Gold Coast Interurban - timetable improvements

[colinw]

I thought the LRT was going to Helensvale via Harbour Town, not to a new station at Parkwood.

Regarding Altandi - no way!  It is one of the more useful stations on the Beenleigh line, with decent bus interchange possibilities.  Altandi is, in many ways, a far more useful station than Sunnybank.  Of all the stations between Runcorn & Coopers Plains, Altandi is actually the one I have had the most need for, due to the proximity of the buses on Mains Road.

Or is your "Pinelands" station an underground station at Mains rd?

I'd quite happy with the local services going "over the top" and the expresses going via the tunnel, but the important thing is that Sunnybank/Sunnybank Hills keeps a station (and maybe one, not the proliferation we have now), and that station has convenient interchange with Mains Rd buses to Sunnybank, Griffith U & Garden City.

Actually, another thing about the S2K project that irks me is that the opportunity wasn't take to rationalise the excessive number of closely spaced stations between Coopers Plains & Kuraby.  We could have killed off at least two stations rather than just building 3 platform monstrosities (which will be hard to quad through) where the steam era stations stood.

For my money, we could have easily culled Runcorn + Fruitgrove down to one station, and Altandi/Sunnybank/Banoon down from 3 to 2.  Going further north, you could just as readily kill both Rocklea & Salisbury, replacing with a single station near the old Nyanda, and using the space freed at Salisbury for some curve easing.

I'd love to get into Brisbane's suburban system with an axe and thin out those stations.

[somebody]

First stop Fruitgrove, then Pinelands, then Coopers Plains.

Closing Runcorn, Sunnybank, Banoon, and swapping Pinelands for Altandi?  Hmm.

I guess that has the upside that the 135 can resume a sensible route.  Runcorn doesn't really have any reasonable bus alternative and neither does Banoon.

I'd quite happy with the local services going "over the top" and the expresses going via the tunnel.

Ditto.

[SurfRail]

I thought the LRT was going to Helensvale via Harbour Town, not to a new station at Parkwood.

It's not going anywhere after Parklands Drive at present, that's the only definite!

I think the Parkwood option has a good chance for numerous reasons (big park'n'ride in an appropriate location with no better use, corridor already available with minimal resumption needed if any) and with the only disadvantage being a slightly longer travel time for train-only commuters (although a much faster travel time for anybody going to the coastline than at present).  Both the GCCC and State are very keen on getting a connection to the railway ASAP, and Helensvale is probably not that doable with current funding. 

Assuming the cost of the extension would be much lower than the initial set-up cost (around $86m per km I think), Parkwood is much more doable.  Call it maybe $5m apiece for 4 new trams and $50m per km for the 4km or so of extension, all up that is maybe $250m accounting for worst case.  With something that cheap comparatively, there is a good chance even GCCC might be able to chuck in a substantial part of the cost using the Transport Levy.

Helensvale option I think is closer to doubling the system length (rough as guts guess is that it is around 10km, current system length is 13km).  As a town centre it actually doesn't generate a lot of activity outside of the immediate local catchment, and you have a very long dead section of around 6km between here and Harbour Town with only a little residential around Arundel.  You also have a dead section from Parkwood to Griffith Uni, but it is shorter.

I think you would get considerably better benefit from 2 separate 4km extensions - one to Parkwood, and one to Harbour Town.  The link from Helensvale to Southport via Labrador would continue to be a bus route, and the Harbour Town service could extend further north.  (Going into foam mode, the Parkwood branch might even be able to be extended towards Pacific Pines.)

Regarding Altandi - no way!  It is one of the more useful stations on the Beenleigh line, with decent bus interchange possibilities.  Altandi is, in many ways, a far more useful station than Sunnybank.  Of all the stations between Runcorn & Coopers Plains, Altandi is actually the one I have had the most need for, due to the proximity of the buses on Mains Road.

Or is your "Pinelands" station an underground station at Mains rd?

Pinelands is underground at the intersection of Beenleigh and Mains, which makes it a better interchange location and puts it right at a shopping centre.  Exactly the same bus services nearby.  As Simon says, you can then run the 135 via its old route because it would no longer be traversing a level crossing at Sunnybank, that stretch of line being gone.

