Article: Call for inner-city rail loop

[ozbob]

From Brisbanetimes click here!

Call for inner-city rail loop

Call for inner-city rail loop
Tony Moore | June 10, 2008 - 1:34PM

Queensland Transport must test an inner-city rail loop linking the Ipswich and Beenleigh lines in a bid to take the pressure off overcrowded bus services, a rail lobby group urged today.

Rail: Back On Track has called for the reactivation of a largely under-utilised line to form an inner-city loop from Central station to Yeerongpilly, Tennyson across to Sherwood, Normanby and back to Exhibition (RNA Showgrounds) and Brunswick rail stations.

Spokesman Robert Dow said the new Queensland Tennis Centre at Tennyson (which includes a unit development), the new busway at Normanby, the expansion of the Royal Brisbane Hospital and the re-development of the Royal National Association's Exhibition Grounds should be the catalyst for a re-think of the inner city rail loop.

"If this was done on a regular basis, it would provide an inner-city rail loop which could combine all of these elements and free-up capacity on the southern (Beenleigh) and western (Ipswich) rail lines," Mr Dow said.

"We really think it is an opportunity that is an innovation from the usual 'point-destination' type services they have now," he said.

Mr Dow said he anticipated the service could run in both directions and start with three passenger carriages to test if the inner-city rail link would be popular.

"If it was done on a regular basis, it would provide an inner-city loop service which would take some of the congestion off the inner city buses."

Mr Dow said he was surprised Queensland Rail had so few services connecting the Beenleigh line and the Ipswich line, particularly given the expansion of the Ipswich rail line from Sherwood to Darra.

"Presently there is no regular rail services connecting the main southern and western rail lines," he said.

"Exhibition and Tennyson stations do not have regular rail services.''

"Running a regular loop service stopping all stations from Central to Yeerongpilly, Sherwood, Milton, Exhibition and back to Central in both directions would give passengers options other than going through the CBD when travelling `cross suburbs'."

He said improving rail links to the Exhibition station - now used just for special events like last weekend's Caravan and Camping Expo and the RNA Exhibition in August - simply made sense.

"Providing a regular commuter service to the Exhibition station would facilitate access to the major medical precinct at Herston and businesses in the general area," he said.

"The former railway station at Normanby should be re-instated and linked into the Normanby bus station. This would give further transit options for commuters."

Queensland Rail has commented generally that it planned to improve the Exhibition rail service, but has not described how it could be linked to other services.

Earlier this year when the redevelopment of the RNA site was discussed, the State Government suggested the Exhibition rail station could have a new "mixed" bus and rail station, similar to what is now at South Bank.

A committee including Queensland Rail and Queensland Transport will report next year on a possible underground rail link between Woolloongabba, the city and Spring Hill.

That possible rail line could have a link to the showgrounds.

The Rail: Back on Track suggests using existing stations.

Public transport researcher Jago Dodson, from Griffith University's Urban Research Program, welcomed the innovative thinking on public transport, but doubted the inner-city rail loop could generate enough extra commuter traffic to be viable.

"I would rather they increase the frequency of rail services across the entire network, so that everyone gets the benefit," Mr Dodson said.

He said South Bank was already well served by busways and the Royal Brisbane Hospital would also be better served by the Northern Busway, when it was finished.

"The Exhibition rail station is still a fair way from the hospital, so I am not sure that would provide real benefits," he said.

Mr Dodson said he also doubted the frequency of events at the State Tennis Centre at Tennyson warranted more frequent rail services than already existed.

"But I do welcome new and innovative thinking on this type of thing."

Thanks for the interest Brisbanetimes!

[ozbob]

Radio 4BC John Miller Show followed up with a short interview.

Thanks for the support John and 4BC

Mp3 of interview here!

Apologise about the quality but I only had a pocket radio.

[ozbob]

Original media release:

Media Release 7 June 2008

Brisbane: Call for Inner South West Rail Loop service

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport users has called for the introduction of an innovative regular inner south west loop rail service to run all stations from Central, Southbank, Yeerongpilly, Tennyson, Sherwood, Milton, Exhibition, Brunswick St, Central.  This service could run in both directions at 20 minute intervals. It would allow passengers to make connections between presently isolated main lines and would allow the Exhibition and Tennyson stations to be brought into regular service.  A railway station at Normanby could also be re-established and integrated with the Normanby bus station.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

?Presently there is no regular rail service connecting the main southern and western rail lines. Exhibition and Tennyson stations do not have regular rail services.?

