RAIL - Back On Track Forum

The Sunshine Coast will get CoastConnect, which is bus improvements, Adelaide has GO zones, Canberra has Blue, Red Rapid services and Brisbane has the BUZ.

I think there is scope for BRT on the Gold Coast and it can be up and running while we wait for Light Rail or other modes to extend.

The Gold Coast has some nice fast arterial roads good for CityGlider like BRT services. So, post your ideas... will draw up a map...

What's the main centre out at Nerang- Nerang Fair or Centro Nerang?

For discussion purposes, here is the set I suggested in the Commonwealth Games thread:

Quote from: SurfRail on May 14, 2011, 20:41:28 PM

Quote from: Simon on May 14, 2011, 20:13:27 PMGiven that the capacity is likely to increase considerably on the Gold Coast, is there a need for a bus upgrade in the meantime to try to bring in some more patronage to fill the trams?

Absolutely, and I echo TTs sentiments about the feeder network.

We need a bigger bus fleet than present to make the feeders work properly in 2014, even with the withdrawal of most of the bus routes from Pac Fair to Southport. There also needs to be a lead-in and implementation plan, which I am not seeing at the moment.

Even 100 extra buses would probably be enough to stimulate capacity, which is 25 a year until opening or about 2 a month - perfectly manageable with a bit of willpower.  Surfside's new Coomera depot due to open shortly will have enough room for about 180 at maximum capacity, so when taken with the 2 current depots there is comfortably space for just over 500 buses, more if you get a bit squeezy.

I expect there are 4 big problems to this happening quickly

• absense of funding, either in an absolute sense or because it is being misallocated;
• a perception that GCRT will "fix" everything and that there is no need to do anything beforehand;
• the fact we have had a big fleet replacement and modernisation from 2006-2010 which included withdrawal of the vast majority of minibuses; and
• the fact that Bustech - Surfside's sole supplier and a related entity - is busy building buses for everybody else at present.

I think they really should be aiming for 10-15 minute headways on the following bus corridors once the system is running, which would form the basis of our core frequent network.

• Southport to Paradise Point (current 706);
• Southport to Nerang to Broadbeach (the proposed 740, which is more or less the same as the 'inland' line I was talking about earlier) - combined with the withdrawal of the 745;
• Broadbeach to Robina Rail via Varsity Lakes;
• Broadbeach to Runaway Bay via Ashmore/Benowa, Griffith Uni and Harbour Town (more or less current 738 with further extension);
• Robina to Burleigh (pre-recent changes version of the 765, straight down Christine Ave); and
• Helensvale to Griffith Uni (current 709).

For south of Broadbeach, I know they are assessing a few options

• Single 5 minute frequency bus route operating via current Route 700/706 (ie diverting into The Pines);
  
• Single 5 minute frequency bus route operating via current Route 700 only; or
• Combination of the above - 2 route numbers.  Probably 50/50 during the day and withdraw the diverted route from late night to early morning.  The diverted route would be important because it would be the best connection for the railway in this stretch.

Absolute minimum for off-peak service anywhere on the Coast should be 30 minute headways, except for Route 748 which can probably do with an hourly service.  (The section between Robina and Bond Uni needs to be separated from the rural bit.)  We should also be pushing to takeover the Tweed bus routes from Transport NSW, particularly with the big development going it at Cobaki which they will have no interest in servicing properly.

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 09:48:32 AM
What's the main centre out at Nerang- Nerang Fair or Centro Nerang?

Nerang is a bit of a problem child.  The "business" centre is the axis starting on Southport-Nerang Road at the council chambers and stretching west to the Price Street area and probably as far as Nerang Fair (the area that is also known locally as "Petro's Corner").  The 2 bigger shopping centres are Nerang River Plaza and Nerang Mall, which are isolated from this area, on the other side of the river.  The station is also isolated from both spots, on the other side of the M1 and a light industrial precinct.

