Cross River Rail Project

[Stillwater]

Thanks for that, colinw.  It would be ironic if the state government included in its full cost/benefit ratio for the CRR project the benefits of the North West Transit Corridor connector tunnel without building the tunnel.  Under that scenario, the government will be including a Claytons 'benefit factor' for SCL train customers travelling along a 'ghost line' tunnel between City and Alderley while actually denying customers use of that line by virtue of its being non-existent.  It would seem to be part of the warped logic applying to the SCL at present.  It is interesting that IA is seeking clarification though.

[Set in train]

Did anyone see the rubbish on 10 News Tuesday arv?

Ran a graphic for the lead to a story about CRR that the project was underway! Only by the end of the report did you hear from Fare's Fair's absent letter writer (minister) saying that she was hopeful for money from the Feds.

All they are doing is a barge in the river for geotech testing for a project that is a long way away from funding.

Yet 10, desperate to fill 90mins, took the bait.

eta: personally I found the story insulting & misleading for those without our knowledge.

[Mr X]

I thought the story was a useless waste of time

[Golliwog]

I'm assuming it's the same as this one on CM: http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/river-drilling-begins-on-cross-river-rail-project/story-e6freoof-1226209394800

River drilling begins on Cross River Rail project

    by: Robyn Ironside
    From: The Courier-Mail
    November 29, 2011 3:37PM


Cross River Tunnel drilling Brisbane River November 29

Drilling has begun in the Brisbane River on the Cross River Rail project. Picture: Wesley Monts Source: The Courier-Mail

DRILLING has begun into the bottom of the Brisbane River as part of preparations for the as yet unfunded Cross River Rail project.

Although construction on the project has been delayed until 2014 because of the January floods, Transport Minister Annastacia Palaszczuk said the government was keen to do the preliminary works while it waited for federal funding.

``It's absolutely crucial that we have everything set in place so when the money comes from Infrastructure Australia we are job ready. We are ready for the construction and we are set to go,'' said Ms Palaszczuk.

A floating drill is being used from a river barge to get 15 separate core samples up to 60m under the river bed between the Botanic Gardens and the Kangaroo Point cliffs.

Project Director Luke Franzmann said they wanted to be sure of what they were working with.

``While we have information from the Clem7 Tunnel and information from the Captain Cook Bridge, you really want to know exactly what the information is like at the location where you want to build the project,'' said Mr Franzmann.

``The river barge drilling has only just commenced and it is what we expect, so that's very reassuring.''

Ms Palaszczuk said upon completion in 2020, Cross River Rail would stretch for 18km between Yerongpilly and Victoria Park including 10km underground.

It will include four underground stations with one each at Woolloongabba and Albert Street.

``This is crucial for how our rail network will cope into the future,'' said Ms Palaszczuk.

``We're talking here about a project that's worth over $6 billion but absolutely necessary for the future of transport in south-east Queensland.''

She said a business plan for the $8 billion project was still being prepared but acquisition talks had already begun with property owners.

``We have money set aside to pay for this drilling and scientific work (and) there is a budget that's allocated for property acquisitions,'' she said.

LNP leader Campbell Newman has not fully committed to Cross River Rail although an infrastructure discussion paper released in September indicated work would begin immediately on the project.

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Cross river rail firms as pre-election sweetener

Cross river rail firms as pre-election sweetener
Daniel Hurst
November 30, 2011 - 3:00AM

The business case for Brisbane's $8 billion cross river rail project will be finished in "in the next few months", raising the possibility of a pre-election announcement.

But Queensland Transport Minister Annastacia Palaszczuk yesterday declined to comment when asked what discussions she may have had with the federal government about a potential election eve funding agreement.

"I can't reveal that at the moment," she told reporters at a media event heralding preliminary drilling tests currently underway in the Brisbane River.

In January, the state government announced it would delay construction of the cross river rail project by up to two years, with completion unlikely until 2020, because of the financial impact of the summer floods.

But the government has been keen to promote the fact it has continued to push ahead with planning work for the 18-kilometre north-south railway line that will include 10 kilometres of underground tunnels from Yeerongpilly to Victoria Park.

Ms Palaszczuk said the proposed funding split – detailing how much money would come from the federal government, the state government and the private sector – was yet to be finalised.

The minister said she had had preliminary discussions with the federal government and would continue talks once the business case was completed and submitted to Infrastructure Australia.