?Running a regular loop service stopping all stations from Central to Yeerongpilly, Sherwood, Milton, Exhibition and back to Central in both directions would give passengers options other than transiting through the CBD when travelling ?cross suburbs?.

?Providing a regular commuter service to the Exhibition station would facilitate access to the major medical precinct at Herston and businesses in the general area. The former railway station at Normanby should be re-instated and linked into the Normanby bus station. This would give further transit options for commuters.?

?This loop service would be a smart addition to the QR urban network.  It would help relieve some of the inner city congestion on buses and rail. It would encourage further public transport uptake and overall benefits for the community.?

?What are we waiting for??

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org

[ozbob]

Blog comments at Brisbanetimes are interesting, and generally very supportive  click here!

[stephenk]

Continued from another thread.....

Yes the present arrangement around Bowen Hills is a restriction but with a bit of thought can be overcome.

I'm sorry, but I really don't think this idea would work:-

If trains were to traverse the loop in both directions then in the Bowen Hills area clockwise trains would:-
1) Conflict with freight and depot movements heading from Mayne towards Normanby.
2) Block anti-clockwise trains through the single track curve at Bowen Hills.
3) Block anti-clockwise loop, Caboolture, Nambour, North Coast, and Shorncliffe trains in platform 4 (and surrounds) at Bowen Hills.
Running trains in both directions around the Exhibition Loop would be very difficult to operate during off-peak, and impossible to operate during the peaks.

Also this loop service would traverse many a flat junction elsewhere, causing conflicts with other train movements. For clockwise services this would involve 5 conflicting movements, for an anticlockwise service this would involve 4 conflicting movements. You only need to look at the terrible unreliability of London's Circle Line to see that conflicting junction movements are a bad idea.

[jason]

i second this

I don't think Ozbob is a person who works in the industry, has the technical knowledge to make public comments the way he does, more only being self serving for his darra / oxley to city.

From the looks of his photo it appears that he is only an white collar CBD office worker who has no actual interests in Planning, ecomonics, business or public transport services but only sky-larking as someone who pretends that they are knowledgable in such matters

I thought this was a forum for a mixture or professional and non-professionals, but run by someone who actually works in the industry that has some knowledge, not someone pretending.

[Zoiks]

Lay off the attacks on ozbob. He is and has been an advocate of rail and PT for many many years. I do think however that he should consult the community a bit more before making these media statements. Some technical knowledge might have prevented this blunder from happening. As stephink has posted its not possible to run effectivly at this time.

Moral of the story:
This wont happen for technical reasons
Jason, lighten up. We are all pushing for the same final outcome.
Ozbob. Even though you are the founder, "the CEO is only as good as his advisors". If you have an idea, maybe post it for discussion before making a media release of it.

[ozbob]

Jason,

Check out -->  http://backontrack.org/mbs/index.php?topic=258.0
Before making accusations please check your facts.  The media in fact find it useful that we are not industry engaged or with other agenda other than improved public transport outcomes.

I am a strong supporter of improved services on all lines.

Have a listen to this Jason --> http://backontrack.org/audio/bfast_190508_busway.mp3
I do travel by bus regularly in fact.

I am a medical scientist, and have always informed the press of that.  Any one can put out media on anything.  It is up to the press whether or not they wish to engage with it.
We are a community group and the media well understands that.  The media checks out thoroughly who they are dealing with, and as a community group we are grateful for the support that we do get from time to time.  It is hard work but work I enjoy in part as it is helping the wider community and it is way of developing some new skills.  Even setting up and running this web site takes time and a commitment.  These things just don't happen.  The support of our moderators is also very appreciated in their roles.

I value the support of all our members and the wider public.  We receive steady feedback via our form too.

As far as blunder re the Loop service, it is not.  Remember during Exhibition week loop services run non stop during peak and off peak.  Even if the original proposal is modified it still has a lot of practical common-sense and the response in the media confirms that.  We first raised the possible utilisation of the Exhibition loop with QR in January of this year when representatives of the group had a visit to QR Citytrain. Prior to that an earlier media release here --> http://backontrack.org/mbs/index.php?topic=175.0. QR indicated then that they will be looking at ways to incorporate loop services. Feedback from QR yesterday to Brisbanetimes also indicates it is still on the agenda. Media releases are not necessarily the correct answer in themselves but are tools to promote debate and perhaps lead to improvements in the longer term.

