Cross River Rail Project

[ozbob]

From leaks on blogs and so forth, it does seem that there is a lot of activity going on internally within Queensland Rail and TMR looking at options for increasing capacity on the rail network, in the lead up to CRR.

There was a post on the CM blog mentioning that work on a 'crash-protection' system was being done to reduce headways.  Queensland Rail won't detail the behind the scenes stuff.  It will be many years yet before CRR even if it gets the green signal in February.

Sector 3 timetable is CRR and associated changes.  Even that is being looked at in early way, obviously to coordinate with the actual construction operation and so forth.

The experts that LNP refer to are often unemployed ex politicians who masquerade as their advisers. 

The present government won't necessarily spell out what is going on at this time, they just want to give the LNP rope ...

[colinw]

I really do not believe 30 TPH through Merivale and Roma St is going to happen, even with a signalling upgrade to ERTMS level 2 or CBTC standards, nor is such a solution going to be robust.

These systems work by dividing physical track sections into shorter "virtual blocks". Trains actively report their position by bidirectional communication with a BP ("block processor" - CBTC terminology) or RBC ("radio block center" - ERTMS terminology), such that the the position of each train is known to a finer degree of positioning than given by traditional techniques for detection of track occupancy (track circuits and axle counters).  This then allows movement authorities to be granted that allow trains to run closer behind others than is permitted with conventional track circuits & signals. The driver will drive to the in-cab signalling rather than the lineside signalling. In such systems, a train may pass a signal displaying a red aspect if the in-cab DMI indicates that authority exists. Non-equipped trains or trains with failed equipment drive to the lineside signal aspects, functioning equipped trains drive to the in-cab aspects. Often the lineside signals are extended by adding a blue aspect which indicates "drive to CBTC/ERTMS authority if available", in this case an equipped train running closely behind another would be passing blue over red aspects while driving to the authority displayed in cab.

This kind of capacity enhancement works very well indeed on SIMPLE metro lines, with a pair of up & down lines, as trains can follow at close headway, down to about 80 seconds with high performance braking and the best CBTC systems available at present.  Simple track topology, where trains stop at all stations and each accelerates away smoothly as the next train slows & stops at the station running on the heels of the previous train, works well.

What does NOT work nearly as well with these systems is legacy railways with lots of changes of speed limit, flat junctions, long dwell times, etc, i.e. systems where a low allowed speed causes sections to clear slowly, or where trains are held by junction conflicts.  That is because the limitation on capacity in these systems is PHYSICAL - the nature of the infrastructure, not LOGICAL - the nature of the signalling system.

Guess which kind of network Brisbane has?

A CBTC system would provide the ability to run very tight headways where our railway is a simple dual track line with reasonable high inter-station speeds, e.g. once duplicated the Ferny Grove line could be converted to metro like headways quite easily provided the arrangements at Ferny Grove allowed turning back trains sufficiently fast.  What a CBTC system will NOT do is unravel the mess at the Roma St junctions, or the 3 into 2 bottleneck at Merivale, or the long dwell times at Roma St & Central, or the way the entire fan out of lines crams into just two up and two down tracks.

I suspect that the highest capacity even a state of the art signalling system is likely to get across the Merivale Bridge is probably no more than around 24 tph.

Another point, once you push your infrastructure to the point where you are extracting maximum capacity via ERTMS level 2 or CBTC, you are very vulnerable to congestion due to failures as simple as ONE TRAIN losing its radio comms.  Once a train drops "off the network", it can only be tracked by the track circuits/axle counters, and thus several things happen:

1. The train cannot follow another any closer than allowed by the physical signals & track circuits.
2. The following train cannot follow any closer than allowed by the physical signals & track circuits.
3. The train is restricted to low speed under a "restricted manual" or "driver responsible" mode, thus slowing things further.

You have a system that works well when all the equipment on EVERY TRAIN is working AOK.  Lose equipment on a train and others run late with cascading effects.  Lose a block processor and the entire section of track controlled by it falls back to its capacity under the original signalling system.