"The business case should be completed in the next few months," she said.

An election is due in the first half of next year, with speculation surrounding February or March.

Ms Palaszczuk said the project could be delivered in a "staged" manner so that priority sections would come first.

Her comments came as drilling continued to firm up planners' knowledge of the exact characteristics of the rock underneath the Brisbane River.

Workers on a floating barge, set up near the City Botanic Gardens last week, will drill about 15 holes up to 60 metres deep between now and early next year.

This will help determine exactly where and how deep the rail tunnels under the river should be.

Project director Luke Franzmann said the project would ultimately require seven-metre-wide tunnels to be bored, and the quality of the rock would determine what type of tunnel boring machine suited.

He said the drilling work could build on the knowledge of the riverbed already drawn from the nearby Clem7 tunnel and Captain Cook Bridge projects.

The cross river rail project is touted as a solution to the rail capacity crisis looming in about 2016, with an extra river crossing allowing extra trains to head north and south.

The Liberal National Party argues it can delay the capacity problems by five years by building an extra platform at the South Brisbane and South Bank train stations, and has vowed to look for ways to deliver a cross river rail project at a lower cost.

The government's proposal would include four new underground train stations at Boggo Road, Woolloongabba, Albert Street and Roma Street, two new surface stations at Yeerongpilly and the Exhibition Grounds, and upgrades to the Rocklea and Moorooka stations.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/cross-river-rail-firms-as-preelection-sweetener-20111129-1o52t.html

[Stillwater]

A final business case has always been the most crucial, yet elusive, element of the CRR project.  The state government has preferred to feed the public artists' impressions and simulations ahead of the hard-nosed calculations and financial analysis that would prove its worth.  The thinking would seem to be that if a groundswell of public opinion is behind it, a project that has a benefit-cost ratio of about 1.1 or 1.2 can be pushed across the line ahead of other national transport infrastructure projects with a higher BCR.  Infrastructure Australia remains prudently cautious about some of the assumptions that the government has made in the business case analysis so far.  It remains to be seen whether the numbers will be worked through to a satisfactory conclusion before the political imperative kicks in at election time, when political parties are prone to make rash promises.  This is such a mammoth project that it must stack up on the business case findings.  The maximum value must be wrought from the expenditure of taxpayer dollars, or the restriction of that expenditure in favour of the private sector taking a bigger commercial risk.

Big business will invest confidently if the business case has rigour. Pollies running around at election time like chooks with their heads cut off may be inclined to concede a bigger public concession than is necessary in order to get CRR up and running.  What's wrong with that?  It means that fewer dollars are available for other public works.  Business needs to be enticed into the project and its investment maximised.

The changes of government in Victoria and NSW and the desire of those administrations to alter priorities for submission to Infrastructure Australia means that spare cash notionally allocated to those states potentially could be available to CRR by virtue of the fact that it is closer to being 'shovel ready'.

At a recent Property Council business breakfast, where he was a guest speaker, Mr Franzmann intimated that the business case had been 'virtually finalised', which would now appear to be bureaucratese for 'we are a few months away'.  The minister has confirmed this.  Certainly, Infrastructure Australia still has a number of reservations about the CRR project, as this assessment shows - http://www.infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/2011_coag/files/Cross_River_Rail_Appraisal2011.pdf

Is it the case that politics will drive the project?  Probably.  If the ALP makes CRR a centrepiece of its campaign, then the LNP is left a little flat-footed in respect of its vague PT offerings -- extending platforms at South Brisbane and Southbank for instance.  Labor will tout CRR as a project benefiting every electorate, directly or indirectly, from Coolangatta to Noosa.  Voters in electorates outside SEQ might see that as more pork being flung off trucks to what they perceive as an elite few.  Alternatively, Labor's go-ahead for CRR would send the signal that $6 or $7 billion is avaliable within government for public transport, and rail in particular.  The LNP would be tempted to repackage those dollars for a more targeted (read marginal electorate) audience.

Already the LNP has signalled it is thinking along those lines, since Campbell Newman has described CRR as the the product of 'Labor dreamers' and has made vague promises of the need to look to the problems of rail to both coasts.  Or was that a sop to his constituency - vague enough for hopeful electors to notice without saying much at all.  It is the art of the politician.  Maybe Mr Newman is thinking of a 'lean and mean' underground (a metro?) and some change left over for other things. Right now, the LNP transport policy, such as it is, is a bit like weak tea.  It attempts to slake the thirst without imparting flavour.