I have received private supportive feedback from people who do understand the proposal and as pointed out previously it is an idea to encourage some lateral thinking.

See this post, from a member who is very experienced in rail matters.  http://backontrack.org/mbs/index.php?topic=990.msg4375#msg4375

Jason, with almost every post you either have a go at me or our members. 
It is not necessary.  Your  attempts to belittle me are rather pointless and just re-inforce why a voice from the general commuters is desirable.  Your input is welcome, no need to put others down constantly.

I do consult widely and the press release was a synthesis of a number of independent ideas raised by members.  At times I have requested feedback on issues and the responses have been good, other times none.

Some times due to the nature of the media there is little time for direct consultation though.
We encourage feedback and always have.  Many members do that direct, for various reasons they don't want to post.  To establish a presence in the media responses have to be quick. One of the problems with previous commuter groups has been the response time to slow to be effective. Other groups such as CAST take a more expert oriented view and have an underpinning of experts.  We are the bottom rung of the ladder and are quite happy with that.

If you track through many of the releases you will see that they are in fact the synthesis of members suggestions and comments.

We are volunteers. We do this because we care.

Cheers
Ozbob

[stephenk]

Jason,

Your comments in this thread are completely unjustified. Some of the statements you have made recently in other threads have been completely off the mark!

If you read through past posts and media statements Ozbob has come up with some excellent ideas on this forum. He is also the driving force for getting the commuters voice heard.

Whilst I don't agree that a bidirectional loop service would work, I am able to discuss it in an adult manner. This is what message boards are for, to share and discuss ideas.

[ozbob]

Thanks for your comments Stephen and Zoiks.

Yes there are some issues with running clockwise particularly at the moment I agree.  But it is good to discuss it the context of linking up with possible other services that could also provide partial relief for some of the inner city loadings.


Hopefully all this will be the catalyst for some further innovation down the track so to speak 

The blogg feedback on the Brisbanetimes article is interesting.
See -->  here!

In time we might see regular runs through Tennyson once again.

Regards
Ozbob

[mrciclismo]

jason,

three things:
1. you should not belittle ozbob, this is inappropriate and insulting to him.  He is a volunteer and does a fine job.
2. ozbob has never made a secret of his background and his media statements are usually a distillation of opinions raised on this site (no pretending here).
3. the last line in your post of 10th June specifically "I thought this was a forum for a mixture or professional and non-professionals, but run by someone who actually works in the industry that has some knowledge, not someone pretending.", shows that you don't understand the nature of this group.  Every media release by ozbob has the following line at the head "RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport users ............"

Your opinion is welcome but the suggestion is that you a) stop belittling ozbob and b) reassess whether this community group meets your needs and find another industry one if it doesn't.

[david]

I don't think Ozbob is a person who works in the industry, has the technical knowledge to make public comments the way he does, more only being self serving for his darra / oxley to city.

First of all Jason, I think if Ozbob did work in the industry, there would be little need for a group like Rail Back On Track as the rail system would be much better than what it is today. Which brings me to this question - Do you work for QR Jason?

Secondly, your insult about Ozbob being self-serving for Oxley/Darra has shocked me. Have you not been awake for the past couple of years? There's almost a city being built full of people called "Springfield", and guess where all of these people catch the train from? That's right...the "Oxley/Darra area". I suppose that you don't live in this area so you wouldn't know the numbers of people catching a train in this area. Not to mention that Oxley/Darra get at least 5 buses from feeder suburbs (which i am a fan of), increasing rail patronage at these stations even more. If you would like to, try catching the 7:32am or 7:40am services from Darra, and see what you think afterwards. Ozbob also regularly campaigns for increased services for the Ferny Grove and Shorncliffe as well as all of the other rail lines in Brisbane. Just read some of the forums and you will see.

As for the debate over the use of the Exhibition and Tennyson loops, I can't see how it could hurt anyone...sounds like a great idea to me!

[stephenk]

Getting back on topic, I have been thinking further about this inner-city rail loop plan, and have some more concerns that it wouldn't work.

On top of the track conflicts around the Bowen Hills area which would occur from a clockwise loop train (which would restrict and reduce reliability of services using the Caboolture/Shorncliffe Lines), the service at Bowen Hills would either have to be:-
1) Non stopping (as per Ekka services) - making connections from lines to the North to Exhibition Line services longer as passengers would have to change at Brunswick Street.
2) 3-car trains - thus reducing train capacity and limiting overall line carrying capacity.
3) Only southern 3-cars berth at platform - with potential safety implications from people trying to disembark in northern 3-cars!

