Brisbane's Ferries - the Next Generation - Your Thoughts

[SteelPan]

Looking say, 2020 PLUS, what do you see moving people along the river cities magnificent natural H20 Highway?  Bigger/Newer 'Cats or something very different?

Any examples in other cities you've seen?  Interested in other peoples thoughts.

:conf    :conf   :conf

[#Metro]

* All stops to permit double berthing at the same time- keeps capacity high.

* Current network split into two all stopping lines that inter-mesh to keep SPEED high and travel time low (this has to be done to keep passengers on board)

* CityFerry monohull network progressively phased out into CityCat line 2 and whatever else replaced by bridges that allow bus over or "to and fro" services.

* Get frequencies down to as far as they can go- I would say maximum frequency is around 5-7 minutes as dwells at stops are quite large

* Larger gangways so that embarking and disembarking passengers don't get in the way of each other

* Closed stops- touch on/touch off on the pontoon

* An extension into Yeronga


The larger ferries have a larger displacement- i.e. the shove more water away from them, which causes larger wash / waves and damages the river bank and is also slower. Hence there is an upper limit to what the CityCat can do.

[somebody]

Cut the link between North Quay and Guyatt Park!  Have two routes on a higher frequency.

[#Metro]

I agree!

The big threat to CityCat is actually expansion and adding intermediate station (counter-intuitive I know), but if you add more stops, you are going to S L O W the entire service right down, and the service will begin to look a lot like the Beenleigh line where you have to take Valium before you board to numb the pain of S T O P P I N G  A T  A L L  T W E N T Y  T W O  S T A T I O N S  E V E R Y S I  N G L E  O N E  O M G W H Y D I D I N O T J U S T W A L K I N T O M Y L O C A L C A R D E A L E R A N D D R I V E A W A Y

West End-Guyatt Park can be done by a monohull and later a bridge. Citybound Pax can go to 199 or CityGlider if there is no ferry. Toowong bound pax can get BUZ 412

So I agree- CUT!!

[somebody]

Should be Guyatt Park - West End - UQ

[Golliwog]

Once theres decent PT to compete, I can't see a ferry being a good long distance mode. If the river was straighter, then perhaps. Even as is with no stops between Regatta and North Quay, the Citycats are not really faster, though fairly sure they would have to be in peak.

For example: When I went mucking about on the ferries on ANZAC day, I caught a ferry from Northy Quay up to Bulimba. When we got to Hawthorne, we got kicked off as our ferry had to go refuel but they had a replacement waiting. Once at Bulimba, I had to wait for the cross river ferry to come back, then for it to take me across, then for the next City Glider to come along. Got off at CC and went over to the SB ferry terminals and found I had a 20 minute wait for the next city cat heading towards UQ. When it finally got there, it had the same deckhand who had been on the Citycat that had terminated at Hawthorne.

[dwb]

I agree!

The big threat to CityCat is actually expansion and adding intermediate station (counter-intuitive I know), but if you add more stops, you are going to S L O W the entire service right down, and the service will begin to look a lot like the Beenleigh line where you have to take Valium before you board to numb the pain of S T O P P I N G  A T  A L L  T W E N T Y  T W O  S T A T I O N S  E V E R Y S I  N G L E  O N E  O M G W H Y D I D I N O T J U S T W A L K I N T O M Y L O C A L C A R D E A L E R A N D D R I V E A W A Y

West End-Guyatt Park can be done by a monohull and later a bridge. Citybound Pax can go to 199 or CityGlider if there is no ferry. Toowong bound pax can get BUZ 412

So I agree- CUT!!

Yes Tramtrain I agree, let's get rid of those stations.

[dwb]

Note my sarcasm.

Yes I realise express service patterns are desireable, but come on, if you remove all the stations then you lose the passengers!

[#Metro]

Note my sarcasm.

Yes I realise express service patterns are desireable, but come on, if you remove all the stations then you lose the passengers!

