Discussions from DSCRL thread

[#Metro]

The challenge is the LNP are even more road centric and have a horrible track record of stupid proposals in support of the Lord Mayor!

The two major parties are a case of Dumb and Dumber!

To be fair Blue Team (I avoid naming parties) did increase train frequency in a trial on the Ferny Grove line. This was then rolled out on the Cleveland and Beenleigh lines.

The current Red Team lot have not completed the set by increasing train frequency on the Springfield, Shorncliffe, or Redcliffe lines. AIUI there is no infrastructure obstacle to doing this other than additional labour costs.

Is this still going to be the case in 2032?

They are still base frequency, 30 minutes. Perth does better, 15-min all day to all stations except Thornlie, even on weekends!!

Constructing the SC Line would be a Blue Team signature policy. Sunshine Coast is their main area of support, which is probably why Red Team are delaying the project!

[HappyTrainGuy]

The blue team actually significantly increased labour costs - not from a train crew perspective but a station staff perspective so NGRs were partially compliant. This is why we don't see NGRs on the Ferny Grove line or Beenleigh-Park Road.

[Jonno]

The blue team actually significantly increased labour costs - not from a train crew perspective but a station staff perspective so NGRs were partially compliant. This is why we don't see NGRs on the Ferny Grove line or Beenleigh-Park Road.

The key to delivering the required public transport and associated/supporting active transport is to stop "busting" congestion with road investment.  Both parties need to recognise and accept this.  Having your cake and eating  it (road and public/active transport) will send the state broke.  At the moment the active/public transport investment is being sacrificed beyond CRR and Gold Coast Faster Rail(assuming it is still actually progressing).

[RowBro]

The blue team actually significantly increased labour costs - not from a train crew perspective but a station staff perspective so NGRs were partially compliant. This is why we don't see NGRs on the Ferny Grove line or Beenleigh-Park Road.

The key to delivering the required public transport and associated/supporting active transport is to stop "busting" congestion with road investment.  Both parties need to recognise and accept this.  Having your cake and eating  it (road and public/active transport) will send the state broke.  At the moment the active/public transport investment is being sacrificed beyond CRR and a Gold Coast Faster Rail(assuming it is still actually progressing).

Really good point. There's only so much money to go around and so long as the State Government continues to focus on building roads, there will only be so much left over for PT. Hate it or not, the Blue team is just as likely (or more likely) as the Red team to spend most of the money on road. The only team which would see that change is the Green team and they won't be gaining power. Best thing that could happen is a hung parliament with the Greens and Independents holding the balance of power.

[#Metro]

The key to delivering the required public transport and associated/supporting active transport is to stop "busting" congestion with road investment.  Both parties need to recognise and accept this.  Having your cake and eating  it (road and public/active transport) will send the state broke.

I think a faster rail vision would captivate the public.

If the train goes at 160 km/hr for most of its length and is the same or faster than car overall, then it will have public support over motorways. It will also have capacity over motorways. They might even be open to giving up space on a motorway to put in the tracks.

The public understands very easily the value of train at 160 km/hr > 100 km/hr car. They're not attracted to motorways because they like cars or motorways, they like it because this mode is often the fastest door-to-door for them.

Video: Ozbob

 

[Jonno]

The key to delivering the required public transport and associated/supporting active transport is to stop "busting" congestion with road investment.  Both parties need to recognise and accept this.  Having your cake and eating  it (road and public/active transport) will send the state broke.

I think a faster rail vision would captivate the public.

If the train goes at 160 km/hr for most of its length and is the same or faster than car overall, then it will have public support over motorways. It will also have capacity over motorways. They might even be open to giving up space on a motorway to put in the tracks.

The public understands very easily the value of train at 160 km/hr > 100 km/hr car. They're not attracted to motorways because they like cars or motorways, they like it because this mode is often the fastest door-to-door for them.

Video: Ozbob

 

Yet the really successful mode share cities look nothing like Perth.  They are compact and accessible.  Yes they have great rail links around their but their cities are compact, walkable, safe to cycle in and oriented around the rail, metros, light rail, etc.  The solution is not to replace all of today's trips with public transport trips but to change the majority of the trips themselves. Speed is important but its just one aspect of a much much more complex issue.  Having fast trains down the middle of a freeway is missing the point entirely.  Plus the station have dangerous noise levels and totally unenjoyable experience.

[HappyTrainGuy]

The blue team actually significantly increased labour costs - not from a train crew perspective but a station staff perspective so NGRs were partially compliant. This is why we don't see NGRs on the Ferny Grove line or Beenleigh-Park Road.