Also the Exhibition Station is still a 5-10 minute walk from the main employer in that area - RCH/RBWH. The RCH already has a busway station about 1 minute walk from it's main entrance, and in a year or two the same will be the case for the RBWH. For a quoted 20 minute loop frequency, passengers wishing to connect with a loop service at Roma Street, it would be faster to change onto the Busway with a bus every 7.5mins. For passengers wishing to connect at Bowen Hills/Brunswick St it would actually be on average faster to walk to the RCH/RBWH (takes me 13mins). There are also buses at least every 15mins from Bowen Hills and Brunswick St to RCH/RBWH for those who don't like walking. So really is there any benefit of running trains around the Exhibition Loop? Not really, and any benefits are quickly outweighed by the costs (operational).

To make the most of available track capacity, services should be made a simple as possible i.e reducing track, junction, and terminus conflicts. Thus adding extra services along existing routes (15min off-peak within Brisbane's conurbation) would be the most sensible thing to do rather than creating complicated loop services. This may require some small infrastructure improvements at some locations such as reversing sidings at termini. Maybe services could be tweaked for a 30min Ipswich Line (maybe Darra terminus) to City (and beyond) via Tennyson/Yerongpilly. This would allow passengers from the Ipswich Line better access to the Beenleigh/Gold Coast corridor and South Bank area.

[jason]

My comments regarding OzBob was in relation to recent comments he made on Courier Mail Web Site blog, where he belittled another blogger on it.

It also came after reading abusive comments he made on this website after he publically attacked an Architect who approached him and the group to form and be a part of a Community Reference Group

[ozbob]

I have never belittled anyone on any site.

There was another  person who was posting as my known identity at news com, steps have been taken since to ensure that person does not do that again.  This can be verified at news com.  I have a special email address now at news com which indicates  to news com when it is actually me blogging.  Sad one has to resort to these procedures to avoid silly attacks and so forth, but overall the cause - improved public transport I believe is worth the effort as I think you agree too Jason.

The second incident has been filed here (http://backontrack.org/mbs/index.php?board=23.0), any one can  judge the merit of your claim.  A possible misunderstanding was corrected and apology made.

To guard against the sort of incidents that did occur at News com, I would also like remind all users of the following extracts from our Terms of use at http://backontrack.org/mbs/index.php?topic=3.0  These terms of use have been in place since RAIL Back On Track commenced.

The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator, moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time should they see fit.

Also:

Multiple user accounts by the same person are not permitted at RAIL - Back On Track. If you have a problem with accessing your account, please do not just re-register, email admin@backontrack.org for assistance.

And:

RAIL - Back On Track Admin may remove or refuse to accept a user's registration at any time.

If anyone is not happy with our terms of use please advise and I will remove your registration.

Cheers
Ozbob

[ozbob]

Thanks for your comments Stephen. Yes, there are difficulties but no harm in sussing out further options.

There is a study under way looking at the utilisation of the Exhibition loop line, a rail bus interchange at the RNA station, and the underground rail loop. Some members felt it was timely to further highlight the exhibition line, link the utility of cross suburban service options as something worth considering. The underground rail loop even it was to go ahead I think would be at least 20 to 25 years away. So options that can improve things in the short term would work. Agreed the more technically inclined rail fraternity see problems (as do I in part).  But others are suggesting that there is merit. Modifying the base proposal so that say services from Darra loop around back to Darra. And services from say Shorncliffe loop around back to Shorncliffe  is another way. We have suggested that in the past too. The advantage of that is it does not cause a great increase in traffic through the CBD (but there is capacity for some ramp up, as indicated by the Exhibition week services fitting well with the normal timetable).  But it seems that this week release did hit the stress spot with many. And that is a good thing as it promotes debate.

As I mentioned elsewhere the public really does think that having a rail inner city option would be very useful.
In fact the support has been overwhelming at Brisbanetimes, and was probably the reason they put out the follow up article today I would suggest. It is a popular idea.  All popular ideas are not necessarily achievable I agree, but it will hopefully  have a postive impact on the study. Which was the one of the aims of advancing the release.

As usual, I have been criticised elsewhere, but that doesn't worry me.  QR itself has previously indicated that they are looking at options so I am comfortable with that.

