Logan and Southern Region

[STB]

One thing I will mention about the 566 that some people commenting on here about might not realise (forgive me if I'm wrong about that though) is that the 566 does get sardined quite well, however the crush happens largely at Loganholme (with further contribution from 8MP, Garden City and Griffith), rather than while going through Windaroo and Tanah Merah.

From what I have seen in the mornings, the 566 (and 571 for that matter) hauls loads to Loganholme of maybe 20–30 odd people. However, they then fill up (for the most part) at Loganholme from the "peak hour commuter lineup" that forms. As all 3 peak services leave from the same stop, what happens is you have a large line up of commuters at that one stop. Each time a 566, 569 or 571 comes in, the lineup fills the bus until either the line disappears or the bus hits capacity – whichever happens first (often the latter). When the bus hits full, the line stops and waits for the next express to come in a few minutes later, with the line replenishing during the wait.

This is probably why the 566 and 571 (and the 573 and 575, as this happens to them at Springwood) were retained IMO – not as a rocket from a suburb that doesn't require one, but as additional peak capacity for Loganholme Station (Springwood Station for the 573 and 575). If you were to shorten the 566 and 571 to Loganholme (and 573 and 575 to Springwood) you would just need to throw more buses at the 555, 569 and 581 routes to fill the capacity shortfall that would form there.

I would tend to agree with that assessment. 

I would also ask people to not get onto the 'LETS CUT' bandwagon unless you understand the route and the dynamics of why a route may exist.  Yes, there are some bus routes that ideally should be removed, mainly from the BT area, but as Nathan has pointed out, the 566 hauls up to 30 people before Loganholme, and that's a a fairly decent load, despite there also being a train, which I should also point out, people out that way (and I have about 1.5 years of travelling out there to/from work to back myself up), that no one will catch a train out of Beenleigh if it is going all stations or even part express, the psychological part of that is that of a longer trip, and more uncomfortable trip at that by going all stations from 40km out of the city, so people will tend to catch the expresses from the Gold Coast instead, but if they are standing room only, then they will revert to the bus ie: route 566.  It's the same reason why the Cleveland expresses need to stay on as much as possible in the sector 2 timetables, hardly anyone catches the all stoppers between Manly and Cleveland, but plenty catch the expresses between those stations, to the point where it is standing room when you depart Manly.

I would bet my life that if anyone tried to remove route 566 from the network, you'll not only have further congestion at Loganholme which the only way of sorting out is adding more 569s, 571s etc, negating the removal of route 566 in terms of route KMs spent (ie: not really any gain in savings), but also the locals would not be impressed if you told them you are train passengers, catch the train, the response would be, 'no, I'm not catching the all stopper, and I don't want to stand on the GC express (for whatever reason), I'll drive instead!', and people will do that.  I've heard in my local area that since route 257 has been removed, people are choosing to drive instead of taking the train, even though they live in a train corridor.  Mostly because for them it is more convienent in spending time getting to the station, and then catching the train, as oppose to walking out the door for 5mins and getting the bus in.  It's human nature to find the most efficient way into where you are going based on where you live.  Even I do it!

@Gazza, yeah it was in the bad days of the GC expresses being a proper 'Bombay Express', where people in selfishness took camper chairs onto the train to sit on, taking up valuable standing space.  There were even people sitting in between the carriages IIRC, a big safety no-no.

[nathandavid88]

 

It makes sense to keeop the bus in service if it is largely full when it arrives at Loganholme without forcing a transfer, but from when I've been on it I don't know that is usually the case.  Same with the 571.

It's not full generally, but I see it as a waste–reducing measure.

As I said, the routes like 566 serve more of a purpose as added capacity for Loganholme Station. If you were to separate the 566, you would basically have a higher frequency peak version of the 565 and 553 (566 combines the southern part of both these routes) that would bring people to Loganholme, right? Once these routes get to Loganholme, you'd have to do something with the buses – either run them back to Windaroo/Beenleigh where they'd carry 99% air (not much demand for the reverse route during peak) and put on additional 569s (which to me seems to require a net increase in buses); or you could have them convert to a 569 on arrival at Loganholme – no different to a 566 except with a route number change and kicking everyone off and onto the back of the line before refilling (great way to p%ss people off). Having them as a 566 just eliminates that p%ssing off part of the latter option.

Running the route as the 566 is really the least wasteful way to run this route – two routes (feeder and trunk) with two buses that would both have dead running halves are combined into a single rocket route using only one bus. Clarks do this kind of thing extensively from Loganholme. For example: evening buses running a 3 in 1 route combination of the 570 loop to Loganholme, that becomes a 553 to Beenleigh, and returns to Loganholme as a short running 565 before continuing on as a new 570 (rinse and repeat). It largely eliminates dead running while still providing these connections which aren't greatly used, but do attract enough use to warrant retain them.

[#Metro]

They should ALL be terminated at 8 Mile Plains where passengers would transfer to an automated Subway service to the CBD.

[nathandavid88]

Or just continue the automated subway to Loganholme...

[#Metro]

Or just continue the automated subway to Loganholme...

Ideally you would do this but baby steps first. Not everybody is on board with the idea (I am a loon apparently, LOL, even though it works perfectly fine in both Vancouver and Toronto) and there isn't Class A ROW which is mandatory for subway operation beyond 8 MP at the moment.

Fares have to rise a bit higher still before I think other people start to 'get' it. 

[#Metro]

First Generation 'Skytrain' operating in Toronto, known as 'The RT'.
Note the guideway and curves as well. More modern generations operate in Vancouver and Kuala Lumpur...

[nathandavid88]

Fares have to rise a bit higher still before I think other people start to 'get' it. 

I think fares have to rise a lot higher before we can afford it!

[#Metro]

I think fares have to rise a lot higher before we can afford it!

Ha ha ha. What's so affordable about firing rockets and buses from 40+km away in peak hour ALL running directly to the CBD with 1 staff person per 65 people?

Waste like this is pushing up fares and subsidies to the highest levels on the planet. Even Perth has cheaper fares and lower subsidies.

[James]

I would tend to agree with that assessment. 

