Train design measures to increase capacity

[#Metro]

Seating-rearrangement?

Are seating re-arrangements one way of increasing peak hour capacity on the Cleveland, Beenleigh and Gold Coast lines?
Personally I am a bit reluctant to see seating capacity reduced on the GC line as it is very long distance, though the other lines are shorter?

[somebody]

Longitudonal seating on IMUs was a shocker!!  I don't like measures to reduce seating at any time.

[#Metro]

I understand that people do not want to lose their creature comforts and want to hold on to service as it is right now.
But fact of the matter is, CRR is delayed and we now have to think about sacrifices where we would otherwise not
have thought about them.

Patronage and population are going to grow no matter what. We need capacity. Is it really fair that we give someone a seat and, by that act, we leave 10 people waiting at the platform? Which is the lesser evil? That's the kind of choices I think we face now.

[mufreight]

Reducing the number of seats might increase capacity but does not justify the creation of cattle class commuting and while concern has been expressed for commuters on the GC line apply a little thought to those on the outer reaches of the system on the Sunshine Coast and Ipswich lines, of course if the intention is to make commuting as inconvenient and uncomfortable as possible to deter the use of rail then the suggestion is a winner.

[#Metro]

Mufreight, during peak hour, demand always exceeds supply on all transport modes.
Far from deterring patronage, there will be no problem in filling up the extra capacity if it is provided.

I would suggest the real deterrent is not being able to get on the train because it is full, especially during peak hour, because space is being taken
up by seats, and then the customer has to wait for the next service. Might not be a problem on some lines, but may
be a problem on others.

The real deterrent to patronage is poor off peak frequency. I am sure, due to the far lower numbers on rail
in the off peak, the even if seats were re-arranged, everybody would be able to get a seat in the off peak.

[mufreight]

Patronage and population are going to grow no matter what. We need capacity. Is it really fair that we give someone a seat and, by that act, we leave 10 people waiting at the platform? Which is the lesser evil? That's the kind of choices I think we face now.

These are not the choices that we face now, they are what an incompetent and inept Transport Minister would like to force on commuters, remove the government car and force these short-sighted arrogant clows to use public transport and watch the situation change

[somebody]

Don't make a backward step.  That's my approach in general.  Brisbane has enough trouble getting people on PT even in peak.  If the system gets more congested, then there would be a lot more willingness to compromise.  I don't think we should compromise on rollingstock because of an announced delay to CRR.

Demand exceeds supply, maybe, but the solution isn't to degrade service quality.

[#Metro]

We can't change the wind, we can change the sails.

A week ago or so, I floated the ideas of what we could do in the event that CRR would be delayed or cut.
People didn't believe me or didn't want to believe me; maybe people thought that was too awful a truth to believe in?

The fact is, unless there is some financial miracle or magical turnaround, it is coming. The question is now- what are we going to do about it?

[#Metro]

Demand exceeds supply, maybe, but the solution isn't to degrade service quality.

People need to get to work. There may be other measures, but what are they?
Re-arrangement can be done progressively before we have a catastrophe of congestion and then go "oh, why didn't we do something about this earlier?"

[Fares_Fair]

I'm not sure that having many people standing on a train (in lieu of sitting) to save space on a train is appropriate in these days with emphasies on safety.

Whilst it is true that not many trains crash (statistically per capita or no. of journeys), the thought of multiple multitudinous human missiles
as a result of standing passengers in a crash is too horrific to contemplate.

What they should probably be doing is providing seat belts on trains for passengers security and safety in the event of an emergaency braking or collision.
What with all of the boom gate incidents happening, it is only a matter of time.

It would be interesting to know the statistics of train crashes and fatalities and injuries at the same level compared to motor vehicles.
I'm sure rail would be seen to be much safer statistically.

I recall the Granville disaster on January 18, 1977 and the 83 who died there due to the bridge collapse onto the carriages
(I vividly recall watching the event on TV during the school holidays) and wonder if seat belts may have saved lives to those adjacent to the bridge-crushed carriages.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[mufreight]

Don't make a backward step.  That's my approach in general.  Brisbane has enough trouble getting people on PT even in peak.  If the system gets more congested, then there would be a lot more willingness to compromise.  I don't think we should compromise on rollingstock because of an announced delay to CRR.