I'd quite happy with the local services going "over the top" and the expresses going via the tunnel, but the important thing is that Sunnybank/Sunnybank Hills keeps a station (and maybe one, not the proliferation we have now), and that station has convenient interchange with Mains Rd buses to Sunnybank, Griffith U & Garden City.

Pinelands fits the bill really.  With that and the Mains Rd bus services plus the local feeders, I don't think you would need any of the others.  I would even look at closing Runcorn as it would be around 500-600m away, which is virtually a bus stop interval.

Fruitgrove would be your main Garden City interchange point.

Actually, another thing about the S2K project that irks me is that the opportunity wasn't take to rationalise the excessive number of closely spaced stations between Coopers Plains & Kuraby.  We could have killed off at least two stations rather than just building 3 platform monstrosities (which will be hard to quad through) where the steam era stations stood.

For my money, we could have easily culled Runcorn + Fruitgrove down to one station, and Altandi/Sunnybank/Banoon down from 3 to 2.  Going further north, you could just as readily kill both Rocklea & Salisbury, replacing with a single station near the old Nyanda, and using the space freed at Salisbury for some curve easing.

I'd love to get into Brisbane's suburban system with an axe and thin out those stations.

I'd like to see some serious station rationalisation, as not only would it improve speeds but it would make it cheaper to upgrade to DDA compliance.  I'm talking serious razor-gang stuff here, like:

Ipswich Line
- Merging East Ipswich and Booval or just closing East Ipswich
- Merging Ebbw Vale and Bundamba
- Merging Riverview and Dinmore
- Closing Gailes

Cleveland Line
- Closing Wynnum

Beenleigh Line
- Closing Dutton Park
- Merging Salisbury and Rocklea
- Doing my Pinelands idea
- Either cut through the back of Trinder Park and retain the surface alignment south of here, or build a tunnel between Kingston and Kuraby with a new stop at Logan Central and decommission the surface route (getting rid of Trinder Park either way)
- Closing Holmview

Ferny Grove Line
- Merging Wilston and Newmarket
- Sinking the line between Enoggera and Grovely, putting a single station closer to Brookside and closing Gaythorne, existing Mitchelton and Oxford Park

Shorncliffe Line
- Closing Bindha
- Closing North Boondall or merging with Deagon

Caboolture Line
- Closing and/or merging Sunshine and Virginia
- Relocating Bald Hills to Telegraph Road

Kippa-Ring Line
- Not building either Murrumba Downs or Kinsellas Road

[somebody]

Looking at a map, I suppose Banoon would be catered for by a revised 135.  But would that be a better outcome that just sending trains for stations south of Yeerongpilly via CRR?  Not clearly.

It's really Runcorn which doesn't have good alternatives.

Dutton Park doesn't get much peak use but it apparently gets a bit of use in the day - perhaps people heading to PAH.

With CRR but without the Coomera R bridge you could still have Coomera starting trains combined with what they want - greater express trains.

Maybe if they created a southern entrance to the Beenleigh yard.

Apparently they don't need to.  The new service can't be operated out of Robina yard.

[somebody]

The bridge is not the only issue limiting GC trains to 15min, but more than 15min is not required for many years or decades yet.

Another issue is getting between Beenleigh and Kuraby without the expresses catching the stoppers.  Both can be pushed to about 12 minute frequencies.

Final issue is the damn Robina yard.  Expanding stabling into Redbank while leaving this undone was nothing short of disgraceful, unless, perhaps they had a need for 4-5 trains' stabling and 3 more wouldn't do, but even then.

The Tripple should have been built as a Quad, but ideally on a curve eased alignment, it wasn't and it never will be now with the 4th track built along side in I believe not too distant future. Building the Quad may enable some fat to be removed from the timetable.

Probably, but I'll be reasonably satisfied with 20 minute frequency + 10 minute frequency to Kuraby (or some other point) in a post CRR world.

The CRR will save some time for some, but I don't believe the GC trains will use it from day 1 if the nth end flyover isn't built. And as Surfrail I think high lighted, the route for the CRR will benefit some, disadvanatge others and net savings of 10min may actually be lost on a large chunk of the customers.