I would also ask people to not get onto the 'LETS CUT' bandwagon unless you understand the route and the dynamics of why a route may exist.  Yes, there are some bus routes that ideally should be removed, mainly from the BT area, but as Nathan has pointed out, the 566 hauls up to 30 people before Loganholme, and that's a a fairly decent load, despite there also being a train, which I should also point out, people out that way (and I have about 1.5 years of travelling out there to/from work to back myself up), that no one will catch a train out of Beenleigh if it is going all stations or even part express, the psychological part of that is that of a longer trip, and more uncomfortable trip at that by going all stations from 40km out of the city, so people will tend to catch the expresses from the Gold Coast instead, but if they are standing room only, then they will revert to the bus ie: route 566.  It's the same reason why the Cleveland expresses need to stay on as much as possible in the sector 2 timetables, hardly anyone catches the all stoppers between Manly and Cleveland, but plenty catch the expresses between those stations, to the point where it is standing room when you depart Manly.

I would bet my life that if anyone tried to remove route 566 from the network, you'll not only have further congestion at Loganholme which the only way of sorting out is adding more 569s, 571s etc, negating the removal of route 566 in terms of route KMs spent (ie: not really any gain in savings), but also the locals would not be impressed if you told them you are train passengers, catch the train, the response would be, 'no, I'm not catching the all stopper, and I don't want to stand on the GC express (for whatever reason), I'll drive instead!', and people will do that.  I've heard in my local area that since route 257 has been removed, people are choosing to drive instead of taking the train, even though they live in a train corridor.  Mostly because for them it is more convienent in spending time getting to the station, and then catching the train, as oppose to walking out the door for 5mins and getting the bus in.  It's human nature to find the most efficient way into where you are going based on where you live.  Even I do it!

Question, what makes you, living in an obscure pocket of suburbia over 40km from the CBD, somehow more deserving of frequency which at times in AM peak is better than what I, someone living around 6km from the CBD, does?

What makes these people entitled to a bus service like this, which is just duplication and makes the network more complex?

They should be fed to the rail network. If they don't like it, here's a revolutionary idea - how about you stop living in the middle of bloody nowhere and move to somewhere closer in and live a more sustainable lifestyle? PT is not a taxi service, and people living in zone 8 should stop acting like they're bloody entitled to a rocket from their hose in the middle of nowhere to the CBD. You are not.

Sure, you can drive if you want, have fun sitting in traffic on the M1 though.

Also, nathan: these buses run dead all the way from the CBD to quite possibly Windaroo! This is 42km of dead running - what a huge waste of resources.

[#Metro]

Question, what makes you, living in an obscure pocket of suburbia over 40km from the CBD, somehow more deserving of frequency which at times in AM peak is better than what I, someone living around 6km from the CBD, does?

What makes these people entitled to a bus service like this, which is just duplication and makes the network more complex?

They should be fed to the rail network. If they don't like it, here's a revolutionary idea - how about you stop living in the middle of bloody nowhere and move to somewhere closer in and live a more sustainable lifestyle? PT is not a taxi service, and people living in zone 8 should stop acting like they're bloody entitled to a rocket from their hose in the middle of nowhere to the CBD. You are not.

Sure, you can drive if you want, have fun sitting in traffic on the M1 though.

Also, nathan: these buses run dead all the way from the CBD to quite possibly Windaroo! This is 42km of dead running - what a huge waste of resources.

AMEN.

Nobody has the unchallengable right to direct high-waste rockets to their front door from 40 km away. What a joke!! If the Gold Coast Line trains get full at peak hour, does this mean we can start firing rocket buses from Tweed Heads, Coolangatta, Nerang, Surfers Paradise, Robina, Southport, Helensvale etc etc? By some of the logic in this thread you would think so.

Boost train capacity by signal upgrades, CRR etc. This cannot continue - yes it is convenient but so is the government dialling and sending a taxi to everyone's front door. The buses on these routes which run only a handful of services per day are very costly to buy and it is a waste to have them sit around all day in the depot and only be used during peaks.

[techblitz]

hmmm
566 city to Beenleigh rail 50 mins

central station - beeleigh rail 60 mins

this could also work to the same 566 travel times but only if the 566 was rostered to meet each gold coast train  ( 45 mins + 5 minute penalty)


just did a quick comparison for 555 vs logan rockets to Loganholme

takes 42 minutes via the 555

and for the rockets its a nice 33 minutes. No wonder they are so popular 

[James]

hmmm
566 city to Beenleigh rail 50 mins

central station - beeleigh rail 60 mins

this could also work to the same 566 travel times but only if the 566 was rostered to meet each gold coast train  ( 45 mins + 5 minute penalty)


just did a quick comparison for 555 vs logan rockets to Loganholme

takes 42 minutes via the 555

and for the rockets its a nice 33 minutes. No wonder they are so popular 

hmmm...

I have an amazing idea! I'm going to introduce P746. The Gold Coast Highway corridor, especially between Surfers and Broadbeach, is really densely populated. I think we should put a rocket through there to cater for commuters to Brisbane, meaning people no longer have to crowd up the Gold Coast train. It will run express from Nerang station to Brisbane, via the SE Busway stopping only at Loganholme, 8MP and Buranda.

I anticipate this rocket will take one hour to travel to the CBD. Now because pax don't need to transfer, and the trip from Nerang takes around 70 minutes, we should save around 15 minutes. What a great idea - I'm sure Surfside will absolutely get on board with this one! Think about how fast it will be! Think about how passengers will benefit.

 

This is the logic you are applying. It is awful logic, if I had not implied that already.

[techblitz]

james I wish you would make up your mind seriously...
sometimes its hard to tell when you are actually telling the truth or when you are spinning BS...

this is from the other thread in which you were countering LD on his subway proposal.
LD stated that rockets should feed into GU then pax transfer to the city. Actually ,hes also just emphasised the point in this thread as well with 8mp.

you countered..using a rocket service as an example 

Let us use a specific example. I'll call the transfer penalty 5 minutes in this case. Yes, the wait time will only be around 2 minutes, but as I have said, people do not like transferring. The reason why we force transferring in PT is because it is not economic to provide rockets to everybody's doorstep, and hence for some passengers on lower-patronage routes, we can feed them into rail/bus. We are going to use Mains Rd at Altandi - stop 68 as our example. We will assume an average wait time of one minute.

