Cross River Rail Project

[Stillwater]

CRR via Exhibition ... now we will have 'world class' urban design to 'show other cities how it's done'.  Oh gawd!
http://www.couriermail.com.au/life/homesproperty/details-revealed-of-re-development-at-rna-showgrounds/story-e6frequ6-1226131279351

[O_128]

Redbank/Springfield via Milton

Ripley-Ipswich to Strathpine via Central

What's the difference? I read that ExpressLink from Ipswich would run via CRR2.

Redbank and Springfield services combine at Darra, running all stations to the city and then on to Shorncliffe, the Airport or Doomben.  (Slight possibility Doomben may be hooked into a Merivale Bridge pattern or terminate at Roma Street.)

"Ipswich" services would be all stations Ripley to Redbank via Ipswich, then limited stations to the city, then limited stations to Northgate, then all stations to Strathpine and terminate.

CRR2 does not feature in any current proposals.  I also don't see why it should, it appears completely unnecessary.  The existing main line gives a notional 24 trains per hour in the peak with some improvements (ie 40+ trains in the 2-hour peak) - that is surely enough for the western suburbs.  The inner city metro from Toowong to Newstead is a more worthy idea and could form the nucleus of a metro network which will in the long term replace the busways, eg:

-   Capalaba to Indooroopilly via Carindale, Buranda and UQ
-   Loganholme to Bracken Ridge
-   Light metro/light rail to replace the busway from Buranda to RBWH

This is the plan that I've heard of swell surf rail, theres 3 kind of "semi" plans.

1, convert busways to light rail
2. convert busways to metro
3. convert north south and eastern busways to metro, while the uq busway is light railed to RBWH and the metro tunnels from buranda to RBWH and continues to chermside. while keeping the core of the busway for light/rail buses.

[HappyTrainGuy]

I'm sorry, but it takes far more time to reverse the shuttles. Surely that's an axiom.

Aren't we talking about extended Ipswich-Caboolture services to Rosewood and not the Ipswich-Rosewood shuttle? They never run 6 car shuttles as platforms aren't long enough and would block level crossings while at Karrabin and Thagoona.

[somebody]

I'm sorry, but it takes far more time to reverse the shuttles. Surely that's an axiom.

Aren't we talking about extended Ipswich-Caboolture services to Rosewood and not the Ipswich-Rosewood shuttle? They never run 6 car shuttles as platforms aren't long enough and would block level crossings while at Karrabin and Thagoona.

Yes.

They wouldn't block the LX's if the front 3 cars were locked O/B.

[colinw]

This probably should go in another thread, rather than the CRR one.  But anyway ...

IMHO it probably makes sense to just extend the platforms, rather than having silly operational constraints like 3 car platforms.

Thomas St -> room to extend platform to west

Wulkuraka -> already has 6 car platform, half closed off, on the down side

Karrabin -> room to extend platform to west

Walloon -> room to extend platform in either direction

Thagoona -> room to extend platform to west

Rosewood -> looks like its 6 cars already

Note sure if some signals would have to move to accommodate this?  Might drive costs up.

I just wish we had a reason to talk about the platform lengths at Laidley & Gatton :-(

[HappyTrainGuy]

Its been a while but once the train gets to Ipswich the guard attends to any needs for passengers boarding/disembarking etc, then has to walk to the front, walk through the train to make sure no one is left onboard, secure the first set, final check then lets the driver know that passengers have boarded and is okay to go if ready. Remember the driver has to isolate/reenergise the cab if they leave it.

[somebody]

Its been a while but once the train gets to Ipswich the guard attends to any needs for passengers boarding/disembarking etc, then has to walk to the front, walk through the train to make sure no one is left onboard, secure the first set, final check then lets the driver know that passengers have boarded and is okay to go if ready. Remember the driver has to isolate/reenergise the cab if they leave it.

Again, that is still preferable to kicking everyone off the train and asking them to wait 10 minutes (or whatever it is) for the connecting service.

[mufreight]

Its been a while but once the train gets to Ipswich the guard attends to any needs for passengers boarding/disembarking etc, then has to walk to the front, walk through the train to make sure no one is left onboard, secure the first set, final check then lets the driver know that passengers have boarded and is okay to go if ready. Remember the driver has to isolate/reenergise the cab if they leave it.