I have grappled with local feeder routes in the Nerang/Clearwater/Highland Park/Carrara area for a long time (being a resident) and still haven't come up with anything really satisfactory, but I think the trunk route I have suggested would be a good one.

My preference would be to keep it simple.  Current Route 20A from Southport to Nerang Station, mated to current Route 745 to Broadbeach and terminate there.  Possibly serving Jupiters and interchanging at the Convention Centre rather than forcing a transfer at Broadbeach South, for what is a very short trip in there that would need to be by bus anyway.

There is also an issue with services from the southern part of the area to Broadbeach.  It would be much faster and more attractive to continue to have a service operating down Nielsens Road for most of the area than forcing a transfer at Nerang, which is out of the way and in another fare zone.  There is also no other real opportunity to interchange with the 745 until you get to Nerang-Broadbeach Road itself, whereupon the 20/20A follow exactly the same route to Broadbeach.  Possibly a separate service is required from Broadbeach, which operates directly down Nielsens Rd and Alexander Drive and then somehow back to Nerang Rail, preferably taking in Centro Nerang.  

Feeder routes could cover the off-line sections currently on the 20/20A, such as Boonooroo Park (in which I live), Pappas Way and the area near the Nerang High School on the 20, and the southern area of Highland Park on the 20A.  Highland Park in particular needs improvement, as it is under-served both geographically and in terms of frequency.  The other routes which provide service in this area are the 748 and 21 - neither is brilliant.

I'd like to see what suggestions people can come up with...

Thanks. I'll see if I can draw these up...

Some sketchy ideas so far...

Rapid Transit #1

Varsity Lakes Train Station to Southport
via Christine Ave, Bermuda St, Southport-Burleigh Road, Bundall Road, Ferry Rd
and Australia Fair LRT interchange

~ 20 km in length

Much of this is probably the 747 route already. Boost frequency to BUZ levels, wide
stop spacing and more legible bus stops. As more people come online traffic light priority,
resume median for exclusive bus lanes.

Rapid Transit #2

Southport to Nerang
via McLaren Road, Southport-Nerang Road, Queen St and Australia Fair LRT interchange

~ 15 kilometres

Rapid Transit #3

Pacific Fair to Paradise Point
via Nerang Broadbeach Road, Ashmore Road, Benowa Road,
Wardoo Street, Government Road, Hollywell Road, Morala Ave, Runaway Bay Shopping Centre,
The Esplanade and Scooter Ave

~ 24 kilometres

Express Bus
Helensvale Rail Rocket
via Australia Fair, Smith Street Motorway, Pacific Motorway and Helensvale Rail.

One of my gripes about going to the Gold Coast is there doesn't seem to be anything fast between Southport and Helensvale and it isn't obvious which bus is the "fast" bus to get straight to Australia Fair.

QuoteSouthport to Paradise Point (current 706);

Support this one.

Route 706
http://translink.com.au/travel-information/services-and-timetables/buses/route-706

With the LRT going in, this route could begin at Southport and maybe be extended all the way up to the end of the Esplanade at Paradise point. Why does the route just die at the Paradise Pt shops? So extend to make it more useful.

QuoteSouthport to Nerang to Broadbeach (the proposed 740, which is more or less the same as the 'inland' line I was talking about earlier) - combined with the withdrawal of the 745;

With the LRT going in, my thought were to just run a frequent service from Nerang via Southport Nerang Road to Australia Fair in more or less a straight line. They can probably change to LRT at Australia Fair. This is why I like the LRT on the core, it is going to make the bus network so much simpler and easier to route.

QuoteBroadbeach to Runaway Bay via Ashmore/Benowa, Griffith Uni and Harbour Town (more or less current 738 with further extension);

Hmm.. I wouldn't support this one as rapid tranist. It spends a lot of its time on slow streets and winding around.