When Jago Dobson responds "But I do welcome new and innovative thinking on this type of thing." I think we have all made a worthwhile contribution to the public debate.

Cheers
Ozbob

[stephenk]

Modifying the base proposal so that say services from Darra loop around back to Darra. And services from say Shorncliffe loop around back to Shorncliffe  is another way. We have suggested that in the past too.

This is a better idea for utilisation of the loop, as all trains would run anti-clockwise. However it again has problems. The trains using the loop would have to cross the line running in the opposite direction at Roma St (Darra loopers), and Mayne (Shorncliffe loopers). This would eat up line capacity. It would also mean that the Northbound line through the city would run more services than the Southbound. Maybe not a problem at present, but when services are ramped up in the next few years with new trains there may be a problem.

[ozbob]

What I was  suggesting there Stephen is (all stations) Darra to Milton, Roma St, Central Brunswick St, Exhibition (Normanby) Milton Darra.

Similarly (all stations) Shorncliffe Albion Exhibition (Normanby) Roma St Central  Brunswick Shorncliffe.

A different concept with the one way running through the CBD axis, but one way of increasing capacity, servicing the Exhibition loop, and helping the inner suburban congestion, and still allowing more express patterns in from Darra/Northgate.

How do you think that would go? Also has the advantage of providing all lines with transit to Exhibition either via Roma St / Central /Brunswick St.

[stephenk]

What I was  suggesting there Stephen is (all stations) Darra to Milton, Roma St, Central Brunswick St, Exhibition (Normanby) Milton Darra.

Similarly (all stations) Shorncliffe Albion Exhibition (Normanby) Roma St Central  Brunswick Shorncliffe.

A different concept with the one way running through the CBD axis, but one way of increasing capacity, servicing the Exhibition loop, and helping the inner suburban congestion, and still allowing more express patterns in from Darra/Northgate.

How do you think that would go? Also has the advantage of providing all lines with transit to Exhibition either via Roma St / Central /Brunswick St.

My comments were based on those operating patterns. I think it could work at current service frequencies. Certainly the current timetable must allow for a 4tph Exhibition service (i.e 4tph extra Northbound through the CBD). However when more trains are delivered and Ipswich-Caboolture Line services are ramped up then this could be an issue. As I mentioned above these service patterns still require a conflicting move at the entrances to the loop.

Given that the case for running trains to Exhibition is marginal (particularly when the busway opens to RBWH), I would rather see extra services added that run through Brisbane (e.g) Darra to Shorncliffe) as opposed to looping around and eating up track capacity.

I have also considered the idea of trains entering and leaving service from Mayne stopping at Exhibition (which often happens when the Exhibition line is in operation). However, for people travelling outh (who would have to change at Roma Street) it would be just as easy to use the busway to Roma Street. For people travelling north, it would be faster to just walk to Bowen Hills rather than taking the train via Roma St, Central, and Brunswick St.

[ozbob]

Thanks Stephen for the comments.

I still think there is plenty of capacity so maybe something in the interim is possible.  Things still function during the high frequency Exhibition services during the Ekka.

The real solution of course will be an underground loop that is being worked up in a feasibility study at the moment by the authorities.

I have been impressed with the overwhelming support for a service to the Exhibition from the public (many of them bus users and they are having problems), the Royal Brisbane Hospital, the Nurses Union, the RNA and others eg. Tristan Peach.  CAST has also supported this in the past as well.

Discussion is good, from that progress can be made!

Regards
Bob

[stephenk]

The real solution of course will be an underground loop that is being worked up in a feasibility study at the moment by the authorities.

Absolutely, a new underground rail tunnel through the city is what Brisbane really needs!

[ozbob]

Whooaaaa

-->  http://backontrack.org/mbs/index.php?topic=1027.msg4512#msg4512

It is all happening!   