I'm quite interested in the CRR-lite suggestion, although I think it may not represent particularly good value-for-money as it will have a substandard alignment, inconvenient underground platform location at Roma St, and entirely avoids the transformational effects of the new downtown and 'Gabba stations. It also locks in the indirect and slow South Brisbane route, thus the major Beenleigh/Gold Coast time savings from CRR at not realised.

On the plus side, it would be available for Cleveland line trains, and might give us enough capacity to proceed with Browns Plains/Greenbank/Flagstone.

[#Metro]

Terminating trains at South Brisbane will be a catastrophe. 1000 pax all heading down to Cultural Centre to catch a crowded bus. Plus trains need to turn around etc.

Maybe we should just go back to Wilbur Smith Plan 1970! (Cross River Rail 1970)
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=3304.0

[ozbob]

There is another option for CRR, not normally spoken about.

It is a modification of Wilbur Smith's original plan.  The tunnel proceeds to Woolloongabba and then comes out of the cliffs around Kangaroo Point.  Across the river than drops back into a tunnel.

This idea has also been scoped and is achievable.  It is a lot cheaper to build a bridge over a river than tunnel below the river.  The other advantage is that the bridge can be used for buses, on top, underneath what ever.

The bridge would have the same clearance for shipping as the Go between bridge.  Interesting idea is it not?  It has been suggested this would get the cost down to around 5$B.  The station at the Gabba doesn't have to be as deep either.

I don't think it will get up, but it is out there, although in disguise.  I wonder if it is something the LNP has up it's sleeve?

[ozbob]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhh    COINCIDENCE ...  LOL

[#Metro]

There is one catch. QUT is in the way as well as trees that are hundreds of years old in the botanic gardens PLUS you are going to have screeching trains going through family picnic area. Everything comes at a cost. It also might be an eyesore with all the wires and hole half way up the cliff.

That said, a combined rail/busway bridge could be built and later the busway could be converted to metro to run over that bridge.
All Cleveland trains could proceed via South Bank and all Beenleigh and CRR Gold Coast trains via Wilbur Smith Tunnel

[somebody]

Add a couple of crossovers and terminating at Sth Bris #2 is reasonably easy, so long as there is not a big increase in counter peak service on the South Bank stretch.  Not on current infrastructure though.  The best candidate is the less loaded Gold Coast trains, of course.  I loath this idea.

It's a far better alternative to have these trains take over serving Dutton Park/Farfield/Yeronga in peak.  That would free up seats on the BNH line, although I guess not the CVN line.

[Stillwater]

Five billion dollars you say?  In the imaginative way that politicians think, that would leave $3 billion 'change' (from the $8 billion the Labor Government hopes to get from Infrastructure Australia for CRR) to spend on other things, maybe a metro.  

It would be a bit like an amusement park ride to pop out of the Kangaroo Point cliffs to see the city before you are thrust underground again.  Going the other way, you'd think the train was about to slam into a cliff, except it doesn't.  Kewl.  

[BrizCommuter]

If we are talking high capacity inner city service, go metro. High frequency, I think a service every 70-80 seconds is possible (Vancouver).

You are getting theoretical/maximum capacity confused with actual/realistic capacity!
The actual average peak frequency of the Vancouver SkyTrain is every 108secs (33.3tph), which is still impressive.

[Cam]

The Wilbur Smith Plan sure has great CBD station locations. A much better location for Roma St. Central station is under Queen St where it should be.
There are enough office buildings around the proposed Eagle St station to warrant a station there.

[#Metro]

You are getting theoretical/maximum capacity confused with actual/realistic capacity!
The actual average peak frequency of the Vancouver SkyTrain is every 108secs (33.3tph), which is still impressive.

I know, but it can go even more frequent.

[Stillwater]

Do others see the irony?  In the early 1970s, the state government of the day had prepared the 'Wilbur Smith Plan', which would have contributed much to the social and built fabric of the city if fully implemented.  It was only partially implemented, and so its truly integrated nature (and benefits) were lost.  Fast forward to 2011 and we have the Connecting SEQ 2031 document.  As with the Wilbur Smith Plan, it will be partially implemented, with less than spectacular outcomes. 