Either way, it is going to be an interesting campaign.  PT will be higher up the agenda of both parties, provided the LNP can finalise its transport policy in time.  It does not have one at present.  Going to the election without a comprehensive PT plan leaves the LNP open to criticism that it doesn't know where it is going on transport infrastructure.  Don't worry, the ALP would hammer that point.  Again it will proclaim that it has a 20-year transport plan, albeit unfunded and with rubbery timelines, while the LNP has some platform extensions, a few railway overpasses and a muddled grab-bag of other ideas as outlined in a transport discussion paper, or espoused by Campbell Newman while on the election trail.

As to the election timing, the Queensland Electoral Commission would appear to be worried about supervising local government and state government elections within the same timeframe.  Simply, it does not have the resources to manage both simultaneously.  Council elections are due to be held in March, although the state could defer them.  The commission has advised the government that it requires a six-week separation between state and local government polls.  If council elections are fixed in March, then the state election 'window of opportunity' becomes February or April, but could be as late as June.

We live in interesting times, as the Chinese curse goes.

[ozbob]

Not often realised is the state election 2012 could be as late as June ...

[colinw]

Not often realised is the state election 2012 could be as late as June ...

And I'm betting Bligh will go all the way to that, allowing "glass jaw" Newman to display his weaknesses for the longest amount of time possible, while the LNP flounders around in desperate search for something ... anything ... that could be construed as a meaningful policy.  Originally I was keen to see Bligh and the ALP gone, but the more I see of how the LNP & Newman conducts itself, the less I am inclined to send my swinging vote that way ...

Regarding the BCR of CRR, at 1.1 it seems on the low side but I am not convinced this is accurate.

Also what is the impact / cost of NOT building CRR, in terms of congestion, lost re-development opportunity, road projects to compensate for declining PT share, impact of suburban rail congestion on the freight task, etc.?  Sometimes the BCR of a project does not tell the whole story ...

[Golliwog]

What I would also be interested in seeing is what does the BCR become if the project is scaled down in cost from $8B as Newman has suggested? Is the cost much higher because you need to spend that extra money to get the full benefits?

Edit: Got my millions and billions mixed up.

[colinw]

$8M?  Huh?

[O_128]

Not often realised is the state election 2012 could be as late as June ...

Labor might do something nice and get the funding before the election then its pretty much locked in even if they lose

[#Metro]

The Liberal National Party argues it can delay the capacity problems by five years by building an extra platform at the South Brisbane and South Bank train stations, and has vowed to look for ways to deliver a cross river rail project at a lower cost.

I don't know how this will work. And it may involve sitting and waiting, horrible.

I'm surprised that the BCR came in at 1.1, which is barely above water. For a project that is going to unlock the rail system and have major network wide time saving implications (30 minute services can now go down to 15 minutes all day, save 15 minutes on waiting time plus 10 minutes on journeys on that line). I am surprised.

I don't even think Clem 7 wipes off 15 minutes waiting time plus 10 minutes trip time. That's a huge saving in time x the people who use it, that is significant.

The delay of the project by putting it off into the future would reduce the BCR IMHO.

[colinw]

How it might play out ...

Delay it a while, cost blows out, BCR goes negative, and then project gets canned.

A positive BCR for a swag of expensive road projects can then be conflated based on congestion growth that could have been mitigated by the missing rail project, and we end up paying 5 times as much as CRR for a road non-solution.

Meanwhile a few extra trains a day sit cooling their heels at South Brisbane as an interim measure.  Finally an ETCS level 2 or similar is installed for a sizeable percentage of the CRR cost but only a minor increment in system capacity by shoe-horning maybe an extra 4 to 6 TPH through double track & flat junctions.

By 2020, Brisbane's suburban rail system is the lowest frequency of its kind in Australia, and 2nd lowest in patronage barely ahead of Adelaide (which is catching up fast thanks to electrification & frequent services on its much smaller network). Perth by then is doing double our passenger numbers on less than half the route mileage.

Yes, I am being negative & cynical, but I give better than 50/50 odds that what I say above is close to what will actually happen.

We are at the crucial tipping point RIGHT NOW. Get CRR right, and the system goes one way, get it wrong or cancel it and rail loses its ability to perform the "heavy lifting" as the core of our transport system.

