Discussion on 20 minute off peak frequency

[verbatim9]

https://twitter.com/Robert_Dow/status/1007098183594283008

Another reason to aim for 20mins or better relinquishing the 15min timetable on a couple of lines and making most train lines 20mins or better 7am-9pm 7 days. This will make crosstown trips faster and less waiting time if a transfer is to be made. Inner city lines out to Northgate, Cannon Hill, Darra and stations south will potentially see services every 10mins off peak 7 days.

[Arnz]

https://twitter.com/Robert_Dow/status/1007098183594283008

Another reason to aim for 20mins or better relinquishing the 15min timetable on a couple of lines and making most train lines 20mins or better 7am-9pm 7 days. This will make crosstown trips faster and less waiting time if a transfer is to be made. Inner city lines out to Northgate, Cannon Hill, Darra and stations south will potentially see services every 10mins off peak 7 days.

Put down the foam machine.  As pointed out by others previously 20 mins is not workable for a number of reasons including stuffing up the line capacity by taking away more trains.  20 mins everywhere in the short term also destroys bus connections in parts of SEQ. Buses are not infinite in most areas of SEQ.

[verbatim9]

https://twitter.com/Robert_Dow/status/1007098183594283008

Another reason to aim for 20mins or better relinquishing the 15min timetable on a couple of lines and making most train lines 20mins or better 7am-9pm 7 days. This will make crosstown trips faster and less waiting time if a transfer is to be made. Inner city lines out to Northgate, Cannon Hill, Darra and stations south will potentially see services every 10mins off peak 7 days.

Put down the foam machine.  As pointed out by others previously 20 mins is not workable for a number of reasons including stuffing up the line capacity by taking away more trains.  20 mins everywhere in the short term also destroys bus connections in parts of SEQ. Buses are not infinite in most areas of SEQ.

It's not foam just because a few can't see the benefits It would be driver neutral as the drivers for 15min off-peak will not be required. Changing from 4 trains to 3 trains an hour on some lines off-peak.

[Arnz]

https://twitter.com/Robert_Dow/status/1007098183594283008

Another reason to aim for 20mins or better relinquishing the 15min timetable on a couple of lines and making most train lines 20mins or better 7am-9pm 7 days. This will make crosstown trips faster and less waiting time if a transfer is to be made. Inner city lines out to Northgate, Cannon Hill, Darra and stations south will potentially see services every 10mins off peak 7 days.

Put down the foam machine.  As pointed out by others previously 20 mins is not workable for a number of reasons including stuffing up the line capacity by taking away more trains.  20 mins everywhere in the short term also destroys bus connections in parts of SEQ. Buses are not infinite in most areas of SEQ.

It's not foam just because a few can't see the benefits It would be driver neutral as the drivers for 15min off-peak will not be required. Changing from 4 trains to 3 trains an hour on some lines off-peak.

And it takes away more trains in off-peak and peak, leading to less peak sevices and more crowding.  As well as take away more connecting bus services.

Didnt think you be a advocate for taking away more services.

Buses are not infinite in most areas of SEQ.

[verbatim9]

https://twitter.com/Robert_Dow/status/1007098183594283008

Another reason to aim for 20mins or better relinquishing the 15min timetable on a couple of lines and making most train lines 20mins or better 7am-9pm 7 days. This will make crosstown trips faster and less waiting time if a transfer is to be made. Inner city lines out to Northgate, Cannon Hill, Darra and stations south will potentially see services every 10mins off peak 7 days.

Put down the foam machine.  As pointed out by others previously 20 mins is not workable for a number of reasons including stuffing up the line capacity by taking away more trains.  20 mins everywhere in the short term also destroys bus connections in parts of SEQ. Buses are not infinite in most areas of SEQ.

It's not foam just because a few can't see the benefits It would be driver neutral as the drivers for 15min off-peak will not be required. Changing from 4 trains to 3 trains an hour on some lines off-peak.

And it takes away more trains in off-peak and peak, leading to less peak sevices and more crowding.  As well as take away more connecting bus services.

Didnt think you be a advocate for taking away more services.

Buses are not infinite in most areas of SEQ.

The overall timetable would be better leading to 10mins or better in peak. Better point to point traveling times in off-peak with less waiting times at transfer points.

[Arnz]

https://twitter.com/Robert_Dow/status/1007098183594283008

Another reason to aim for 20mins or better relinquishing the 15min timetable on a couple of lines and making most train lines 20mins or better 7am-9pm 7 days. This will make crosstown trips faster and less waiting time if a transfer is to be made. Inner city lines out to Northgate, Cannon Hill, Darra and stations south will potentially see services every 10mins off peak 7 days.

Put down the foam machine.  As pointed out by others previously 20 mins is not workable for a number of reasons including stuffing up the line capacity by taking away more trains.  20 mins everywhere in the short term also destroys bus connections in parts of SEQ. Buses are not infinite in most areas of SEQ.

It's not foam just because a few can't see the benefits It would be driver neutral as the drivers for 15min off-peak will not be required. Changing from 4 trains to 3 trains an hour on some lines off-peak.

And it takes away more trains in off-peak and peak, leading to less peak sevices and more crowding.  As well as take away more connecting bus services.

Didnt think you be a advocate for taking away more sea rvices.

Buses are not infinite in most areas of SEQ.

The overall timetable would be better leading to 10mins or better in peak. Better point to point traveling times in off-peak with less waiting times at transfer points.

At the expense of less peak train services and less bus services across SEQ.  Leading to peak hour crowding on less trains and less people on the feeder buses in SEQ as a result of less frequency.

Leading to less services on the whole PT network for people around SEQ  overall on a rob peter to pay paul basis.

When you run services on a track with optimal capacity within the resources given, even during rail (e.g every 6-12 mins in peak on the 'railfail' timetable on the Ipswich-Caboolture/Nambour line) any rail scheduler would run it within the maximum capacity (even within the resources available in the 'railfail' timetable)

Not take away more services.

[verbatim9]

Buses and Trams would not be affected. But good reason to overall the bus timetable anyway. High frequency bus services already run to a 10min frequency re 412.15 min off peak.

[Arnz]

Buses are not 'infinite' in most areas of SEQ. It would mean taking bus services away from another route(s) to fund a "20 min feeder" in the outer areas.

[verbatim9]

Buses are not 'infinite' in most areas of SEQ. It would mean taking bus services away from another route(s) to fund a "20 min feeder" in the outer areas.

We are getting the Bne Metro so buses will be rerouted to the suburbs in need as well as becoming potential feeder buses. At the moment not too many stations have feeder buses that run regularly anyway. Plus the current government is focusing on Park n Ride.

[Arnz]

Buses are not 'infinite' in most areas of SEQ. It would mean taking bus services away from another route(s) to fund a "20 min feeder" in the outer areas.

