LNP: Brisbane Metro Plan

[ozbob]

It is the tone of your intent.  If you persist you will be removed.

It is not in the collegial spirit that members discuss issues. By all means use a font size to make a point.  But general use is not acceptable.

Terms of use of this site are here> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=3.0

[ozbob]

I want to see these vehicles Quirky's talking about. Watered down slightly, they'd be (electric) superbuses.

Edit: also, 7 cumulative replies between hitting the bottom of the thread and getting the reply posted, go team!

LOL.  Yes, I would not be surprised if the Metro collapses on closer  detailed analysis and electric super buses end up doing the Metro bit.  This would work well and would be a lot cheaper.  Big strides being made in electric buses.

[SteelPan]

Ok so from your reply, we could conclude that.

-Rail systems cant be afforded everywhere.
-Some rail system ideas are silly
-In some places, other forms of transportation can do the job just fine.

Is that a fair response?

> The system proposed is a modest outlay by PT infrastructure standards
> Your next point is meaningless in this context
> In this instance a light rail based proposal ticks every box!

Let's DO it!

[Gazza]

Have to be completely segregated.  I get the impression it is not going to be.  If it was, surely they would do driverless?

I reckon they looked at it and decided the cost was too high.  They want to get it up so are not concerned with the longer term operating costs I reckon.

I think it would be grade sepped, judging by the fact the map has points such as putting cultural center station underground, making the victoria bridge a green bridge, and closing north quay to through traffic. Those are the only points of conflict with surface traffic.

The nature of a rubber tyre metro is that it sits in a guideway that will not work with LXings.

The guideway allows the tight turns by stopping tipping.

[ozbob]

Doubt if this is really the finished product, but if driverless would need better protection.

[SteelPan]

It is the tone of your intent.  If you persist you will be removed.

It is not in the collegial spirit that members discuss issues. By all means use a font size to make a point.  But general use is not acceptable.

Terms of use of this site are here> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=3.0

"tone on my intent".........OK then "thanks" and an interesting insight!

[#Metro]

Something I am uncomfortable about with the metro.

See, it is turning left into Adelaide Street when it gets off the Victoria Bridge (assuming the bridge doesn't collapse under the weight imbalance and dynamic loads).

But we also know that the Victoria Bridge will also carry the buses from West End into the CBD (not sure which street, detail lacking about service pattern).

How does that work at the CBD end of the Victoria Bridge?

Think about it. If the bus 199 is on the Victoria Bridge, it needs to get into the CBD by coming off the bridge and turning right or left. If it

turns right, it has to cross the metro alignment.

If the bus turns left, there is room, but for the metro it would be a bloody tight turn! It would immediately have to navigate a turn in the

opposite direction because it needs to get into Adelaide St. Basically reverse curves.

And in incredible irony, this location is actually where the exit of Brisbane City Council's HQ at Brisbane Square is located. It would literally

cut off access to BCC's own headquarters! You cannot make this up!!

 

Google Maps Aerial https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-27.471223,153.0225259,145m/data=!3m1!1e3

[Gazza]

Ok so from your reply, we could conclude that.

-Rail systems cant be afforded everywhere.
-Some rail system ideas are silly
-In some places, other forms of transportation can do the job just fine.

Is that a fair response?

> The system proposed is a modest outlay by PT infrastructure standards
> Your next point is meaningless in this context
> In this instance a light rail based proposal ticks every box!

Let's DO it!

But my point in general is that you have a tendency to attack people that disagree with certain rail proposals "Because this is rail back on track and we should support all rail ideas".

Bear in mind there is a spectrum of what people would like to see done. At one end you'd have people like Abbott who think all PT is a waste of money, at the other end are some train foamers who would have a train down every street if they could.

I find it annoying to be shouted at just because for example I think a passenger train to the port of brisbane is a dumb idea, when in fact there are plenty of rail proposals I do want to see, like Cross River Rail, a metro to Chermside, trains to Maroochydoore, expansion of the GC light rail, and so on and so forth.

Heaps of stuff i want to see get done, yet apparently this isn't good enough and I have to support every rail idea posted on here?

