBro on October 03, 2024, 17:46:35 PM

Quote from: verbatim9 on October 03, 2024, 17:21:52 PM18 services a day may equate to services every 90 mins with services every 45 mins during peak. It could also equate to services running every 60 mins? Operating hours from 0500 - midnight across 7 days?

It would be infinitely better than Gympie North 

18 services a day would cater for the larger population. I don't think Gympie itself is a high growth area, but it's likely to get more services over time as well.

Quote from: verbatim9 on October 05, 2024, 16:33:20 PM

Quote from: RowBro on October 03, 2024, 17:46:35 PM

Quote from: verbatim9 on October 03, 2024, 17:21:52 PM18 services a day may equate to services every 90 mins with services every 45 mins during peak. It could also equate to services running every 60 mins? Operating hours from 0500 - midnight across 7 days?

It would be infinitely better than Gympie North 

18 services a day would cater for the larger population. I don't think Gympie itself is a high growth area, but it's likely to get more services over time as well.

But still very dependent on what inland rail wants to build. It's pointless speculating what services would be if inland rail can't even commit to infrastructure plans. If the line goes through Kagaru it will be double stack height. If they force a gauge transfer at Rosewood why not just run services via the existing interstate line. No need for new facilities, additional rollingstock or additional restrictions on the QR corridor. Only Aurizon goes to the port. So why would they transfer gauge, remarshall, crew change and then head to the port? Why would SCT do the same but only to access their existing facility? If the ARTC can't commit to a corridor that won't cost a fortune why would operators show interest and in turn why would ARTC want to spend money on a Toowoomba-Brisbane connection. As I've mentioned Gladstone is a real option for industry insiders as you can eliminate a lot of problems with the Brisbane area for freight. It also opens up options for freight operators eg PN using the existing corridor for Brisbane traffic while travelling via Toowoomba for northern Queensland. PN could build a new facility at Gladstone and have transfers done there instead. Chuck interstate containers on the back. Quick drop off and pick up and off it goes to Brisbane while the interstate train gets marshalled and sent south via Inland rail. That changes the entire business operations as you don't have to deal with brisbane, narrow gauge-truck-standard gauge transfer procedure and existing interstate line restrictions. That's attractive for freight operators but not so much for passenger operators.

Is there any reason the 539 couldn't be extended to Toowoomba? Probably not an ideal solution, but for something intermediate it would be pretty cheap. I believe 539s are already operated by seatbelt-equipped coaches (happy to be corrected if I'm wrong, though), so should be no issues there.

Not outside the realms of possibility I should think.  The issue will be that it's a slow trip and would fare poorly against the coaches that don't need a subsidy.

Agreed, but it still might present a viable option for some travellers, like the time-rich but money-poor, or those who don't drive and live within walking distance of the Translink route catchment, but not the coach catchment.

I'm not talking about 4 bph or anything, but maybe extending the current 539 to Toowoomba (except for, perhaps, the Laidley short workings.

I recall it or something similar was broached before but the shift length was restricting or something like that.

Quotemight present a viable option for some travellers

In some respects I feel like this is coded language for "I cant think of a scenario for using this, its something for other people"

Like its 1h 10 mins Roma St to Rosewood, then another 1h 40 mins to Helidon on 539, and then getting up to Toowoomba is going to take another 20 according to Google Maps driving directions.

It's over 3 hours, nobody is going to want to use a service like that.

^ have you ever been on the 539?  It is in fact well used for local transport considering the ramshackle timetable.  I reckon it would be useful if it did go up to Toowoomba, not so much for a Brisbane to Toowoomba commute, but local transport from Rosewood and towns further out, to and from Toowoomba.

[Bus Route 539 - Helidon to Rosewood https://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=14664.0 ]

^Agreed re local usage.
Would it not make more sense (from a timekeeping/shift scheduling perspective) to have a Toowoomba, Withcott and to Gatton local route as part of the Toowoomba network?

Quote from: Gazza on October 08, 2024, 09:31:24 AM^Agreed re local usage.
Would it not make more sense (from a timekeeping/shift scheduling perspective) to have a Toowoomba, Withcott and to Gatton local route as part of the Toowoomba network?