We are getting the Bne Metro so buses will be rerouted to the suburbs in need as well as becoming potential feeder buses. At the moment not too many stations have feeder buses that run regularly anyway. Plus the current government is focusing on Park n Ride.

We're not talking about Brisbane Metro.  We're talking about the foamy "20 mins on all rail lines" proposal which is almost entirely unfeasible as it also uses buses outside of the BCC area for feeders.  Buses are not "infinite" in most areas of SEQ (apart from the BCC and parts of the GC).

That is in addition to the problems pointed out by others in the past by this proposal.

[verbatim9]

Buses are not 'infinite' in most areas of SEQ. It would mean taking bus services away from another route(s) to fund a "20 min feeder" in the outer areas.

We are getting the Bne Metro so buses will be rerouted to the suburbs in need as well as becoming potential feeder buses. At the moment not too many stations have feeder buses that run regularly anyway. Plus the current government is focusing on Park n Ride.

We're not talking about Brisbane Metro.  We're talking about the foamy "20 mins on all rail lines" proposal which is almost entirely unfeasible as it also uses buses outside of the BCC area for feeders.  Buses are not "infinite" in most areas of SEQ (apart from the BCC and parts of the GC).

That is in addition to the problems pointed out by others in the past by this proposal.

^^Park n Ride. I doubt that Sunshine Coast will warrant 20mins or better but certainly Gold coast. Surfside didn't run extra buses when the train frequency was increased recently. Didn't hear any complaints.

[Arnz]

Buses are not 'infinite' in most areas of SEQ. It would mean taking bus services away from another route(s) to fund a "20 min feeder" in the outer areas.

We are getting the Bne Metro so buses will be rerouted to the suburbs in need as well as becoming potential feeder buses. At the moment not too many stations have feeder buses that run regularly anyway. Plus the current government is focusing on Park n Ride.

We're not talking about Brisbane Metro.  We're talking about the foamy "20 mins on all rail lines" proposal which is almost entirely unfeasible as it also uses buses outside of the BCC area for feeders.  Buses are not "infinite" in most areas of SEQ (apart from the BCC and parts of the GC).

That is in addition to the problems pointed out by others in the past by this proposal.

^^Park n Ride. I doubt that Sunshine Coast will warrant 20mins or better but certainly Gold coast. Surfside didn't run extra buses when the train frequency was increased recently. Didn't hear any complaints.

That defeats the point of Public Transport.  Also, every "10 mins" would actually "take away" trains from the GC and would underutilise the City tracks (although the slots can be used elsewhere on a rob peter to pay paul basis).  GC already operates every 8 to 15 minutes in peak.

Every 20 mins off peak and every 10 mins in peak is still a foamy idea that causes more problems than it solves.

[verbatim9]

Buses are not 'infinite' in most areas of SEQ. It would mean taking bus services away from another route(s) to fund a "20 min feeder" in the outer areas.

We are getting the Bne Metro so buses will be rerouted to the suburbs in need as well as becoming potential feeder buses. At the moment not too many stations have feeder buses that run regularly anyway. Plus the current government is focusing on Park n Ride.

We're not talking about Brisbane Metro.  We're talking about the foamy "20 mins on all rail lines" proposal which is almost entirely unfeasible as it also uses buses outside of the BCC area for feeders.  Buses are not "infinite" in most areas of SEQ (apart from the BCC and parts of the GC).

That is in addition to the problems pointed out by others in the past by this proposal.

^^Park n Ride. I doubt that Sunshine Coast will warrant 20mins or better but certainly Gold coast. Surfside didn't run extra buses when the train frequency was increased recently. Didn't hear any complaints.

That defeats the point of Public Transport.  Also, every "10 mins" would actually "take away" trains from the GC and would underutilise the City tracks (although the slots can be used elsewhere on a rob peter to pay paul basis).  GC already operates every 8 to 15 minutes in peak.

Every 20 mins off peak and every 10 mins in peak is still a foamy idea that causes more problems than it solves.

It's not a foamy idea. We don't have the density to copy Sydney's 15 mins or better. Melbourne has had 20 mins or better for a long time. It's only recently been improved due to population increases. Brisbane's network doesn't have the patronage for 15mins or better. Alot offpeak 15min trains are 1/2 empty to Ferny Grove and to Cannon Hill as well as to Northgate. Reducing to 20 mims or better can share the resources around for the whole network. That's what public transport is all about. Good transport for the whole network not just on a couple of lines which are not getting the loads off peak.

[#Metro]

I don't really mind either way - there won't be a patronage response until the network hits 15 minute services in the off peak IMHO.

The network generally is so poor quality (service frequency, accessibility, running cost) that we really should be talking about bus reform.

Remember that there is a driver shortage - we cannot even run the current services, or a full timetable that we had before the network fell over, so I feel this discussion is rather redundant.

[Arnz]

Buses are not 'infinite' in most areas of SEQ. It would mean taking bus services away from another route(s) to fund a "20 min feeder" in the outer areas.

We are getting the Bne Metro so buses will be rerouted to the suburbs in need as well as becoming potential feeder buses. At the moment not too many stations have feeder buses that run regularly anyway. Plus the current government is focusing on Park n Ride.

We're not talking about Brisbane Metro.  We're talking about the foamy "20 mins on all rail lines" proposal which is almost entirely unfeasible as it also uses buses outside of the BCC area for feeders.  Buses are not "infinite" in most areas of SEQ (apart from the BCC and parts of the GC).

That is in addition to the problems pointed out by others in the past by this proposal.

^^Park n Ride. I doubt that Sunshine Coast will warrant 20mins or better but certainly Gold coast. Surfside didn't run extra buses when the train frequency was increased recently. Didn't hear any complaints.

That defeats the point of Public Transport.  Also, every "10 mins" would actually "take away" trains from the GC and would underutilise the City tracks (although the slots can be used elsewhere on a rob peter to pay paul basis).  GC already operates every 8 to 15 minutes in peak.

Every 20 mins off peak and every 10 mins in peak is still a foamy idea that causes more problems than it solves.

It's not a foamy idea. We don't have the density to copy Sydney's 15 mins or better. Melbourne has had 20 mins or better for a long time. It's only recently been improved due to population increases. Brisbane's network doesn't have the patronage for 15mins or better. Alot offpeak 15min trains are 1/2 empty to Ferny Grove and to Cannon Hill as well as to Northgate. Reducing to 20 mims or better can share the resources around for the whole network. That's what public transport is all about. Good transport for the whole network not just on a couple of lines which are not getting the loads off peak.

Your idea still takes away peak trains from the other lines and underutilises the line capacity throughout the City.  Sure it may solve one problem e.g Cleveland, but it causes problems for the other (e.g Beenleigh).

It's still a reduction overall for the network which spreads across to the connecting buses in most regions outside of Brisbane

[Arnz]

I don't really mind either way - there won't be a patronage response until the network hits 15 minute services in the off peak IMHO.