The key to delivering the required public transport and associated/supporting active transport is to stop "busting" congestion with road investment.  Both parties need to recognise and accept this.  Having your cake and eating  it (road and public/active transport) will send the state broke.  At the moment the active/public transport investment is being sacrificed beyond CRR and Gold Coast Faster Rail(assuming it is still actually progressing).

I know. I was only pointing out the bs labour excuse. Lots of people here currently and in the past have always blamed crew labour costs for the frequency. Crew labour does play a part but it's not the major part. Rollingstock has a pricing difference ie NGRs are cheaper to run than EMU's which inflates the service cost. NGR require substantially more station staff than the rest of the fleet which further inflates the operating cost - as I said this is why NGRs have not been rolled out on the Ferny Grove line and Park Road-Beenleigh section due to a lack of staff (the ngr rollout across different lines wasn't due to driver certification but rather station staff numbers). There are many other factors such as a lack of bus/rail interchange, poor station access ie stations have stadium light while the pathways/roads leading to them are in darkness, trip generators and patronage.

[#Metro]

Yet the really successful mode share cities look nothing like Perth.  They are compact and accessible. Yes they have great rail links around their but their cities are compact, walkable, safe to cycle in and oriented around the rail, metros, light rail, etc. 

Well, people aren't going to walk and cycle in from the Sunshine Coast to Brisbane. That's the reality of the situation. We have a very much lower density as well and longer distances. We need to find something that works for us and our circumstances. Perth has done really well in taking a formula and adapting it for low density places.

I think part of the objections to the Perth system are because it separates the transport from the Urbanism. With the Perth model you don't have to force conversion of the city to higher density etc; Whereas with the other models, for those to work, you do.

The solution is not to replace all of today's trips with public transport trips but to change the majority of the trips themselves. Speed is important but its just one aspect of a much much more complex issue.  Having fast trains down the middle of a freeway is missing the point entirely.  Plus the station have dangerous noise levels and totally unenjoyable experience.

Time savings are the largest source of benefit for motorway and PT projects.

If your product/offering isn't as good as the competition, then your passengers are going to go to the competition. This is the story of the last 40 years.

Should Perth have built a slower train? The traditional lines in Perth don't get as much patronage as the Manduah and Joondalup lines do. The fast ones collect about 2x - 3x more passengers. I think that's telling us something important about speed.

TransPerth comparison of Train Line Patronage --->
https://www.pta.wa.gov.au/about-us/priorities-and-performance/transport-performance

[Jonno]

Yet the really successful mode share cities look nothing like Perth.  They are compact and accessible. Yes they have great rail links around their but their cities are compact, walkable, safe to cycle in and oriented around the rail, metros, light rail, etc. 

Well, people aren't going to walk and cycle in from the Sunshine Coast to Brisbane. That's the reality of the situation. We have a very much lower density as well and longer distances. We need to find something that works for us and our circumstances. Perth has done really well in taking a formula and adapting it for low density places.

I think part of the objections to the Perth system are because it separates the transport from the Urbanism. With the Perth model you don't have to force conversion of the city to higher density etc; Whereas with the other models, for those to work, you do.

The solution is not to replace all of today's trips with public transport trips but to change the majority of the trips themselves. Speed is important but its just one aspect of a much much more complex issue.  Having fast trains down the middle of a freeway is missing the point entirely.  Plus the station have dangerous noise levels and totally unenjoyable experience.

Time savings are the largest source of benefit for motorway and PT projects.

If your product/offering isn't as good as the competition, then your passengers are going to go to the competition. This is the story of the last 40 years.

Should Perth have built a slower train? The traditional lines in Perth don't get as much patronage as the Manduah and Joondalup lines do. The fast ones collect about 2x - 3x more passengers. I think that's telling us something important about speed.

TransPerth comparison of Train Line Patronage --->
https://www.pta.wa.gov.au/about-us/priorities-and-performance/transport-performance

I present to you Amsterdam  NO maths involved no

[#Metro]

And likewise, I present Perth.

No citywide wholesale demolition & reconstruction required. Notice how the city centre isn't residential like Amsterdam?



All lines at ~ 15-min all-day frequency. Speed varied.


I have nothing against urban densification etc. I just don't think we should be waiting around for it to get the transport right.