As an alternative, I'd extend a bus from Coomera Rail, via the Motorway and then down through hope island road, olsen avenue, griffith uni, back on olsen avenue, down currumburra rd (quite steep!), then along Ashmore Road to Pacific Fair via Southport-Burleigh Road

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 10:35:03 AM
Rapid Transit #1

Varsity Lakes Train Station to Southport
via Christine Ave, Bermuda St, Southport-Burleigh Road, Bundall Road, Ferry Rd
and Australia Fair LRT interchange

~ 20 km in length

My preference would be to connect Southport to the denser areas around Varsity Lakes, which are actually on the other side of the lake from Christine Ave in that stretch.  I think your route is otherwise very sound, but I would send it along Varsity Parade, through Bond Uni and along Cottesloe before rejoining your proposed route.

You could provide a small interchange along Christine Avenue to connect to a Burleigh-Robina service and get a network effect going.

Bus stop infrastructure is also needed at the Super Q Centre, as there is no way to disembark or board the 747 to get there at present.

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 10:35:03 AM
Rapid Transit #2

Southport to Nerang
via McLaren Road, Southport-Nerang Road, Queen St and Australia Fair LRT interchange

~ 15 kilometres

Probably a good one too.  There are certain efficiencies in linking this to the Nerang-Broadbeach Road one.

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 10:35:03 AM
Rapid Transit #3

Pacific Fair to Paradise Point
via Nerang Broadbeach Road, Ashmore Road, Benowa Road,
Wardoo Street, Government Road, Hollywell Road, Morala Ave, Runaway Bay Shopping Centre,
The Esplanade and Scooter Ave
~ 24 kilometres

The present network design of the 706 seems to work OK, so I would keep that feeding into Southport and leave any other services to terminate at Runaway Bay.  If any route continues to Paradise Point, the terminus is at the Boat Harbour and is more easily accessed from the south than looping around through the narrower streets to the north, all of which are in walking distance.

As a possible variation – feed into Harbour Town for LRT connection, then up Oxley Drive?

Where do you plan to put this one between Pac Fair and Ashmore Road?  If it is roughly along the 738, I would support it.

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 10:35:03 AM
Express Bus
Helensvale Rail Rocket
via Australia Fair, Smith Street Motorway, Pacific Motorway and Helensvale Rail.
One of my gripes about going to the Gold Coast is there doesn't seem to be anything fast between Southport and Helensvale and it isn't obvious which bus is the "fast" bus to get straight to Australia Fair.

Me likey, although this service could afford a very quick diversion into Griffith Uni which would give it a nice patronage spike while there is no LRT to Helensvale.

I would also add one from Nerang Rail to Surfers via Ross Street, Ashmore Road and Isle of Capri and promote that as being the fastest way there.

For that matter, I would add another rapid route – the 715, in basically its current form.  Withdraw the 703 and use the resources to help pay for it.

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 10:56:41 AM

QuoteBroadbeach to Runaway Bay via Ashmore/Benowa, Griffith Uni and Harbour Town (more or less current 738 with further extension);

Hmm.. I wouldn't support this one as rapid tranist. It spends a lot of its time on slow streets and winding around.

It is surprisingly well patronised though, and you can iron out the Benowa section by going straight up Currumburra Road instead of its current path.  Of all the routes added to the network in the last decade, it is one of the more important ones because it fulfils a definite cross-town function.

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 10:45:23 AM

QuoteSouthport to Nerang to Broadbeach (the proposed 740, which is more or less the same as the 'inland' line I was talking about earlier) - combined with the withdrawal of the 745;

With the LRT going in, my thought were to just run a frequent service from Nerang via Southport Nerang Road to Australia Fair in more or less a straight line. They can probably change to LRT at Australia Fair. This is why I like the LRT on the core, it is going to make the bus network so much simpler and easier to route.

Possibly we are at cross purposes?  The 740 wouldn't include the Surfers Paradise component I mentioned in the LRT discussion, so wouldn't be a loop line - more like a < , with Nerang at the apex.  What you've described above it pretty much the northern leg of the < .