Could work!   

Quote from: Gazza on October 08, 2024, 08:47:04 AM

Quotemight present a viable option for some travellers

In some respects I feel like this is coded language for "I cant think of a scenario for using this, its something for other people"

Like its 1h 10 mins Roma St to Rosewood, then another 1h 40 mins to Helidon on 539, and then getting up to Toowoomba is going to take another 20 according to Google Maps driving directions.

It's over 3 hours, nobody is going to want to use a service like that.

It isn't a long term "solution" or anywhere near as popular as rail, but I'd probably use a service like this over Greyhound crap. Especially if it was upgraded to a legible timetable (maybe hourly is asking too much but even every 2 hours is "legible").

There's a big difference in perception once it's a public bus you can just jump on.

It also sets the stage for pushing trains further out even if the trip over the range stays by bus for a very long time.

Murrays buses do Toowoomba-Brisbane in two hours 20 mins.

The one arriving in the morning peak takes 2h20.

The others do it in 1h45.

Pretty sure they use Milton Road between Toowong and Roma Street.

If Murrays and Greyhound were accredited to use the busway and were able to incur the Legacy Way toll economically, it might speed things up using the M5 and the INB.  It would be less direct and full of loop-de-loops (like the western suburbs expresses and what the Maroon Cityglider does at Buranda), but it would be substantially less congested in that last / first bit.  Given the state of the M5 between Toowong and the M7 I don't know if that would actually make much difference in peak.

Quote from: Gazza on October 08, 2024, 08:47:04 AM

Quotemight present a viable option for some travellers

In some respects I feel like this is coded language for "I cant think of a scenario for using this, its something for other people"

Like its 1h 10 mins Roma St to Rosewood, then another 1h 40 mins to Helidon on 539, and then getting up to Toowoomba is going to take another 20 according to Google Maps driving directions.

It's over 3 hours, nobody is going to want to use a service like that.

Not at all. I don't expect anyone (or very few) people to use it to travel from Brisbane to Toowoomba, but it's almost certainly viable for people travelling from the Lockyer Valley <-> Toowoomba, and possibly the western parts of Ipswich.

Toowoomba Chronicle --> Toowoomba to Brisbane passenger rail business case reveals best option delivers 'modest' results as report silently released $

QuoteThe Labor government silently dropped a $15 million rail feasibility report as it entered caretaker mode, which was announced years ago and revealed travel times similar to a bus.

The best option for a Toowoomba passenger rail line will likely take longer than a car or a bus, relies on the contentious construction of the bloated Inland Rail, and has a "low benefit-to-cost ratio" for taxpayers.

That's according to the $15m business case the state government silently released before entering caretaker mode last month – more than five years after it was first funded. ...

^ took a while ... 

Quote from: ozbob on October 03, 2024, 11:15:06 AMToowoomba to Brisbane Passenger Rail

https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/projects/toowoomba-to-brisbane-passenger-rail-strategic-business-case

Current status

The Australian and Queensland governments have finalised the Strategic Business Case which included the first 2 stages of the Queensland Government's Project Assessment Framework, namely the Strategic Assessment of Service Requirements and Preliminary Evaluation. 

The Toowoomba to Brisbane Passenger Rail Summary Report outlines the finding of the Strategic Business Case and next steps.

Report > https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/_/media/c9d86df828a3472d916ecf0dcdf9283f.pdf?rev=d88aaf076c1144878369db29ec906e31&sc_lang=en&hash=E34DAABB48D7478BDAB9F86A0BAFBACB

Hard hitting when they say it will be slower than a car or bus.
With the improvements they have been doing to roads, a lot of trains are slower than cars now though.
In fact, isn't the proposed sunshine coast train line going to be slower than cars and buses, depending on where on the line you travel to?
I wonder if this is some sort of criteria that needs to be factored in. Should they be aiming for higher speed to improve BCR, or does it become exponentially expensive to add more speed?