[Stillwater]

Mention is made of a BCR of 1.42, but that was when elements of North West Transport Corridor were added in.  These elements will not proceed, or won't proceed to the extent envisaged, and have been removed from the project cost.  However, benefits accruing to passengers who otherwise would have used those elements have stayed within the number crunching.  IA seems to be wanting greater clarification of these things.  And, yes, BCRs can change the extent to which you measure the benefits side of things particularly.  That's fine, so long as the benefits are legitimate and not some sort of creative accounting.

[Stillwater]

Currently, the IA appraisal of CRR states:

"Conclusion: In general, the economic appraisal is robust and has a reported benefit‐cost ratio above 1:1. There are some areas being followed up with the proponent that may potentially overstate the benefit cost ratio."

[colinw]

Have you seen any analysis of the impacts of the "do nothing" scenario?  Previous studies I've seen take this into account.

[Stillwater]

The impacts of the 'do nothing' scenario should be factored into the calculation of the BCR IMHO.  At this late stage, all should have a better handle on the BCR, its inputs and how it was calculated.  Queensland is still faffing about such that IA is saying "there are some areas being followed up with the proponent that may potentially overstate the benefit cost ratio."  Note also IA's language, especially where it says the BCR reportedly is 1.1, as though even the 1.1 figure is in doubt.  It should not be.  Every legitimate benefit should have been costed and included to calculate a rock solid BCR. 

Gloss and glitz PR is no substitute for a bullet-proof business case and BCR, which is why the state government needs to get it right before a motsa in public money is poured into this project.  IA seems to want a defencible BCR, which boils down to good corporate governance.  If the BCR falls below 1, you don't scrap the project, just look at its scale and design to make savings to get the BCR back above 1.  While Campbell Newman is unclear and general, obviously he is asking the question about value for money.  He would want to look at this project from a position of incumbency in government.

[somebody]

I'm surprised that the BCR came in at 1.1, which is barely above water. For a project that is going to unlock the rail system and have major network wide time saving implications (30 minute services can now go down to 15 minutes all day, save 15 minutes on waiting time plus 10 minutes on journeys on that line). I am surprised.

30 minute frequency on every un-branched line in QLD reduces the benefit of the rail network.

How it might play out ...

Delay it a while, cost blows out, BCR goes negative, and then project gets canned.

A positive BCR for a swag of expensive road projects can then be conflated based on congestion growth that could have been mitigated by the missing rail project, and we end up paying 5 times as much as CRR for a road non-solution.

Meanwhile a few extra trains a day sit cooling their heels at South Brisbane as an interim measure.  Finally an ETCS level 2 or similar is installed for a sizeable percentage of the CRR cost but only a minor increment in system capacity by shoe-horning maybe an extra 4 to 6 TPH through double track & flat junctions.

By 2020, Brisbane's suburban rail system is the lowest frequency of its kind in Australia, and 2nd lowest in patronage barely ahead of Adelaide (which is catching up fast thanks to electrification & frequent services on its much smaller network). Perth by then is doing double our passenger numbers on less than half the route mileage.

Yes, I am being negative & cynical, but I give better than 50/50 odds that what I say above is close to what will actually happen.

We are at the crucial tipping point RIGHT NOW. Get CRR right, and the system goes one way, get it wrong or cancel it and rail loses its ability to perform the "heavy lifting" as the core of our transport system.

If our representations on Ferny Grove line 15 minute frequency are unsuccessful then I have little doubt that you are about right.  There's no cost recovery in an infrequent rail network!

[#Metro]

Sometimes I wonder

What is the point spending all this money on the rail network, only to run pitiful frequency on it?

[Golliwog]

$8M?  Huh?

Haha, my bad, fixed up now, $8B (or there abouts anyway). The price seems to fluctuate a bit every now and then.

[colinw]

Ok, got you.  For a moment there I thought you meant Newman was proposing to replace CRR with a $8M extra platform at South Brisbane or something :-)

[ozbob]

LOL

[Golliwog]

Ok, got you.  For a moment there I thought you meant Newman was proposing to replace CRR with a $8M extra platform at South Brisbane or something :-)

Haha, don't give him any ideas!

[Mr X]

Sometimes I wonder

What is the point spending all this money on the rail network, only to run pitiful frequency on it?

Make CRR a busway if you want the frequency  buses are cheaper than trains

I assume we will get the projected frequencies in errrr.. 2026?