Demand exceeds supply, maybe, but the solution isn't to degrade service quality.

A practical and positive response  

We can't change the wind, we can change the sails.

A week ago or so, I floated the ideas of what we could do in the event that CRR would be delayed or cut.
People didn't believe me or didn't want to believe me; maybe people thought that was too awful a truth to believe in?

The fact is, unless there is some financial miracle or magical turnaround, it is coming. The question is now- what are we going to do about it?

Sack the current collection of incompetents who pose as a government and who are fudging the figures to mask their incompetence, there is no actual saving to be made by delaying the construction of CRR but there is a quite unacceptable and measureable cost as a consequence of this delay.
What are we going to do about it? make it known beyond any doubt that we will not accept this further stupidity that some honest accountability is required, not more fudged figures and spin to now justify doing nothing (which in all probability is what was intended anyway)  Then vote the incompetent duplicit grubs out of office.

[ozbob]

I'm sure rail would be seen to be much safer statistically.

40 to 50 times safer than car road transport.  Seat belts on our trains are not needed IMHO.  Trains are designed with seating and standing loads and engineered accordingly.  There will also be some risk with any form of transport and risk assessments on rail don't suggest the need for seat belts.

[colinw]

Then vote the incompetent duplicit grubs out of office.

Assuming that occurs in about a year's time, do we have any idea what the LNP's public transport policies are likely to look like?

I know Langbroek is on the record as opposing the light rail on the Gold Coast, but apart from that what do we know?  Are they for or against CRR.  What about Trout's Road, or MBRL (they had a brain fade and at least one candidate publicly opposed that during the recent Federal campaign). What about CAMCOS?  Would the Connecting SEQ 2031 framework remain in place, or get thrown out & re-drawn?

On the main topic of this thread ..

I am utterly opposed to any moves to make the rail commute even less comfortable.  A huge percentage of public transport use in Brisbane is discretionary in nature - people don't HAVE to use it and could drive, or could switch modes to bus if they wanted to.  Making the trains less comfortable is a sure way to commit patronage suicide, at which point logic dictates that CRR would be gone forever as the need for it would be removed.

The discussions on this site in the wake of the CRR deferral are getting surreal, and to me resemble a toy getting thrown out of playpen by a very angry toddler.  We're so shocked and dismayed by what has occurred that ideas are being proposed that I'm sure we wouldn't have dreamed of otherwise.  A time-out is called for.

Now - imagine CRR had never been proposed, and none of us had ever heard of the idea.  Set aside your anger about it, pretend it was never on the agenda. Patronage has shot upward, the system is within a few TPH of full capacity in peak, but has a huge amount of spare capacity in the shoulder and offpeak.  What do we do?

[#Metro]

Sack the current collection of incompetents who pose as a government and who are fudging the figures to mask their incompetence, there is no actual saving to be made by delaying the construction of CRR but there is a quite unacceptable and measureable cost as a consequence of this delay.
What are we going to do about it? make it known beyond any doubt that we will not accept this further stupidity that some honest accountability is required, not more fudged figures and spin to now justify doing nothing (which in all probability is what was intended anyway)  Then vote the incompetent duplicit grubs out of office.

Um, that's great but I, not anyone else has the magical wand that will just make it all go away. All I have is my ballot paper and a pencil.
Seriously, this is great, but we need other solutions too.

[BrizCommuter]

Standing is a routine way of life for commuters in many cities with decent public transport. SE Queenslanders will have to get used to it!

[#Metro]

Now - imagine CRR had never been proposed, and none of us had ever heard of the idea.  Set aside your anger about it, pretend it was never on the agenda. Patronage has shot upward, the system is within a few TPH of full capacity in peak, but has a huge amount of spare capacity in the shoulder and offpeak.  What do we do?

Ask BrizCommuter!!!


