Train Upgrade Zone (Ferny Grove/Beenleigh Line)

[#Metro]

Just wondering how this would work post-duplication.

So express services on this line would be converted to all-stops operations.
I'm just wondering how this would or could work as we know that the Gold Coast trains get in the way when they run express.

One idea would be to run the train to Tennyson and then do a turn back?
Would this help? Are there problems with this idea?

Some small issues:

The two express services in the pm peak save a grand total of about 2 minutes or so. Why not abolish them and increase the frequency at the stations in between?
Its a similar story with the am peak. Then there is the 8:50 am "super express" from Kuraby, which gets into Central at about 9:30 am.
What is the purpose of this service, it is half an hour after peak hour has finished?!

[ClintonL94]

I'm only guessing the train at Kuraby(8:50am) runs express to the city because it is a 3 car train and probably won't be able to hold the amount of passengers if it's a all stops?.. That's why a second train(6-car) starts from Kuraby?

[#Metro]

Surely they could make it a six car in that case. And it is outside peak hour as well. Seems doubtful...

[BrizCommuter]

Shouldn't this thread be ...(Beenleigh Line) instead of ...(Ferny Grove Line)? Infrastructure issues on the Beenleigh Line do not prevent running 4tph to Ferny Grove.

[#Metro]

Done.
There has been a long running debate about just how far trains on the Beenleigh line can run.
Kuraby seems to be as far as they can get before having to delay GC trains (happy to be corrected here).

Hard infrastructure improvements may be needed to ensure 15 minutes both directions in all circumstances.

[somebody]

Not sure what you are asking here.  Off peak operation, assuming line pairings remain the same, will be governed by the timetabling constraints which the Airport-GC single track sections impose.  Will the be 4tph?  There isn't at Virginia under the proposed timetable.

[BrizCommuter]

Kuraby seems to be as far as they can get before having to delay GC trains (happy to be corrected here).

Running 4tph on the Beenleigh Line as far as Kuraby will delay the GC trains (in at least 1 direction) by 4 minutes.

[#Metro]

http://translink.com.au/resources/travel-information/maps/110117_busway-and-train-network.jpg

Train map

[#Metro]

I've done a comparison to test a few ideas. I've often heard that 'the train system has a different function to the buses', buses are for shorter services in the suburbs and rail is for longer distance. Well, I don't think this is convincing at all, we simply compare the distances on the Shorncliffe (not shown) and Ferny Grove lines and their station spacing:

SE Busway (~ 16.5 km for CBD)
Cultural Centre - South Bank 1km
South Bank- Mater Hill 1km
Mater Hill to Buranda 2km
Buranda to Greenslopes 1.5 km
Greenslopes to Holland Park 2.5 km
Holland Park to GU 2km
GU to GC 2.5 km
GC to 8 mile plains 2.5 km

average spacing = 1.8 km +/- 0.6 km

Spacing was measured in google earth, rounded to nearest 100m

Ferny Grove Line (~16.1 km from central by rail)
Ferny Grove to Keperra 2.6 km
Keperra to Grovely 800 m
Grovely to Oxford Park 700 m
Oxford Pk to Michelton 1.1 km
Mitchelton to Gaythorne 1.3 km
Gaythorne to Enoggera 700 m
Enoggera to Alderly 900 m
Alderly to Newmarket 1.5 km
Newmarket to Wilston 1km
Wilston to Windsor 1km
Windsor to Bowen Hills 1.8 km
Bowen Hills to Valley 1.4 km
Valley to Central 1.3 km
Central to Roma Street 800 m

average spacing = 1.2 km +/- 0.5 km

Spacing was measured by looking at the station spacing line guides in Wikipedia, subtracting distances from
Central. The number to the right of the average spacing is the standard deviation, which tells
us how much variance there is in the measurements. In other words, most stations are around 1.2 km
apart, only a tiny minority are 700m apart or greater than 1.7km apart.

What this also shows is that the idea of "Rail is only really for longer distance commutes" is
not convincing at all. The spacings on the FG line are slightly closer than busway
but not by much (the standard deviations overlap), and the length of the line is also comparable to that of the SE Busway.

A bus (i.e. Brisbane CityGlider BRT) or LRT with a spacing of 500-800+ m
would be considered 'rapid transit' (the 'RT' in BRT). So both the busway
and the FG rail line (and by extension, I suspect most other rail lines too)
qualify as RT.

It's becoming painfully obvious why our rail system is not attracting
patronage. Even though it has similar stop spacing and an exclusive track
like busways, the busways operate frequent services and the buses join the busway.

In contrast, our train service is only half hourly and the buses aren't frequent to
the station and don't really feed it.

Hopefully an analogy will make this clearer: If I ran only two articulated buses down the SE Busway
in the off-peak and only allowed a handful or no buses to join the busway, I would have chronic
problems in growing patronage too! And, effectively, this is how our rail lines are being operated,
so there can be no question about why I often find the trains I catch to have empty carriages.

This is not an argument of bus vs rail, it is simply clarifying the reasons why many of our rail lines
appear to be low patronage in terms of geometry and connectivity.

[somebody]

Might be preaching to the converted, TT.

The Ferny Grove line is far from the ideal train line.

[#Metro]

No, it's not perfect; but that is not a reason to dump it or neglect it. I've used it myself.
2 tph is just shocking. Wardell Street is a carpark, anything along that street just crawls. A bicycle would be faster along that stretch.

The intention of that line is clear from its design. It is meant to serve suburban trips.