Incorporating Toowoomba into the Translink network and integrating long-distance buses/coaches

So from the report, the travel time for the improved train will be 130 minutes, or 2 hours 10 minutes (Roma St - Toowoomba). It will be standard speed rail. But the current bus/coach is already ~ 20 minutes faster than this.

Something we can do in the window of now to medium term:

1. Incorporate Toowoomba into the Translink zone network and ticketing system
2. Subsidise buses/coaches between Toowoomba and Brisbane (you can have 50c fares on it if you want)
3. Fund additional infill services (can be a trial). TMR and Toowoomba Regional Council could contribute funds for that.

The advantages of this approach are that:

- Doesn't preclude a rail option being done in the future
- No waiting for an indefinite period with dependencies on federal funding, inland rail, heavy infrastructure works
- Service-based approach, so low risk of a large cost blowout or complications (as seen with infra projects and Inland Rail project).
- Minimal planning/studies required (avoids EIS, flood modelling, geotech investigations etc).
- Builds patronage
- Low or no new infrastructure required to achieve it
- about 20 minutes faster than the rail option scenario
- Probably deliverable and achievable within 2 years
- Very low cost compared to new infrastructure, and likely much better BCR/NPV business case indicators
- Option to extend some selected services or all services to Wellcamp Airport, connecting Toowoomba to Wellcamp Airport with public transport. Is it the case there is currently no public transport there at all?

Dealing with objections

TMR doesn't fund commercial coach operators. There has been some suggestion that "TMR doesn't fund that" because the bus operator is private. This is a distraction. TMR is already funding privately operated planes to fly around regional Queensland for the same purpose of regional connection, and both VIC and NSW fund a coach network that integrates with long-distance rail networks (V/Line and NSW Trains).

In addition to this, urban bus services outside of BCC are all private operators, as is the BCC ferry and tram operator (G Link). If there is a blocker reason for not funding it, that reason cannot be some policy of not funding a commercial coach operator.

Funding. Financially, subsidising bus/coach services is also a good approach as if Toowoomba Regional Council gets on board (and possibly other councils such as Lockyer Valley) then that funding responsibility can be shared.

Congestion. Would only impact peak services, which could be dealt with by re-introducing the Coronation Drive bus lane in peak hours (this would also speed up BCC buses as well). As the bus/coach is already 20 minutes faster, there is also buffer there for congestion effects versus a train.

The next step here would be to do a study similar to the rail one, but looking at the bus/coach option.



Notes
Greyhound Buses
https://www.greyhound.com.au/book-a-ticket/availability?origin=TWB&destination=BNE

TMR Long distance Air services
https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/travel-and-transport/long-distance-air-services

NSW Trains Regional Coach & Rail Network
https://transportnsw.info/regional-network-map

PTV Regional Coach and Train Network
https://www.ptv.vic.gov.au/assets/PDFs/Maps/Network-maps/52a677a2a3/PTV_Regional-Train-Coach_Network_Map_2017.pdf

Question on Notice  No. 1216  Asked on 13 October 2021 (gives an idea of the ballpark of what subsidies per passenger currently are for regional PT services)
https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/tableoffice/questionsanswers/2021/1216-2021.pdf

TMR already fund/subsidise greyhound buses across Queensland. We've already had this discussion previously on Toowoomba-Brisbane services. Nothing new about that.

One problem is going to be fare equipment and fare collecting. Tickets will have to be purchased online prior. If you want to contract outside greyhound that's your biggest problem. You need an operator that has buses that can run the route/distance while also meeting compliance. That rules a lot of operators out. There are many operators out there that can do that service. KBL, CBL, Thompsons etc but they don't have any infrastructure out that way.

NSW buslink and vline spawned out of very different circumstances. Railway lines and population centres are different so sizing varies along with the amount of towns. They shut down railway lines and put a bus in place. We just shut the line down with no replacement. Here that allowed towns to dwindle along with industry to downsize/relocate elsewhere. Similar to railway lines that allowed them to establish their own bus network and infrastructure overtime. To do that now from scratch simply would be too expensive both in nsw or in qld. Even if you just want to do a small network you need buses, drivers and fleet facilities. All cost preventive for such a minor amount of passenger traffic.