[mufreight]

Perhaps a more practical approach to the problems and potential solutions that have been raised on this subject would be this.
That the exhibition station be relocated under Bowen Bridge Road giving access to both the Exhibition and the RBH precint.
Initialy the loop concept could be operated with trains operating as 3 car sets over the following figure eight loop Central - Roma Street- Yeerongpilly - Sherwood - Milton - Exhibition - Brunswick Street - Central in both directions.
The construction of an underground loop should be undertaken with the first stage of that project being the construction of a connection between the Exhibition loop and Central Station divirging off the Exhibition loop in the vicinity of Yorks Hollow and running underground to an underground station beneath Central.  An intermediate station under Gregory Terrace would service the Grammar Schools.
The station at Central should be constructed with four platforms and initialy some services would operate using this route from Central to Cabolture and Shorncliffe, using the underground station as a turnback will free up some train paths through the Bowen Hills - Brunswick Street - Central - Roma Street section for other additional services.
The next stage of the construction of the underground link would continue in the direction of Gardens Point to an underground station at Alice Street, when this section was completed services would then be extended from Central to turnback there servicing The Parliament and the Gardens Point University of Technology Campus.
The next stage would be the construction under the river to a station at Wooloongabba having an interchange with the Wooloongabba Bus Station, again on the complerion of that section services would be extended to operate from the Gabba.
To complete the loop the line would then continue underground to connect with the Beenleigh line in the vicinity of Dutton Park.
Once that connection was made loop services could operate through the new line in both directions on a Central - Milton - Sherwood - Yeerongpilly - Dutton Park - Central underground - Exhibition - Brunswick Street - Central loop service supplementing rerouted services over the underground line between the Gold Coast - Airport, Shorncliffe - Beenleigh and possibly Rosewood - Cabolture via Yeerongpilly - Dutton Park - Central underground - Exhibition Station (RBH) and Albion
The benefits of services to Wooloongabba, Parliament, Spring Hill and RBH are undoubted as are the benefits of the connecting services that can then be efficently operated via the proposed loop.
That such an underground connection would also resolve the problems of the restriction of services because of capacity constraints both cross river (by removing the need for the construction of another cross river rail crossing) and through the Roma Street - Bowen Hills section.
It would provide rail service into areas not presently served by rail, Gabba, Parliament, Spring Hill and RBH while providing capacity for additional services on all lines and improved connections between existing lines in the Cityrail network.
These improved levels of service would contribure to greater usage of rail thus reducing the dependence on road based transport both public and private.

[Zoiks]

Should the suggested underground line be 2 or 4 tracks. Im hoping for 4 for future expansion

[ozbob]

Thanks mu!  Very interesting perspective, and I am sure it will be noted.

Regards
Bob

[mufreight]

To add,
Zoiks questioned as to if the underground loop should be constructed as two tracks or four,
effectively this loop if constructed as two tracks would would give six tracks through the CBD and if built as four tracks knowing the bean counters cost constraints would ensure that the proposal never got off the ground, by building the underground station at Central as a four platform station the additional tracks there would enable trains to have recovery time built into their running times and could dwell there untill their actual departure times much as happens at Central at present, it would also simplify any future amplification of the underground to four tracks.
To construct the link as four tracks is not at this time either realistic or practical as the capacity of the lines that the link would connect with would then become the constraint on the numbers of services that could be operated and the extra two tracks would be underutilised.
Hope that clears up the reasoning used when putting the proposal together

[stephenk]

Initialy the loop concept could be operated with trains operating as 3 car sets over the following figure eight loop Central - Roma Street- Yeerongpilly - Sherwood - Milton - Exhibition - Brunswick Street - Central in both directions.

This bidirectional loop idea would not work without causing major disruptions to other lines and eating up track capacity. Can we please please drop this idea!

I agree with most of your cross city line idea, however:-

The station at Central should be constructed with four platforms and initialy some services would operate using this route from Central to Cabolture and Shorncliffe, using the underground station as a turnback will free up some train paths through the Bowen Hills - Brunswick Street - Central - Roma Street section for other additional services.

Given the huge cost of tunnelling, I think 2 tracks is a more likely option!

The next stage of the construction of the underground link would continue in the direction of Gardens Point to an underground station at Alice Street, when this section was completed services would then be extended from Central to turnback there servicing The Parliament and the Gardens Point University of Technology Campus.

I wouldn't build it in stages with each stop being a temporary terminus. The terminus infrastructure (crossovers, or reversing sidings) would add to the costs. It's best to build it in just one or two stages.

I would also build it in the other direction, as the busiest track on the QR network is currently Park Rd to Bowen Hills northbound in the am peak at 19tph. Thus I would construct from Park Rd/Gabba to Central first, and then to Exhibition.