The government says it has a plan.  But does it intend to implement it?  Not fully and only partially.  Then, in 20 years time, another government will seek to make up for the inaction by devising yet another plan for the future.  Rather arrogantly, the (Beattie) Bligh (Fraser) Government believes it will be the government in power beyond 2031 because its planning stretches beyond that date.

[somebody]

The days of Lib being pro road and Lab pro PT are long gone and in reality it was mostly perception.

In NSW & Vic, perhaps.  I'm not convinced about that in Qld though.

[Golliwog]

The days of Lib being pro road and Lab pro PT are long gone and in reality it was mostly perception.

Regards
Shane

I do agree (to some extent anyway) that some of the road projects proposed by Newman under Transapex were needed. However, what they provided in terms of extra capacity has failed to be utilised properly by re-prioritising the above ground network away from cars and towards PT. In fact, the opposite happened under Newman when he ordered the removal of the buslanes from Coronation Drive. He may be good for some things PT related, but his rules seems to be that it can NEVER come at a cost to cars.

[O_128]

The days of Lib being pro road and Lab pro PT are long gone and in reality it was mostly perception.

Regards
Shane

I do agree (to some extent anyway) that some of the road projects proposed by Newman under Transapex were needed. However, what they provided in terms of extra capacity has failed to be utilised properly by re-prioritising the above ground network away from cars and towards PT. In fact, the opposite happened under Newman when he ordered the removal of the buslanes from Coronation Drive. He may be good for some things PT related, but his rules seems to be that it can NEVER come at a cost to cars.

What Newman Did and What he wanted to do are most likely two completely different things.  The outrage if he funnelled cars into these projects like the lane cove tunnel in sydney would have been huge. Look all the "battlers" who refuse to use these things and would rather clog up the road system. Ideally the story bridge should have had bus lanes added. When legacy way is finished coro needs bus lanes and the go between bridge should have allowed the closure of the vic bridge.

This is very similar to the current parking scandals that the courier mail keeps pushing.

[Golliwog]

CM journalism can be pretty crap sometimes. Anytime they don't have enough actual material on something 'scandalous' (which to them seems to be anything that may change how people do anything) instead of finding something else to make an article on, they go find some Joe Blow family/couple/whatever and ask their opinion, as if what Marcy from down at the corner shop thinks on some topic is the be all and end all of what matters. 9 times in 10 I think that the majority of people probably disagree with whatever opinion that is, but the CM goes to find that person who will say what they want. For example, with regards to the UQ scandal, they would not publish in one of those articles any comment that was more than the slightest bit supportive of how the uni was acting (I gave them one, but they focused on the part where I said something negative about it).

I feel much of the outrage that would have been generated would have been faux-outrage, whipped up by the CM and the few people who just have to drive. Besides, it shouldn't have been just Council that was doing it, but they should have been involved with Translink and TMR.

[Set in train]

This idea has also been scoped and is achievable.  It is a lot cheaper to build a bridge over a river than tunnel below the river.  The other advantage is that the bridge can be used for buses, on top, underneath what ever.

Like my favourite hybrid:
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200706/r151176_748935.jpg

[Stillwater]

Bridge over the Clarence River at Grafton?

[colinw]

Terminating trains at South Brisbane will be a catastrophe. 1000 pax all heading down to Cultural Centre to catch a crowded bus. Plus trains need to turn around etc.

Maybe we should just go back to Wilbur Smith Plan 1970! (Cross River Rail 1970)
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=3304.0

The station locations in this old plan are great. Much better than CRR IMHO. Would do for Brisbane what the city circle does for Sydney or the loop for Melbourne.

[ozbob]

This gross failure demonstrates so well the grip that governments, all levels, and society generally was in - car car car mantra.  What a colossal failure!

Picking the pieces of flawed policy is up the to champions like us ..  I will never stop highlighting the gross failure of government policy ..  time is running out.

We have the LNP 'humming and hooing' over Cross River Rail.  They are not worthy of government with that mindset ...

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

10th December 2011

Wilbur Smith, had plans for rail too, great plans ..

Greetings,

To further highlight how myopic and car-centric transport planning has been for the last 40 years or so, consider this.