Also why all the bcc comparisons? You reference the most obscure things to make a paragraph or two that effectively has to no relevance on the topic. Buses all across the state are private operators but fall under translink funding. Strathpine, magnetic island, Caboolture, Townsville, cairns, Rockhampton, Gympie, Sunshine Coast, Redcliffe, good coast, Logan, Ipswich, Maryborough, Mackay... all private operators with a translink contract. Moreton bay council area has BCC, Thompsons, KBL, CBL and HBL providing them services.

Toowoomba is already part of the translink network.

What is everyone's obsession with Wellcamp? Why does every train or bus for Toowoomba have to go via Wellcamp? It's no where near town. Wellcamp doesn't warrant a pt service. It's similar to arguing the cruise terminal needs a buz but the cruise terminal actually has more people using it than the airport does. More private flights/small aircraft depart than large passenger aircraft do. Shuttle services are already in place if you want to get into town/home.
https://www.wellcamp.com.au/passengers/fly/flight-status/

The difference with the other services the State subsidises is that they wouldn't be commercially viable on their own or in the case of flights would be prohibitively expensive.  Many long distance bus services (most Greyhound services, the Premier service etc), certain ferries (eg to North Stradbroke) are self-sustaining without breaking a traveller's bank.

The pattern of settlement in Queensland is such that all the large population centres except Toowoomba happen to be either in SEQ or along the coastline between SEQ and Cairns, and the state is sufficiently big that it is better for a lot of people making intrastate journeys to just fly.

Estimating patronage: check out the difference between the result from the methodology used here on RBOT and TMR's. I got 0.91 million pax p.a. and TMR got 1.04 million pax.  

Estimation of Patronage Under a Set of Assumptions
https://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?msg=269602

Quote from: #MetroEstimation of Patronage Under a Set of Assumptions

Using a test value of PT=1% and a value of 175,000 for population...

(175,000/100) x 2 trips/day x 5 days/week x 52 weeks = 0.91 million pax/year.

This assumes 1750 daily boardings (e.g. towards Ipswich/Brisbane) at Toowoomba station.

More precise figures could be obtained by travel surveys and traffic surveys to determine how many people were already commuting by car.

TMR value 4,000 pax/day x 5 weekdays x 52 weeks = 1.04 million

Quote from: HTGTMR already fund/subsidise greyhound buses across Queensland. We've already had this discussion previously on Toowoomba-Brisbane services.

Do they subsidise the Toowoomba-Brisbane route? If not, why not?

Quote from: HTGOne problem is going to be fare equipment and fare collecting. Tickets will have to be purchased online prior. If you want to contract outside greyhound that's your biggest problem. You need an operator that has buses that can run the route/distance while also meeting compliance. That rules a lot of operators out. There are many operators out there that can do that service. KBL, CBL, Thompsons etc but they don't have any infrastructure out that way.

Is the fare/ticketing issue insurmountable? How do other states such as WA, VIC and NSW do it?

Quote from: HTGNSW buslink and vline spawned out of very different circumstances. Railway lines and population centres are different so sizing varies along with the amount of towns. They shut down railway lines and put a bus in place.... To do that now from scratch simply would be too expensive both in nsw or in qld. Even if you just want to do a small network you need buses, drivers and fleet facilities. All cost preventive for such a minor amount of passenger traffic.

Too expensive, as compared with what? TMR was just studying a railway line upgrade which would be orders of magnitude more expensive to deliver, and would also require paying for drivers, fleet facilities and vehicles. Indeed, whereas a coach would have 1 staff member, a train would have two, and possibly more for onboard service.

Quote from: HTGToowoomba is already part of the translink network.

Yes, with the recent 50c fares initiative, the Toowoomba fare zones are wiped out. But it's not part of the SEQ network map, and neither are the coach services Brisbane-Toowoomba, and they probably should be added.