As for operations, I would run the Ferny Grove - Beenleigh Line through the new tunnel. It would involve extending the Ferny Grove's flyover at Bowen Hills. It would allow Shorncliffe Line services to move to the Suburban tracks, allowing for more Caboolture Line trains on the Main tracks. It would also give Beenleigh/Gold Coast commuters a choice of routes into the city (via South Bank or Gardens Point). It would allow for an increase in services on all lines, and simple reliable operations.

[Derwan]

Wasn't there talk of upgrading Bowen Hills to a bus/rail interchange?  Perhaps it will be redesigned to allow bidirectional travel on the exhibition loop without impeding on outbound services.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that being people outside of the industry, we can only speculate on what might be able to happen and what might not be able to happen.  We can't rule anything in OR out.  Just because something is or isn't feasible in our own minds doesn't mean something is or isn't possible - nor does it mean we should stop discussing possibilities.

The best solutions often spring from a seed planted by someone thinking outside the box.... someone who isn't constrained by traditional ways of thinking.

So keep speculating and coming up with possibilities.  It just might be the next big thing for public transport in Brisbane. 

[mufreight]

Further explanation for Stephenk,
A single direction loop service simply does not work, the public simply does not accept the idea of having to travel a complete loop to reach a point that is one stop in the reverse direction, a point that I saw proven in my time working in the bus industry.
There is sufficent track capacity at the present time to allow such a service.
It is worth remembering that once the first stage of the undergroung link is constructed and brought into service some parths would become avaliable through the existing CBD lines.
As for constructing and commisioning the line in stages, it would be logical for a crossover between the running lines at Central, an operating ploy that would save the need for further crossover facilities as the line extended the trains operating over the extension operate as if there were two single track sidings beyond Central running out on the one line then reversing and using the same line to return as far as Central where they would return to the appropriate line using the turnback crossovers installed for the initial section to Central. this would give something like an 8 trains per hour capacity on the extended line.
Effectively the construction would be a continuing process but as each section was completed it would be brought into service, this would then generate commuter and political support ensuring that there was sufficent support for the completion of the link.
The proposal is one part logic, one part practiality (based on a lifetime of experience in public transport) and the remainder is based upon an understanding of the political mind and the needs of expediency.
I hope that this fleshes out my reasoning behind porposal.

[stephenk]

There is sufficent track capacity at the present time to allow such a service.

No there isn't.

Here are 12 reasons why the bidirectional loop is unworkable (the 1st one really proves my point):-
(I have used Ozbob's 20minute bidirectional frequency for my argument here)

1) Platform 4 at Bowen Hills - the clockwise loopers would have to run in the wrong direction through this platform. This would limit the headway on the Down Main to 6 minutes whenever this movement takes place. The realistic peak capacity for the Down Main is 15tph/4min headway due to dwell time at Central. At a 20 minute frequency the anti-clockwise loopers would take 3 tph. The clockwise loopers would take 4.5tph (see above). Thus you have just limited the Down Main (Caboolture/Nambour/North Coast/Shorncliffe) to just 7.5tph. It currently operates 12tph in the afternoon peak. Oh dear!

2) There are conflicting junction movements in multiple locations. An example is a train travelling from Yerongpilly to Tennyson will have to cross the path of Gold Coast & Beenleigh to City services. Whilst this can be timetabled to limit conflicts, if it is happening in multiple locations it gets much harder to timetable. Also any delay will cause on a knock on effect with other services travelling in the other direction.

3) Two single track sections (near Corinda and Bowen Hills) - even more conflicting movement problems.

4) Figure 8 operation as suggested by mufreight would add "mega" conflicts near Roma Street. Each service would have to cross the path of 2 to 3 other services! Example Normanby to South Brisbane would have to cross the path of services to Ipswich, from Ipswich and from South Brisbane. This would cause not only cause chaos during the peaks, but limit track capacity.

5) Sydney is presently trying to reduce conflicting movements as part of it's Clearways project. The London Underground and New York Subway realised that conflicting movements and grade junctions were a bad idea in the early 1900s. The worlds most reliable and frequent metro systems (Paris, Moscow, Hong Kong) do not have any conflicting junction movements. So why do you want to increase them?

6) The line from Park Road to Roma Street is already near it's maximum realistic capacity of approx 20tph, with 19tph inbound trains during the morning peak.  Adding trains to the Beenleigh Line at Yerongpilly would reduce the number of trains that could be run on either the Beenleigh Line (beyond Yerongpilly), Gold Coast Line, and Cleveland Line. This would increase overcrowding on these lines.