Duties usually carried out by station staff who advise the guard that the front set is empty, over the last 12 months I have never witnessed the front set actually locked off but the station porter ensures that no passengers join the front three cars.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Again, that is still preferable to kicking everyone off the train and asking them to wait 10 minutes (or whatever it is) for the connecting service.

I still fail to see why they shouldn't extend the station lengths. I thought the shortened dwell time from Caboolture-Rosewood trains at Ipswich would have been a big selling point for you?

[somebody]

Again, that is still preferable to kicking everyone off the train and asking them to wait 10 minutes (or whatever it is) for the connecting service.

I still fail to see why they shouldn't extend the station lengths. I thought the shortened dwell time from Caboolture-Rosewood trains at Ipswich would have been a big selling point for you?

I don't mind if they do the extensions, but they don't need the extensions to get 90% of the benefit.  If they do extend the platforms, who says that they would get rid of the shuttles?

[somebody]

Back to topic, why does the CRR tunnel connect to the mains.  Surely the suburbans is more logical - you can keep the Airport-Gold Coast pairing, and increase capacity from Central to Virginia-GYN above 20tph without splitting the services between the stations.  I suppose that does have the unfortunate side effect of a lack of sectorisation at Albion #1 & #2.

I guess they don't see the merit of keeping services together in this town, to my exasperation, so I guess that notion doesn't rate with the authorities.

[Golliwog]

Shorncliffe, Doomben and the Airport lines connect to the suburbans. None of these are going to be needing 9 car trains any time soon. Caboolture and SC Line will as they are much longer. Its as simple as that.

[#Metro]

This is the plan that I've heard of swell surf rail, theres 3 kind of "semi" plans.

1, convert busways to light rail
2. convert busways to metro
3. convert north south and eastern busways to metro, while the uq busway is light railed to RBWH and the metro tunnels from buranda to RBWH and continues to chermside. while keeping the core of the busway for light/rail buses.

Funding?

[somebody]

Shorncliffe, Doomben and the Airport lines connect to the suburbans. None of these are going to be needing 9 car trains any time soon. Caboolture and SC Line will as they are much longer. Its as simple as that.

Which means that Airport trains will no longer be able to continue to the Gold Coast after CRR.  Which won't be popular in some quarters.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Gold Coast-Nambour with an interchange at Eagle Junction  Oh look.... a flying pig..... 

[SurfRail]

Back to topic, why does the CRR tunnel connect to the mains.  Surely the suburbans is more logical - you can keep the Airport-Gold Coast pairing, and increase capacity from Central to Virginia-GYN above 20tph without splitting the services between the stations.  I suppose that does have the unfortunate side effect of a lack of sectorisation at Albion #1 & #2.

I guess they don't see the merit of keeping services together in this town, to my exasperation, so I guess that notion doesn't rate with the authorities.

Can't agree with your reasoning on this one.

Caboolture and the outer Beenleigh / nearer Gold Coast are very different operating environments to Shorncliffe, Ferny Grove, Darra etc.  Given you will want 9-car trains for the latter and not the former, then it makes perfect sense to hook the north coast into the lines south of Yeerongpilly.  

Caboolture and Redcliffe services will run express most likely from Strathpine, so any service from there to Virginia will be provided by a pattern not extending beyond Strathpine.  The proposed operating paradigm has the advantage of separating out whole stretches of line to have their own patterns like this, which will stop unsustainable buggers like me filling up trains for those living closer in.

I'm not too bothered about the loss of a direct connection to the airport.  We will have our own airport line in the form of Coolangatta eventually, which will serve most domestic destinations and a growing number of international ones.  

Changing at Roma Street won't be difficult for those who still use BNE, and is no different to what happens in most other cities.  Sydney included - no direct trains from the Airport to any centre of any importance except Cambelltown (occasionally) and the CBD itself.  Transferring at Central in Sydney is a mite harder with only that single elevator at the far northern end of platform 22 usually crammed with people.