[Set in train]

And I'm betting Bligh will go all the way to that, allowing "glass jaw" Newman to display his weaknesses for the longest amount of time possible, while the LNP flounders around in desperate search for something ... anything ... that could be construed as a meaningful policy.  Originally I was keen to see Bligh and the ALP gone, but the more I see of how the LNP & Newman conducts itself, the less I am inclined to send my swinging vote that way ...

It's Queensland politics, it doesn't matter what side it is, the quality is always low. I take that opinion as an immutable fact, it'll never improve.

[somebody]

I'm still digging into timetables and plotting the data but it would appear the money spent to date is simply not enough, even a CRR won't allow 15min GC and Beenleigh trains.

Looks to me like the Gold Coast trains gain 8 minutes on the Beenleigh trains Coopers Plains-Beenleigh.  The reference design has Beenleigh line trains either separated or on the same stopping patterns north of Salisbury.  Which on paper should be sufficient to allow 4tph GC + 4tph BNH.  There is little margin however.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Services do use platforms 2/3 at Roma Street. I don't see longer trains being introduced (not until CRR) becuase of the issues involving running 6 car plus trains. Traction motor stress (if just chucking on a random extra car), Availbility of rollingstock, platform length (Currently Exhibition, Petrie P1, Caboolture and P2/3/10 at Roma Street which  P10 is used by the Tilts running via Normanby in peak. There's not much space at Central to accept an extended platform which is where the majority get on) and the older ones still use...

[HappyTrainGuy]

EMUs are rockin 6-8x 135kw traction motors 

They already have a 7 car train available. Combine a couple trailer cars to the ICE power pairs to get a 7 car train. Lock the last carriage doors so people can still board the last carriage via the previous carriage. Run it P10 Roma Street - Central exp Petrie exp Caboolture exp Gympie North I think it would be easier with NGR. Rather than having this random carriage plonking around they can roll off a couple 4 car sets so people can still traverse the carriage length to walk through.

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Minding gaps will fix train strain: Newman

Minding gaps will fix train strain: Newman
Daniel Hurst
December 7, 2011 - 3:00AM

Brisbane's $8 billion cross-river rail project will never happen, Liberal National Party leader Campbell Newman has declared, arguing shorter gaps between trains could be part of the solution to looming inner-city capacity problems.

The future of the state government's yet-to-be funded underground rail project is shaping up as a key election issue, amid imminent moves to submit the business case to the federal government's funding body Infrastructure Australia.

The proposed 18km north-south railway line would include 10 kilometres of underground tunnels from Yeerongpilly to Victoria Park.

The project would feature four new underground train stations at Boggo Road, Woolloongabba, Albert Street and Roma Street, two new surface stations at Yeerongpilly and the RNA Exhibition Grounds, and upgrades to the Rocklea and Moorooka stations.

But the government in January delayed construction of the project by two years, citing the budgetary impact of the floods, with completion now not expected until 2020.

This is despite advice to government that the only inner-city rail bridge over the Brisbane River would reach full capacity in 2016

Mr Newman said the LNP would look at tackling the capacity issues through other measures, including introducing new signalling systems to reduce the gap between trains and adding an extra platform at South Bank and South Brisbane stations to help ensure trains did not have to wait as long before loading and unloading passengers.

He denied his plan was a short-term fix only, saying it would "serve us well to the medium term", and dismissed the government's project as an "$8 billion unfunded fantasy" that would never happen.

Asked whether a new river crossing would be needed to properly tackle the capacity issues, Mr Newman said "it may or may not".

"In the long term of course we're going to need that," he told brisbanetimes.com.au.

"But the public don't want us to waste their money. That's what they're crying out for us to stop.

"They want to stop the waste and inefficiency in this government, so the idea is to get better rail services to the Gold Coast, the Sunshine Coast, across the Brisbane River, by actually getting more capacity in the system, by better signalling, by reconfiguring the way trains operate, by station and platform changes, we actually can do that without spending a colossal amount of money."

Robert Dow, from commuter lobby group Rail Back on Track, said the ideas could lead to marginal improvements but not network-wide solutions.

Mr Dow said the cross-river rail project would create significant flow-on benefits, including capacity improvements for Sunshine Coast and Gold Coast trains running through the city.

"Cross-river rail is the linchpin of the new rail network," he said.