Wilbur Smith, known well in Brisbane for road planning actually put forward some very constructive rail plans in the 1970s.  The failure to move forwards with those plans has left the transport basket case that is SEQ generally.

The closure of the Brisbane tram system in 1969 further confirmed how out of touch governments were.

The present debate concerning Cross River Rail would have been a non-issue if policy and government had actually grasped the future as proposed by Wilbur Smith.

Look at Wilbur's proposals (below).  Just imagine Brisbane had that been implemented.

It is absolutely essential that Cross River Rail proceed immediately.  If the LNP cannot grasp that then they should not be in Government in my opinion.

Best wishes
Robert

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

Wilbur Smith Plan 1970! (Cross River Rail 1970)
http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=3304.0

[HappyTrainGuy]

Shuttles!

[ozbob]

Shuttles!

We would have a functional network for the future.  There was also a much earlier proposal for a tunnel to cross under the river around where the naval museum is as well.

Smith's plan was a beauty.  Clem Jones said towards the end that one of his greatest regrets was getting rid of the trams.  Retro-spectroscopes are marvellous instruments ..

[BrizCommuter]

If we are talking high capacity inner city service, go metro. High frequency, I think a service every 70-80 seconds is possible (Vancouver).

You are getting theoretical/maximum capacity confused with actual/realistic capacity!
The actual average peak frequency of the Vancouver SkyTrain is every 108secs (33.3tph), which is still impressive.

Mumbai is moving from 2-3min to 90sec with heavy rail crowded trains using relatively cheap GPS safe working system that knows where the train is, what track its on, what track the surrounding trains are on which way they are going what the points are set for etc. The prototype I sawe on TV fitted in a box about 0.5m square if that. And before we hear comments on low safety, I believe Mumbai suburban system has one of the better safety performances in world based on people moved/distance travelled.

Regards
Shane

Approx. 2500 to 3500 deaths per year. Doors that don't close. You think thats safe?

Also, again don't confuse theoretical/max capacity with actual/timetable-able capacity. The quoted figures for new signalling projects are usually the former.

[Set in train]

Bridge over the Clarence River at Grafton?

That's the one! Have never been on the train tracks below the car deck sadly.

And I agree, wholehearted support for the Wilbur Smith plan, the location of the stations are great, in the spots where Brisbane needs railway stations.

I support this over the current plan.

As for station interface with ground level, take over lanes of city streets instead of costly plans for resumptions. No need for fancy concourses and 'public plazas' (read: loiter spots for after dark crims), lifts, stairs in space saving fashion and get on with it!

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Rail fix must happen, says 'uphill battle' Bligh

Rail fix must happen, says 'uphill battle' Bligh
Daniel Hurst
December 14, 2011 - 3:00AM

Queensland Premier Anna Bligh has rubbished claims the $8 billion cross-river rail project is a pipedream, hitting back at opposition predictions the unfunded plan to transform Brisbane's transport network would never happen.

In an end-of-year interview with brisbanetimes.com.au, Ms Bligh described the flagship underground rail project as crucial while admitting she faced an uphill election battle next year.

Ms Bligh said she would ultimately accept the people's judgment but vowed to fight to hold onto the role she still loved, placing jobs, education and environmental protection at the centre of her re-election pitch.

During the wide-ranging interview, coming a few days before she goes on Christmas leave, Ms Bligh:

    Insisted she was on track to achieve her 100,000 new jobs pledge despite the inclusion of part-time positions in her tally;
    Argued Queensland's debt levels were "very sustainable" contrary to opposition criticism;
    Defended a ban on same-sex couples adopting by saying Queenslanders had still had "very conservative views"; and
    Vowed to serve a full term as South Brisbane MP if Labor lost government, and nominated the introduction of the prep year as her proudest legacy.

Ms Bligh named the $8 billion cross-river rail project as one of her top infrastructure priorities for southeast Queensland in coming years.

The project, which is yet to secure any federal funding and was delayed by two years following the floods, would involve an 18 kilometre north-south railway line, of which 10 kilometres would be in underground tunnels from Yeerongpilly on the southside to Victoria Park on the northside.