About the only big issue I have with the published proposals is sending the NWTC stopping service via Bowen Hills, but I am slightly more sold on the idea than I was before – as long as there is a CoastLink stop at Kelvin Grove.

[O_128]

This is the plan that I've heard of swell surf rail, theres 3 kind of "semi" plans.

1, convert busways to light rail
2. convert busways to metro
3. convert north south and eastern busways to metro, while the uq busway is light railed to RBWH and the metro tunnels from buranda to RBWH and continues to chermside. while keeping the core of the busway for light/rail buses.

Funding?

This is quite far away and very preliminary, but I've been told theres a bit of a disagreement, Gov wants metro while planners want light rail, mainly so in the future UQ - Newfarm can be light railed and even to browns plains.

[somebody]

Caboolture and the outer Beenleigh / nearer Gold Coast are very different operating environments to Shorncliffe, Ferny Grove, Darra etc.  Given you will want 9-car trains for the latter and not the former, then it makes perfect sense to hook the north coast into the lines south of Yeerongpilly.  

While I'm open to counter arguments on this one particularly, this one doesn't work for me.  If there are to be 9 car trains, platforms have to be lengthened, and doing that for BNH-VL + EJ + Airport = 10 platforms.  Sending the 9 car trains north of the Airport would be problematic, probably enough to kill the idea. Although lengthening the Airport platforms might not be that easy.

I can't see a perfect solution here, but I'll believe Trouts Rd and Strathpine terminating when I see it.

[SurfRail]

I can't see a perfect solution here, but I'll believe Trouts Rd and Strathpine terminating when I see it.

As will I - we've yet to break ground on anything yet of course!

[Arnz]

Gold Coast-Nambour with an interchange at Eagle Junction   Oh look.... a flying pig.....  

I would think Nambour would become Nambour-Beerwah shuttles post CAMCOS in most post CRR/CAMCOS situations.  The Nambour slots right now and post Landsborough dup in 2021 will most likely be taken by the CAMCOS/Sunshine Coast corridor, thus the Nambour trains becomes Beerwah shuttles whilst the CAMCOS corridor to the Sunshine Coast proper becomes the direct service. 

I can't remember whether if it's CAMCOS or the Beerburrum-Landsborough papers, but one of those reports had a artist sketch of a 3-platform Beerwah station.

Any direct trains north of Beerwah on the NCL will most likely be the few ICE operated Gympielanders and Tilt Trains (non-TL fares).

[O_128]

Gold Coast-Nambour with an interchange at Eagle Junction   Oh look.... a flying pig.....  

I would think Nambour would become Nambour-Beerwah shuttles post CAMCOS in most post CRR/CAMCOS situations.  The Nambour slots right now and post Landsborough dup in 2021 will most likely be taken by the CAMCOS/Sunshine Coast corridor, thus the Nambour trains becomes Beerwah shuttles whilst the CAMCOS corridor to the Sunshine Coast proper becomes the direct service. 

I can't remember whether if it's CAMCOS or the Beerburrum-Landsborough papers, but one of those reports had a artist sketch of a 3-platform Beerwah station.

Any direct trains north of Beerwah on the NCL will most likely be the few ICE operated Gympielanders and Tilt Trains (non-TL fares).

are shuttles a huge issue?, Otherwise Nambour/ Camcos and Caboolture will be to much not to mention Kippa ring. The only way would be quadded caboolture - straphpine and then trouts road, with out trouts road it won't be possible.

[somebody]

I actually think it should be Caboolture-Nambour shuttles coordinated with CAMCOS trains which would run express between Caboolture and the CAMCOS branching point.

But I doubt that will happen.

[Golliwog]

Which means that Airport trains will no longer be able to continue to the Gold Coast after CRR.  Which won't be popular in some quarters.

But the sky won't fall in if they don't. Reading the EIS, the intercity stopping pattern is Elanora to Caloundra running express Strathpine to Roma St (using CRR), and from the figure, north of Roma St it only stops at Petrie, Caboolture and two stations at each end of the CAMCOS corridor. The other CRR routes are interurbans going Caboolture to Elanora, Redcliffe to Flagstone Creek, and Nambour (not connected to anything, would turn back at Clapham) all of which were 9 car except for Redcliffe-Flagstone. Rosewood is planned to be connected to the Airport, Springfield with Shorncliffe and Ripley with Doomben (on the mains) 6 car services. In the peak there would also be Strathpine all stoppers running to Roma St (or something), in the off-peak, Redcliffe services would become the all stoppers Strathpine to Loganlea and Ferny Grove to Cleveland on the suburbans, 6 car services.