Current trip:
1 minute wait time
+
33 minute trip to CBD (using 7:39am P133 service)
=
34 minute trip

Lapdog's proposed subway trip:
1 minute wait time (frequency is so high it can't be increased)
+
14 minute trip to GU
+
5 minute transfer
+
19 minute trip to CBD (assuming similar trip time to now)
=
39 minute trip

You are selling the residents of Mains Rd an inferior option.

Ps:  some other quotes from you in that thread

And inconvenience people who actually use their bus route, while other people on lesser-used corridors continue to have express buses to their doorstep?

And full bus routes, 99% of the time, make money. Therefore, we can put on another service, and over time it will make money too. Yes, you can turn them back, but then the transfer makes things more inconvenient, especially given these money-making routes are very frequent, and inevitably in peak hour.

&

The people in Brisbane can get a better option simply by reforming the network a la the bus review, and see how things go from there. We do not need to take the axe to some of Brisbane's most popular bus services in exchange for Lapdog's ideology of 5 minute feeder bus frequency everywhere.

like I said...you seem to change your point of view when it suits you......shall we say the mood of the thread or when someone puts up a decent argument (nathandavid and stb did btw)

[SurfRail]

The 566 really doesn't bear on the other issues James has raised, all of which involve no feasible rail alternative and buses running at much, much, much higher headways.

[ozbob]

Logan and Southern Region maps

--> http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/seq-bus-network-review-2013/logan/maps

[James]

james I wish you would make up your mind seriously...
sometimes its hard to tell when you are actually telling the truth or when you are spinning BS...

this is from the other thread in which you were countering LD on his subway proposal.
LD stated that rockets should feed into GU then pax transfer to the city. Actually ,hes also just emphasised the point in this thread as well with 8mp.

you countered..using a rocket service as an example 

like I said...you seem to change your point of view when it suits you......shall we say the mood of the thread or when someone puts up a decent argument (nathandavid and stb did btw)

Firstly, if it was not obvious, P746 was very much a sarcastic post. There is a BIG difference between the Mains Rd corridor and Windaroo.

In my long-term ideological plan, a railway line runs down Mains Road, and the SE Busway will not need more than bi-artics to cope with demand. I have stated numerous times, the 130/140/150 and its associated rockets exist solely because of the failure to expand the railway network and have pax feeding into the rail network. Nothing more. If Altandi had a massive interchange and the BL line followed a direct, fast alignment to the CBD (not this awful thing it does now on 2tph) on high frequency, yes, I'd be all for feeding passengers to rail. But it doesn't. The other issue with a subway is what happens further down the line - buses can't go to UQ, buses can't go to Carindale, and buses can't join the busway at Buranda or HPW if it is so desired. You are forcing a near transfer for passengers which is far from desirable.

By comparison, with a railway line, the 130/140/150 and their associated rockets can simply go from Parkinson/Browns Plains, hit Fruitgrove/Plainlands (yes, re-align the BL line before you build Mains Rd railway), and then continue some services to GU/Garden City for connectivity purposes and terminate. This saves even more resources, avoids having to build more infrastructure and still gives the busway flexibility in the inner section. If you take off the 130/140/150 from the busway, you will realise that especially on weekends, at stations like Greenslopes and HPW, the busway is nothing but buses acting like trains on the inner Ipswich line. They come every 15 minutes and pick up a few passengers at each station.

You also ignore frequency. We could give Windaroo much better frequency if we terminated the bus at Beenleigh. You cannot physically do this with the Mains Road corridor. The road has 7.5 minute frequency at 6am on a Sunday morning, and a bus every minute in peak!

The 566 isn't popular. It gets its classification from the pax it picks up at Loganholme. Finally, Windaroo is in zone 8. Mains Rd, for the most part, is in zone 4. Can you see the difference between the two?

Each and every situation is different, there is no 'one size fits all' in PT planning. The 130/140/150 do well with what they do. The 566 only succeeds because of pax from Loganholme. Resources could be used much better simply by telling pax to get on a Gold Coast or Beenleigh train.

[STB]

I'm amazed that they are implementing this in December.  I would've thought they would implement this at the same time as the Sector II timetables to get connectivity happening between train and bus, which for many years has been quite poor in the Southern (Logan) Region.  Unless, in the change we get awesome connections, and then once the Sector II timetables come in, the connections get bad again lol.

[ozbob]

http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/seq-bus-network-review-2013/logan/maps