Quote
Possibly we are at cross purposes?  The 740 wouldn't include the Surfers Paradise component I mentioned in the LRT discussion, so wouldn't be a loop line - more like a < , with Nerang at the apex.  What you've described above it pretty much the northern leg of the < .

Oh, OK. Well just for legibility, I would split the two into two routes with different numbers unless you wanted to through-route.

Proper bus stations and stops are going to be key. Maybe there should be a proper bus station and bus stops out at Nerang.

Quote
My preference would be to connect Southport to the denser areas around Varsity Lakes, which are actually on the other side of the lake from Christine Ave in that stretch.  I think your route is otherwise very sound, but I would send it along Varsity Parade, through Bond Uni and along Cottesloe before rejoining your proposed route.

I can see this... but I think as a compromise you could get a Robina-Gold Coast Highway route ramped up in frequency and just place an interchange point there at the intersection of Southport-Burleigh Rd and Cottesloe Drive. The core frequent network is just to provide fast arteries that you can have the more local routes interconnect and interchange with... and ultimately I am thinking as the train line inches towards the border, this RT route will be incrementally extended down Bermuda Ave to finally end at (Reedy Creek?) train station.

So far it looks like we might have the beginnings of a basic network going...

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 11:15:11 AM

Quote
Possibly we are at cross purposes?  The 740 wouldn't include the Surfers Paradise component I mentioned in the LRT discussion, so wouldn't be a loop line - more like a < , with Nerang at the apex.  What you've described above it pretty much the northern leg of the < .

Oh, OK. Well just for legibility, I would split the two into two routes with different numbers unless you wanted to through-route.

Proper bus stations and stops are going to be key. Maybe there should be a proper bus station and bus stops out at Nerang.

I think the changeover point would have to be Nerang Rail itself.  12 bus bays, only 2 of which are in regular use... pity they aren't provisioning other newer stations with this sort of interchange capacity.  (Kippa-Ring initial designs look dreadful in that respect, and virtually every other state leaves us for dead.)

QuoteI think the changeover point would have to be Nerang Rail itself.  12 bus bays, only 2 of which are in regular use... pity they aren't provisioning other newer stations with this sort of interchange capacity.  (Kippa-Ring initial designs look dreadful in that respect, and virtually every other state leaves us for dead.)

Yeah. Station positioning matters too- it should be near a main road so that you don't have to deviate the bus too much to get to it. My gripe with interchange design is that you don't usually have through-movement (i.e. where the bus can go 360 degrees around the station, or go from one side to another by going underneath the platforms). The new springfield station will allow full degrees of freedom to move around the station-- the Nerang station as it is does not allow this.

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 11:23:47 AM

Quote
My preference would be to connect Southport to the denser areas around Varsity Lakes, which are actually on the other side of the lake from Christine Ave in that stretch.  I think your route is otherwise very sound, but I would send it along Varsity Parade, through Bond Uni and along Cottesloe before rejoining your proposed route.

I can see this... but I think as a compromise you could get a Robina-Gold Coast Highway route ramped up in frequency and just place an interchange point there at the intersection of Southport-Burleigh Rd and Cottesloe Drive. The core frequent network is just to provide fast arteries that you can have the more local routes interconnect and interchange with... and ultimately I am thinking as the train line inches towards the border, this RT route will be incrementally extended down Bermuda Ave to finally end at (Reedy Creek?) train station.

I still think it would be superior to serve this area from the western side and have an interchange with the Robina service in a busier and better surveilled space like Bond Uni or the Market Square precinct, rather than out in an isolated spot on Bermuda Street.  Security and accessibility issues will come into play.  For a superior interchange, you would need more pedestrian focused traffic signals (not really desirable as Bermuda St is an arterial road and minor freight route) or fixed infrastructure like a small terminal or over/underpasses, whereas Bond already has its main stop at the roundabout in front which is a very simple and workable design.  (Having fond memories of sitting at that stop on a daily basis for nearly 3 years of study...)