The network generally is so poor quality (service frequency, accessibility, running cost) that we really should be talking about bus reform.

Remember that there is a driver shortage - we cannot even run the current services, or a full timetable that we had before the network fell over, so I feel this discussion is rather redundant.

Exactly.  What QR should be at least working on returning to a consistent Mon-Friday timetable in 2019 by applying the current Mon-Thursday timetable to Friday with the Cleveland, Shorncliffe and Ipswich gaps fixed (e.g applying the Friday only services to Mon-Thurs on those lines).

Small Steps first.

[verbatim9]

I don't really mind either way - there won't be a patronage response until the network hits 15 minute services in the off peak IMHO.

The network generally is so poor quality (service frequency, accessibility, running cost) that we really should be talking about bus reform.

Remember that there is a driver shortage - we cannot even run the current services, or a full timetable that we had before the network fell over, so I feel this discussion is rather redundant.

Exactly.  What QR should be at least working on returning to a consistent Mon-Friday timetable in 2019 by applying the current Mon-Thursday timetable to Friday with the Cleveland, Shorncliffe and Ipswich gaps fixed (e.g applying the Friday only services to Mon-Thurs on those lines).

Small Steps first.

There will be a complete overall of.the timetable in the future. Aiming for 20 mins or better 7 days 7am-9pm will improve point to point travel times with trains and other modes. This can help increase patronage and get people out of their private vehicles on the weekends.

[Arnz]

I don't really mind either way - there won't be a patronage response until the network hits 15 minute services in the off peak IMHO.

The network generally is so poor quality (service frequency, accessibility, running cost) that we really should be talking about bus reform.

Remember that there is a driver shortage - we cannot even run the current services, or a full timetable that we had before the network fell over, so I feel this discussion is rather redundant.

Exactly.  What QR should be at least working on returning to a consistent Mon-Friday timetable in 2019 by applying the current Mon-Thursday timetable to Friday with the Cleveland, Shorncliffe and Ipswich gaps fixed (e.g applying the Friday only services to Mon-Thurs on those lines).

Small Steps first.

There will be a complete overall of.the timetable in the future. Aiming for 20 mins or better 7 days 7am-9pm will improve point to point travel times with trains and other modes. This can help increase patronage and get people out of their private vehicles on the weekends.

You're pretty much on your own on this one. Still a foamy idea, short or medium term with the lack of drivers and not to mention it takes away services from other lines (both off-peak and peak - leading peak commuters back into their cars with the less services on crowded trains) with the flaws pointed out in the past by others (e.g underutilises the city lines).

[SurfRail]

It will completely destroy connectivity with the bus network, even moreso than now, and we will end up with the Melbourne problem.

If we were going to start running buses on 40 / 20 / 10 pulses instead of 60 / 30 / 15, then fine - but I can't see that happening.

In any event, the immediate focus must be on getting the 2016 timetable back with a high degree of reliability, both crewing and rollingstock wise (ie flog off the EMUs as soon as practicable in addition to cranking out more and more drivers).

[verbatim9]

I don't really mind either way - there won't be a patronage response until the network hits 15 minute services in the off peak IMHO.

The network generally is so poor quality (service frequency, accessibility, running cost) that we really should be talking about bus reform.

Remember that there is a driver shortage - we cannot even run the current services, or a full timetable that we had before the network fell over, so I feel this discussion is rather redundant.

Exactly.  What QR should be at least working on returning to a consistent Mon-Friday timetable in 2019 by applying the current Mon-Thursday timetable to Friday with the Cleveland, Shorncliffe and Ipswich gaps fixed (e.g applying the Friday only services to Mon-Thurs on those lines).

Small Steps first.

There will be a complete overall of.the timetable in the future. Aiming for 20 mins or better 7 days 7am-9pm will improve point to point travel times with trains and other modes. This can help increase patronage and get people out of their private vehicles on the weekends.

You're pretty much on your own on this one. Still a foamy idea, short or medium term with the lack of drivers and not to mention it takes away services from other lines with the flaws pointed out in the past by others (e.g underutilises the city lines).

Call it what you want. It's been a proven workable timetable in Melbourne. Others may agree or disagree. I am not on my own on this one. Its just what you interpret it to be.

[Arnz]

I don't really mind either way - there won't be a patronage response until the network hits 15 minute services in the off peak IMHO.

The network generally is so poor quality (service frequency, accessibility, running cost) that we really should be talking about bus reform.

Remember that there is a driver shortage - we cannot even run the current services, or a full timetable that we had before the network fell over, so I feel this discussion is rather redundant.

Exactly.  What QR should be at least working on returning to a consistent Mon-Friday timetable in 2019 by applying the current Mon-Thursday timetable to Friday with the Cleveland, Shorncliffe and Ipswich gaps fixed (e.g applying the Friday only services to Mon-Thurs on those lines).

Small Steps first.

There will be a complete overall of.the timetable in the future. Aiming for 20 mins or better 7 days 7am-9pm will improve point to point travel times with trains and other modes. This can help increase patronage and get people out of their private vehicles on the weekends.

You're pretty much on your own on this one. Still a foamy idea, short or medium term with the lack of drivers and not to mention it takes away services from other lines with the flaws pointed out in the past by others (e.g underutilises the city lines).

Call it what you want. It's been a proven workable timetable in Melbourne. Others may agree or disagree. I am not on my own on this one. Its just what you interpret to be.

Like it was pointed out just then, it would stuff up the bus network, and as pointed out many times.  Buses are "not infinite" in most areas of SEQ, and money isn't exactly rolling in for new buses outside of the BCC and parts of the GC.

It may have "questionably" worked in Melbourne, but as of current there's still the crewing shortage for QR to go "every 20 minutes" and destroy the bus connections across SEQ.

Some may agree with you outside of this forum, but you're pretty much on your own here.

[verbatim9]

I don't really mind either way - there won't be a patronage response until the network hits 15 minute services in the off peak IMHO.

The network generally is so poor quality (service frequency, accessibility, running cost) that we really should be talking about bus reform.

Remember that there is a driver shortage - we cannot even run the current services, or a full timetable that we had before the network fell over, so I feel this discussion is rather redundant.

Exactly.  What QR should be at least working on returning to a consistent Mon-Friday timetable in 2019 by applying the current Mon-Thursday timetable to Friday with the Cleveland, Shorncliffe and Ipswich gaps fixed (e.g applying the Friday only services to Mon-Thurs on those lines).

Small Steps first.

There will be a complete overall of.the timetable in the future. Aiming for 20 mins or better 7 days 7am-9pm will improve point to point travel times with trains and other modes. This can help increase patronage and get people out of their private vehicles on the weekends.

You're pretty much on your own on this one. Still a foamy idea, short or medium term with the lack of drivers and not to mention it takes away services from other lines with the flaws pointed out in the past by others (e.g underutilises the city lines).

