Kurraby to Woodridge realignment and triplication

[verbatim9]

Does anyone agree that the section of the Gold coast line from Kurraby to Woodridge needs realignment to increase speed and reliability on the line?

[STB]

There's a bunch of areas on the Beenleigh line that could be realigned to get a straighter path down to Beenleigh and the Gold Coast, don't forget Sunnybank and Fairfield (yes I know the Fairfield part of the line was realigned due to the 1893 floods - the original alignment went along Fairfield Road).  Very very unlikely that will ever happen though, the alignment seems to be rather fixed.

[SurfRail]

Woodridge to Kuraby should be done (and can be done a lot more easily than some other possible deviations).  If Trinder Park needs to be obliterated so be it.  Woodridge is spitting distance and there is a bus on both sides of the corridor which goes there.

I'm very skeptical about adding more tracks south of Kuraby though.  What would they actually achieve that four tracks inbound of Kuraby wouldn't?

[achiruel]

I think triplication beyond Kuraby wild be required to run both GC and Beenleigh services at 15 minutes counter peak while still running a decent amount of peak services e.g 8tph beenleigh and 6tph GC.

[SurfRail]

Triplicated lines don't really help in running an even bi-directional express service.

I'm very reticent to see any money spent on the current alignment - it's awful.  Every dollar spent building extra tracks through the Altandi or Trinder Park chicanes is a dollar that isn't being spent duplicating Manly to Cleveland, or building more light rail.

[achiruel]

I agree that the alignment is poor.  I wouldn't want triplication on the current alignment, but I think I would be a good idea on a new alignment.

Also regarding triplication not increasing capacity - I very much doubt the proposed new Sector 1 timetable would be possible without triplication between Petrie and Northgate.

[SteelPan]

The only long term serious improvement worthwhile to the Bris/Beenleigh section of the GC line, is twin bored CBD to Beenleigh tunnels with a handful of strategic stops representing the development of the modern wider Brisbane region [only approx double in length, what Sydney is already doing with the underground component of its NW Rail link] - realignments etc will never give this vital corridor the grunt it deserves, it services regions with billions of dollars worth of projects coming! B'leigh/GC is great - B'leigh to Bris CBD totally lets it down as a high-speed inter urban corridor. Reducing tunneling costs and better technology, have put this project well into the doable basket - particularly given Brisbane already needs to tunnel a 2nd corridor through the CBD - two birds killed, with one stone!

Obviously, once you get the Bris/GC pressure off the existing Bris/B'leigh corridor, you can undertake more reasonable improvements, reflecting its true "suburban rail corridor" capacity. Project could also include a link from inner Southside lines into the new CBD corridor - delivering the CRR project.

[SurfRail]

^ I can see no reason why you need to build all 40km of this new alignment underground.  Surface treatments would work for nearly the entire length, and you could just use the busway alignment for the most part between Eight Mile Plains and Greenslopes (which would have the added benefit of p%ssing the ineffective buses off a major line haul route).

[James]

Really you can just use the existing reserved motorway/busway corridor. Might be a little expensive to convert the busway, probably cheaper than re-aligning the Beenleigh line though. Once you hit Buranda, you can put the railway line in a tunnel a la CRR and retain the Eastern/Inner busway.

The fact is right now, the car sh%ts all over the train in terms of travel time (especially out of peak) because the railway line does the equivalent of turning off the highway at Exit 34 and following Logan Rd/Beenleigh Rd/Beaudesert Rd.