534    60 mins    Weekdays: 6.30am to 9.30pm
Saturdays: 6.30am to 7.00pm
Sundays: 8.30am to 5.30pm
540    60 mins    Weekdays: 5.45am to 7.00pm
541    60 mins    Weekdays: 6.00am to 7.00pm
Saturdays: 8.30am to 6.30pm
Sundays: 8.30am to 5.30pm
542    60 mins    Weekdays: 6.30am to 7.00pm
Saturdays: 8.00am to 6.30pm
Sundays: 8.00am to 6.00pm
543    60 mins    Weekdays: 6.30pm to 6.30pm
545    Weekdays: 30 mins
Weekends: 60 mins    Weekdays: 6.00am to 9.00pm
Saturdays: 7.30am to 7.30pm
Sundays: 8.30am to 6.30pm
546    Weekday AM peak: 10 trips
Weekday PM peak: 9 trips    Weekday AM peak: 5.45am to 8.30pm
Weekday PM peak: 3.30pm to 6.30pm
547    60 mins    Weekdays: 6.30am to 7.30pm
550    Weekdays: 30 mins
Weekends: 60 mins    Weekdays: 6.00am to 8.00pm
Saturdays: 7.30am to 6.30pm
Sundays: 8.45am to 6.30pm
551    Weekday AM peak: 5 trips
Weekday PM peak: 5 trips    Weekday AM peak: 5.45am to 8.30am
Weekday PM peak: 4.15pm to 7.15pm
552    Weekdays: 30 mins
Weekends: 60 mins    Weekdays: 6.00am to 7.00pm
Saturdays: 8.00am to 7.00pm
Sundays: 8.00am to 6.00pm
553    60 mins    Weekdays: 6.30am to 11.00pm
Saturdays: 7.30am to 11.00pm
Sundays: 8.30am to 6.00pm
554    60 mins    Weekdays: 7.00am to 7.30pm
Saturdays: 8.00am to 7.00pm
Sundays: 9.00am to 6.30pm
555    15 mins    Weekdays: 5.30am to 12.00am
Saturdays: 6.00am to 11.30pm
Sundays: 6.15am to 9.45pm
N555    From Loganholme to the Valley: 3 trips
From the Valley to Loganholme: 6 trips    
Fridays and Saturdays: 11.37pm to 6.30am
560    Weekdays: 30 mins
Weekends: 60 mins    Weekdays: 6.00am to 8.00pm
Saturdays: 7.00am to 7.00pm
Sundays: 8.00am to 6.00pm
561    Weekday AM peak: 5 trips
Weekday PM peak: 5 trips    Weekday AM peak: 6.15am to 8.30am
Weekday PM peak: 5.00pm to 7.30pm
562    Weekdays: 60 mins
Saturdays: 60 mins    Weekdays: 7.15am to 7.00pm
Saturdays: 8.15am to 6.15pm
563    60 mins    Weekdays: 6.15am to 10.00pm
Saturdays: 8.00am to 6.45pm
564    Sundays: 2 hourly    Sundays: 8.30am to 6.00pm
565    60 mins    Weekdays: 8.15am to 4.45pm
Saturdays: 8.30am to 10.30pm
Sundays: 8.00am to 5.30pm
566    Weekday AM peak: 6 trips
Weekday PM peak: 5 trips    Weekday AM peak: 6.00am to 9.00am
Weekday PM peak: 4.30pm to 7.00pm
568    Sundays: 2 hourly    Sundays: 10.00am to 5.30pm
P569    Weekday AM peak: 9 trips
Weekday PM peak: 8 trips    Weekday AM peak: 6.30am to 9.00am
Weekday PM peak: 3.00pm to 7.00pm
570    60 mins    Weekdays: 6.00am to 5.00pm
571    Weekday AM peak: 5 trips
Weekday PM peak: 5 trips    Weekday AM peak: 6.30am to 8.30am
Weekday PM peak: 4.15pm to 6.45pm
572    Weekdays: 30 mins Weekends: 60 mins
Weekdays: 7.15am to 12.00am
Saturdays: 6.15am to 12.00am
Sundays: 7.15am to 9.30pm
573    Weekday AM peak: 14 trips
Weekday PM peak: 11 trips    Weekday AM peak: 6.00am to 9.30am
Weekday PM peak: 4.15pm to 7.00pm
574    60 mins    Weekdays: 8.00am to 5.30pm
575    Weekday AM peak: 6 trips
Weekday PM peak: 4 trips    Weekday AM peak: 6.00am to 8.30am
Weekday PM peak: 5.00pm to 6.30pm
576    60 mins    Weekdays: 6.00am to 6.15pm
Saturdays: 6.00am to 4.15pm
Sundays: 9.00am to 4.15pm
577    Weekday AM peak: 6 trips
Weekday PM peak: 6 trips    
Weekday AM peak: 6.30am to 8.45am
Weekday PM peak: 4.30pm to 6.30pm
578    60 mins    Weekdays: 8.00am to 6.00pm
Saturdays: 9.30am to 6.45pm
579    Weekday AM peak: 5 trips
Weekday PM peak: 5 trips    Weekday AM peak: 6.30am to 8.30am
Weekday PM peak: 5.00pm to 6.30pm
P581    Weekday AM peak: 9 trips
Weekday PM peak: 7 trips    Weekday AM peak: 6.30am to 9.00am
Weekday PM peak: 3.00pm to 6.00pm
582    Weekdays to Springwood: 6 trips
Weekdays to Slacks Creek: 6 trips    Weekdays: 9.30am to 2.30pm

[#Metro]

In my long-term ideological plan, a railway line runs down Mains Road, and the SE Busway will not need more than bi-artics to cope with demand.

We are slightly apart but have a generally similar position. I agree with you that rail is something very worthy to consider directly down the Mains Road corridor. I have been pilloried for this radical position, but I believe also that it is justifiable and technically feasible.

There is a historical precedent for this also. Canada opened it's first Subway in 1954 down Yonge St because the trams on the surface were bursting at the seams with passenger load. A giant trench was sunk into the street and a subway placed in the trench and covered over. This cut-and-cover technique is much cheaper and faster than tunnelling using a TBM. It could be used on the Mains Road Corridor - placing rail exactly where it is required - dead straight through the middle of Sunnybank - with stations opening up into major shopping centres along Mains Road.

http://www.toronto.ca/archives/canada_first_subway/index_subway.htm

I will release further ideas in due course, there is a lot for me to do at the moment, but I think it is a good idea (i.e. rail down Mains Rd) worth exploring.

[nathandavid88]

Question, what makes you, living in an obscure pocket of suburbia over 40km from the CBD, somehow more deserving of frequency which at times in AM peak is better than what I, someone living around 6km from the CBD, does?

What makes these people entitled to a bus service like this, which is just duplication and makes the network more complex?

They should be fed to the rail network. If they don't like it, here's a revolutionary idea - how about you stop living in the middle of bloody nowhere and move to somewhere closer in and live a more sustainable lifestyle? PT is not a taxi service, and people living in zone 8 should stop acting like they're bloody entitled to a rocket from their hose in the middle of nowhere to the CBD. You are not.

Sure, you can drive if you want, have fun sitting in traffic on the M1 though.

Also, nathan: these buses run dead all the way from the CBD to quite possibly Windaroo! This is 42km of dead running - what a huge waste of resources.

AMEN.

Nobody has the unchallengable right to direct high-waste rockets to their front door from 40 km away. What a joke!! If the Gold Coast Line trains get full at peak hour, does this mean we can start firing rocket buses from Tweed Heads, Coolangatta, Nerang, Surfers Paradise, Robina, Southport, Helensvale etc etc? By some of the logic in this thread you would think so.

Boost train capacity by signal upgrades, CRR etc. This cannot continue - yes it is convenient but so is the government dialling and sending a taxi to everyone's front door. The buses on these routes which run only a handful of services per day are very costly to buy and it is a waste to have them sit around all day in the depot and only be used during peaks.