Call it what you want. It's been a proven workable timetable in Melbourne. Others may agree or disagree. I am not on my own on this one. Its just what you interpret to be.

Like it was pointed out just then, it would stuff up the bus network, and as pointed out many times.  Buses are "not infinite" in most areas of SEQ, and money isn't exactly rolling in for new buses outside of the BCC and parts of the GC.

It may have "questionably" worked in Melbourne, but as of current there's still the crewing shortage for QR to go "every 20 minutes" and destroy the bus connections across SEQ.

Some may agree with you outside of this forum, but you're pretty much on your own here.

It wouldn't stuff up the Bus network. That's an utter illusion. BCC run buses mainly independently from trains. It's only really the Gold Coast buses that may need future tweaking as well as Redcliffe Buses? Ipswich buses still need improvement anyway. Like I said it's only your interpretation that I am alone on this one.

[Arnz]

I don't really mind either way - there won't be a patronage response until the network hits 15 minute services in the off peak IMHO.

The network generally is so poor quality (service frequency, accessibility, running cost) that we really should be talking about bus reform.

Remember that there is a driver shortage - we cannot even run the current services, or a full timetable that we had before the network fell over, so I feel this discussion is rather redundant.

Exactly.  What QR should be at least working on returning to a consistent Mon-Friday timetable in 2019 by applying the current Mon-Thursday timetable to Friday with the Cleveland, Shorncliffe and Ipswich gaps fixed (e.g applying the Friday only services to Mon-Thurs on those lines).

Small Steps first.

There will be a complete overall of.the timetable in the future. Aiming for 20 mins or better 7 days 7am-9pm will improve point to point travel times with trains and other modes. This can help increase patronage and get people out of their private vehicles on the weekends.

You're pretty much on your own on this one. Still a foamy idea, short or medium term with the lack of drivers and not to mention it takes away services from other lines with the flaws pointed out in the past by others (e.g underutilises the city lines).

Call it what you want. It's been a proven workable timetable in Melbourne. Others may agree or disagree. I am not on my own on this one. Its just what you interpret to be.

Like it was pointed out just then, it would stuff up the bus network, and as pointed out many times.  Buses are "not infinite" in most areas of SEQ, and money isn't exactly rolling in for new buses outside of the BCC and parts of the GC.

It may have "questionably" worked in Melbourne, but as of current there's still the crewing shortage for QR to go "every 20 minutes" and destroy the bus connections across SEQ.

Some may agree with you outside of this forum, but you're pretty much on your own here.

It wouldn't stuff up the Bus network. That's an utter illusion. BCC run buses mainly independently from trains. It's only really the Gold Coast buses that may need future tweaking as well as Redcliffe Buses? Ipswich buses still need improvement anyway. Like I said it's only your interpretation that I am alone on this one.

Again, Buses are not "infinite" in most areas of SEQ.  Money isn't exactly rolling in for new buses outside of the BCC area and the operators have to make do with what they have.

That's why most of the bus changes outside of BCC involve axing services to create new routes.  Applying "20 mins" to the rail network would just screw connections up as theres no funds for "extra services" without having to rejig (long wait between services) or to axe services.

Edit: Also Hornibrook is on record of having lobbied for improvements/more services in the past but Treasury/TransLink division keep knocking them back on the basis of "no funds available".

Have read your past threads on the 20 min foam in the past, pretty sure that virtually almost everyone posting in the past threads opposed that idea.  Maybe a non-poster lurker reading this forum may support your idea or a few in other forums, but you're on your own on here.

[Arnz]

It will completely destroy connectivity with the bus network, even moreso than now, and we will end up with the Melbourne problem.

If we were going to start running buses on 40 / 20 / 10 pulses instead of 60 / 30 / 15, then fine - but I can't see that happening.

In any event, the immediate focus must be on getting the 2016 timetable back with a high degree of reliability, both crewing and rollingstock wise (ie flog off the EMUs as soon as practicable in addition to cranking out more and more drivers).

Getting a consistent Mon-Fri timetable (for 2019 if not sooner) with the gaps on the Cleveland, Shorncliffe and Ipswich lines fixed should be the short-term focus once the resources (rollingstock and drivers) become available.  Then work on restoring the Oct 2016 timetable from there.

[verbatim9]

I don't really mind either way - there won't be a patronage response until the network hits 15 minute services in the off peak IMHO.

The network generally is so poor quality (service frequency, accessibility, running cost) that we really should be talking about bus reform.

Remember that there is a driver shortage - we cannot even run the current services, or a full timetable that we had before the network fell over, so I feel this discussion is rather redundant.

Exactly.  What QR should be at least working on returning to a consistent Mon-Friday timetable in 2019 by applying the current Mon-Thursday timetable to Friday with the Cleveland, Shorncliffe and Ipswich gaps fixed (e.g applying the Friday only services to Mon-Thurs on those lines).

Small Steps first.

There will be a complete overall of.the timetable in the future. Aiming for 20 mins or better 7 days 7am-9pm will improve point to point travel times with trains and other modes. This can help increase patronage and get people out of their private vehicles on the weekends.

You're pretty much on your own on this one. Still a foamy idea, short or medium term with the lack of drivers and not to mention it takes away services from other lines with the flaws pointed out in the past by others (e.g underutilises the city lines).

Call it what you want. It's been a proven workable timetable in Melbourne. Others may agree or disagree. I am not on my own on this one. Its just what you interpret to be.

Like it was pointed out just then, it would stuff up the bus network, and as pointed out many times.  Buses are "not infinite" in most areas of SEQ, and money isn't exactly rolling in for new buses outside of the BCC and parts of the GC.

It may have "questionably" worked in Melbourne, but as of current there's still the crewing shortage for QR to go "every 20 minutes" and destroy the bus connections across SEQ.

Some may agree with you outside of this forum, but you're pretty much on your own here.

It wouldn't stuff up the Bus network. That's an utter illusion. BCC run buses mainly independently from trains. It's only really the Gold Coast buses that may need future tweaking as well as Redcliffe Buses? Ipswich buses still need improvement anyway. Like I said it's only your interpretation that I am alone on this one.

Again, Buses are not "infinite" in most areas of SEQ.  Money isn't exactly rolling in for new buses outside of the BCC area and the operators have to make do with what they have.

That's why most of the bus changes outside of BCC involve axing services to create new routes.  Applying "20 mins" to the rail network would just screw connections up as theres no funds for "extra services" without having to rejig (long wait between services) or to axe services.

Edit: Also Hornibrook is on record of having lobbied for improvements/more services in the past but Treasury/TransLink division keep knocking them back on the basis of "no funds available".

Have read your past threads on the 20 min foam in the past, pretty sure that virtually almost everyone posting in the past threads opposed that idea.  Maybe a non-poster lurker reading this forum may support your idea or a few in other forums, but you're on your own on here.