It also means you can have a faster Robina - Broadbeach service by having your interchange at Bond and then ducking the service straight back onto Cottesloe/Cheltenham in a revamped and direct version of the 750, without having to service Varsity.

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 11:23:47 AM
So far it looks like we might have the beginnings of a basic network going...

Oh, absolutely.  There is plenty of inefficiency in our current system - nowhere near Brisbane's, but still issues.

I find it immensely annoying to live in the last region (central/northern Gold Coast) to have had no substantial redesign since TransLink started operating, so I have a particular interest in it beyond my own personal needs.

QuoteOh, absolutely.  There is plenty of inefficiency in our current system - nowhere near Brisbane's, but still issues.

I find it immensely annoying to live in the last region (central/northern Gold Coast) to have had no substantial redesign since TransLink started operating, so I have a particular interest in it beyond my own personal needs.

I think this is a carryover of the Surfside era when services down there were TERRIBLE came at random times, you had to buy transfer tickets which were only valid on the next bus service that came past. Same with Brisbane I think, the broom needs to go through the entire bus network.

I'm having a deeper look, lets start with Paradise point RT.

I've extended the 706 a bit further. There is a bit of a large cul de sac at the end where the bus could turn around. If that is not big enough, there is a loop outside Donald Ave near the park there. As for PT to sovereign islands, the way that road network has been designed is a crime against urban planning! No PT will be possible there except maybe bicycles.

It is a bit far to walk IMHO around a km or so, so I think extension would be good. The LRT is going to free up a lot of bus-route
km to play with!

A change proposed- go via Hollywell Road. What do you think?

I think the radius of demand would be larger (as it is not bordering the sea on one side) and might be better suited to a rapid transit route. A more local type service ending at Runaway bay could be sent via Marine Pde on that section I'm thinking.

This was the concept from Connecting SEQ 2031:

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 12:16:11 PM
A change proposed- go via Hollywell Road. What do you think?

I think the radius of demand would be larger (as it is not bordering the sea on one side) and might be better suited to a rapid transit route. A more local type service ending at Runaway bay could be sent via Marine Pde on that section I'm thinking.

I think this would be fine.  As long as you start serving Bayview Street from the "Land's End" area at the roundabout, as that is where the medium to high-density starts as you can see, you've got a good base.

Paradise Point I don't have a strong opinion about, so I would be happy to go along with your notions.  There just needs to be adequate terminus space to accommodate other services, such as what is supposed to be the northern end of the current no. 5.

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 12:29:04 PM
This was the concept from Connecting SEQ 2031:

It covers virtually everything we have discussed.  I did see that when it came out, but there's nothing revolutionary in it, so no surprise it is reflecting what we are putting up.

What is missing from that I feel (by 2031 anyway) is a good connection along the 715 corridor between Harbour Town and Southport via Frank Street, a service between Burleigh and The Pines via the back end of town (western Elanora) and a service from Helensvale to Oxenford (interchanging with a Coomera/Hope Island/Oxley Dr etc service).

The 750 will also probably survive in some form to cover the stops in between the LRT, be rerouted to cover Remembrance Dr through Surfers and continue to serve Main Beach and Seaworld.  I'd rather that than have more LRT stops so as to eliminate all buses from the corridor, otherwise the service does become a bus on steel wheels.  (The 750 is already on a 10 min frequency Monday to Saturday for most of the day and evening between Pac Fair and Seaworld and has good loadings, which are going to mostly be picked up by the LRT.)

Otherwise its a very solid place to start from.

Quote from: SurfRail on May 15, 2011, 11:37:14 AM
Oh, absolutely.  There is plenty of inefficiency in our current system - nowhere near Brisbane's, but still issues.

I find it immensely annoying to live in the last region (central/northern Gold Coast) to have had no substantial redesign since TransLink started operating, so I have a particular interest in it beyond my own personal needs.

I hear you.  Not that familiar with the Gold Coast, but I certainly see that there are numerous issues with the bus system up here.  New infrastructure has not been properly utilised, however there have always been issues with the system, such as a number of routes which try to be both cross town and radial. (320, 321, 322, 475/6, 325, 335 etc).