While I'm open to counter arguments on this one particularly, this one doesn't work for me.  If there are to be 9 car trains, platforms have to be lengthened, and doing that for BNH-VL + EJ + Airport = 10 platforms.  Sending the 9 car trains north of the Airport would be problematic, probably enough to kill the idea. Although lengthening the Airport platforms might not be that easy.

I can't see a perfect solution here, but I'll believe Trouts Rd and Strathpine terminating when I see it.

.
From their drawing, there are only 10 stations that would have to be upgraded for the nine car intercity service (which seems to be the flagship) and another 12 for the other 9 car services to Caboolture/GC, plus another 10 for Nambour to have 9 car services.

Whats the problem with Strathpine terminating/starting?

I actually think it should be Caboolture-Nambour shuttles coordinated with CAMCOS trains which would run express between Caboolture and the CAMCOS branching point.

But I doubt that will happen.

The CRR map has the intercity service as the only service connecting CAMCOS to Caboolture and doesn't stop until Caboolture. At least in peak hour anyway.

[somebody]

Which means that Airport trains will no longer be able to continue to the Gold Coast after CRR.  Which won't be popular in some quarters.

But the sky won't fall in if they don't.

I would agree with that.

Whats the problem with Strathpine terminating/starting?

Nothing IF combined with Trouts Rd.  Without Trouts Rd, I don't see the need to move the turnback point from Petrie.  Petrie would actually be far more logical as a turnback point for a tiered service, similar to the 333/330/340.  Petrie is also very busy (4th on the network), so why stop short of that?

It also requires infrastructure.

[HappyTrainGuy]

I reckon half of the stuff mentioned here is just nonsense personally.

[SurfRail]

I reckon half of the stuff mentioned here is just nonsense personally.

You're probably right.

The EIS is ultimately just lines on a map, but that is what they are working off for the time being.

[colinw]

I reckon half of the stuff mentioned here is just nonsense personally.

If you look at the record in this country for delivery of projects floated by the pollies, I think the true figure is probably in excess of 90%.  We can only hope that CRR does not end up adding to that statistic.

[somebody]

I reckon half of the stuff mentioned here is just nonsense personally.

On RailBoT, or with the official plan?

I reckon half of the stuff mentioned here is just nonsense personally.

If you look at the record in this country for delivery of projects floated by the pollies, I think the true figure is probably in excess of 90%.  We can only hope that CRR does not end up adding to that statistic.

90% NOT delivered?  I don't think it's even that bad in Sydney.

[colinw]

90% NOT delivered?  I don't think it's even that bad in Sydney.

I think if you were to dig up the full list of proposals over the years, it would easily hit that level.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_railways_in_Sydney

Natinwide the statistic is probably not as high as that, mainly because SA & WA have had very few proposals and what they have proposed has tended to get built.

But NSW, Vic & QLD seem to be constantly pushing projects that will never see the light of day.

[HappyTrainGuy]

I reckon half of the stuff mentioned here is just nonsense personally.

On RailBoT, or with the official plan?

The plan. Stuff like all these fantasy routes, obsurd running patterns, terminating and running express to Strathpine and what not.

[SurfRail]

I reckon half of the stuff mentioned here is just nonsense personally.

On RailBoT, or with the official plan?

The plan. Stuff like all these fantasy routes, obsurd running patterns, terminating and running express to Strathpine and what not.

I will put up my hand in support of the plans.

What is actually that absurd about the running patterns being proposed?  The intention is to tier the network to better reflect land use and intensity of service, like most countries do. 

Strathpine is an appropriate mid-range terminus because of the local land use and it being the most likely branching point for the NWTC.  Petrie could conceivably be a terminus instead, but I see little reason.  You would be forcing a lot more transfers at Petrie (nothing there except a car park) compared to Strathpine (major business precinct and subregional activity centre).  The NWTC services would need to terminate at Strathpine anyway to prevent them hogging up paths between there and Petrie.