People up Redcliffe and Bribie way are mainly utilising the park and rides or getting dropped off. The feeder buses are very low patronized. I have been on them and max 6 people on the bus at anyone time off-peak. Peak maybe has better patronage, but Park n Rides seem to be the go for some reason in SEQ. Even at Ferny Grove it will be a massive Park and Ride. So really the feeder thing is not an issue when it comes to 20mins or better. Except the Gold coast but the tram services  Helensvale now where bulk of the people seem to interchange.

[Arnz]

I don't really mind either way - there won't be a patronage response until the network hits 15 minute services in the off peak IMHO.

The network generally is so poor quality (service frequency, accessibility, running cost) that we really should be talking about bus reform.

Remember that there is a driver shortage - we cannot even run the current services, or a full timetable that we had before the network fell over, so I feel this discussion is rather redundant.

Exactly.  What QR should be at least working on returning to a consistent Mon-Friday timetable in 2019 by applying the current Mon-Thursday timetable to Friday with the Cleveland, Shorncliffe and Ipswich gaps fixed (e.g applying the Friday only services to Mon-Thurs on those lines).

Small Steps first.

There will be a complete overall of.the timetable in the future. Aiming for 20 mins or better 7 days 7am-9pm will improve point to point travel times with trains and other modes. This can help increase patronage and get people out of their private vehicles on the weekends.

You're pretty much on your own on this one. Still a foamy idea, short or medium term with the lack of drivers and not to mention it takes away services from other lines with the flaws pointed out in the past by others (e.g underutilises the city lines).

Call it what you want. It's been a proven workable timetable in Melbourne. Others may agree or disagree. I am not on my own on this one. Its just what you interpret to be.

Like it was pointed out just then, it would stuff up the bus network, and as pointed out many times.  Buses are "not infinite" in most areas of SEQ, and money isn't exactly rolling in for new buses outside of the BCC and parts of the GC.

It may have "questionably" worked in Melbourne, but as of current there's still the crewing shortage for QR to go "every 20 minutes" and destroy the bus connections across SEQ.

Some may agree with you outside of this forum, but you're pretty much on your own here.

It wouldn't stuff up the Bus network. That's an utter illusion. BCC run buses mainly independently from trains. It's only really the Gold Coast buses that may need future tweaking as well as Redcliffe Buses? Ipswich buses still need improvement anyway. Like I said it's only your interpretation that I am alone on this one.

Again, Buses are not "infinite" in most areas of SEQ.  Money isn't exactly rolling in for new buses outside of the BCC area and the operators have to make do with what they have.

That's why most of the bus changes outside of BCC involve axing services to create new routes.  Applying "20 mins" to the rail network would just screw connections up as theres no funds for "extra services" without having to rejig (long wait between services) or to axe services.

Edit: Also Hornibrook is on record of having lobbied for improvements/more services in the past but Treasury/TransLink division keep knocking them back on the basis of "no funds available".

Have read your past threads on the 20 min foam in the past, pretty sure that virtually almost everyone posting in the past threads opposed that idea.  Maybe a non-poster lurker reading this forum may support your idea or a few in other forums, but you're on your own on here.

People up Redcliffe and Bribie way are mainly utilising the park and rides or getting dropped off. The feeder buses are very low patronized. I have been on them and max 6 people on the bus at anyone time off-peak. Peak maybe has better patronage, but Park n Rides seem to be the go for some reason in SEQ. Even at Ferny Grove it will be a massive Park and Ride. So really the feeder thing is not an issue when it comes to 20mins or better. Except the Gold coast but the tram services  Helensvale now where bulk of the people seem to interchange.

So in other words "let's axe more bus and train services and get more people back in their cars."  Defeating the initial point of PT.

20 min is still foam when it just creates more problems than it solves, especially when it gets more people back in their cars - both off-peak and peak. 

Cleveland and Shorncliffe commuters for example have returned to their cars (some since 2014 as Brizcommuter reported previously), putting "20 min/10 mins" will get more people on other lines back in their cars as it takes train services away from other lines in peak.

[verbatim9]

So in other words "let's axe more bus and train services and get more people back in their cars."  Defeating the initial point of PT.

20 min is still foam when it just creates more problems than it solves, especially when it gets more people back in their cars - both off-peak and peak.  Cleveland and Shorncliffe commuters for example have returned to their cars, putting "20 min/10 mins" will get more people on other lines back in their cars as it takes train services away from other lines.

More feeder buses are not going to happen if they are not utilised. Yep! You just need to except that it's an car orientated city and will be for a very long time. Hence Park  n Rides. Thats what the people seem to want and the Government thinks the same way. So there shouldn't be and issue moving forward to 20 mins or better with the trains.

[Arnz]

So in other words "let's axe more bus and train services and get more people back in their cars."  Defeating the initial point of PT.

20 min is still foam when it just creates more problems than it solves, especially when it gets more people back in their cars - both off-peak and peak.  Cleveland and Shorncliffe commuters for example have returned to their cars, putting "20 min/10 mins" will get more people on other lines back in their cars as it takes train services away from other lines.

More feeder buses are not going to happen if they are not utilised. Yep! You just need to except that it's an car orientated city and will be for a very long time. Hence Park  n Rides. Thats what the people seem to want and the Government thinks the same way. So there shouldn't be and issue moving forward to 20 mins or better with the trains.

Every 20 mins is still foam when it underutilises the city lines which has a capacity of between 18-20tph, and it still takes away peak services from other lines under the "20/10" format.

Taking away services from other lines that currently run on 6/12/15/24 to go "20/10" will lead to commuters on the other lines back into their cars.  Do it properly with 15 minutes or better (with 3 min headways possible on the current tracks).  Not this 20/10 rubbish which just robs Paul to Pay Peter.

Put the foam down dude.

[verbatim9]

So in other words "let's axe more bus and train services and get more people back in their cars."  Defeating the initial point of PT.

20 min is still foam when it just creates more problems than it solves, especially when it gets more people back in their cars - both off-peak and peak.  Cleveland and Shorncliffe commuters for example have returned to their cars, putting "20 min/10 mins" will get more people on other lines back in their cars as it takes train services away from other lines.

More feeder buses are not going to happen if they are not utilised. Yep! You just need to except that it's an car orientated city and will be for a very long time. Hence Park  n Rides. Thats what the people seem to want and the Government thinks the same way. So there shouldn't be and issue moving forward to 20 mins or better with the trains.

Every 20 mins is still foam when it underutilises the city lines which has a capacity of between 18-20tph, and it still takes away peak services from other lines under the "20/10" format.

Taking away services from other lines that currently run on 6/12/15/24 to go "20/10" will lead to commuters on the other lines back into their cars.  Do it properly with 15 minutes or better (with 3 min headways possible on the current tracks).  Not this 20/10 rubbish which just robs Paul to Pay Peter.