[aldonius]

If the metro goes where the cars currently are it mostly works at the city end (not sure how QSBS is meant to function, but anyway), but then the turn is far too tight at the Busway portal on Melbourne St.

[thetron]

I want to see these vehicles Quirky's talking about. Watered down slightly, they'd be (electric) superbuses.

Edit: also, 7 cumulative replies between hitting the bottom of the thread and getting the reply posted, go team!

Basically O-barnish

[Gazza]

See, it is turning left into Adelaide Street when it gets off the Victoria Bridge (assuming the bridge doesn't collapse under the weight imbalance and dynamic loads).

Check out the design of the bridge, the supports run the full width and and spans are made up of several parallel concrete box girders.


But we also know that the Victoria Bridge will also carry the buses from West End into the CBD (not sure which street, detail lacking about service pattern).

How does that work at the CBD end of the Victoria Bridge?

Think about it. If the bus 199 is on the Victoria Bridge, it needs to get into the CBD by coming off the bridge and turning right or left. If it

turns right, it has to cross the metro alignment.

If the bus turns left, there is room, but for the metro it would be a bloody tight turn! It would immediately have to navigate a turn in the

opposite direction because it needs to get into Adelaide St. Basically reverse curves.

The only plausible way to do it might be to mirror the arrangement on the Victoria Bridge, and have metro on the State Library Side, and buses on the ferris wheel side.

And in incredible irony, this location is actually where the exit of Brisbane City Council's HQ at Brisbane Square is located. It would literally

cut off access to BCC's own headquarters! You cannot make this up!!

I dont think this is insurmountable. They said that north quay would be closed to through traffic. That means you could have a cul de sac feeding into that car park.

If the metro goes where the cars currently are it mostly works at the city end (not sure how QSBS is meant to function, but anyway), but then the turn is far too tight at the Busway portal on Melbourne St.

The map nominates an underground cultural center station

[Gazza]

I want to see these vehicles Quirky's talking about. Watered down slightly, they'd be (electric) superbuses.

Edit: also, 7 cumulative replies between hitting the bottom of the thread and getting the reply posted, go team!

Basically O-barnish

Not really

[#Metro]

Good points Gazza. I think it is not the best alignment.

The bridge itself cannot support LRT without major strengthening works. Thus, a proper investigation is required to confirm that the weight and dynamic loads can be supported for a Metro (presumably heavier than LRT).

Secondly, I think the CRR alignment would be better, and cheaper to do all at once. Double deck rail over rail.

[#Metro]

Alignment Poll (Members)

Please fill in this poll if you haven't already done so. Expires this Tuesday.

http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=11956.0

[BrizCommuter]

A few more things:

If this is not driverless, then maximum capacity would be restricted to around 30-34tph instead of 42tph+.

Also, where is this mythical rubber-tyred metro in Hong Kong (as per the LNP Murdoch media article and press release)? The only "rubber-tyred metro" I know of in HK is a people mover at the airport.

The "rubber-tyred metros" in Miami and Tokyo (as per LNP press release) are low capacity people movers.

[#Metro]

Lille, France

[ozbob]

^ driverless ...

[ozbob]

Good article ..

Brisbanetimes --> Lord Mayor Graham Quirk announces Brisbane Metro plan

Costings breakdown for Lord Mayor Graham Quirk's Brisbane Metro proposal:

    $1.15 billion: Brisbane Metro line, tunnel and station construction, Woolloongabba to Herston.
    $80 million: Stabling and maintenance depot for rolling stock
    $120 million: Land purchase costs
    $170 million: 75 carriages for light metro sets, will grow to 150 carriages by 2031 to carry 30,000/hour
    $20 million: Business case and detailed design


Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/lord-mayor-graham-quirk-announces-brisbane-metro-plan-20160131-gmi2xx.html

[Gazza]

$20 million: Business case and detailed design

$20 million for design?

Righto

[thetron]

Can't see that happening.  Rail will service the CBD as it does now, with the additional capacity from CRR as well.  The metro, if it is ever built, will be for the displaced bus pax.