I think you are wrong here.  All of the focus from TMR has been on getting the Gold Coast trains in the CRR tunnel.

In Short, spending too much on this line is the least of Brisbane's issues and the return in increased pax loadings will be minimal outside what the Quad will offer, ie clockface 4t/hr for Beenleigh and GC, after that the increased ridership is I believe not likely to be worth the outlay. The GCL is currently one of the better IU lines in Australia, probably ranking No.2 behind Perth Sth line, however much of Brisbane's other lines are way behind. So I'd rather the limited funds be focused on real problems such as SCL,NCL, CL, Ips freight corridore, Greenbank, Doomben extension. All of which on a per $basis I'm sure will see more bodies on rail.

I agree with this.

[SurfRail]

The bridge is not the only issue limiting GC trains to 15min, but more than 15min is not required for many years or decades yet.

Not what the timetabling team has told me previously.  The bridge is the principal constraint and is itself enough of one to stop higher frequency, even if there are other constraints (eg lack of fourth track to Kuraby).  I don't doubt you could create a timetable around it, but I think they consider it to be far too prone to unreliability if something goes wrong.

I agree that we shouldn't be spending too much money speeding up Gold Coast trains, the priorities are elsewhere.  Getting a more reliable, even and slightly extended peak is the most important thing at the moment.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Rtt - 130kph is paper value. IMUs can easily hit those speeds

[ozbob]

http://www.alex4gaven.com.au/3453/time-to-review-gold-coasts-new-early-morning-train-service-dr-alex-douglas-mp/

Time to review Gold Coast's new early morning train service – Dr Alex Douglas MP

A new train service between Brisbane and Gold Coast which started a month ago is being poorly patronised, according to Member for Gaven Dr Alex Douglas MP.

"The Minister for Transport needs to reassess the value of this service departing Nerang at 5.42 am because only a handful of passengers are using it," he said.

"It's fair to say the new service has been given a trial and there's not the demand to warrant the running of the train.

"One passenger told me he boarded the train at Helensvale recently and there were three other people in his carriage.

"After stops at Coomera, Ormeau and Beenleigh, there were only 8 passengers in the lead carriage, and a handful in the second carriage.

"I wrote to the Minister on February 1st when passengers told me the service wasn't being used and I'm still waiting for a reply.

"Passengers say a better option would be to reschedule the existing 4.45 am train to an earlier time and provide the additional train from Nerang just before 5 am as neither the 5.29 am or 5.59 am services are over-crowded.

"Rescheduling a train to just before 4.30 am would allow commuters to travel to Brisbane Airport to depart before 7 am, as well as providing service for tradesmen and construction workers who commute to Brisbane daily."

[BrizCommuter]

http://www.alex4gaven.com.au/3453/time-to-review-gold-coasts-new-early-morning-train-service-dr-alex-douglas-mp/

Time to review Gold Coast's new early morning train service – Dr Alex Douglas MP

A new train service between Brisbane and Gold Coast which started a month ago is being poorly patronised, according to Member for Gaven Dr Alex Douglas MP.

"The Minister for Transport needs to reassess the value of this service departing Nerang at 5.42 am because only a handful of passengers are using it," he said.

"It's fair to say the new service has been given a trial and there's not the demand to warrant the running of the train.

"One passenger told me he boarded the train at Helensvale recently and there were three other people in his carriage.

"After stops at Coomera, Ormeau and Beenleigh, there were only 8 passengers in the lead carriage, and a handful in the second carriage.

"I wrote to the Minister on February 1st when passengers told me the service wasn't being used and I'm still waiting for a reply.

"Passengers say a better option would be to reschedule the existing 4.45 am train to an earlier time and provide the additional train from Nerang just before 5 am as neither the 5.29 am or 5.59 am services are over-crowded.

"Rescheduling a train to just before 4.30 am would allow commuters to travel to Brisbane Airport to depart before 7 am, as well as providing service for tradesmen and construction workers who commute to Brisbane daily."

Yet another idiotic MP. Give it a chance, the service has only been running for a few weeks!