Also just spied this on the GCCC website - appears they are putting together a new transport plan which will draw on Connecting SEQ and other instruments.

http://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/t_standard2.aspx?pid=7644

Quoteabout eight per cent of the Gold Coast workforce is employed in Brisbane

Quote from: SurfRail on May 15, 2011, 19:04:52 PM
Also just spied this on the GCCC website - appears they are putting together a new transport plan which will draw on Connecting SEQ and other instruments.

http://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/t_standard2.aspx?pid=7644

I think they want to revamp the Gold Coast line timetable first.  Won't get much improvement though.

Is there even train paths to do that kind of thing? 15 minutes from Varsity Lakes to Brisbane all day?

More bicycle racks- everywhere, near shopping centres and bus stops..

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 19:18:01 PM
Is there even train paths to do that kind of thing? 15 minutes from Varsity Lakes to Brisbane all day?

Strongly doubt this.

Also if they're going to beef up Beenleigh trains, off-peak/weekend GC trains (and peak Beenleigh expresses) will need to be stopping all stations from Yeerongpilly to Park Road to maximise track capacity on this section.  

2 of the morning GC expresses affected by the XPT 3rd track train paths will also have to be stopping all-stations from Yeerongpilly into the City (if Beenleigh services are improved), since the third track is dedicated entirely for the XPT during that period.  

GC commuters are very lucky they have the 3rd track dedicated for them for most of the peak periods (with the exception of the morning XPT taking the third track).  During the off-peak, quite a fair bit of freight traffic was using the third track (well since my last visit down on the Beenleigh line not too long ago).

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 19:18:01 PM
Is there even train paths to do that kind of thing? 15 minutes from Varsity Lakes to Brisbane all day?

More bicycle racks- everywhere, near shopping centres and bus stops..

I don't think that is contemplated, but you can fix up the parts where the GC timetable has staggers in it, e.g. the 5:14pm train ex-Central which comes after a 21 minute gap, with two trains in the next 25 mins.

I'd like to see them not relying on the DG anymore, and I think that is achievable with the Salisbury-Kuraby triplication.

Quote from: Simon on May 15, 2011, 20:11:50 PM

Quote from: tramtrain on May 15, 2011, 19:18:01 PM
Is there even train paths to do that kind of thing? 15 minutes from Varsity Lakes to Brisbane all day?

More bicycle racks- everywhere, near shopping centres and bus stops..

I don't think that is contemplated, but you can fix up the parts where the GC timetable has staggers in it, e.g. the 5:14pm train ex-Central which comes after a 21 minute gap, with two trains in the next 25 mins.

I'd like to see them not relying on the DG anymore, and I think that is achievable with the Salisbury-Kuraby triplication.

The construction of CRR will remove the need for GC trains to use the DG between Yeeroongpilly and the CBD and there is sufficent space in the rail corridor for an additional two NG tracks from Yeeroongpilly to the Salisbury junction point of the DG and the NG third track.
This would resolve all conflicts with and SG movements and or freight services to and from the port while still retaining a redundency option should difficulties arise on either the existing lines between Salisbury and South Brisbane or on the CRR line. 

Quote from: mufreight on May 16, 2011, 06:47:33 AM
The construction of CRR will remove the need for GC trains to use the DG between Yeeroongpilly and the CBD and there is sufficent space in the rail corridor for an additional two NG tracks from Yeeroongpilly to the Salisbury junction point of the DG and the NG third track.
This would resolve all conflicts with and SG movements and or freight services to and from the port while still retaining a redundency option should difficulties arise on either the existing lines between Salisbury and South Brisbane or on the CRR line. 

That may be, but don't you think there is a need to maximise the utilisation of the existing infrastructure in the meantime?