Mr Dow said shorter gaps between trains could deliver some increase in capacity and would have to be accompanied by the introduction of an automatic train protection system to reduce the crash risk.

He called on the LNP to provide greater detail about its plan.

"More detail is needed. The public wants to know detailed policies. Broad statements won't do it," Mr Dow said.

"We can't see, on the information provided so far, how that will provide the benefit across the network that cross-river rail will achieve."

Opposition transport spokesman Scott Emerson said the LNP planned to increase the number of platforms at South Bank and South Brisbane stations from three to four.

He said this meant more trains would be able to load and unload south of the Merivale Bridge at any one time and, combined with shorter distances between each train going over the bridge, this would increase capacity by about 15 per cent.

He denied government claims that there was not space at the stations for the extra platforms, saying engineers had advised the LNP it could be done.

Mr Emerson said the LNP measures would provide an extra five years of breathing space.

"We'll put out more as we go along and give more details, but we've said clearly what we will do," he said.

Mr Emerson said the government had not yet spelt out its own solution to deal with the 2016 capacity crunch time.

"There's no point Labor putting its head in the sand wishing and hoping and praying the money will come. We need to deal with the practical realities."

But Mr Dow said Infrastructure Australian may take note of the cross-river rail project's wider economic benefits, including its ability to help with the flow of freight trains on the southeast Queensland rail network by providing an alternative river crossing for passenger trains.

"My own view is that the chances are good," he said of the funding request.

"If they don't do it it's going to cost a lot more in terms of congestion and road trauma. It will also improve freight transport."

State Transport Minister Annastacia Palaszczuk said yesterday the business case for the project was currently being finalised while the federal government considered the submission for funding to Infrastructure Australia.

"Cross-river rail represents a public transport revolution for the southeast," she said.

"It has the capacity to move up to 120,000 people into the inner city in the two-hour morning peak period – that's the equivalent of a 30-lane motorway.

"It will almost double the capacity of the inner-city rail network making it one of Queensland's most important infrastructure projects and it remains our government's number one transport priority.

"It will address the capacity constraints of the 300-kilometre southeast Queensland rail network and allow an extra 96 trains from the Gold Coast, Sunshine Coast and outer Brisbane suburbs to come into the CBD each weekday during morning peak.

"While we wait for federal government to put funding on the table, we're getting on with job of planning this important piece of infrastructure for south east Queensland."

Mr Newman said he did not believe the federal government was going to stump up the cash needed to deliver the proposed cross-river rail project.

He said if Labor was re-elected the project would never happen the way it was planned, arguing it was being used "like a Christmas bauble they put out there to try to get re-elected".

"It is never going to happen," he said.

The state election is expected in February or March next year.

The rail debate comes as Brisbane City Council touts a proposed new bus-only "green bridge" across the Brisbane River connecting to a tunnel under Adelaide Street.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/minding-gaps-will-fix-train-strain-newman-20111206-1oh0g.html

[Stillwater]

QUOTE: "The future of the state government's yet-to-be funded underground rail project is shaping up as a key election issue." 

Let's have a sensible debate about what is possible and doable.  Of course, it matters for nothing if the state government can't get that business case off to IA so all the funding and BCR scenarios can be examined.  And it all falls like a pack of cards if IA says CRR does not represent value for money.  In that case, the ALP will be examining the same solutions as the LNP has begun to formulate.  Can't wait to see the full picture from the LNP when it finally releases its transport policy.

Good article BTW - balanced and puts everyone's point of view by drawing out their thinking.

[ozbob]

Asked whether a new river crossing would be needed to properly tackle the capacity issues, Mr Newman said "it may or may not".

"In the long term of course we're going to need that," he told brisbanetimes.com.au.

Even Mr Newman acknowledges it is needed though.

Very clear demarcation now.

South east Queensland is facing a very grim transport future.  The ALP haven't helped by delaying the project, but I am still optimistic it will get up.

It is very solid CRR.  The things the LNP are talking about will be implemented progressively anyway, with the exception of additional platforms at SouthBank / South Brisbane.  Those don't really solve anything.  

[Jonno]

And TransApex which has cost more then CRR to date has achieved...absolutely nothing.  Newman should not throw stones in his glass house!!!

[ozbob]

As the rail system deteriorates further, the public backlash will become even more significant.

Do they have any idea of the cost of ATP?  This was on hold as well the last I heard.  

