Brisbane Inner Rail Solution

[somebody]

They arrive after 9am but they can run early if they aren't schedulled to drop off/pick up passengers and spaces in the timetables. Bunched up peak hour services use P10 as a terminus platform while another service is held or uses P8.

Ensuring that they don't run early is a more reasonable suggestion than running from Ekka to P9 or P7 at Roma St, or P8 for that matter.

Chance of it happening?  Miniscule.  Besides the area is already served by buses.

[SurfRail]

The current Government's cut-price CRR scheme suffers from a similar shortcoming if used to route CRR services to any of Doomben, Airport or Shorncliffe without building grade separation somewhere between Mayne & Albion.

To be fair, that was never intended anyway.  That kind of operational flexibility is, in my view, too expensive to worry about. 

It's the same kind of thinking which has given us massive and expensive to maintain railyards at Sydney, Jolimont and Adelaide, and the busway network.  I'd rather have the operational limitations of sending the service in one direction thanks!

[HappyTrainGuy]

They arrive after 9am but they can run early if they aren't schedulled to drop off/pick up passengers and spaces in the timetables. Bunched up peak hour services use P10 as a terminus platform while another service is held or uses P8.

Ensuring that they don't run early is a more reasonable suggestion than running from Ekka to P9 or P7 at Roma St, or P8 for that matter.

Chance of it happening?  Miniscule.  Besides the area is already served by buses.

Huh? The current bunched up CityTrain services are running from Central to P8 or P10 (it commonly happens) to terminate. Similar to CityTrain services from Central running into P2-P3 for terminating. TravelTrains run in from one or both ends. The first one would occupy the Central end of P10 before moving down to the Normanby end and the next TT will pull in behind occupying the Central end. Usually its the DTT on the Normanby end followed by the ETT at the Central end.

The problems with using the the Exhibition platforms is proper access as it requires the RNA to play ball. That can change depending on events that are on. Things are changing but its still a while off. Then comes the issue of clearing the trains of any customers still left onboard before it goes into Mayne. Lots of trains might go past but they won't be going very fast due to the signals. There is also the queue of trains that form to enter Roma Street. It might have been something that worked ages ago but today is a different story. There might be decent amounts of empty movements but these can be a host of services from driver training, mtce testing, rollingstock positioning/positioning/random rollingstock returning to Mayne ie cancelled late running services/airport contracts, rollingstock/component run ins (refurbs for example), to/from the cleaning sheds, chartered services, planned services and so on.

[somebody]

Chance of it happening?  Miniscule.  Besides the area is already served by buses.

So are lots of stations, but they still have trains. Perhaps go live there for a year and let us know what is your prefered way to travel.

You've got to be kidding.  That would cross every other trains' path.

It's just a bad practice, and would lower reliability.

Simon/all,
kidding no, please think some more after reading the following

As I said I don't know what happens now, but I used walk along the track through to Normandy twice daily in peak and many other times. In 2002/2003 there alot of empty movement along this line, alot! in peak (I'm talking a few per hour). I didn't say it had to be all Doomben services or any in peak.

The Doomben option was for off-peak if there were gaps in the empty movements in the timetable. If you cannot make a 30min cross over in the 2002/2003 30min timetable of what is effectively 3 through line services using any of the various number of cross overs between EJ and RS, there is something wrong.

Do people even know that there was at least a MU that terminated just pass the junction on the Ekka line, then returned back headed nth about 15-20min later? Buggered if I can remember which days of the week and where it came from or going to and how many times during the day it did this. Another 2min each way down to Ekka wouldn't kill anyone. Does this movement still happen. What about the Sunny coast services?

It was just an idea back then, if anyone has a 2002/03 timetables or even today of empty car movements from Roma St to Mayne this wuld be interesting, as for crossing movements, I've spent alot of time looking down and there are alot more than people I think give credit for, even in peak, may as well use them with one extra stop!

Now will it work on today's timetable, I don't know, just an idea!

regards
Shane

You have a lot to learn about operating a railway.

Huh? The current bunched up CityTrain services are running from Central to P8 or P10 (it commonly happens) to terminate. Similar to CityTrain services from Central running into P2-P3 for terminating. TravelTrains run in from one or both ends. The first one would occupy the Central end of P10 before moving down to the Normanby end and the next TT will pull in behind occupying the Central end. Usually its the DTT on the Normanby end followed by the ETT at the Central end.

Kind of my point.  If you got rid of Normanby via Roma St #7 movements, there would be no advantage that I can see from using Roma St #10 from Central #5.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Its not just related to P7 movements though. There's been many a time in morning peak where I've seen a northbound service or none at all waiting for a clear signal on P6/7, a Richlands/Ipswich train getting ready to depart Roma Street on P8, Bowen Hills/Caboolture service (from Milton) just going over the crossovers into P9 and Roma Street service exiting the tunnel pulling into P10. Its not in peak hour but the same thing can sometimes been seen with out of service trains (usualy use the middle road) and when freight trains are making the cross some 12 car units stop on P10).