Quote from: Simon on May 16, 2011, 10:42:03 AM

Quote from: mufreight on May 16, 2011, 06:47:33 AM
The construction of CRR will remove the need for GC trains to use the DG between Yeeroongpilly and the CBD and there is sufficent space in the rail corridor for an additional two NG tracks from Yeeroongpilly to the Salisbury junction point of the DG and the NG third track.
This would resolve all conflicts with and SG movements and or freight services to and from the port while still retaining a redundency option should difficulties arise on either the existing lines between Salisbury and South Brisbane or on the CRR line. 

That may be, but don't you think there is a need to maximise the utilisation of the existing infrastructure in the meantime?

One would readily admit that there is a need to optomise the use of existing infrastructure but that should not be at the expense of longer term infrastructure which if not provided within the short term will create total gridlock of the entire system.
The costs of the ongoing failure to provide infrastructure for which there is already an apparent existing need compounds over time and a packet of band aids are of little use when gangrene sets in and the entire limb needs be amputated to save the patient.
As a short term relief the Airporter services could be routed via Tennyson and run into the CBD on the mains to free up paths for additional Beenleigh and Cleveland originating services over the Merivale Street bridge, the big but is that workings such as this are only a stop gap not a resolution of the problem of lack of infrastructure.

Quote from: mufreight on May 17, 2011, 18:50:51 PM
As a short term relief the Airporter services could be routed via Tennyson and run into the CBD on the mains to free up paths for additional Beenleigh and Cleveland originating services over the Merivale Street bridge.

Yuck.  No thanks. The system has enough conflicting moves as it is, not to mention the increased travel time reducing the availability of rolling stock.

I'd rather have my service stop all stations from Yeerongpilly to the city than go the long way around, which would alleviate demand for extra Beenleigh services.  Not popular with some of my fellow commuters, but without CRR I see little other choice.

Just for the record Surfrail they have operated Airporter services via the Tennyson loop on a number of occasions when there have been problems on the lines between Yeeroongpilly and Roma Street.
Despite the conflicting moves the delay has been minimal and less than would be the case if a service were to be run all stations from Yeeroongpilly into Roma Street which would be some seven minutes slower than a through service on that line.

Quote from: SurfRail on May 17, 2011, 21:05:06 PM

Quote from: mufreight on May 17, 2011, 18:50:51 PM
As a short term relief the Airporter services could be routed via Tennyson and run into the CBD on the mains to free up paths for additional Beenleigh and Cleveland originating services over the Merivale Street bridge.

Yuck.  No thanks. The system has enough conflicting moves as it is, not to mention the increased travel time reducing the availability of rolling stock.

I'd rather have my service stop all stations from Yeerongpilly to the city than go the long way around, which would alleviate demand for extra Beenleigh services.  Not popular with some of my fellow commuters, but without CRR I see little other choice.

I'm with SurfRail on the Airporter.  If any trains besides Caboolture ones use the mains, it should be the Shorncliffe ones. Although I guess that does assume that they have the same stopping pattern Northgate-Bowen Hills.

Pretty good suggestion about the Gold Coast trains serving all to Yeerongpilly.  It is perfectly achievable on current infrastructure, although a conflicting move at Coopers Plains.  I think such an idea may give a bit of a push to getting Gold Coasters behind CRR.

Quote from: mufreight on May 18, 2011, 07:06:48 AM
Just for the record Surfrail they have operated Airporter services via the Tennyson loop on a number of occasions when there have been problems on the lines between Yeeroongpilly and Roma Street.
Despite the conflicting moves the delay has been minimal and less than would be the case if a service were to be run all stations from Yeeroongpilly into Roma Street which would be some seven minutes slower than a through service on that line.

I don't think that is necessarily the case, having some experience with said services from time to time.  In peak, you'll end up interfering with the Richlands services, and presumably end up with a less than satisfactory arrangement similar to an Airport train which departs immediately after an all-stopping Doomben train.

It would only work if you had a clear run, and that is not exactly likely - and you hit the same capacity problem once you get to Roma Street west.