Put the foam down dude.

^^That's right! 20 mins or better resulting in sharing the resources around for better point to point travel times across the entire week. Not just on a couple of lines. It's not foam yet a practocal idea to get people back on trains 7 days a week. Not just M-F into the city centre and back. The only person interpreting the idea as foam is you. Others are accepting or impartial, but certainly haven't discarded it as foam.

[Arnz]

So in other words "let's axe more bus and train services and get more people back in their cars."  Defeating the initial point of PT.

20 min is still foam when it just creates more problems than it solves, especially when it gets more people back in their cars - both off-peak and peak.  Cleveland and Shorncliffe commuters for example have returned to their cars, putting "20 min/10 mins" will get more people on other lines back in their cars as it takes train services away from other lines.

More feeder buses are not going to happen if they are not utilised. Yep! You just need to except that it's an car orientated city and will be for a very long time. Hence Park  n Rides. Thats what the people seem to want and the Government thinks the same way. So there shouldn't be and issue moving forward to 20 mins or better with the trains.

Every 20 mins is still foam when it underutilises the city lines which has a capacity of between 18-20tph, and it still takes away peak services from other lines under the "20/10" format.

Taking away services from other lines that currently run on 6/12/15/24 to go "20/10" will lead to commuters on the other lines back into their cars.  Do it properly with 15 minutes or better (with 3 min headways possible on the current tracks).  Not this 20/10 rubbish which just robs Paul to Pay Peter.

Put the foam down dude.

^^That's right! 20 mins or better resulting in sharing the resources around for better point to point travel times across the entire week. Not just on a couple of lines. It's not foam yet a practocal idea to get people back on trains 7 days a week. Not just M-F into the city centre and back. The only person interpreting the idea as foam is you. Others are accepting or impartial, but certainly haven't discarded it as foam.

While taking away trains from other lines for the 20 minute foam.  As it stands Queensland STILL doesn't have enough drivers or rollingstock, and as pointed out, the "20/10/5" underutilises the city lines when theres capacity for every 6-12 minutes on most lines.

And as per past threads on this forums most other readers interpreted as foam with the "timetable modelling" thing.  You're basically on your own here.

Do it properly. Every 15 minutes when resources permit or not at all.  20 minutes is still not enough to get people out of their cars.

[verbatim9]

So in other words "let's axe more bus and train services and get more people back in their cars."  Defeating the initial point of PT.

20 min is still foam when it just creates more problems than it solves, especially when it gets more people back in their cars - both off-peak and peak.  Cleveland and Shorncliffe commuters for example have returned to their cars, putting "20 min/10 mins" will get more people on other lines back in their cars as it takes train services away from other lines.

More feeder buses are not going to happen if they are not utilised. Yep! You just need to except that it's an car orientated city and will be for a very long time. Hence Park  n Rides. Thats what the people seem to want and the Government thinks the same way. So there shouldn't be and issue moving forward to 20 mins or better with the trains.

Every 20 mins is still foam when it underutilises the city lines which has a capacity of between 18-20tph, and it still takes away peak services from other lines under the "20/10" format.

Taking away services from other lines that currently run on 6/12/15/24 to go "20/10" will lead to commuters on the other lines back into their cars.  Do it properly with 15 minutes or better (with 3 min headways possible on the current tracks).  Not this 20/10 rubbish which just robs Paul to Pay Peter.

Put the foam down dude.

^^That's right! 20 mins or better resulting in sharing the resources around for better point to point travel times across the entire week. Not just on a couple of lines. It's not foam yet a practocal idea to get people back on trains 7 days a week. Not just M-F into the city centre and back. The only person interpreting the idea as foam is you. Others are accepting or impartial, but certainly haven't discarded it as foam.

While taking away trains from other lines for the 20 minute foam.  As it stands Queensland STILL doesn't have enough drivers or rollingstock, and as pointed out, the "20/10/5" underutilises the city lines when theres capacity for every 6-12 minutes on most lines.

And as per past threads on this forums most other readers interpreted as foam with the "timetable modelling" thing.  You're basically on your own here.

Do it properly. Every 15 minutes when resources permit or not at all.  20 minutes is still not enough to get people out of their cars.

Like I said the word foam you tend to use alot not leading to and substantial substance to the debate. I have addressed the 15min frequency and why it's not the way forward for the next 7 years.

[Arnz]

So in other words "let's axe more bus and train services and get more people back in their cars."  Defeating the initial point of PT.

20 min is still foam when it just creates more problems than it solves, especially when it gets more people back in their cars - both off-peak and peak.  Cleveland and Shorncliffe commuters for example have returned to their cars, putting "20 min/10 mins" will get more people on other lines back in their cars as it takes train services away from other lines.

More feeder buses are not going to happen if they are not utilised. Yep! You just need to except that it's an car orientated city and will be for a very long time. Hence Park  n Rides. Thats what the people seem to want and the Government thinks the same way. So there shouldn't be and issue moving forward to 20 mins or better with the trains.

Every 20 mins is still foam when it underutilises the city lines which has a capacity of between 18-20tph, and it still takes away peak services from other lines under the "20/10" format.

Taking away services from other lines that currently run on 6/12/15/24 to go "20/10" will lead to commuters on the other lines back into their cars.  Do it properly with 15 minutes or better (with 3 min headways possible on the current tracks).  Not this 20/10 rubbish which just robs Paul to Pay Peter.

Put the foam down dude.

^^That's right! 20 mins or better resulting in sharing the resources around for better point to point travel times across the entire week. Not just on a couple of lines. It's not foam yet a practocal idea to get people back on trains 7 days a week. Not just M-F into the city centre and back. The only person interpreting the idea as foam is you. Others are accepting or impartial, but certainly haven't discarded it as foam.

While taking away trains from other lines for the 20 minute foam.  As it stands Queensland STILL doesn't have enough drivers or rollingstock, and as pointed out, the "20/10/5" underutilises the city lines when theres capacity for every 6-12 minutes on most lines.

And as per past threads on this forums most other readers interpreted as foam with the "timetable modelling" thing.  You're basically on your own here.

Do it properly. Every 15 minutes when resources permit or not at all.  20 minutes is still not enough to get people out of their cars.

Like I said the word foam you tend to use alot not leading to and substantial substance to the debate.

Because there's still not enough drivers for the "20 min" timetable in the short to medium term.  I can stick up all night although the debate as #Metro pointed should really be redundant due to the ongoing drivers issue.

And the proposal still takes away train services from the other lines in both off-peak and in peak.  Leading to some more peak commuters back into their cars as some can't stand the crowding on less services, especially those on the Cleveland line.

Therefore it's still what it is, foam.

[verbatim9]

So in other words "let's axe more bus and train services and get more people back in their cars."  Defeating the initial point of PT.