However, this train would be much busier if it was used to fill in the gap between the 06:45 and 07:04 ex-Ferny Grove!

[somebody]

It would be more utilised if fares policy promoted avoiding the peak hour.

[Set in train]

Crandon wants more trains, is this possible? He has started a petition:

http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/work-of-assembly/petitions/e-petition?PetNum=2154

Here is a tweet of his including media release:
https://twitter.com/MichaelCrandon/status/368196462821113856

And don't forget his hashtag: #moregoldcoasttrains - really up with social media at Crandon's office, hashtag is one seventh the capacity of a tweet! And it has the problem same last letter of a word as the first letter of the next word, always a problem online.

Where is his petition for duplicating the Coomera River crossing? Or for more counterpeak services?

[SurfRail]

Crandon wants more trains, is this possible? He has started a petition:

http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/work-of-assembly/petitions/e-petition?PetNum=2154

Here is a tweet of his including media release:
https://twitter.com/MichaelCrandon/status/368196462821113856

And don't forget his hashtag: #moregoldcoasttrains - really up with social media at Crandon's office, hashtag is one seventh the capacity of a tweet! And it has the problem same last letter of a word as the first letter of the next word, always a problem online.

Where is his petition for duplicating the Coomera River crossing? Or for more counterpeak services?

It's rather self-serving I think.  QR have already confirmed via the last CRG that the new timetable is due for implementation early next year and will feature more peak hour trains for the Gold Coast.

[Set in train]

Agreed.

[Old Northern Road]

Isn't the Gold Coast line the least overcrowded line? The line currently has a train every 16mins during peak so I guess the only improvement they can make is to increase it to every 15mins.

[SurfRail]

Isn't the Gold Coast line the least overcrowded line? The line currently has a train every 16mins during peak so I guess the only improvement they can make is to increase it to every 15mins.

More early trains, more regular spacing and "doublestacking" some services to 7-8 min headways so they can get through the Coomera-Helensvale section without mucking up contrapeak too much.

[ozbob]

Gold Coast Bulletin --> Plea for more peak hour trains

THERE is a push for six new train services to be added to the Gold Coast line during peak hours to end the overcrowding on the "Bombay Express".

A petition signed by almost 140 people was tabled in the Queensland Parliament yesterday calling for an extra three trains in each peak period. comeach for the peak hours in the morning and evening.

The Gold Coast line is often referred to as the Bombay Express because of overcrowding at peak times which leaves passengers standing for the one-hour trip to Brisbane.

The Newman Government added an extra morning and evening service last year but Coomera MP Michael Crandon said too many passengers were still standing and more services were needed to prevent the overcrowding.

"In my mind, that was just a stop-gap measure," he said.

"We dead set need a proper upgrade.

"Right now we need commuters to be able sit down on their way to Brisbane."

A spokesman for Transport Minister Scott Emerson said recent figures showed that about two-thirds of services on the Gold Coast line had passengers standing for more than 20 minutes of their journey from Brisbane's Central station.

"We've now asked Queensland Rail to look at options to improve services on the Gold Coast line," he said.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Bombay my ass!

[techblitz]

A spokesman for Transport Minister Scott Emerson said recent figures showed that about two-thirds of services on the Gold Coast line had passengers standing for more than 20 minutes of their journey from Brisbane's Central station

hmmm....while emersons concern is to be commended.....I point him to the p546 where passengers are forced to stand from king George square all the way to the rsl park and ride due to lack of capacity on park ridge transit buses. 32 minutes folks....almost EVERY bus from 4pm up to 6pm...LOTS of standees...and that's not all...the buses crowd right to the front until pax are standing next to the bus driver which then presents a challenge to the passengers at the front who don't have a way to get a proper grip to counter sharp stops and turns.

I spoke to a regular user yesterday at the park and ride and she told me she has actually been flung forward on one of her standing trips and fell over.
Until the extra p546 services come in (Early to mid 2014)....I ask mr emerson/BCC to consider extending the operating hours of the p142 to offset overcrowding on the 546...

[petey3801]

Bombay my ass!

Agreed.