7) Running this loop would provide an uneven service, weighted towards the South of Brisbane. This does not make efficient use of track capacity, and would limit services from stations north of Bowen Hills.

8 ) Bowen Hills platform 4 (again) can only accommodate 3 car of trains using the loop. Trains would either have to berth just 3-cars (safety implications), not stop (making connections to loop from North 4 minutes longer, but at least reduce the impact of 1)), or run as 3 cars (waste of track capacity).

9) With new trains being delivered and ordered, the track capacity is likely to be used to maximum within a few years (i.e 20tph Suburban tracks, 15tph Main tracks, all trains 6-car). This would make many of the above problems even worse.

10) It is debatable how much of a benefit a full time service to Exhibition would be, especially when the Northern Busway opens to RBWH.

11) It is debatable how necessary a regular train service to Tennyson is. I'm sure that an improved Corinda to Yerongpilly bus would be more cost effective.

12) A loop service has no terminus. Where would your looping trains take their delay catch up time without delaying trains behind?

I don't wish to cause offence, but this bidirectional loop idea is really an unworkable "trainspotters fantasy". Whilst there is nothing wrong in sparking debate with fresh ideas, we sometimes have to be realistic.   

If anyone still thinks that it is a good idea, then they should ride London's infamously unreliable Circle line until they realise quite how bad conflicting movements and grade junctions are!

[mufreight]

Good valid comment but if the naysayers rule nothing gets done so to continue

Quoted from Stephenk
I don't wish to cause offence, but this bidirectional loop idea is really an unworkable "trainspotters fantasy". Whilst there is nothing wrong in sparking debate with fresh ideas, we sometimes have to be realistic.   

It is fact that this trainspotters fantasy is operated quite successfully each exhibition through the key section through the hole on the wall at Bowen Hills

As for the Park Road - Roma Street section the extended use of the dual gauge would aleviate this potential problem, the bigest hitch from the operational point of view is South Brisbane - Roma Street, a point that further supports the need for the proposed underground link.

Yes there are potential conflicts of train paths but it is possible.

As for Yeerongpilly - Tennyson - Sherwood a train does it in less than a third of the time of the bus and it would provide a practical connection between the southern and western lines.

[ozbob]

Until an underground loop extension appears, I think simply bringing the say the Darra and Shorncliffe services through the cbd and then out around the loop would work, is within existing constraints and would provide a service.  In any case it is unlikely to happen until the Exhibition station complex is done. One is planned, I am sure then that a regular rail service will be a feature.  The existing layouts can be changed.

This is no fantasy, it is something that is being considered as part of the study at the moment.

Another wild card is the possibility that Mayne yard and facilities it self may go. Where?  I am not sure, but it could be decentralised.  I remember as a lad in Melbourne the massive yards at Flinders St for the suburban stuff mainly.  Now gone.  A similar fate may well await Mayne.


The point about Tennyson, is not loading at Tennyson but utilising the link for novel patterns between the two lines.  There is some of that at the moment, eg Services from Corinda to South Brisbane and onwards and vice versa. The odd special Gold Coast to Ipswich via Tennyson and vice versa.  In time these might be more regular services.

Cheers
Bob

[stephenk]

It is fact that this trainspotters fantasy is operated quite successfully each exhibition through the key section through the hole on the wall at Bowen Hills

Not quite. The Ekka loop runs anti-clockwise only. Also being an "inner rail" loop service it has no conflicting movements. Extra trains running to Exhibition tend to be those entering and exiting service from Mayne yard.

This is a whole different ball game to running a bidirectional loop, which the current track layout at Bowen Hills prevents.

[ozbob]

Just for interest.

From Courier Mail click here!

Brisbane's new $77 million tennis centre serves it up

Brisbane's new $77 million tennis centre serves it up
Article from: The Courier-Mail

By Paul Malone

June 21, 2008 12:00am

TENNIS stars will be offered a free trip to the Whitsundays as part of a high-powered player recruiting campaign for the inaugural Brisbane International tournament in January.

The Brisbane International, from January 4 to 10, will officially open the new $77 million state tennis centre at Tennyson.

It is anticipated that either the centre itself or the main 5500-seat stadium will be named after Pat Rafter, the most recent Queenslander to win a Grand Slam title ...
More --> here

Yeerongpilly and Tennyson could be useful stations for this centre.  Maybe some specials could be run across the link from Corinda to Yeerongpilly (as in days of old  ) when major events on.  Would make it easier for folks to get there.