[Stillwater]

It would be interesting to compare rail's performance at relieving Queensland's congestion woes today, compared with the situation as outlined in this 2009 Auditor-General's report.  http://www.qao.qld.gov.au/files/file/Reports/2009_Report_No.3.pdf

[Stillwater]

Brisbane Inner Rail Solution

You are an LNP government in waiting and CRR is a major infrastructure project, heavily promoted by Labor, that has captured the people's imagination.  You announce that you will come up with your own plan, wary always of the state of the finances.  You announce that you will release a transport plan before the election, but then realise that your backbench wants to include everything in it (a big bag of everything: mess), stuff you could never hope to deliver.  You can the plan.

You don't want to do CRR, but you have to ease into this situation, take the public with you.  You get your mates, the mayors, to release the Cleveland Solution.  That goes down like a lead balloon.  So you say you will review CRR after the election, but you will act responsibly by introducing some capacity enhancement measures in the interim, effectively putting off a decision on a start for CRR.  You try to knock it off via a 'review' but the team that came up with the proposal had examined all the alternatives and deemed this the best solution.  There's no room to move.  You accept that, but you strip it to its bear bones (CRR Lite).  Will you fund and build CRR, the media asks?  Will you, will you?

You still don't want to build CRR Lite, because you don't have the money, so you play the political game with the feds about funding.  Federal Labor is not about to do LNP any favours.  If the feds agreed to fund, they would expect some contribution from the state, but you don't have even that contribution.  What to do?

You lump what you want and what you don't want into one package, call it 'Brisbane Inner Rail Solution'.  It comes in two parts - what you want to build, and can afford, and what you don't want to build, because you would prefer to put money that otherwise would be spent in SEQ on CCR Lite to work in marginal electorates throughout Qld.  So, now, when the media asks 'will you build CRR', you say: 'we are fully committed to the Brisbane Inner Rail Solution'.  And you say it with conviction, just as Bill Clinton said 'I did not have sex with that woman', because of some very strict definition of what constitutes sex.  Clinton had convinced himself.  He had to, to seem believable.

So, Mr Emerson, will you commit to, fund and build CRR?  Answer:  'I am committed to the Brisbane Inner Rail Solution.'  Just as the Sunny Coast Line duplication was halted unexpectedly at Beerburrum by Labor after they lost the local seat, Mr Emerson and LNP intend implementing only the first stage of the Brisbane Inner Rail Solution (the capacity enhancement works), but not the second.  Or not unless the feds pay for the lot.

So we are at exactly the same situation that we were at before the last state election.  Will you fund CRR, Mr Emerson?  Most likely, the answer will be 'I did not have sex with that woman'.

[Stillwater]

We can but hope that the LNP federally will want to promise 'something rail' for the Sunshine Coast in support of Mal Brough as their candidate in the seat of Fisher.  That could be duplication to Landsborough.  Such a promise would also get the LNP state members off the hook.  They were sucking up to the electorate about SCL, but have gone very quiet ever since.  They can't promise light rail for the Sunshine Coast (several electorates), because that is in the embryonic phase.  Augmenting heavy rail to Nambour fits more closely with fed objectives of supporting the efficient movement of freight between states and major regions within those states.

[mufreight]

Pretty much a case of if there has not been a start on construction of at least Beerburrum - Glasshouse prior to the end of this term of government then you can take it as read that nothing will be done before 2018.
By applying pressure on the polies both state and federal now they might actually do something, a write to your local member and or candidate campaign covering all the electorates both state and federal on the NCL as far north as Townsville now could bear fruit.
Many of the LNP members realize that they will have to give something to their electorate, actual runs on the board instead of the hot air they have delivered to date if they are to survive.
As federal money will be needed to deliver this infrastructure the lead up to the federal election is the best time to get them to commit themselves.

[mufreight]

Unless the State LNP actually commences work on Beerburrum - Glasshouse prior to the Federal election nothing will be done except more hot air untill the next Federal election, and in all probability if the LNP are elected then not even then.
Hunderds of millions will be spent on the Bruce Highway and Toll will buy a bulk lot of B trailers so they can operate B tripples on road.
All the planning has been done for Beerburrum to Landsbrough and in theory work could be recommenced tomorrow if the decision was made today to proceed but giv :pfy:en the continual bleat about the State being broke as a consequence of the actions of the previous government we are more likely to see a herd of    over than a single bulldozer or excavator on site.

[somebody]

I agree.

Perhaps it can be made an Federal election issue?  Although I doubt it, with all the Sunshine Coast seats already being in LNP hands, and very likely to stay that way.

[Stillwater]

Well, if it is to be made a federal election issue, the starting point must be to take a gamble on which party will win.  It's no use having federal Labor saying it will fund duplication to Landsborough, in the first place, if the LNP doesn't match it, and the LNP then goes on to win the election.  We will then have the government in power having no commitment to the SCL upgrade.

The opinion polls are showing that the LNP will win federally, and it will desperately will want to shore up the seats of Fisher and Fairfax.  Fisher is where Mal Brough will be standing as the LNP candidate.