Quote from: HTGWhat is everyone's obsession with Wellcamp? Why does every train or bus for Toowoomba have to go via Wellcamp? It's no where near town. Wellcamp doesn't warrant a pt service. It's similar to arguing the cruise terminal needs a buz

It's a private airport connection van that will cost an additional $20 and is not integrated PT. Comparison to providing a BUZ to the cruise terminal is an exaggeration, nobody is asking for HF levels of service, just a lifeline basic connection for a city of 173,000 residents.

Quote from: SurfRailThe difference with the other services the State subsidises is that they wouldn't be commercially viable on their own or in the case of flights would be prohibitively expensive.  Many long distance bus services (most Greyhound services, the Premier service etc), certain ferries (eg to North Stradbroke) are self-sustaining without breaking a traveller's bank.

A private operator that is not subsidised will provide only the commercially viable level of service and that will usually fall well short of the socially desired level of service / community expectations (cost, frequency, span). Airtrain is a good example of this problem.

Transport is the product, modes are just a means of delivering it. A subsidised operator between Brisbane and Toowoomba would be able to increase service levels from about 4 per day each way to 18, the same as the proposed train and charge a 50c fare rather than $35-40 fare. Patronage under that scenario will be far higher and the service much better overall IMO, and TMR could potentially deliver it within one election term.

Let's move things forward for PT to Toowoomba.

Wellcamp Airport Shuttle (from $20)
https://www.shuttlebugtbar.com.au/wellcamp-airport-shuttle

You would be better off allocating the proposed subsidies into stage one of the rail to Gatton, rather than subsidising buses to and from Toowoomba.

Quote from: SilverChased on October 20, 2024, 06:53:57 AMHard hitting when they say it will be slower than a car or bus.
With the improvements they have been doing to roads, a lot of trains are slower than cars now though.
In fact, isn't the proposed sunshine coast train line going to be slower than cars and buses, depending on where on the line you travel to?
I wonder if this is some sort of criteria that needs to be factored in. Should they be aiming for higher speed to improve BCR, or does it become exponentially expensive to add more speed?

Yes, aim for at least 90 mins.

If you have any decently fast rail to Gatton, it could then connect to a Greyhound to Toowoomba.
Why does the Greyhound need to depart from Roma St or wherever they go from now?

Quote from: verbatim9 on October 20, 2024, 09:56:58 AMYou would be better off allocating the proposed subsidies into stage one of the rail to Gatton, rather than subsidising buses to and from Toowoomba.

I suspect the tunnel through the Little Liverpool Range would be needed for service beyond Grandchester to be competitive. It's been a while since I looked at the speed boards and line diagrams, but I think the average speed through there is about 30kph on the current alignment. That being said, the proposed Inland Rail Tunnel in that section is not that long (850m) if it were to be built in isolation.

Quote from: SilverChasedIf you have any decently fast rail to Gatton, it could then connect to a Greyhound to Toowoomba. Why does the Greyhound need to depart from Roma St or wherever they go from now?

Great question SilverChased. The coach service can start wherever it is necessary and convenient to do so. When fast rail to Gatton begins, the route could be adjusted.

However, it is also necessary to consider the impact on customer journeys and experiences. Direct services are preferred in this case I suspect as an interchange would require adding additional time to the timetable (as one or the other connecting service could be delayed) and a transfer penalty (removing luggage from a train and then reloading it on to a coach). The passenger may have already changed from other services to get to Roma Street, so it is good to minimise these changes where possible.

The rail service TMR investigated is already 20 minutes slower than the existing coach service. Adding a connection at Gatton would probably add another 10-15 minutes dwell to get the connection and offload/reload the luggage.

Quote from: #Metro on October 20, 2024, 10:24:43 AM

Quote from: SilverChasedIf you have any decently fast rail to Gatton, it could then connect to a Greyhound to Toowoomba. Why does the Greyhound need to depart from Roma St or wherever they go from now?

Great question SilverChased. The coach service can start wherever it is necessary and convenient to do so. When fast rail to Gatton begins, the route could be adjusted.

However, it is also necessary to consider the impact on customer journeys and experiences. Direct services are preferred in this case I suspect as an interchange would require adding additional time to the timetable (as one or the other connecting service could be delayed) and a transfer penalty (removing luggage from a train and then reloading it on to a coach). The passenger may have already changed from other services to get to Roma Street, so it is good to minimise these changes where possible.