You're still not getting what the 566 does  and the fact that it doesn't matter how you cut it back, the exact same amount of waste would still exist, and possibly more will be created.

Firstly, if we cut the 566 back to Beenleigh Rail as a feeder, a second feeder route would need to be added, as half of the 566 feeder catchment is north of Beenleigh. Unlike the 565 which runs down the highway from Beenleigh to Loganholme, the 566 uses the 553 route between Beenleigh and Loganholme, running along Clarks Road and Drews Road through Tanah Merah and the western half of Loganholme. So, for the feeder operations of the route to cover the same ground, you either need to run one route from Windaroo – Loganholme; or one Windaroo – Beenleigh service and a Beenleigh – Loganholme (via Drews & Clarks Road) service. Obviously, these routes would only be popular in one direction, so they effectively would still dead run the return direction.

Now, as I said earlier, apart from the modest feeder loads, the 566 provides additional capacity for the extremely popular Loganholme – CBD route. Passengers for this route make up the bulk of the 566's passengers, and cutting the route back to a feeder won't make them disappear. If a feeder runs all the way from Windaroo to Loganholme, most people will still go all the way to Loganholme anyway, and if you have two feeders, you'd might get a marginal decrease from Windaroo people talking the train at Beenleigh, but that's all. The Tanah Merah passengers will still switch at Loganholme, while others will still turn up a in the morning as currently. Therefore you would need to add extra services to the 569, 571 or 555 to compensate for the 566's lost capacity. If it's the 569 or 571, you still have dead running back to Loganholme, and if it's the 555 you have effective dead running back (the return 555 is lucky if it carries 5 people). This, of course, is on top of the effective outbound dead running by the feeders routes as mentioned above.

For my money, I see no reduction in the amount of dead running by splitting the route, just a case of the current dead running being segmented over the 2 or 3 routes over the same distance. What I do see though is that 2 or 3 buses and drivers would be required to transport the same amount of people as each single 566, with the feeder routes spending most of the time carting largely air around. To me, that seems even more wasteful (dead running isn't the only form of bus waste), having two or more buses doing the work of one with no reduction in dead running.

If anyone can show me a way that the 566 can be axed and replaced in a way that replicates all the services the route provides (both feeder and additional peak capacity), reduces the dead running/effective dead running that occurs, doesn't increase the amount of buses required and can be implemented right now without subway or light rail projects that are nothing more than foam, I'd love to hear it.

[#Metro]

If anyone can show me a way that the 566 can be axed and replaced in a way that replicates all the services the route provides (both feeder and additional peak capacity), reduces the dead running/effective dead running that occurs, doesn't increase the amount of buses required and can be implemented right now without subway or light rail projects that are nothing more than foam, I'd love to hear it.

This is the problem with the busway system. It is very hard to design a feeder and transfer model when the bus capacities are so low. Full buses = barely occupied train. So you have to invent more and more bus routes - reliever routes, rocket routes, to take the load which a train could easily do effortlessly.

There is no solution if you insist on the implausible conditions you suggest. In my view, ALL logan buses would be terminated at 8 Mile Plains Subway station, and buses would then be turned back to the suburbs from which they originated from to perform another run. By doing it this way, you actually increase hourly passenger capacity on the buses as well.

[nathandavid88]

If anyone can show me a way that the 566 can be axed and replaced in a way that replicates all the services the route provides (both feeder and additional peak capacity), reduces the dead running/effective dead running that occurs, doesn't increase the amount of buses required and can be implemented right now without subway or light rail projects that are nothing more than foam, I'd love to hear it.

This is the problem with the busway system. It is very hard to design a feeder and transfer model when the bus capacities are so low. Full buses = barely occupied train. So you have to invent more and more bus routes - reliever routes, rocket routes, to take the load which a train could easily do effortlessly.

There is no solution if you insist on the implausible conditions you suggest. In my view, ALL logan buses would be terminated at 8 Mile Plains Subway station, and buses would then be turned back to the suburbs from which they originated from to perform another run. By doing it this way, you actually increase hourly passenger capacity on the buses as well.

That's the problem though, the conditions I'm talking about are what currently exist. While it's all well and good to say that there are better ways of doing it in the best case scenario of having light rail up the SEB or Mains Road corridor, we are far from having that best case scenario, so we do need to be mindful of the constraints that exist and work out how to achieve best practice results within the constraints we have. As wasteful as it is, the 566 is a case of this – it is the least wasteful way to both provide a Beenleigh and Tanah Merah feeder service, and contribute to the required bus capacity for Loganholme Station. Likewise for the 571 which mirrors the same approach.

As far as light rail and subway foam goes, I personally think going down that route would be a distraction from the bigger job to be tackled, and that's boosting the heavy rail network to the stage where we could feed routes like the 551 and 561 into Kingston Station, and feed the numerous Mains Road Rockets into Altandi Station and do so without the passenger having to put up with long interchange waits, increased travel time and overcrowding of services that exist now. Hell, it could result in Loganholme to CBD via Loganlea Station being a viable option for more people as well.

[#Metro]

That's the problem though, the conditions I'm talking about are what currently exist. While it's all well and good to say that there are better ways of doing it in the best case scenario of having light rail up the SEB or Mains Road corridor, we are far from having that best case scenario, so we do need to be mindful of the constraints that exist and work out how to achieve best practice results within the constraints we have. As wasteful as it is, the 566 is a case of this – it is the least wasteful way to both provide a Beenleigh and Tanah Merah feeder service, and contribute to the required bus capacity for Loganholme Station. Likewise for the 571 which mirrors the same approach.

As far as light rail and subway foam goes, I personally think going down that route would be a distraction from the bigger job to be tackled, and that's boosting the heavy rail network to the stage where we could feed routes like the 551 and 561 into Kingston Station, and feed the numerous Mains Road Rockets into Altandi Station and do so without the passenger having to put up with long interchange waits, increased travel time and overcrowding of services that exist now. Hell, it could result in Loganholme to CBD via Loganlea Station being a viable option for more people as well.