Disagree. Speed is important. Two lines rather than one, all day, would be better IMHO.

If we put a CityCat outside everyone's house on the river-- and make it stop absolutely everywhere every single time it is going to become less useful.

[dwb]

I think it is fully valid for instance to add a city cat stop at Milton. I'm sure there are other places too.

[#Metro]

I think it is fully valid for instance to add a city cat stop at Milton. I'm sure there are other places too.

I'm not disagreeing with you about adding infrastructure (concrete), I'm talking about the service (mobility).
CityCat expansion with retention of the current operational philosophy will lead to a degraded quality of service.

In the same way that we don't rip out each station between Park Rd and Beenleigh for the sake of the Gold Coast Express (we just don't stop GC trains there), I think it may be possible to fold the many of the monohull CityFerry stops and take a few current citycat stops and have two all day lines, rather than just one very slow all stops service.

More is not always better, and in many cases, may be worse.

[colinw]

...the service will begin to look a lot like the Beenleigh line where you have to take Valium before you board to numb the pain of S T O P P I N G  A T  A L L  T W E N T Y  T W O  S T A T I O N S  E V E R Y S I  N G L E  O N E  O M G W H Y D I D I N O T J U S T W A L K I N T O M Y L O C A L C A R D E A L E R A N D D R I V E A W A Y

Hey, some of us like stopping at the post-industrial wasteland of Rocklea and watching the tumbleweeds blow along the platform past the graffiti.   (Just be thankful they closed Gloucester St & Nyanda pre electrification, or it would be 24!)

Seriously 'though, I agree with what you suggest for the ferries.  Too many stops = rotten apple slow service.

[#Metro]

Hey, some of us like stopping at the post-industrial wasteland of Rocklea and watching the tumbleweeds blow along the platform past the graffiti.   (Just be thankful they closed Gloucester St & Nyanda pre electrification, or it would be 24!)

Seriously 'though, I agree with what you suggest for the ferries.  Too many stops = rotten apple slow service.

I hate the Beenleigh and Cleveland lines with passion. I think Rocklea could have some potential if there were better connections- certainly some space for trains if a turnback needed to be built somewhere. Closing stations is difficult, skipping them using 2-tier services much less so.

People drive cars not because they'e dumb or they don't care about the environment etc etc, it is because it is the only option that makes any sense because everything else is so slow and you have to perform a pilgrimage just to get to the train station; why would you torture yourself?

[dwb]

Seriously 'though, I agree with what you suggest for the ferries.  Too many stops = rotten apple slow service.

Yes I get that and I agree to a certain extent, however the ferry service isn't (predominantly) a commuting service. For instance tourists want different things than "commuters".

[somebody]

Seriously 'though, I agree with what you suggest for the ferries.  Too many stops = rotten apple slow service.

Yes I get that and I agree to a certain extent, however the ferry service isn't (predominantly) a commuting service. For instance tourists want different things than "commuters".

Please don't say that a subsidised service should be there for tourists.

[#Metro]

Yes I get that and I agree to a certain extent, however the ferry service isn't (predominantly) a commuting service. For instance tourists want different things than "commuters".

This is the "disneyland" theory of transit, people have good intentions but the things they think improve PT, does the exact opposite and destroys it...
For example, I like monohull CityFerries, but they are almost utterly useless to me.

Consider, for example, his conclusion that some transit services should be designed specifically to be slow:

A passenger vehicle that travels a mere ten miles per hour, such as the New Orleans streetcar, may be anathema to current transportation ideology.  ... Time that is lost to the destination, however, is time afforded to the passenger to people-watch, window-shop, and sightsee ... A slow-moving transit vehicle adds welcome animation to the street, drawing people to it, unlike a fast one from which safety-minded pedestrians keep their distance.