20 min is still foam when it just creates more problems than it solves, especially when it gets more people back in their cars - both off-peak and peak.  Cleveland and Shorncliffe commuters for example have returned to their cars, putting "20 min/10 mins" will get more people on other lines back in their cars as it takes train services away from other lines.

More feeder buses are not going to happen if they are not utilised. Yep! You just need to except that it's an car orientated city and will be for a very long time. Hence Park  n Rides. Thats what the people seem to want and the Government thinks the same way. So there shouldn't be and issue moving forward to 20 mins or better with the trains.

Every 20 mins is still foam when it underutilises the city lines which has a capacity of between 18-20tph, and it still takes away peak services from other lines under the "20/10" format.

Taking away services from other lines that currently run on 6/12/15/24 to go "20/10" will lead to commuters on the other lines back into their cars.  Do it properly with 15 minutes or better (with 3 min headways possible on the current tracks).  Not this 20/10 rubbish which just robs Paul to Pay Peter.

Put the foam down dude.

^^That's right! 20 mins or better resulting in sharing the resources around for better point to point travel times across the entire week. Not just on a couple of lines. It's not foam yet a practocal idea to get people back on trains 7 days a week. Not just M-F into the city centre and back. The only person interpreting the idea as foam is you. Others are accepting or impartial, but certainly haven't discarded it as foam.

While taking away trains from other lines for the 20 minute foam.  As it stands Queensland STILL doesn't have enough drivers or rollingstock, and as pointed out, the "20/10/5" underutilises the city lines when theres capacity for every 6-12 minutes on most lines.

And as per past threads on this forums most other readers interpreted as foam with the "timetable modelling" thing.  You're basically on your own here.

Do it properly. Every 15 minutes when resources permit or not at all.  20 minutes is still not enough to get people out of their cars.

Like I said the word foam you tend to use alot not leading to and substantial substance to the debate.

Because there's still not enough drivers for the "20 min" timetable in the short to medium term. 

And the proposal still takes away train services from the other lines in both off-peak in peak.  Leading to some more peak commuters back into their cars as some can't stand the crowding on less services, especially those on the Cleveland line.

Therefore it's still what it is, foam.

Thats not true at all until the modelling has been done by QR. That just your fears and interpretation of a maybe scenario.

^^Should I say unlikely scenario re people hoping back in cars because of an improved timebale of 20mins or better.

[Arnz]

So in other words "let's axe more bus and train services and get more people back in their cars."  Defeating the initial point of PT.

20 min is still foam when it just creates more problems than it solves, especially when it gets more people back in their cars - both off-peak and peak.  Cleveland and Shorncliffe commuters for example have returned to their cars, putting "20 min/10 mins" will get more people on other lines back in their cars as it takes train services away from other lines.

More feeder buses are not going to happen if they are not utilised. Yep! You just need to except that it's an car orientated city and will be for a very long time. Hence Park  n Rides. Thats what the people seem to want and the Government thinks the same way. So there shouldn't be and issue moving forward to 20 mins or better with the trains.

Every 20 mins is still foam when it underutilises the city lines which has a capacity of between 18-20tph, and it still takes away peak services from other lines under the "20/10" format.

Taking away services from other lines that currently run on 6/12/15/24 to go "20/10" will lead to commuters on the other lines back into their cars.  Do it properly with 15 minutes or better (with 3 min headways possible on the current tracks).  Not this 20/10 rubbish which just robs Paul to Pay Peter.

Put the foam down dude.

^^That's right! 20 mins or better resulting in sharing the resources around for better point to point travel times across the entire week. Not just on a couple of lines. It's not foam yet a practocal idea to get people back on trains 7 days a week. Not just M-F into the city centre and back. The only person interpreting the idea as foam is you. Others are accepting or impartial, but certainly haven't discarded it as foam.

While taking away trains from other lines for the 20 minute foam.  As it stands Queensland STILL doesn't have enough drivers or rollingstock, and as pointed out, the "20/10/5" underutilises the city lines when theres capacity for every 6-12 minutes on most lines.

And as per past threads on this forums most other readers interpreted as foam with the "timetable modelling" thing.  You're basically on your own here.

Do it properly. Every 15 minutes when resources permit or not at all.  20 minutes is still not enough to get people out of their cars.

Like I said the word foam you tend to use alot not leading to and substantial substance to the debate.

Because there's still not enough drivers for the "20 min" timetable in the short to medium term. 

And the proposal still takes away train services from the other lines in both off-peak in peak.  Leading to some more peak commuters back into their cars as some can't stand the crowding on less services, especially those on the Cleveland line.

Therefore it's still what it is, foam.

Thats not true at all until the modelling has been done by QR. That just your fears and interpretation of a maybe scenario.

I have read in the past QR has ruled out "20 minute" frequencies in the past as it's not workable with their track capacity.  It's set at 3 minute headways in the City track pairs. 

Therefore it's either 30mins or 15 mins or better in the off-peak.  None of the 20/10/5 rubbish which gobbles up capacity (and takes away trains as a result).

And as per pointed out by #Metro and others, Qld still doesn't have the drivers for 20 mins everywhere in the first place. 

[verbatim9]

So in other words "let's axe more bus and train services and get more people back in their cars."  Defeating the initial point of PT.

20 min is still foam when it just creates more problems than it solves, especially when it gets more people back in their cars - both off-peak and peak.  Cleveland and Shorncliffe commuters for example have returned to their cars, putting "20 min/10 mins" will get more people on other lines back in their cars as it takes train services away from other lines.

More feeder buses are not going to happen if they are not utilised. Yep! You just need to except that it's an car orientated city and will be for a very long time. Hence Park  n Rides. Thats what the people seem to want and the Government thinks the same way. So there shouldn't be and issue moving forward to 20 mins or better with the trains.

Every 20 mins is still foam when it underutilises the city lines which has a capacity of between 18-20tph, and it still takes away peak services from other lines under the "20/10" format.

Taking away services from other lines that currently run on 6/12/15/24 to go "20/10" will lead to commuters on the other lines back into their cars.  Do it properly with 15 minutes or better (with 3 min headways possible on the current tracks).  Not this 20/10 rubbish which just robs Paul to Pay Peter.

Put the foam down dude.

^^That's right! 20 mins or better resulting in sharing the resources around for better point to point travel times across the entire week. Not just on a couple of lines. It's not foam yet a practocal idea to get people back on trains 7 days a week. Not just M-F into the city centre and back. The only person interpreting the idea as foam is you. Others are accepting or impartial, but certainly haven't discarded it as foam.

While taking away trains from other lines for the 20 minute foam.  As it stands Queensland STILL doesn't have enough drivers or rollingstock, and as pointed out, the "20/10/5" underutilises the city lines when theres capacity for every 6-12 minutes on most lines.