Think outside the square box
- Existing portals restrict amount of trains/buses per hour
- Underground heavy rail tunnel is nolonger feasible.  CRR is dead duck
- On demand transport maybe the way to go. This includes uber and PRT-pod/MRT and smaller tunnels is cheaper
- You can't just keep pushing everything via cultural centre

Idea in would be to upgrade park road station to 8 lines above ground
Meanwhile a massive underground interchange for automated buses and on demand PRT

A passenger gets off at Park Rd station from Gold Coast. Heading to Eagle Street for drinks
On there phone. They request a PRT to goto eagle street to direct road via underground tunnels

[Gazza]

PRT isn't really a good solution because the capacity is too low.

Every example talks about these little 4 person pods running every few secods. But we can already see an example of this style of system in practice:



Yet the above frequenty sees queues to board of 1 hour or more.

Now imagine trying to empty out a CBD using lots of little PRT pods.

It's not going to have the level of sheer people moving power as this:

[ozbob]

CRR is far from being a dead duck.  ATP will also allow a gain of around 20-30% in peak train capacity as well.

I agree the Cultural Centre has issues though.  PRT has a place but simply will not be adequate for the projected passenger loads.

The existing heavy rail, with CRR and the proposed Metro will handle the bulk.

[Stillwater]

You know, the more you look at Team Quirk's proposal, in reality it is an admission that the bus network arrangements, as they exist, are stuffed.  The Lord Mayor can't bring himself to say it -- he just hopes people will be captivated by a very shiny new (and expensive) toy.  What now for CRR?

Also, what hope is there of a Labor state government, with its obligations to unions, to fund driverless PT vehicles?  Basically, Quirk wants the state and feds to pick up the cost of his wet dream foam.

[ozbob]

This proposal is for driver operated vehicles.  Confirmed by the Deputy Lord Mayor.  Nothing in this works against CRR at all.

Solutions are needed for all modes.  Network reform will buy time, but it is inevitable that a metro system will eventually happen. TMR has had a long range metro plan for years. I doubt if I will see it though.

Yes, it is a recognition that the network model needs to change.  Quirk is now proposing a trunk and feeder model.  Complete about face, but unless they deliver some immediate bus network reform things will just get worse.  Bus reform will be important if they actually start work on this.  Knocking out the SEB will cause more than a few issues, ditto northside.

[thetron]

The idea of CRR and BAT is magical unicorn. It's too expensive, imaginary and no-longer feasible project to invest in heavy rail anywhere in the world.

[ozbob]

The idea of CRR and BAT is magical unicorn. It's too expensive, imaginary and no-longer feasible project to invest in heavy rail anywhere in the world.

You are clearly in the wrong place.  We support heavy rail when is appropriate.

What are your reasons for being here?  You seem intent on pushing a line which is not what we support.

[ozbob]

I draw your attention to > http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=258.msg150226#msg150226

We are here to support rail.  If you are not interested in doing that.  Don't bother thanks.  Find somewhere else to annoy.

Goodbye ' thetron ' ...

[kram0]

The idea of CRR and BAT is magical unicorn. It's too expensive, imaginary and no-longer feasible project to invest in heavy rail anywhere in the world.

I suggest you look at the major infrastructure that is currently underway for the Sydney metro with stage one, 2/3 complete and stage two already confirmed for a 2018 start.

[ozbob]

Not that this would be desirable necessarily in Brisbane, but Manila Light Rail T2 carries up to 60,000 passengers per hour per direction.

Which puts the claims of Team Quirk at 3000 in its true light.

[SurfRail]

The idea of CRR and BAT is magical unicorn. It's too expensive, imaginary and no-longer feasible project to invest in heavy rail anywhere in the world.

This is so laughably and demonstrably false that one can only imagine how limited this guy's frame of reference is.

[aldonius]

OK, now I've seen the Cultural Centre station alignment. Looks like it cuts under that about-to-be-developed corner site. Hope there aren't critical foundations there!

[verbatim9]

Why can't they run LRT vehicles like Toronto ? Not fast enough? Steel wheels?

[BrizCommuter]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com.au/2016/01/quirky-brisbane-metro-capacity.html
Wow, two BrizCommuter posts in one day. This one looks at the claimed capacity figure of 30,000 passengers/hour.