The urban design point is undeniable.  Relative speed is a dominant factor in the perception of safety, so slow-moving vehicles feel safer than fast ones.  But is this really our primary concern in choosing transit technologies?  Quick:  You have a meeting at 8:00 AM tomorrow.  Will you set your alarm at 6:00 and take the boring old subway, or set it at 5:00 so that you can ride a 10 mph service that offers you the chance to "people-watch, window-shop, and sightsee"?   We should all understand the emerging ideologies of slowness, but we'd surely deserve ridicule if we proposed such an ideology to a Rapid Transit agency or the High Speed Rail commission.


Nordahl's book is also a fine example of the great fallacy of transit tourism.  Political leaders frequently take junkets to other cities, ride those cities' transit systems as tourists, and then come home proposing to build the same kind of service.  But our values as tourists are different from our values as commuters:  We enjoy riding the Ferris wheel, but that doesn't mean we'd enjoy commuting on one.  

http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/the-disneyland-theory-of-transit.html

[#Metro]

If tourists want a tourist cruise, they should book and pay for one.
http://www.kookaburrariverqueens.com/

[SurfRail]

For example, I like monohull CityFerries, but they are almost utterly useless to me.

No offence TT, but who cares what you like or need to use and uses that as the basis of their provision of services? 

The monohulls provide a cross-river connection for those who need it.  CityCats cannot provide that function reliably - mechanically or in terms of providing speedy service.  No amount of stopping patterns is going to change that - those big diesels need to be spooled up and let go on the open river, not driven in squirts.

Transit technology needs to be deployed in the appropriate environment.  The fact the monohulls are slow doesn't bother me one bit - crossing a river is not exactly something a CityCat can do appreciably faster or for cheaper.

[somebody]

I'm still surprised that they bothered with fixing up the useless River Plaza stop for the monohulls though.  Mater Hill busway station provides a much more useful service to the area.

[#Metro]

No offence TT, but who cares what you like or need to use and uses that as the basis of their provision of services?  

Well with an average of 1 person per trip is it? 75% subsidies and 15% fare increases and some of the highest fares in the world,  I think it is more than valid to ask what my money is being spent on.

The monohulls provide a cross-river connection for those who need it.  CityCats cannot provide that function reliably - mechanically or in terms of providing speedy service.  No amount of stopping patterns is going to change that - those big diesels need to be spooled up and let go on the open river, not driven in squirts.

I don't deny that cross river only services may be better done by the monohull--- or a bridge, but I think there is scope to convert many to a second, complimentary citycat line.

Transit technology needs to be deployed in the appropriate environment.  The fact the monohulls are slow doesn't bother me one bit - crossing a river is not exactly something a CityCat can do appreciably faster or for cheaper.

Some of these crossings may be better done as bridges in the future with a bus over them, others as citycats on a second line.

[SurfRail]

No offence TT, but who cares what you like or need to use and uses that as the basis of their provision of services?  

Well with an average of 1 person per trip is it? 75% subsidies and 15% fare increases and some of the highest fares in the world,  I think it is more than valid to ask what my money is being spent on.

The monohulls provide a cross-river connection for those who need it.  CityCats cannot provide that function reliably - mechanically or in terms of providing speedy service.  No amount of stopping patterns is going to change that - those big diesels need to be spooled up and let go on the open river, not driven in squirts.

I don't deny that cross river only services may be better done by the monohull--- or a bridge, but I think there is scope to convert many to a second, complimentary citycat line.

Transit technology needs to be deployed in the appropriate environment.  The fact the monohulls are slow doesn't bother me one bit - crossing a river is not exactly something a CityCat can do appreciably faster or for cheaper.

Some of these crossings may be better done as bridges in the future with a bus over them, others as citycats on a second line.

I think I probably took the tenor of your post a bit far - I agree that the inner city service (apparently numbered 3/4) is execrably inefficient, and that River Plaza should stay closed for good.