And as per past threads on this forums most other readers interpreted as foam with the "timetable modelling" thing.  You're basically on your own here.

Do it properly. Every 15 minutes when resources permit or not at all.  20 minutes is still not enough to get people out of their cars.

Like I said the word foam you tend to use alot not leading to and substantial substance to the debate.

Because there's still not enough drivers for the "20 min" timetable in the short to medium term. 

And the proposal still takes away train services from the other lines in both off-peak in peak.  Leading to some more peak commuters back into their cars as some can't stand the crowding on less services, especially those on the Cleveland line.

Therefore it's still what it is, foam.

Thats not true at all until the modelling has been done by QR. That just your fears and interpretation of a maybe scenario.

I have read in the past QR has ruled out "20 minute" frequencies in the past as it's not workable with their track capacity.  It's set at 3 minute headways in the City track pairs. 

Therefore it's either 30mins or 15 mins or better in the off-peak.  None of the 20/10/5 rubbish which gobbles up capacity (and takes away trains as a result).

^^Quote the link and the source and check that it's still the case today?

Until then 20mins or better is still a worthwhile network timetable to look into further with possible implementation in the near future.

[Arnz]

Reading the Track Layouts reports and past information dating back some years ago.  Also read the "RailFail" timetable was based on the "patronage" modelling to keep to the 3 min headways per line (while keeping slots for restoration of services).

And as pointed out by others, Qld still doesn't have the drivers to go 20 mins everywhere in the short to medium term (2-4 years).  While it's been nice to stay up all night, the debate however is going to end up moot.

Which by 5 years or thereabouts there would be debate whether to go to 15 minutes or better by then considering Qld's history of stuffing up recent transport projects.

[verbatim9]

Reading the Track Layouts reports and past information dating back some years ago.  Also read the "RailFail" timetable was based on the "patronage" modelling to keep to the 3 min headways per line (while keeping slots for restoration of services).

And as pointed out by others, Qld still doesn't have the drivers to go 20 mins everywhere in the short to medium term (2-4 years).  While it's been nice to stay up all night, the debate however is going to end up moot.

Which by 5 years or thereabouts there would be debate whether to go to 15 minutes or better by then considering Qld's history of stuffing up recent transport projects.

^^Quote the link and the source and check that it's still the case today?

Until then 20mins or better is still a worthwhile network timetable to look into further with possible implementation in the near future.

[Arnz]

So in other words "let's axe more bus and train services and get more people back in their cars."  Defeating the initial point of PT.

20 min is still foam when it just creates more problems than it solves, especially when it gets more people back in their cars - both off-peak and peak.  Cleveland and Shorncliffe commuters for example have returned to their cars, putting "20 min/10 mins" will get more people on other lines back in their cars as it takes train services away from other lines.

More feeder buses are not going to happen if they are not utilised. Yep! You just need to except that it's an car orientated city and will be for a very long time. Hence Park  n Rides. Thats what the people seem to want and the Government thinks the same way. So there shouldn't be and issue moving forward to 20 mins or better with the trains.

Every 20 mins is still foam when it underutilises the city lines which has a capacity of between 18-20tph, and it still takes away peak services from other lines under the "20/10" format.

Taking away services from other lines that currently run on 6/12/15/24 to go "20/10" will lead to commuters on the other lines back into their cars.  Do it properly with 15 minutes or better (with 3 min headways possible on the current tracks).  Not this 20/10 rubbish which just robs Paul to Pay Peter.

Put the foam down dude.

^^That's right! 20 mins or better resulting in sharing the resources around for better point to point travel times across the entire week. Not just on a couple of lines. It's not foam yet a practocal idea to get people back on trains 7 days a week. Not just M-F into the city centre and back. The only person interpreting the idea as foam is you. Others are accepting or impartial, but certainly haven't discarded it as foam.

While taking away trains from other lines for the 20 minute foam.  As it stands Queensland STILL doesn't have enough drivers or rollingstock, and as pointed out, the "20/10/5" underutilises the city lines when theres capacity for every 6-12 minutes on most lines.

And as per past threads on this forums most other readers interpreted as foam with the "timetable modelling" thing.  You're basically on your own here.

Do it properly. Every 15 minutes when resources permit or not at all.  20 minutes is still not enough to get people out of their cars.

Like I said the word foam you tend to use alot not leading to and substantial substance to the debate.

Because there's still not enough drivers for the "20 min" timetable in the short to medium term. 

And the proposal still takes away train services from the other lines in both off-peak in peak.  Leading to some more peak commuters back into their cars as some can't stand the crowding on less services, especially those on the Cleveland line.

Therefore it's still what it is, foam.

Thats not true at all until the modelling has been done by QR. That just your fears and interpretation of a maybe scenario.

I have read in the past QR has ruled out "20 minute" frequencies in the past as it's not workable with their track capacity.  It's set at 3 minute headways in the City track pairs. 

Therefore it's either 30mins or 15 mins or better in the off-peak.  None of the 20/10/5 rubbish which gobbles up capacity (and takes away trains as a result).

^^Quote the link and the source and check that it's still the case today?

Until then 20mins or better is still a worthwhile network timetable to look into further with possible implementation in the near future.

There still isn't enough drivers for 20 minutes to everywhere for the next 2-4 years.  And by then the 20 minute thing would be moot in 2-4 years as per all government documents past and present (ConnectingSEQ, etc) they'll be debating 15 minutes.

By the time the driver issues are sorted, there would be debate on 15 min or better services by then within the track capacity of the network.  Even the Landsborough duplication may see 15 mins to Caboolture on a "2 Landsborough/1 Nambour/1 Caboolture) arrangement.

[#Metro]

I have to say, I am impressed with the quotations within a quotation within a quotation!

The timetable may be altered in the future, but only to restore what was already lost.

At the current rate, we can expect RailFail to resolve sometime in 2026. That is another eight years away.

Trying to work out 20 vs 15 - NEITHER are possible on the current network due to #RailFail.

RailFail Calculations & Projection here The year 2026 - the end date for #RailFail?
https://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=12649.msg209451#msg209451

[Arnz]

While I don't mind staying up the night.  The overall 20 minute proposal is going to end up moot in a few years as we don't have the drivers for it in the first place for the next 2-4 years.

Small steps first, let's get a Mon-Fri consistent timetable back for 2019 with the Cleveland, Shorncliffe and Ipswich gaps filled first.  That should not take much extra resources.  Then work on restoring the October 2016 timetable from there.

By the time QR does get enough drivers with excess, whatever incarnation of "ConnectingSEQ" the current state government posts up will be posting either "4TPH" or better on their glossy posters.  Thus it's likely by that point, politicians and gunzels will be debating 15 mins or better on all rail lines (maybe also debating whether Beerwah/Landsborough should be included), with the exceptions of Rosewood, beyond Landsborough (and perhaps) Doomben.