[ozbob]

Queensland Parliament Hansard

http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/hansard/2011/2011_09_08_DAILY.pdf

Private Members' Statements

Cross River Rail

Mr EMERSON (Indooroopilly—LNP) (3.01 pm): As early as 2005, then Premier Peter Beattie
predicted a rail capacity crisis in 2016 over the Merivale Bridge, the only inner-city rail crossing in
Brisbane, with major consequences for passenger transport especially on the Gold Coast, Cleveland
and Beenleigh lines. In 2008 the inner-city rail capacity study again identified 2016 as the crucial
deadline. Even the current Premier admitted in 2009 that a solution was desperately needed by 2016.
Last week the LNP announced that, if elected, it would immediately begin work on increasing
platform capacity at the Southbank and South Brisbane stations. This would provide up to an extra five
years capacity over the Merivale Bridge and deliver valuable time to put longer term solutions in place.
Public transport advocacy group Rail Back On Track supported the LNP's announcement saying, 'We
have long suggested such steps will be necessary.'

But what is the state Labor government doing about the 2016 capacity crisis? It has no solution.
Its only answer is the Cross River Rail project. But that $8.2 billion project remains unfunded and will not
be completed until at least 2020, four years after the capacity crisis is reached. I say 'at least', because
last week we saw the Bligh government finally reveal the truth about its Cross River Rail project. On 612
ABC Radio last week Madonna King asked Labor Minister Neil Roberts whether under Labor there was
a promise to build Cross River Rail 'but not necessarily any money to build it or a date in which it will be
built'? What was Minister Roberts response? 'That is correct, Madonna.'

So Labor has known for over six years about the rail crisis coming in 2016 but still has no solution,
no plan and no idea. Its own minister has admitted that the Cross River Rail proposal is a glossy
brochure with no money and no date.
(Time expired)

Cross River Rail

Hon. SD FINN (Yeerongpilly—ALP) (Minister for Government Services, Building Industry and
Information and Communication Technology) (3.03 pm): Last Tuesday, the Minister for Transport
announced key changes to the Cross River Rail reference design including moving the new Yeerongpilly
station 250 metres further south to industrial land, moving the southern tunnel portal 110 metres further
south as well as relocating the evacuation building that had been placed in Fairfield. These important
changes are a win for the people in the electorate that I represent as they mean that 10 fewer residential
properties are required for resumption. Many constituents have told me that the design changes show
that the feedback both they and I provided to the project team on the reference design in late 2010 was
listened to. The reference design changes take into account the January 2011 flood data. That data has
been incorporated into the new design.

The environmental impact statement for the Cross River Rail project is now available for public
review and comment. The EIS demonstrates that the Cross River Rail project will deliver significant
benefits to the people in the electorate that I represent, including: faster, more frequent and more
reliable train travel to the city; a turn-up-and-go level of service, with a train every five minutes in the
peak; a new Yeerongpilly train station with better features, including covered platforms, a bus
interchange and a public plaza; and accessibility upgrades to the Rocklea and Moorooka stations.
The EIS also outlines the impacts of construction and operation and measures to avoid, mitigate
or manage these impacts, including at the major construction work site in Yeerongpilly. I am pleased to
see that an acoustic shed is proposed for the Yeerongpilly work site and that buildings around the work
site are being retained to provide a buffer between the work site and residents. In addition, I am pleased
to see that worker parking will be provided for in the work site—something that both I and my
constituents called for during the reference design proposal. I strongly encourage residents to review
the EIS and be involved in the consultation events that are taking place over the next few weeks and
give their feedback directly to the CRR team

For the record, we have not explicitly supported changes at the stations per se, but we have welcomed discussion on incremental improvements to the rail network.  We remain steadfastly strong supporters of CRR and support expediting that project. See the following two posts.

[ozbob]

Media release 1 September 2011

Queensland:  LNP Discussion paper on infrastructure welcome

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers has welcomed commitments to rail, public and active transport as indicated in the discussion paper 'Queensland's Future Together' released today (1).