The rail service TMR investigated is already 20 minutes slower than the existing coach service. Adding a connection at Gatton would probably add another 10-15 minutes dwell to get the connection and offload/reload the luggage.

What do you mean offload luggage? We are talking commuter style trains here, which is the same situation and the Gold and Sunshine Coast when transfering to low floor buses. Secondly, I assume the services to Gatton would be rather quick with some tunnel, raised portions** and new track alignment, eliminating any transfer penalty.

**Low cost prefabricated elevated concrete bridge structures.

Yes, my comment was on the assumption the transfer penalty is more on the coach side, which is exactly the same as it would be now at Roma St (loading luggage) vs a train where you simply hop on. Being at Roma St pretty much assures people have travelled from somewhere else anyway.

My comment was also with the assumption that the service to Gatton is easier to speed up. Looking at the map, the proposed service appears to have alignment issues and loops after this point, which look quite difficult for a train to maintain speed at.

Quote from: #Metro on October 20, 2024, 09:40:52 AMA private operator that is not subsidised will provide only the commercially viable level of service and that will usually fall well short of the socially desired level of service / community expectations (cost, frequency, span). Airtrain is a good example of this problem.

Transport is the product, modes are just a means of delivering it. A subsidised operator between Brisbane and Toowoomba would be able to increase service levels from about 4 per day each way to 18, the same as the proposed train and charge a 50c fare rather than $35-40 fare. Patronage under that scenario will be far higher and the service much better overall IMO, and TMR could potentially deliver it within one election term.

Which is all fine, but at this point every dollar you are throwing at long distance coach services which already run without subsidy is a dollar you cannot throw at more worthy causes, like getting buses on the SEQ urban fringe to run on weekends - this is something you have made abundantly clear given the finite resources with which the state has to work.  Why is encouraging more people to sit on a coach for 2 hours more of a problem to solve, from the same budget, than getting a useful Sunday bus network within Toowoomba itself?

Quote from: SurfRailWhich is all fine, but at this point every dollar you are throwing at long distance coach services which already run without subsidy is a dollar you cannot throw at more worthy causes, like getting buses on the SEQ urban fringe to run on weekends - this is something you have made abundantly clear given the finite resources with which the state has to work.  Why is encouraging more people to sit on a coach for 2 hours more of a problem to solve, from the same budget, than getting a useful Sunday bus network within Toowoomba itself?

Thanks for the question SurfRail.

Deciding the priority of service upgrades to Toowoomba versus other public transport enhancements is a matter for Parliament, and you are right that our wishlist for improvement projects is long. My main point is that the recent TMR report considered only rail improvements without evaluating other modes like enhanced coach services. This omission is significant because upgrading existing coach services could improve regional connectivity more effectively, faster, and more cheaply.

A thorough investigation should consider both rail and coach options, as well as near-term solutions in addition to medium- and long-term ones.

According to the TMR report, rail improvements would be costlier, slower than current coach services by about 20 minutes, dependent on uncertain inland rail upgrades, be deliverable only after a long lag (mid-to-long term), and attract around 1 million passengers annually. In contrast, integrating regional coach services into the Translink network offers a faster, more cost-effective solution that can be implemented sooner (within one term of office).

Funding could come from reallocating existing resources, such as revisiting the 50-cent fares initiative valued at $300 million per year. Enhancing coach services to Toowoomba would cost just a fraction of this amount, with potential additional support from the Toowoomba Regional Council. It would also bring us closer into line with NSW, VIC, WA and SA which offer integrated comprehensive regional PT networks (coach and rail) that are subsidised.

While improving the local bus network in Toowoomba is important, it doesn't address the need for enhanced regional connectivity. By considering all viable options—not just rail—we can optimise resource allocation to improve both regional services like the Toowoomba coach and urban bus services across SEQ, as you've mentioned.

I could be wrong, but I believe the NSW and Vic buses are ticketed like regional trains vs urban service type ticketing. Not insurmountable, but that would be how they get around having smartcard equipment onboard.