[Stillwater]

After all the ironclad promises, not met, all the Premier will say about the Direct Sunshine Coast Line is: "We will look at it."
Annastacia Palaszczuk is not focussed on 23 July 2032 (the opening date for the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games) but on 26 October 2024 -- the date of the next state election. It is not that she is ignoring rail and new railway lines .... she is saving her powder for the middle of next year, when we are likely to see announcements left, right and centre, about new infrastructure projects -- and lots of sod-turning ceremonies that likely will result in the pollies digging a hole to China.

Dirt and shovels are cheap, the actual project a little dearer. The destinations for new lines will be places that suit the Labor Party election strategy and not any consideration of transport efficiencies and effectiveness. (Calounda and Nambour/Nicklin are marginal seats).

And the announcements are likely to be along the lines of ..... 'our 10 per cent is on the table, we call upon the federal government to cough up the remaining 90 per cent' ....

It has become the norm now for governments to release their election costings 2 days before the election so they can't be scrutinised. Besides, Queensland ALP is likely to schedule actual construction works beginning 2025-26 financial year (beyond the 2024 budget).

Expect more promises and very little delivery of the promises.

[Old Northern Road]

All lines at ~ 15-min all-day frequency. Speed varied.


I have nothing against urban densification etc. I just don't think we should be waiting around for it to get the transport right.

The Mandurah line is nearly 4 times as long as the Fremantle line so the Fremantle line is busier per km than Mandurah.

[#Metro]

Hi Old Northern Road,

Thanks for your question. It is a good one.

The Mandurah line is nearly 4 times as long as the Fremantle line so the Fremantle line is busier per km than Mandurah.

Sometimes when we are deciding on what to believe, we run into ambiguity. And we need to figure out a way to resolve competing alternative explanations. We need to keep an open mind, because for all I know, I might be wrong.

Now, the key thing in these cases to resolve the situation is to construct some sort of test. It's good to do this because otherwise we might fall into the trap of repeating things that are popular but not quite right.

Alternative Explanations

1. Placing TransPerth Stations in residential zones where it is more pleasant and you can walk up to the station and build around the stations will generate more patronage

2. Placing TransPerth Stations in a freeway median where you use Park & Ride and buses to make up the patronage will generate more patronage.

After some consideration, I would approach the problem like this:

Test Method

1. Take TransPerth line patronage data and divide by the number of stations on each line (count includes Perth Central).

2. Compare the number of average boardings per station for each line.

- If Explanation 1 is true, then we should observe average boarding per station Freeway Median < Residential.

- If Explanation 2 is true, then we should observe average boarding per station Freeway Median > Residential

Results and Interpretation

What does the data show?

It shows that lines that have stations mostly in the Freeway Median attract ~ 3x more patronage than stations placed in residential areas on the slower lines.

If you look closely, you can also see a pattern.

- The line with the most stops on it in a residential setting attracted the least number of av. passengers per station (Armidale Line).

- The lines with the least stops on it in a freeway median attracted the most number of av. passengers per station (Mandurah and Joodalup Lines).

Conclusion

So in other words, the stations that have low or no density near them and low or no walk up to are attracting multiple times more passengers than those stations placed in residential areas. This is because their catchment with P&R and bus is much larger than walk-up. On average they get way more passengers per station, than the walk-up ones.

If the walk-up was so important, we are not seeing it here.

Based on these results, I would consider motorway corridor running not to be as bad as people might believe. Sure, it looks bad in photographs, but that's not the point of an effective PT system.

[Gazza]

I think Urban transport is more complex than picking the metrics to prove the answer you want.
Eg there is more to the popularity of stations between "pleasant walkup" or "in a freeway"

The type of line you operate is heavily dependent on the context.

It is not a case of saying that a fast "intercity" line is "better" than a "metro" type line with more walkup and more stations.


Eg in the case of the Freo line there is a limit to how many people it can physically draw along its length due to  being on a bit of a peninsular, so lower activity per station would not be unexpected if your furthest customers are at most 1km away.


Meanwhile the two newer lines are able to pull from a larger, but lower density area, eg often 5km away or beyond.

[#Metro]

And I almost forgot to mention, that both the Mandurah and Joondalup lines also both outperformed the Sydney Metro patronage as well over the same period. As we all know, Sydney has the advantage in terms of density etc.

Mandurah (12 stations)  14,357,888
Joondalup (13 stations)  11,752,572

Sydney Metro (13 stations) - 10.6 million.

Perth shows that there is another way to get high patronage than just repeating VLSR + TOD approaches.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Transport_for_NSW_patronage_in_Sydney_by_mode

[Gazza]

I think Metro patronage is pretty good considering it terminates about 9km away from Central.
It'll definitely go up when the extension through to Barangaroo and the CBD opens.