[Gazza]

^ I think you could fit 90m platforms, if you used the real estate at the stations carefully.
Basically, you have a 60m platform face, but you also have the throats at each end where it narrows from 4 lanes to two.

I would imagine that any metro line would run in a straight line down where the passing lanes are, and you'd extend platforms out over the bitumen to meet with the train. At South Bank for example you could even do a 115m platform in this manner.

At Mater Hill the throats at the Gabba end are inside the Tunnel under water street, and there is sufficent width in there to actually have platform faces extending into the tunnel:

[BrizCommuter]

^ I think you could fit 90m platforms, if you used the real estate at the stations carefully.
Basically, you have a 60m platform face, but you also have the throats at each end where it narrows from 4 lanes to two.

I would imagine that any metro line would run in a straight line down where the passing lanes are, and you'd extend platforms out over the bitumen to meet with the train. At South Bank for example you could even do a 115m platform in this manner.

At Mater Hill the throats at the Gabba end are inside the Tunnel under water street, and there is sufficent width in there to actually have platform faces extending into the tunnel:

Even with 90m platforms, that is still only 22,500 passengers/hour.

[#Metro]

Manila LRT-2, isn't LRT. It is built to metro standards, so you would use metro anyway.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manila_Light_Rail_Transit_System_Line_2

"Although operated by the Light Rail Transit Authority, resulting to it being called as "LRT-2", it is actually a heavy rail, rapid transit system owing to its use of Electric multiple units instead of light rail vehicles used in earlier lines and is currently the only line utilizing such type of system in the country."

[#Metro]

Why can't they run LRT vehicles like Toronto ? Not fast enough? Steel wheels?

Verbatim9, let's look at what would happen if we *did* put LRT on the busway. This has been stated before, but I will write it again here for clarity:

One service every 2 minutes is (60 minutes / 2) = 30 vehicles per hour.

Now, we know that LRT would have 300 pax on board. So the theoretical capacity is 300 pax x 30 services = 9000 pphd.
The current busway carries 12 000 pphd in peak hour.

Even if we ran the trams every 1.5 minutes (40 services/hour) we would get 300 pax x 40 services = 12 00 pphd.

The busway can be converted to Light Rail but it would instantly be at capacity on the day it opened. There is thus NO BENEFIT to converting the SEB to LRT. A higher capacity mode is required.

In Toronto, the buses have been organised as a terminate and transfer system. Buses pick up passengers in the suburbs and then drop passengers into the subway system. These street running buses can carry upwards of 40 000 passengers/day, which works out to be around 10 million passengers per year- about the same as a heavily used heavy rail line.

Because of this, Toronto is upgrading these cross-town buses into LRT. The LRT will feed the subway system. Other cities also use LRT to feed Subways.

[Gazza]

Experimenting,I think 115m platforms is the absolute limit, which could fit a 960 pax train, which is getting to 28800 per hour.
If they were actually smart and got driverless then it is feasible they could get beyond 38400 per hour.

I'm unsure how far back you could fit at Mater hill through.

[#Metro]

Now after the foam, comes the political finger pointing between BCC and the State Government. Groan!!

State government gives cool reception to Lord Mayor's Brisbane Metro plan

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/state-government-gives-cool-reception-to-lord-mayors-brisbane-metro-plan-20160131-gmi66j.html

Unfortunately for AP, ex-transport minister, a metro is actually ALP Government policy that has never been retracted.

Shortly after Rachel Nolan left her post as Transport Minister, Annastacia became minister for transport under Bligh. The policy was this, CLEARLY featuring a subway.

The report actually said:

"With an extra 100 000 people forecast to live in inner Brisbane (CBD, Spring Hill, Milton, South Brisbane and Fortitude Valley) and employment numbers doubling by 2031, there will be about 2.4 million trips a day in the inner city (up from one million in 2006). To help distribute these trips across the vibrant inner city core, an entirely new and separate Brisbane subway is proposed. The London Underground and New York city subway are well-known examples of this style of rail operation".

[red dragin]

I saw somewhere mention of six years to build I think.

Where are all the empty rockets going to go during this six year period?