I also agree with 2 CityCat services, but I'm not too sanguine about putting bridges everywhere, as I'm not convinced that it is cost-effective.  An inner city bridge to Kangaroo Point would free up enough monohulls to provide good service at other locations without needing to lock up money in a whole series of them and without needing to use the citycats for a cross-town role.

I've just had a thought further to some of my previous thinking on the subject. Perhaps we have 2 CityCat routes which only serve a single side of the river within 4-5 kilometre stretches, and only very limited interchanging at busier common points where a cross-river service is provided or can be provided?  (Eg Bulimba, New Farm Park, Riverside, Regatta, UQ only?)

[#Metro]

I also agree with 2 CityCat services, but I'm not too sanguine about putting bridges everywhere, as I'm not convinced that it is cost-effective.  An inner city bridge to Kangaroo Point would free up enough monohulls to provide good service at other locations without needing to lock up money in a whole series of them and without needing to use the citycats for a cross-town role.

I've just had a thought further to some of my previous thinking on the subject. Perhaps we have 2 CityCat routes which only serve a single side of the river within 4-5 kilometre stretches, and only very limited interchanging at busier common points where a cross-river service is provided or can be provided?  (Eg Bulimba, New Farm Park, Riverside, Regatta, UQ only?)

In many cases I think bridges would be good because although they cost more upfront, they also have a much higher level of benefit to the community- you can bicycle over them, place buses over them (I recommend this), more people use them than monohull ferries (just see the patronage at River plaza monohull vs the goodwill bridge for instance, orders of magnitude more people use the bridge) in limited cases I can see a better network if a monohull is placed well (i.e. Between Guyatt Pk and West End Ferry- I can't see the logic of having a CityCat at Guyatt park anymore with BUZ 412, and CityGlider/BUZ199 on the other side), removing CityCat from Guyatt Pk may actually be a positive for mobility improvement.

My guiding principle is "does it increase mobility", if the answer is no, there had better be a very good special reason as to why my funds are being expended on it.

[dwb]

Yes I get that and I agree to a certain extent, however the ferry service isn't (predominantly) a commuting service. For instance tourists want different things than "commuters".

Fine. Consider replacing "tourists" with "leisure traveller". I believe my point stands. As much as the last administration liked to blurt out, the cats arent' there as either rapid or mass transit. It doesn't mean they don't have a role.

[#Metro]

A slower service (note the word service) will result in less attractive service as people choose the mode that gives them the faster trip.
The CityCat is not like a heritage tram service.

I just don't want to be paying for rotten apples!

I'm not against new terminals; but I am against 1 very slow CityCat line stopping at all stations all day.
Bridges and possibly 2 CityCat lines so that both lines are fast and frequent would be my view.

[#Metro]

I've just had a thought further to some of my previous thinking on the subject. Perhaps we have 2 CityCat routes which only serve a single side of the river within 4-5 kilometre stretches, and only very limited interchanging at busier common points where a cross-river service is provided or can be provided?  (Eg Bulimba, New Farm Park, Riverside, Regatta, UQ only?)

I would agree with this idea broadly.^^

Fine. Consider replacing "tourists" with "leisure traveller". I believe my point stands. As much as the last administration liked to blurt out, the cats arent' there as either rapid or mass transit. It doesn't mean they don't have a role.

I want people to think carefully about what they are asking for- they may well have good intentions but ultimately are
asking for something that does more harm than good.

Public transport's product is mobility and access, any tourist function should be left to special services or tourist operators.

Does making the CitCat even slower make it "better"?

[SurfRail]

A slower service (note the word service) will result in less attractive service as people choose the mode that gives them the faster trip.
The CityCat is not like a heritage tram service.

I just don't want to be paying for rotten apples!

I agree with your thinking on most things TT, but you seem to be ignoring or discounting the fact that the ferries do pull leisure travellers, which results in very good utilisation in the off-peak.  They are a very public part of Brisbane's profile, and tourists do not behave in the rational manner you are describing - because they don't need to be anywhere in particular, but do have a need to travel.  The fact your time is not worth much to you does not make your needs irrelevant.