If by some miracle funding is achieved prior to the election that might cause a shift.

[curator49]

"Can Do" Newman has almost certainly lost my vote.
He just doesn't seem to get it. If it is a busway or a road tunnel it must be a winner. NOT.
He says the Government is wasting $8b on CRR yet his scheme with a new signalling system, allowing for shorter sections between signals and thus trains running closer together, longer platforms and longer trains will be the answer. It will still cost billions of $ anyway and even he is seemingly suggesting that his concept is a short term "fix" (but it will take years to implement) and still some form of CRR will be needed in the medium term.
Four platforms at Southbank? Where? It will need a new tunnel beside the current standard gauge one. He wants to terminate trains at South Brisbane so commuters will have to walk into the city or catch a bus at the already congested Cultural Centre. A lot of space will be taken up with the installation of crossovers and other infrastructure. The building of a fourth platform at South Brisbane will also be a tight squeeze.
Many trains will still have to go into the city to continue their journeys to Shorncliffe, Ferny Grove and the Airport. What about the already congested Central Station, not to mention Roma Street.
My faith (if I ever had any) in politicians is rapidly disappearing. We have a dysfunctional public transport system in Brisbane because the Brisbane City Council only concerns itself with buses and does not have any vision for the future.

[ozbob]

"Can Do" Newman has almost certainly lost my vote.
He just doesn't seem to get it. If it is a busway or a road tunnel it must be a winner. NOT.
He says the Government is wasting $8b on CRR yet his scheme with a new signalling system, allowing for shorter sections between signals and thus trains running closer together, longer platforms and longer trains will be the answer. It will still cost billions of $ anyway and even he is seemingly suggesting that his concept is a short term "fix" (but it will take years to implement) and still some form of CRR will be needed in the medium term.
Four platforms at Southbank? Where? It will need a new tunnel beside the current standard gauge one. He wants to terminate trains at South Brisbane so commuters will have to walk into the city or catch a bus at the already congested Cultural Centre. A lot of space will be taken up with the installation of crossovers and other infrastructure. The building of a fourth platform at South Brisbane will also be a tight squeeze.
Many trains will still have to go into the city to continue their journeys to Shorncliffe, Ferny Grove and the Airport. What about the already congested Central Station, not to mention Roma Street.
My faith (if I ever had any) in politicians is rapidly disappearing. We have a dysfunctional public transport system in Brisbane because the Brisbane City Council only concerns itself with buses and does not have any vision for the future.

Well put ...

[STB]

I tend to agree with Curator.  I listened carefully to that interview and while he says that he supports CRR, he seems to be determined to take the cheaper path of signalling and platform and train adjustments.  He did say that CRR was some sort of 'gradiose plan', which tells me that he really doesn't have any interest in getting it co-funded (via the Federal Government).  He also seems quite attached to this metro plan as well, which really wouldn't do anything for the heavy rail system, despite him thinking so.

I must admit, I'm starting to feel like I'm already in Sydney with all these plans coming out and some of them not really that workable, and none of them getting legs (exception to CRR which would get legs - Campbell is just talking nonsense saying that it won't get the funding).

[#Metro]

Good on the LNP that there is a plan- FINALLY a crumb of policy reveals itself.
Except--- the plan sounds terrible! A new platform, what is that going to do?

However at 8 billion, CRR will have difficulty being funded. This is true.

I have a feeling the LNP plan is to change the signalling, rip out seats on the beenleigh line trains, add platforms and that's it.

[#Metro]

A metro would probably cost similar to CRR, unless of course it was down the busway where the ROW is already acquired.

[ozbob]

The fatal flaw with the 'platform policy' is does nothing for the rest of the network. It means a minor increase in frequency would be theoretically possible as trains could alternate from the platforms, similar to how Roma St <-> Central , but we know what happens in theory doesn't always work out as intended.  The problem of the congestion from Roma St through to Bowen Hills remains the same.  It has to be said, an idiotic plan (the platform policy) if there ever was one.

The other things mentioned such as signalling improvements and the like are already being done ...  nothing new there either ...

I am waiting for the next LNP announcement that to fix the rest of the network, a new platform will be constructed at Gailes ..

[ozbob]

A metro would probably cost similar to CRR, unless of course it was down the busway where the ROW is already acquired.

Of course it would, and might happen one day.  But it will 20 years later on at least from CRR.