FF, I think, has Mal on record as saying that he supports SCL Upgrade as a priority.  So that is where the focus should be -- getting the LNP to commit in support of Mal Brough as the Member for Fisher.

One of the things going for Qld is that it will be the key state for both parties in the fed election campaign.

[BrizCommuter]

And I agree, the events of this weekend show the value of the Exhibition Loop and, like with Tennyson Line, I would really like to see Translink/QR look into the possibility of making more use of this largely under utilised infrastructure to boost services, if viable.

During normal operation, trains entering the loop from the Caboolture Line have to perform a conflicting move at Mayne. Trains coming from the Ipswich Line cannot serve Bowen Hills and then perform a 2 conflicting moves when exiting the loop. The capacity through the core of the network is not increased by either operation, and the additional conflicts would actually decrease capacity.

It is of course useful if the core tracks are blocked as per last week.

[BrizCommuter]

A quick look at a possible CRR lite scenario 8-9am:

Mains southbound am peak - 18tph
Mains terminating at Roma Street - 10tph (if 4tph continue to Ipswich and Richlands each)
Suburbans southbound am peak - 18tph
Suburbans terminating at Roma Street - 10tph (if 4tph continue to Cleveland, Beenleigh each)
If all of the above services ran via Ekka Loop to Mayne, then assuming 20tph track capacity, there would be zero paths available for northbound CRR services merging at Victoria Park.

To allow 8tph using northbound CRR, then 8 of the above Roma Street terminators would have to continue beyond Roma Street to other stabling locations such as Clapham, Redbank, Manly/Thorneside, or beyond.

[SurfRail]

I have a warm and fuzzy feeling something will be annouced for NCL that will be started in next fed electroal term. Abbott will want to do something to support Newman ease soome of recent pain and reduce Qld unemployment.

My not so warm and fuzzy feeling is that the floods will again cap spending on Rail expansion.

What Abbott will want to spend money on is the Bruce Highway.  He is on record as not believing in railways.

[Stillwater]

We still need to get to the bottom of this.  Both sets of circumstances, as described, cannot co-exist as non-conflicting truths:

"The Queensland Government has submitted the Brisbane Inner Rail Solution (both Early Capacity Works and the core Cross River Rail project), as part its 2012 submission to Infrastructure Australia."

http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Projects/Name/C/Cross-River-Rail/Brisbane-Inner-Rail-Solution.aspx

AND

"A Federal Government spokesman said the only submission received for Cross River Rail from the Newman Government was for $300 million worth of measures to increase capacity on the Citytrain network - not the full $4.4 billion needed for the project."

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/cross-river-rail-project-under-a-cloud-because-of-states-city-country-divisions/story-e6freoof-1226563032723

[Stillwater]

Is the state government fair dinkum about rail investment?

From the Sunshine Coast Daily website, February 1st:

A SECOND Toowoomba range crossing and a once-in-a-generation upgrade of the Bruce Hwy are critical to national productivity, according to Queensland's peak business body.

The Chamber of Commerce and Industry Queensland has made a budget submission to the Federal Government calling for it to fund the major infrastructure projects.

"The Toowoomba Range Crossing and Bruce Hwy are an integral part of Queensland's road network and have a significant impact on national productivity and the competitiveness of businesses," the chamber said in a statement.

The chamber worked closely with the State Government in preparing its submission.

"Unfortunately, the existing range crossing has reached its capacity and is in desperate need of an alternative," the statement says.

"The existing range crossing's steep grade and tight curves results in high levels of congestion, traffic delays and a very poor safety record.

"Coupled with the section through urban Toowoomba with 16 sets of traffic lights the existing route falls well short of specified national highway levels of service."

The submission argues that the crossing, with significant Federal Government funding, would accommodate regional growth, reduce travel time and improve freight efficiency.

The chamber called for a "generational upgrade" of the Bruce Hwy to make up for a decade of under-investment.

"On average there are nine locations which close annually for greater than 48 hours and six locations which close for greater than five days," the chamber's statement says.

"In addition, highway flooding causes destruction with reconstruction resulting in further delays to traffic.

"A massive program of reconstruction has been undertaken since January 2011 and is still under way but the January 2013 floods once again confirm the vulnerability of this national corridor to flooding."

The chamber argued a major upgrade would reduce the road toll by 35% and create $30billion in economic improvement through time savings.

"CCIQ has recommended that the Federal Government match the Queensland Government's commitment to allocate $1 billion over the next 10 years to the cost of upgrading the Bruce Hwy over and above existing funding levels under the Nation Building Program," the statement says.

[#Metro]

The Chamber of Commerce and Industry Queensland has made a budget submission to the Federal Government calling for it to fund the major infrastructure projects.

Sometimes groups like this don't know what they're talking about - except that concrete is sexy. Did they support the tunnels? You only have to look as far as Clem 7 and AirportLink and all the hype about how "vital" it was (yeah, so vital no-one uses it!!) to see how infrastructure worship feeds off itself.