[RowBro]

And I almost forgot to mention, that both the Mandurah and Joondalup lines also both outperformed the Sydney Metro patronage as well over the same period. As we all know, Sydney has the advantage in terms of density etc.

Mandurah (12 stations)  14,357,888
Joondalup (13 stations)  11,752,572

Sydney Metro (13 stations) - 10.6 million.

Perth should be applauded for showing that there is another way to get high patronage than VLSR + TOD approaches.

Sydney Metro.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Transport_for_NSW_patronage_in_Sydney_by_mode

Let's add some context to that graph. Context which you failed to mention.


Firstly 2019-2020 financial year had ~19 million passengers and this was (mostly) before Covid started AND in its second (first full) year of operation. Therefore, had COVID not happened you would have expected the patronage to grow more. Secondly, the 2021 - 2022 financial year had 54% of the total patronage occur in the last 4 months, so if you extrapolate that it is 17,280,540 trips expected over a given year if those rates continued.

Now let's compare this to the Perth figures for the two lines.

As you can see the patronage has dropped because of COVID, but also prior to Covid the patronage was steady. At its best the Joondalup Line didn't even surpass the patronage of the Sydney Metro in its first full operational year. The Mandurah line fairs better, but you also have to keep in mind that the first year of operation was bookended with ~3 months of COVID which was bound to drag the patronage down AND that the Metro is not an established line yet.

In the first few years of operation, you expect that the patronage will grow steadily as people change their travel patterns over time. You are comparing a line that has only recently opened to lines that have been operational for over a decade. I am fairly confident that the Sydney Metro will surpass the Mandurah Line in the next couple of years. It has scope for growth. The Mandurah and Joondalup line (it's clear to see) does not.

When you quote figures, as you love to do, it is important to both provide all the context and reference to your sources. Clearly this was a case of you cherry picking numbers because it suits your narrative and then subsequently ignoring the quite important contextual information.

For brevity here are the sources.
https://www.pta.wa.gov.au/about-us/priorities-and-performance/transport-performance#Mandurah-Line-37
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Metro

[#Metro]

When you quote figures, as you love to do, it is important to both provide all the context and reference to your sources. Clearly this was a case of you cherry picking numbers because it suits your narrative and then subsequently ignoring the quite important contextual information.

And as you yourself have shown, between year 2011-2018, the Mandurah line brought in 20 million passengers per year. That's 2x what Sydney metro is doing now. And higher than your extrapolation.

I do accept that Sydney metro probably will get more patronage over time, but the point was faster rail down the freeway median is highly effective and another tool to get high patronage. Despite the location of stations in the freeway median and despite its reliance on buses & P&R.

[RowBro]

When you quote figures, as you love to do, it is important to both provide all the context and reference to your sources. Clearly this was a case of you cherry picking numbers because it suits your narrative and then subsequently ignoring the quite important contextual information.

And as you yourself have shown, between year 2011-2018, the Mandurah line brought in 20 million passengers per year. That's 2x what Sydney metro is doing now.

Did you ignore everything else. That is only slightly above what Metro did in its best year when that was bookended with COVID in March through to June. It was also the first year of the Metro. You are also comparing what the Metro is doing atm to what the Mandurah was doing at its best. COMPARE best to best NOT whatever suits your narrative.

Additionally, keep in mind that COVID had a much greater impact on Sydney than Perth which was left relatively unscathed. Therefore, it stands to reason it will take longer to bounce back.

[RowBro]

I do accept that Sydney metro probably will get more patronage over time, but the point was fast rail down the freeway median is highly effective and another tool to get high patronage. Despite the location of stations in the freeway median and despite its reliance on buses & P&R.

And using dodgy comparisons at best is not the best way to get this point across.

[RowBro]

And using dodgy comparisons at best is not the best way to get this point across.

What kind of line do you want to see built to Sunshine Coast, Gold Coast etc. A fast one or a slow one?

Fast doesn't have to be in a highway median, besides my objection has nothing to do with the principle of fast trains being good for patronage. It's the dodgy comparison you used.

Funny that you ended up deleting this.

[#Metro]

You are also comparing what the Metro is doing atm to what the Mandurah was doing at its best. COMPARE best to best NOT whatever suits your narrative.

Well, if Perth densities were at Sydney densities... Do you think the line patronage on those two Perth lines would be higher, lower, or the same?

Funny that you ended up deleting this.

I thought I would withdraw it.