It is always easy to argue for the status quo because that is the laziest no-effort option. The issue is that the costs to run what amounts to a taxi service 40km + from the CBD to Logan isn't something that is financially sustainable in the long run. You are right that we have to operate within constraints, and yet one of those constraints happens to be not wasting money like we are doing now. The situation has changed, the room for fare increases (highest fares in the world) and rate increases ($400 pa) and subsidy increases (70%) has run out.

We are all individuals and can individually choose to support or not support or oppose proposals that are put before us. I think a subway service is both technically feasible, has sound precedent in a number of places (Vancouver, Toronto, Kuala Lumpur), has a network conversion precedent (Ottawa) and is financially achievable (given that the highest cost - land acquisition and earthworks) have already been paid for with the busway.

If you like, you are welcome to draw your own network conceptions and post them for others to look at.

[#Metro]

It just entered my mind - Ipswich is what, 30km away? Should we have peak rockets from Ipswich to Brisbane CBD?

[techblitz]

It just entered my mind - Ipswich is what, 30km away? Should we have peak rockets from Ipswich to Brisbane CBD?

Dont mind them nathandavid...i think your putting up some reasonable arguments here. And as a regular user of these services... I would trust yours and stbs judgment over anyone else. Just as i trust htg most of the time with the northside and as much as i hate to say it....james on the centenary routes.

Newsflash LD
Translink doesnt think ipswich or gold coast need cbd bound rockets...your almost funny....they do however feel logan and scarborough need rockets for certain reasons.......what part of this do you and james not understand? A case by case basis...thats what TL have stated....the busway is there..TL and lcbs have decided to make use of it 
Its not as if we are talking all day routes here geez..some of them would also no doubt run to logan and do return runs for other routes to reduce d/running.

Ps: i managed to have a good yak to a 690 driver friday just gone...he said people are catching the 690 from newport to scarborough and actually connecting to the 315. Theres one of your reason it gets good loads. Thought you guys would like that bit of info on passenger preferences.

[Gazza]

As far as light rail and subway foam goes, I personally think going down that route would be a distraction from the bigger job to be tackled, and that's boosting the heavy rail network to the stage where we could feed routes like the 551 and 561 into Kingston Station, and feed the numerous Mains Road Rockets into Altandi Station and do so without the passenger having to put up with long interchange waits, increased travel time and overcrowding of services that exist now. Hell, it could result in Loganholme to CBD via Loganlea Station being a viable option for more people as well.

And just on that, how would the cost of a SEB Metro compare to a couple of deviations on the Beenleigh Line (Pinelands tunnel, Trinder park deviation etc)

[#Metro]

And just on that, how would the cost of a SEB Metro compare to a couple of deviations on the Beenleigh Line (Pinelands tunnel, Trinder park deviation etc)

You do the legwork on that mate. If it were that easy they might not have built the SEB at all.

[James]

Dont mind them nathandavid...i think your putting up some reasonable arguments here. And as a regular user of these services... I would trust yours and stbs judgment over anyone else. Just as i trust htg most of the time with the northside and as much as i hate to say it....james on the centenary routes.

Newsflash LD
Translink doesnt think ipswich or gold coast need cbd bound rockets...your almost funny....they do however feel logan and scarborough need rockets for certain reasons.......what part of this do you and james not understand? A case by case basis...thats what TL have stated....the busway is there..TL and lcbs have decided to make use of it 
Its not as if we are talking all day routes here geez..some of them would also no doubt run to logan and do return runs for other routes to reduce d/running.

Ps: i managed to have a good yak to a 690 driver friday just gone...he said people are catching the 690 from newport to scarborough and actually connecting to the 315. Theres one of your reason it gets good loads. Thought you guys would like that bit of info on passenger preferences.

There's a difference between Logan rockets and the rocket to fking Windaroo. To feed pax to rail at Rochedale or Springwood is a regressive step. To feed pax to rail at Beenleigh is a positive and will save resources.

With regards to the 566 between Beenleigh and Loganholme - does the bus fill much?

Also, think about it this way. The 30 pax at Windaroo are taking seats from pax boarding the bus at Loganholme. It would be more efficient to just run more P569s, and send Windaroo pax to trains. Maybe a P-rocket could start in Tanah Merah and then head to Loganholme and go from there. Being a bit foamy, if you built a bridge across the Logan River you could very well feed pax from Tanah Merah to Eden's Landing station.

Also, with regard to changing to Altandi now - there are numerous things going against it, the big ones being:
1. Rail is less frequent than the current bus services. For every cut, you need a subsequent compensation. 566 could easily have frequency boosted. Mains Rd simply can't, it isn't possible.
2. Interchange facilities are non-existent. At least at Beenleigh they do exist, and are not too bad.
3. Current rail services do not offer the capacity to haul the numbers the 130/140 carries (it does for the 566).

[techblitz]

Look the bottom line is that TL consulted with LCBS and no doubt had 2 choices
1. run a windaroo feeder to beenleigh (assuming they even thought of that) and add an extra service at Loganholme = 2 Buses

OR

keep the 566 as is.... albeit less frequency but knowing full well its an established route with VH VH & current pax happy with the alignment) =  1 Bus
I thought nathandavid has been very clear on this point.

decision made....move on.....bigger fish to fry....like EMPTY peak hour routes at the CC..

[Set in train]

Lovely guys, I've read your to'ing and fro'ing on the 566.

I actually took the 566 today to Loganholme Station aka the Hyperdome to visit the information session.

Three lovely people from Translink's comms team, late 30's to 50's. One male and two females.

The key word being comms team, none of the network planning team were there nor do they intend to be. The senior manager of comms was there to help them along earlier I am told, but for the real tin tacs, no answer.

Answers about changes arising from Sector 2 were unknown.

[achiruel]

Two points:

Firstly, I disagree with scrapping the 566.  It is effectively 3 routes in one (a) Windaroo feeder (b) Tanah Merah feeder and (c) busway spine route.

Pax ex Windaroo can change at Beenleigh for rail services both north and south, if their destination is along the rail line.  They can continue on to the Hyperdome for travel their, to Springwood or Eight Mile Plains.  It also acts as a Beenleigh-Hyperdome (remember these are both Activity Centers) connector, during peak hour.

The alternative is to run more 553s, more 565s, and additional 569s.  The alternatives don't make any sense as they all involve more waste, not less!