Plan B
http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/01/plan-b.html

1) Improved signalling (enhancements to existing system, distance to go overlay, or communication based train control)
2) Improved infrastructure to allow efficient train scheduling
3) Scrap the 20 minute standing overcrowding definition and un-express some expresses -
4) Redesign train interiors with more standing space.
5) Improve bus services along rail corridors
6) Encourage travel out of peaks,
7) Major re-think of urban planning
Decentralise employment
9) Encourage cycling
10) A peak oil crisis
11) Discourage the use of public transport

As you can see, #4 has as much popularity as asking people to eat brussel sprouts. People think about how they might lose their seat- all I can say is, I would personally rather be standing than miss my train and have to wait for the next one!

[Golliwog]

I understand your point about removing seats to increase capacity, but think it would be more beneficial to just increase the period of peak frequency. Many office workplaces offer flextime where it doesn't matter what time you start or finish so long as you work the right number of hours. This makes it easier to adjust your travel time, but its harder once the trains drop back to half hourly. There are a number in my office who all start work at around 7am.

As you have pointed out TT the number of trains we have corresponds to how many are needed for the peak period (plus extras for emergency replacement/maintenance, etc) but once the frequency drops back these just sit in the yard and/or are positioned for the next peak. It would be less expensive to just keep them running in service for longer. I would expect rearranging the seating to be expensive, and ultimately a bit excessive when its only a 2 year delay (and maybe less depending on how the budget goes).

[mufreight]

To stand for 15 to 20 minutes might be acceptable but stretch that out to 40 minutes + and it becomes a different story.
Lowering standards is a retrogade step and deters rather than encourages patronage in public transport.
Other rail systems have amplified their infrastructure to meet demand. Perth, Melbourne, and Sydney all being examples of this over the last 20 years and all have further infrastructure either planned or under construction at this time.  Adelaide is upgrading its rail system to provide the infrastructure capacity to meet an increasing demand, the common thread here is that this provision is to save billions that would otherwise have to be spent on the road networks to achieve a lesser result.
QR has been starved for funds for infrastructure for over 50 years, a lot of catch up is needed and the cost of the rail infrastructure for a given increase in capacity is a third to half that for road and rail has greater social benefit for the community, is less disruptive in terms of resumptions, and far more environmentaly friendly.

[#Metro]

mufreight, I agree, but it's pretty much terminal!

I don't like it either- how can they delay CRR! I agree that all the suggestions so far are band-aids and are totally inferior to CRR, there really is no substitute for CRR (no, not even bus).

All we are trying to do is think up things that make a bad situation less worse. Personally I think CRR delay is a recipe for disaster- just you wait until there are mass delays or unreliability, it will be a shambles just like Connex in Melbourne and all the bad press that received!

I understand your point about removing seats to increase capacity, but think it would be more beneficial to just increase the period of peak frequency.

This is another option I also strongly favour Golliwog. I feel that the very sharp peak behaviour is due to autocorrelation of the supply of train services and the demand for travel from passengers at peak hour. If shoulder services were supplied more frequently, then there would be at least some opportunity to shift to those trains. However, most lines are about 30km from the CBD. So this requires some more rollingstock I believe, at least for the shoulder peak periods because it takes time for those trains to go back out and do another run. But it is a goer and practical suggestion I feel.

Many office workplaces offer flextime where it doesn't matter what time you start or finish so long as you work the right number of hours. This makes it easier to adjust your travel time, but its harder once the trains drop back to half hourly. There are a number in my office who all start work at around 7am.

Yes, these people could take advantage of that. I am always horrified at just how quickly frequency dies off after peak hour.

As you have pointed out TT the number of trains we have corresponds to how many are needed for the peak period (plus extras for emergency replacement/maintenance, etc) but once the frequency drops back these just sit in the yard and/or are positioned for the next peak. It would be less expensive to just keep them running in service for longer. I would expect rearranging the seating to be expensive, and ultimately a bit excessive when its only a 2 year delay (and maybe less depending on how the budget goes).

This is a goer. It is important to realise that the 2 year delay is in addition to the construction period- so remember that after the 2 years of delay, then and only then will they get the shovels out and start digging, all the while the Merivale bridge will be filling up with people during that time until it opens.