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"There is a need to address inner city rail capacity constraints.  Cross River Rail will take some time so it is pleasing to note some effort has been made to propose steps to maximise the utility of existing infrastructure with incremental improvements.  We have long suggested such steps will be necessary."

"Commitments to the broad thrust of other rail and public and active transport related projects is welcome.  But promises do need to be turned into reality.  At least for now, a basis for further discussion and wider community input is in place and this will assist in driving improved policy outcomes."

1. http://candoqld.com.au/policies/the-cando-lnp-building-queenslands-future-together-discussion-paper

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[ozbob]

2nd September 2011

Re: Queensland:  LNP Discussion paper on infrastructure welcome

Greetings,

RAIL Back On Track is a strong supporter of the Cross River Rail as evidenced by media yesterday.

We do support the LNP coming up with proposals to  increase the utility of the existing network though.  The completion date for CRR is now at the earliest 2020, which is well past the attainment of max peak passenger loads.  The LNP proposal to expand both South Brisbane and SouthBank stations however needs detailed clarification.  It does nothing to really address the real choke points on the rail network so detail is needed.

Apart from infrastructure tweak initiatives, other actions such as an improved go card fare structure e.g. increase off peak discount to at least 30% and a better frequent journey discount, together with improvements in out of peak and counter peak frequency, will drive a mode shift out of peak and better utilise the public transport asset around the clock.  Addressing the looming public transport and road system meltdown requires actions now.

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

================================

Media release 25 April 2011  re-released 2 September 2011

SEQ: Cross River Rail should be expedited

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers calls for the Cross River Rail project to be implemented as soon as possible.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"Cross River Rail has a number of advantages besides the obvious ones of peak rail capacity.  It is obvious that there is difficulty in writing a timetable for the north-side, with the timetable starting 6th of June having trains to Caboolture and Nambour all stopping to Northgate, which is clearly undesirable.  Speeding these trains up by allowing the all stopping service to be provided by other trains such as for the Shorncliffe line would become easier with Cross River Rail."

"However the major advantages come on the south side.  Currently it is a 12 minute run from Park Rd to Central, a distance as the crow flies of little over 3km.  If Cross River Rail is even moderately well executed, it will improve on this enormously as well as avoiding the slow turn from Dutton Park.  The Albert Street station will also be a significant benefit in that the walking time for most city destinations will be significantly reduced as compared to the existing location of Central."

"It is reported (1) that current plans involve the Kuraby trains running via South Brisbane while Beenleigh and Gold Coast trains run via Cross River Rail.  This plan reduces the advantages of the Cross River Rail project.  An alternative would be that the Kuraby trains run via Cross River Rail with Corinda via South Brisbane running every 15 minutes to provide service on the bypassed stations and increase the network effect of the system.  Such a plan would also allow all trains through Kuraby to leave from the Albert St station rather than dividing the effective frequency."

"All of this ignores that the Cross River Rail project is required for capacity reasons, and delaying it will result in a calamitous congested network in peak later in a few more years.  This would be further exacerbated by the planned Kippa-Ring line."

"These advantages should be sufficient reason to reverse the decision to delay the Cross River Rail, and implement it as soon as possible, rather than as late as possible.  RAIL Back On Track believes Cross River Rail can be completed for less than the $8 billion originally forecast even with a quadruple track capability on the Roma St to Woolloongabba section. In any case, competition for Infrastructure Australia funding will now be more intense considering both Melbourne and Sydney have major rail projects in train.  Any further delays with moving ahead with Cross River Rail could mean missing the train at Albert Street Station and gridlock for the next 50 years."

Reference:

1. http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2010/11/cross-river-rail-service-forecast.html

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

On 1/09/2011 10:15 AM, RAIL Back On Track Admin wrote:

Media release 1 September 2011

Queensland:  LNP Discussion paper on infrastructure welcome

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers has welcomed commitments to rail, public and active transport as indicated in the discussion paper 'Queensland's Future Together' released today (1).