Talking about alternatives as though an EMP to CBD subway is actually going to happen anytime in the near future is just delusional, we need to work with the existing infrastructure as it is now.  The 566 is NOT comparable to the (old) 161 as it serves more purpose than just an express trip into the city for a select few - it serves large concentrations of pax ex. Loganholme & Springwood.

Secondly, terminating all Logan services at EMP is a TERRIBLE idea, Garden City makes far more sense due to the far greater alternative of connections available there.  I think a lot of Logan pax would simply ditch the bus if forced to transfer at EMP and then AGAIN and Garden City (i.e. 2-3 minutes away) so you'd just end up with even less utilisation and more congestion on the M1/Logan Rd.

Regarding dead running, I think you'll actually find BT does far more dead running per service-km than LCBS does.  I do remember reading this somewhere but can't remember what document was in, if anyone could point me in the right direction I'd be very grateful.

And as to waste...as long as BT is running both the 200 and 222 in competition with each other along OCR, I think that's where the waste attack needs to be focused.  Not to mention to idiocy of routes like 113, 172 continuing beyond Woolloongabba, but I guess at least the cut the 117 back.  Partway there.

[achiruel]

On a completely different issue from my above rant 

I don't really feel that this review has done ANYTHING to make PT more attractive to Logan City residents.  Basically public transport here seems to be confined to peak-hour CBD workers and the destitute who can't afford and the disabled who are unable to operate their own transport.

I would have at the least like to have seen peak and shoulder peak frequency increases on spine routes like the 545, 550 and 560 which between 3-4 pm are almost completely overrun by school students.  Either that or put more school buses on to take care of that issue, which may end up being a better idea as they don't need to run on holidays.

Peak hour in Logan seems to only mean rockets, everything else is ignored.  Maybe LCBS don't have the buses? I don't know.

edit:

This is something like I'd like Logan trunk network to look.  Running hours/frequency:

M-F 6:30am-9:30am & 2:30pm-6:30pm every 15 minutes, 5:00-6:30, interpeak and after 6:30pm-11:00pm half hourly (extended hourly services on Friday nights).

Sat 6:00am-6:30pm every 30 minutes, 6:30-12:30 hourly.

Sun 6:00am-9:00am hourly, 9:00am-6:30pm every 30 minutes, 6:30pm-9:30pm hourly).

This would at least give people an option for public transport during quieter times even if it's not incredibly frequent and avoid doing stupid things like drink driving etc.

http://goo.gl/maps/hvTLp

[STB]

On a completely different issue from my above rant 

I don't really feel that this review has done ANYTHING to make PT more attractive to Logan City residents.  Basically public transport here seems to be confined to peak-hour CBD workers and the destitute who can't afford and the disabled who are unable to operate their own transport.

I would have at the least like to have seen peak and shoulder peak frequency increases on spine routes like the 545, 550 and 560 which between 3-4 pm are almost completely overrun by school students.  Either that or put more school buses on to take care of that issue, which may end up being a better idea as they don't need to run on holidays.

Peak hour in Logan seems to only mean rockets, everything else is ignored.  Maybe LCBS don't have the buses? I don't know.

edit:

This is something like I'd like Logan trunk network to look.  Running hours/frequency:

M-F 6:30am-9:30am & 2:30pm-6:30pm every 15 minutes, 5:00-6:30, interpeak and after 6:30pm-11:00pm half hourly (extended hourly services on Friday nights).

Sat 6:00am-6:30pm every 30 minutes, 6:30-12:30 hourly.

Sun 6:00am-9:00am hourly, 9:00am-6:30pm every 30 minutes, 6:30pm-9:30pm hourly).

This would at least give people an option for public transport during quieter times even if it's not incredibly frequent and avoid doing stupid things like drink driving etc.

http://goo.gl/maps/hvTLp

I used to live along the 572 route, and I know while night services sound great, and provide some additional security if you are staying out longer, the 572's I've heard have been running pretty much empty.  Out my area where I'm living now, routes 272 and 274 run late at night but hardly carry people, with the only exception being Thursday (late night shopping) and Friday nights.  The rest of the time, it's pretty much just carrying air.  I think it's really only within a certain radius of the city that you'll find people using public transport late at night on pretty much any night of the year. 

I also noticed it in Sydney when I was down there recently, the numbers catching public transport late at night was pretty low, even when you taken into consideration that there are 4 million more people down there and the frequency is better than up here.

[Set in train]

Has anyone been to the info sessions held this week for Logan or am I the only one?

[James]

On a completely different issue from my above rant 

I don't really feel that this review has done ANYTHING to make PT more attractive to Logan City residents.  Basically public transport here seems to be confined to peak-hour CBD workers and the destitute who can't afford and the disabled who are unable to operate their own transport.

I would have at the least like to have seen peak and shoulder peak frequency increases on spine routes like the 545, 550 and 560 which between 3-4 pm are almost completely overrun by school students.  Either that or put more school buses on to take care of that issue, which may end up being a better idea as they don't need to run on holidays.

Peak hour in Logan seems to only mean rockets, everything else is ignored.  Maybe LCBS don't have the buses? I don't know.

edit:

This is something like I'd like Logan trunk network to look.  Running hours/frequency:

M-F 6:30am-9:30am & 2:30pm-6:30pm every 15 minutes, 5:00-6:30, interpeak and after 6:30pm-11:00pm half hourly (extended hourly services on Friday nights).

Sat 6:00am-6:30pm every 30 minutes, 6:30-12:30 hourly.

Sun 6:00am-9:00am hourly, 9:00am-6:30pm every 30 minutes, 6:30pm-9:30pm hourly).

This would at least give people an option for public transport during quieter times even if it's not incredibly frequent and avoid doing stupid things like drink driving etc.

http://goo.gl/maps/hvTLp

With regards to this, I'd much rather see:
- 15 minute weekend daytime frequency
- Uniform Saturday/Sunday bus frequency - we need to stop differentiating between the two entirely, not everybody goes to church, stays home and has a Sunday roast any more
- Hourly frequency at night past about 7pm

Especially in lower socioeconomic areas, waiting outside and at bus stops etc. tends to be seen as unsafe and something to avoid, so buses should exist solely as a welfare measure for those who cannot afford alternate means of transport.