Anyway, the new timetable is still slated for January 2014, last I heard, so not much longer till we might see some changes anyway.

[Golliwog]

Bombay my ass!

Agreed.

Anyway, the new timetable is still slated for January 2014, last I heard, so not much longer till we might see some changes anyway.

I assumed this was mostly political posturing anyway, and largely has little to no impact on the changes that will be proposed in the timetable review? Show the Gold Coasters who now have an independent rather than LNP member that the LNP can get things done.

[minbrisbane]

A petition signed by almost 140 people!  How can it be almost 140?  It either was 140, or it wasn't.

Sorry, that article lost all credibility the moment 'Bombay express' was trotted out.

[Set in train]

Would much rather see the member for Coomera petition for improved rail infrastructure in his electorate, namely the duplication of the Coomera River bridge and associated Coomera - Helensvale track duplication.

All the rail ideas in the GCCC's wishlist ahem, Gold Coast City Transport Strategy 2031 rely on there being sufficient capacity within the Gold Coast which does not exist at present.

[ozbob]

Would much rather see the member for Coomera petition for improved rail infrastructure in his electorate, namely the duplication of the Coomera River bridge and associated Coomera - Helensvale track duplication.

All the rail ideas in the GCCC's wishlist ahem, Gold Coast City Transport Strategy 2031 rely on there being sufficient capacity within the Gold Coast which does not exist at present.

^ indeed ...

[James]

Oh goodness, not this 'Bombay Express' delusion again. I once had to do a trip on the train from the Coast to Brisbane in the AM peak. I travelled on the 7:04am ex Varsity Lakes Brisbane City service. Yes, there were a few standees, but nothing awful. And this was core peak, and on an SMU 220, out of all things.

Heaven forbid they get on board a bus to UQ at the start of the year. Now that is true overcrowding. If there's one thing I think could be improved, it is timetable fat. I reckon you could shave 5 minutes off the South Bank - Beenleigh stretch on all trips - there is quite a decent amount of fat in the timetable.

[Set in train]

James - it always seems very tight the southbound timetabled stretch from Coopers Plains to Loganlea.

[Set in train]

Would much rather see the member for Coomera petition for improved rail infrastructure in his electorate, namely the duplication of the Coomera River bridge and associated Coomera - Helensvale track duplication.

All the rail ideas in the GCCC's wishlist ahem, Gold Coast City Transport Strategy 2031 rely on there being sufficient capacity within the Gold Coast which does not exist at present.

^ indeed ...

Would it be worthwhile to begin an official Qld Parli petition on duplicating the Coomera - Helensvale section? Has it been done before?

Happy to ride the rails a few mornings/afternoons when time permits to assist in getting the numbers up.

[Set in train]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, even for a 15min timetable its not needed and there is alot better improvements to the next work that could be gained for the price. Nice to have and should be built at some stage, but not now especially with the current service operation GC to AP, the single track at the airport balances the single track at Coomera.

Other systems seem to survive having single track sections of 15min or better timetables, about time Citytrain learnt to find ways to lower its capital and operating costs and remove the gold plating to make the network more viable for taxpayers in both susbidy and fares.

So why is there only two northbound services in the 5pm hr and three south on this single track? It's timetabled for 6 minutes, so theroretically, there should be capacity for 10 trains within an hour but instead, services are forced into 35 min spacing.

[James]

So why is there only two northbound services in the 5pm hr and three south on this single track? It's timetabled for 6 minutes, so theroretically, there should be capacity for 10 trains within an hour but instead, services are forced into 35 min spacing.

The big thing you are ignoring here is 5pm - 6pm isn't peak hour O/B on the Gold Coast line. The first 'peak hour' (EXP South Bank to Beenleigh) doesn't get on to the single track until 5:37pm.

Counter-peak, services are spaced like that not just due to the availability of the single track. In fact, if you moved the current 5:59pm service to 5:48pm dep. Varsity Lakes, the service would in fact not clash at all with the single track requirement. The reason why this service exists when it does is due to rolling stock availability. In the case of the 5:24pm service, the reason why it is probably moved is to avoid conflicting with I/B Beenleigh trains or a similar requirement. If it was moved to 5:18pm (as per the clockface timetable), it still wouldn't conflict.