Fast doesn't have to be in a highway median, besides my objection has nothing to do with the principle of fast trains being good for patronage. It's the dodgy comparison you used.

Well, what alternative comparison would you have me make?

[RowBro]

Well, if Perth densities were at Sydney densities... Do you think the line patronage on those two Perth lines would be higher, lower, or the same?

It doesn't particularly matter what the density is when you have a brick-and-mortar limit on the number of car parks in a P&R. Even if Perth was denser, the walk-up patronage would be unaffected. If anything, it would be worse for the stations since to capitalize off higher density you want your station to be within that higher density.

[RowBro]

Well, what alternative comparison would you have me make?

You could have made the same comparison while conceding the limitations and contextual information of the comparison to not try and oversell what (little) it shows. I'm sure there are better more well-established rail lines that exist which would better suit the comparison you are trying to make. Either way the onus is not on me to try to find a better source for your comparison.

As we all know the Sydney Metro does not go into the city center and with increased density comes increased options for movement. Just because it has increased density doesn't necessarily mean it has an advantage.

[#Metro]

It doesn't particularly matter what the density is when you have a brick-and-mortar limit on the number of car parks in a P&R. Even if Perth was denser, the walk-up patronage would be unaffected. If anything, it would be worse for the stations since to capitalize off higher density you want your station to be within that higher density.

I've spent some time this year living in Perth, it really is not that bad. I just got the bus in.

This is Cockburn station (pronounced Co-burn). Station is in the freeway median.



 

[RowBro]

All I see is carparks, carparks, and more carparks, dotted around the station. This is not something which should be praised as good PT infrastructure when that much carparking is required.

I appreciate what they've done to get patronage so high in less-than-ideal circumstances but to praise it for its revolutionary PT infrastructure is ridiculous. There's enough carparking around that station that you could build an entire stadium with the footprint.

[Gazza]

Does Sydney Metro even have that much of an advantage for Density at the moment by the way?

Chatswood yes, and so will the new stations on the City and SE segment.

The way I see it, both lines have achieved similar max patronage levels, though Sydney Metro has spent most of its life under Covid whilst WA operated fairly normally due to their strict border policy.

One thing about Sydney Metro is that most stations are low density or not developed yet would you believe.

Like this is a 2022 image of Tallawong


Cherrybrook is McMansionville

[#Metro]

I appreciate what they've done to get patronage so high in less-than-ideal circumstances but to praise it for its revolutionary PT infrastructure is ridiculous. There's enough carparking around that station that you could build an entire stadium with the footprint.

P&R is a legitimate tool to have that sits in the toolbox alongside other measures. And the patronage results speak for themselves. And as you can see, theres some density beginning to take shape around stations too, because the railway is fast.

Is it revolutionary? Absolutely.

Because before the Perth model came along, all we had were examples to look to were the European models that require high density to work. There wasn't a belief that rail was viable in somewhere like Perth, which is why the WA Government in the 1970's started moves to shut down the entire rail network and replace it with buses.

What has been demonstrated here is that you can achieve very high patronage in a low density environment in an Australian city. And I would say in an environment very applicable to SEQ. Not all lines though - this model wouldn't be suitable to apply to Ferny Grove and Doomben lines for example.

It was the desire to compete with the car that resulted in the decision to provide for integration between feeder bus and rail and for large Park and Ride sites around these stations rather than provision for higher density suburbs providing walk-on patronage.

The railway planners argued that the target travellers had a choice and preference for car use, and that this and the low density of development dictate that rail must minimise the journey time to be competitive with the car.

^ And there you have a restatement of the importance of the time gap again. And therefore the importance of moves to get the average speed of trains in SEQ up. Logan and GC Faster Rail is along these lines, but it would be great to have something more ambitious.

Source: Curtis, Carey. 2008. Evolution of the transit-oriented development model for low-density cities: a case study of Perth's new railway corridor. Planning Practice and Research. 23 (3): pp. 285-302. https://rsa.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02697450802423559

[HappyTrainGuy]

Sydney metro and perths highway train have nothing when compared to the holy grail of fast direct public transport.


The legendary. 314.

Also how well do you know your Northside pt knowledge. Where is the 314

[ozbob]

[ozbob]

Sydney metro and perths highway train have nothing when compared to the holy grail of fast direct public transport.


The legendary. 314.

Also how well do you know your Northside pt knowledge. Where is the 314

^ very rare photograph of a ' 314 ' in the wild! 

[SurfRail]

The reason the Mandurah line attracts so many passengers is because of forced interchange, something Brisbane is allergic to.