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"There is a need to address inner city rail capacity constraints.  Cross River Rail will take some time so it is pleasing to note some effort has been made to propose steps to maximise the utility of existing infrastructure with incremental improvements.  We have long suggested such steps will be necessary."

"Commitments to the broad thrust of other rail and public and active transport related projects is welcome.  But promises do need to be turned into reality.  At least for now, a basis for further discussion and wider community input is in place and this will assist in driving improved policy outcomes."

1. http://candoqld.com.au/policies/the-cando-lnp-building-queenslands-future-together-discussion-paper

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[petey3801]

Although lengthening the Airport platforms might not be that easy.

I had a look when I went out there yesterday..

International station might be able to be lengthened to 8-cars relatively easily (althought still expensive due to being on a viaduct), 9 cars would be a stretch though, but may be possible while still keeping a straight platform edge.
Domestic station is another matter. It would be very difficult and exceedingly expensive to lengthen Domestic to 9 cars. Doing so would require either: Adjustment of the tracks on the City end (very expensive and quite difficult) or extention of the current dead end (also exceedingly expensive and fairly difficult due to the overbridge and station office buildings).

For the cost and time of lengthening the Airport platforms to 9-cars, I imagine all platform modifications needed on the north would be able to be achieved for less IMO.

[somebody]

I reckon half of the stuff mentioned here is just nonsense personally.

On RailBoT, or with the official plan?

The plan. Stuff like all these fantasy routes, obsurd running patterns, terminating and running express to Strathpine and what not.

I will put up my hand in support of the plans.

What is actually that absurd about the running patterns being proposed?  The intention is to tier the network to better reflect land use and intensity of service, like most countries do. 

Strathpine is an appropriate mid-range terminus because of the local land use and it being the most likely branching point for the NWTC.  Petrie could conceivably be a terminus instead, but I see little reason.  You would be forcing a lot more transfers at Petrie (nothing there except a car park) compared to Strathpine (major business precinct and subregional activity centre).  The NWTC services would need to terminate at Strathpine anyway to prevent them hogging up paths between there and Petrie.

I think on the north side it has some merit, if it happens as has been suggested.  It's the south side patterns which seem somewhat daft.

[somebody]

I think the critical issue for Beenleigh trains via CRR is the ICRCS forecast demand for peak Gold Coast trains, which was 19tph.  I feel this is up in the realms of flying pigs.  If, as has been posted, 14k Gold Coast workers work in Brisbane then that implies a 25% market penetration of the Gold Coast trains.  Getting to the 19tph requirement would mean an increase in the size of the market, as well as a significant increase in the market penetration.  If this, in fact happens, then the 9 car trains plan is far superior to kicking the Beenleigh line trains out of CRR IMO.

I'd be very interested in BrizCommuter's thoughts on a full time 4tph via Tennyson service in a post CRR world.  Foaming fantasy, or improvement to cross town links?  This is important as the via Yeronga trains cannot serve both Moorooka and Tennyson obviously.

[O_128]

Any news on when the business case will be finished ?

[colinw]

Everyone has been tasked with finding mud to throw at Newman, so there's no time to work on it. 

[Stillwater]

Well, December traditionally is the time for work to start on the budget to be delivered mid-year.  Anna Bligh had better get the CRR business case finished and sent off to the Tooth Fairy's House (err, Canberra) where there just might be a spare $9 billion stuffed under a mattress.  (Remember, this is a project that the state wants the federal government to fund.)  Ms Bligh needs the nod and wink from fellow Labor Princess Fairy Julia that there is nine billion dollars in a crock buried at the end of the rainbow in the backyard.  Then Ms Bligh can have CRR as the centrepiece of a re-election strategy in May, around the time of the federal budget (the local government elections being due in March).  Just look at all the electorates that will benefit from CRR; virtually all of SEQ.  She will tell us that Big Bad Newman huffs and he puffs and threatens to blow away the CRR plans in favour of an undisclosed Metro alternative.  We re-elect her and she announces that CRR needs a lot more work, with construction to start at numerous locations (marginal electorates) just before the following election.  Why not string out good news a further term?  Just think of all those sod-turning pictures with the princes and princesses of Parliament!  We finally get CRR and live happily ever after.  Without the business case, there is no fairytale ending.