This is becoming more generall, but for the 6 minutes a train is on the single track, a train cannot proceed in the opposite direction for 12 minutes. Think of it this way. We have a train timed to get on to the single track at 6:00pm at Coomera (bound for VL). A train cannot leave Helensvale between 5:54pm and 6:06pm as it will conflict with this outbound train. We also need to remember due to limited stabling at Robina, trains need to start coming in the other direction at a certain time.

However, the bigger issue is the Beenleigh line. GC trains can only come every 15 minutes, otherwise they start to rear-end Beenleigh all-stoppers. Assuming you could just all-stop the GC trains in that section, you could maximise the single track section and by doing a bit of service bunching, you could get it up to 6tph, with 2tph proceeding in the counter-peak direction (possibly 4tph if you had dead-running trains timetabled carefully).

I personally do not think the duplication Coomera-Helensvale is the biggest issue. Triplication Kuraby - Loganlea I would see as more pressing, and is the current constraint to peak hour runs.

(Edited at 2:10pm Thursday for spelling/clarifying points)

[somebody]

Quite, Shane.  A 6 minute single track section theoretically allows 5tph per direction.  However there would be no margin in that if the 5tph is in both directions.  5tph peak/2.5tph counter peak might be doable but lesser reliability because 1 train can delay 2 other trains.

Not sure why the Beenleigh line needs further triplications without the bridge either.  Both need to be done at the same time, but it's pointless without CRR.

[Set in train]

So why is there only two northbound services in the 5pm hr and three south on this single track? It's timetabled for 6 minutes, so theroretically, there should be capacity for 10 trains within an hour but instead, services are forced into 35 min spacing.

The big thing you are ignoring here is 5pm - 6pm isn't peak hour O/B on the Gold Coast line. The first 'peak hour' (EXP South Bank to Beenleigh) doesn't get on to the single track until 5:37pm.

Thanks James, most informative. I am learning more about this every day. Very well explained.

[Set in train]

With the new sector 2 timetables, here's the result inbound weekdays on the Gold Coast line:

Varsity - Beenleigh
Old: 5, 6, 5, 6, 5, 8 = 35   New:  3, 6, 5, 6, 4, 7 = 31 (4 mins shorter)

Beenleigh - Park Rd
Old: 33 New: 36 (3 mins longer, that's added Loganlea - Park Rd)

Park Rd - Central
Old: 12 New: 12 (same)

Total duration
Old: 80   New: 79 (1 min shorter)



With the new sector 2 timetables, here's the result outbound weekdays on the Gold Coast line:

Central - Park Rd
Old: 12 New: 13 (1 min longer, added from Roma St to South Brisbane)

Park Rd - Beenleigh
Old: 34  New: 38 (4 mins longer, 2 mins of that is added Loganlea - Beenleigh, does not occur inbound)

Beenleigh - Varsity
Old: 8, 5, 6, 5, 6, 5 = 35   New: 7, 5, 5, 5, 6, 4 = 32 (3 mins shorter)

Total duration
Old: 80   New: 83 (3 mins longer)



Weekends inbound: 81/79 (2 mins shorter)

Weekends outbound: 81/83 (2 mins longer)



Notes:
•Unequal trip durations with new timetable providing 1 min shorter inbound Varsity - Robina, 1 min shorter outbound Coomera - Helensvale, 1 min shorter inbound Coomera - Ormeau
•Timetable optimised for Brisbane bound travel, slower out towards the Gold Coast.



End result:
better off inbound to Brisbane 1 min weekdays, 2 mins weekends.
Worse off outbound to Gold Coast (Varsity) longer journey by 3 mins weekdays, 2 mins weekends. (15 mins/wk for a weekday commuter outbound)

[longboi]

I think I could survive an addition 3 minutes on the train if it meant greater frequency.

[Set in train]

Agreed Nikko, the removal of irregular gaps and more frequent night services is great.

Span of hours still needs improvement, esp weekends. 3:50am starter would help many with 5am starts. Both cities employing more people starting work earlier.