Sydney's entire public ferry network only manages around double the patronage that our single CityCat route does each year, despite the fact that in many cases Sydney's ferries would be vastly more viable than adjacent bus routes or train line (eg Military Rd, Western Line) when compared with Brisbane (eg 109/412, CityGlider, 300/305).

Does anybody know whether the CityCat operation is actually profitable?  I am confident that it has very good cost recovery, even if not full or better.

[somebody]

Sydney's entire public ferry network only manages around double the patronage that our single CityCat route does each year, despite the fact that in many cases Sydney's ferries would be vastly more viable than adjacent bus routes or train line (eg Military Rd, Western Line) when compared with Brisbane (eg 109/412, CityGlider, 300/305).

Does anybody know whether the CityCat operation is actually profitable?  I am confident that it has very good cost recovery, even if not full or better.

Are you excluding the cross river ferries and Sydney St-North Quay monohull route from that patronage?

If so, I'm pretty surprised by that.  The Manly ferries carry 1100, and I think operate every 10 minutes in peak.  Other ferries aren't nearly as important, and probably carry less people between them all than the Manly one.

[#Metro]

I agree with your thinking on most things TT, but you seem to be ignoring or discounting the fact that the ferries do pull leisure travellers, which results in very good utilisation in the off-peak.  They are a very public part of Brisbane's profile, and tourists do not behave in the rational manner you are describing - because they don't need to be anywhere in particular, but do have a need to travel.  The fact your time is not worth much to you does not make your needs irrelevant.

Disagree. This is NOT a reason to make the services slower or start moving towards "irrational" public transport. I don't mind more stations but the speed of the service should be maintained by changing the way the service is operated, and probably converting some CityFerry stops over to CityCat stops as as second separate but complimentary line. Speed is proportional to stop spacing. And certainly one of the best parts of the trips is the section between South Bank and Toowong where there are no stops...

The fact your time is not worth much to you does not make your needs irrelevant.

There are other way to serve this "need". Steam boat on the river, ride a bike, walk, go on the ferris wheel. I doubt tourists would object to a fast (or slow) service, but people who are not tourists and commuters certainly would object to a slow service. In other words, if tourists are indifferent to speed, and non-tourists are time-sensitive, then the best service is still the faster one...

[somebody]

Sydney's entire public ferry network only manages around double the patronage that our single CityCat route does each year, despite the fact that in many cases Sydney's ferries would be vastly more viable than adjacent bus routes or train line (eg Military Rd, Western Line) when compared with Brisbane (eg 109/412, CityGlider, 300/305).

Does anybody know whether the CityCat operation is actually profitable?  I am confident that it has very good cost recovery, even if not full or better.

Are you excluding the cross river ferries and Sydney St-North Quay monohull route from that patronage?

If so, I'm pretty surprised by that.  The Manly ferries carry 1100, and I think operate every 10 minutes in peak.  Other ferries aren't nearly as important, and probably carry less people between them all than the Manly one.

The other point is that in the 1980s or 1990s the Manly ferries were replaced with brand new ferries designed to be no faster. 

[dwb]

Speed is proportional to stop spacing. And certainly one of the best parts of the trips is the section between South Bank and Toowong where there are no stops...

Unless your destination or origin happens to be in the section between South Bank and Toowong.

[#Metro]

Unless your destination or origin happens to be in the section between South Bank and Toowong.

Then Go catch a bus or a CityGlider which has those sections covered already!

If people want slower public transport and actually think that makes it "better" or more scenic, why not lobby for every
CityCat to shut down its engines for 10 minutes on that section and let the tide float it down the river.

I think there would be a lot of furious people on board if that happened... dwell and stopping times on CityCats are very long.
If you are going to add more stops, then two separate and complimentary all day stopping patterns should be looked at.

Please, think about what you are asking for! You may be doing more harm than good.