Maybe there is a need for one more frequent route down the 'main drag' of Logan, but aside from that, I don't see the need. For most people, there just isn't the need to have bus services late at night. A lot of people in the area are normal families with 2 adults and 2 kids, and their primary transport needs (school, work, sports) all exist during the day.

[achiruel]

I think there is still valid reasons for differentiating between Sunday and Saturday services:

(a) Retail hours are different on Saturdays (8am-5pm for major supermarkets, 9-5pm for specialty stores vs Sunday 9am-6pm for majors, 10am-4pm or something like that for smaller shops).
(b) Less people tend to go out on a Sunday night as many (at least those in regular M-F jobs) have to work the next day
(c) A lot of businesses that operate on Saturday don't operate on a Sunday at all, such as many stores outside of major shopping centres (exceptions being Bunnings/Masters etc).  Places like mechanics, where people might need to take a bus from to to pick up a car for example (probably not the best reason but that is why some people are taking public transport.  Many medical offices, dentists, physiotherapists, post offices, are not open on Sundays.

[#Metro]

I think there is still valid reasons for differentiating between Sunday and Saturday services:

(a) Retail hours are different on Saturdays (8am-5pm for major supermarkets, 9-5pm for specialty stores vs Sunday 9am-6pm for majors, 10am-4pm or something like that for smaller shops).
(b) Less people tend to go out on a Sunday night as many (at least those in regular M-F jobs) have to work the next day
(c) A lot of businesses that operate on Saturday don't operate on a Sunday at all, such as many stores outside of major shopping centres (exceptions being Bunnings/Masters etc).  Places like mechanics, where people might need to take a bus from to to pick up a car for example (probably not the best reason but that is why some people are taking public transport.  Many medical offices, dentists, physiotherapists, post offices, are not open on Sundays.

Read: Queensland is a backwater, we all like to sleep in and have restricted trading hours despite the fact other places have completely abolished trade restrictions.

[SurfRail]

I think there is still valid reasons for differentiating between Sunday and Saturday services:

(a) Retail hours are different on Saturdays (8am-5pm for major supermarkets, 9-5pm for specialty stores vs Sunday 9am-6pm for majors, 10am-4pm or something like that for smaller shops).
(b) Less people tend to go out on a Sunday night as many (at least those in regular M-F jobs) have to work the next day
(c) A lot of businesses that operate on Saturday don't operate on a Sunday at all, such as many stores outside of major shopping centres (exceptions being Bunnings/Masters etc).  Places like mechanics, where people might need to take a bus from to to pick up a car for example (probably not the best reason but that is why some people are taking public transport.  Many medical offices, dentists, physiotherapists, post offices, are not open on Sundays.

Read: Queensland is a backwater, we all like to sleep in and have restricted trading hours despite the fact other places have completely abolished trade restrictions.

Despite the fact I agree with you completely, fixing the trading hours is very much the horse, while improving Sunday bus services is the cart.  Not much point doing the latter without the former for the most part.

[James]

I think there is still valid reasons for differentiating between Sunday and Saturday services:

(a) Retail hours are different on Saturdays (8am-5pm for major supermarkets, 9-5pm for specialty stores vs Sunday 9am-6pm for majors, 10am-4pm or something like that for smaller shops).
(b) Less people tend to go out on a Sunday night as many (at least those in regular M-F jobs) have to work the next day
(c) A lot of businesses that operate on Saturday don't operate on a Sunday at all, such as many stores outside of major shopping centres (exceptions being Bunnings/Masters etc).  Places like mechanics, where people might need to take a bus from to to pick up a car for example (probably not the best reason but that is why some people are taking public transport.  Many medical offices, dentists, physiotherapists, post offices, are not open on Sundays.

And this is why we need to stop being such a bloody backwater. James was in America a few years ago, and I found it simply wonderful that even after 24 hours of transit, at 8pm on a Saturday night, I could pop down to the supermarket. And this was in a town with a population of 4,500. 4,500! There isn't a single major supermarket in Brisbane open at that hour, and this is in a city which is over 400 times larger!

I think this image says it all:


The major thing here, in my opinion, is any differentiation, whether it be in pay, trading hours or otherwise, between the two days of the weekend, is stupid in this day and age and should be removed. /rant

Yes, people won't go out as much on a Sunday night, but I didn't discuss night services. In fact, night services in the suburbs (especially areas such as Logan) are best catered to via taxis and infrequent coverage services.

Post offices aren't open on Saturdays either, nor are many banks, some medical offices, most dentists, physiotherapists and so on. Yes, some places are not open on Sundays when they are on Saturdays, but is the closing of these more minor trip generators enough to justify halving bus frequency? I can't speak for others, but I move about on Sundays just as much as I generally do on Saturdays.

It is not just these places which encourage transit. It is going to places like the City (and surrounding areas), cinemas, movies, and yes, the shops are in there too.

[achiruel]

There isn't a single major supermarket in Brisbane open at that hour, and this is in a city which is over 400 times larger!

Actually there is *one*

http://skygate.com.au/info/store/woolworths

Post offices aren't open on Saturdays either

Most are.  At least around here.  Seeing as we're discussing Logan: Logan Central, Slacks Creek, Kingston, Underwood, Springwood, Marsden, Rochedale South, Waterford, Loganholme, Browns Plains, Park Ridge, Beenleigh, Eagleby & Logan Village are all open Saturday.

This is really getting away from the point though.  Control of trading hours of various establishments is completely beyond TL's control.  All they can provide is transport to people at the times when most require it.  Even by looking at the traffic on most major arterial roads before 9am on a Sunday morning you'll find that not many people are moving around at that time of day.  The exception might be people going for a day out to the beach on the Sunshine or Gold Coasts but generally people aren't going to shops, movies, restaurants etc early Sunday.

I think what a lot of people are missing here as well is that public transport is not only a transport issue, it is also a social justice issue.  Many parts of Logan are some of the most disadvantaged (read: poorest) areas of SEQ.  By denying these people adequate public transport they are in many cases being denied the opportunity to improve their lives through employment and community participation.  Forcing them to take taxis at even higher fares they can't afford is not the answer.