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.

Liberal National Party leader Campbell Newman earlier this month dismissed the project as an "$8 billion unfunded fantasy" that would never happen, saying the public did not want their money wasted.

He argued cross-river capacity issues could be dealt with through other, cheaper measures in the medium term, such as running trains closer together and building new platforms at South Bank and South Brisbane stations.

Ms Bligh said the government was working with expert rail network engineers to find ways to deal with the interim capacity issues, expected to cause problems by 2016, but the cross-river rail project was "critical" to adequately deal with growing needs across the network.

"While it's a crossing across the Brisbane River, it's actually critical to passenger and freight movements across the network from Coolangatta through to Gympie, and that then affects every other part of the suburban network in the southeast," she said.

"It is important, it is a huge project and it's not one that's going to happen overnight, but I believe it will happen. I believe it's critical to the network, and it will also change the city, and for the better."

Ms Bligh said interim measures to tackle the Merivale Rail Bridge CBD capacity issues would be no substitute for the cross-river rail project, now slated to be completed by 2020.

"There's no doubt that rail capacity issues can and will be addressed [before the major project is completed]," she said.

"We can extend the life of the current rail network before it reaches capacity by some changes to how the network is utilised, but we are the fastest-growing part of Australia. To think that you can do all of that by some simple changes on the network without ultimately significantly expanding capacity is simply a fairy tale."

The project is expected to undergo another assessment by federal government advisory body Infrastructure Australia this February, raising the possibility of an election eve funding deal.

But Ms Bligh would not directly comment on the prospect of securing federal funding, saying only that the government had worked hard to get the plans to the "shovel-ready" stage because projects that were not set to begin had no chance of clinching funds ...

Read more: --> http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/rail-fix-must-happen-says-uphill-battle-bligh-20111213-1oswi.html




Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/rail-fix-must-happen-says-uphill-battle-bligh-20111213-1oswi.html

[SurfRail]

Incidentally, the 1978 plaque at the northern end of platform 2 at South Brisbane describes the Merivale Bridge as the "Cross-River Rail Link". 

[colinw]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Hear hear!

CRR is critical.  Without it we'll be attempting to fix a severe case of necrosis with a manky bandaid, because for rail that is what Newman and the LNP's lame non-plan amounts to.

Give up on CRR and you give up on rail as the backbone of the public transport system for SEQ. It is that critical.

[Mr X]

I prefer CRR (proposed or Wilbur Smith plans)over any cost cutting 'lite' versions. If we're getting the infrastructure, let's do it properly and get all the benefits.
I am not surprised over the LNP's lack of policy over CRR, they're vague and indecisive over other stuff too- eg. Queensland Health. We need a leader who has faith in the system with passion in making it better.

[Dean Quick]

 They are not worthy of government with that mindset ...

HEAR....HEAR!!!

[Jonno]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

Hear hear!

CRR is critical.  Without it we'll be attempting to fix a severe case of necrosis with a manky bandaid, because for rail that is what Newman and the LNP's lame non-plan amounts to.

Give up on CRR and you give up on rail as the backbone of the public transport system for SEQ. It is that critical.

Please no manky bandaids!!!!

[Mr X]

If we cut say Legacy Way, Clem 7 and Airport Link and used the money for CRR, making it co-funded federally/state and BCC, we could afford it?   Newman wouldn't get the glory of digging holes in Brisbane though! I'd sacrifice those stupid tunnels in a heart beat for CRR, especially Legacy Way.
We'd get more benefit than these ruddy road tunnels that have so far only been to the benefit of ONE bus route (77)!

[HappyTrainGuy]

Which transports air from the southside to the northside.

[ozbob]

From the Couriermail click here!

Extra 100 million trips expected to be made on southeast Queensland public transport by 2018

Extra 100 million trips expected to be made on southeast Queensland public transport by 2018

    by: Robyn Ironside
    From: The Courier-Mail
    October 05, 2011 2:00AM

GETTING up close and personal with fellow public transport commuters is only going to get worse in coming years with an extra 100 million trips expected to be made in southeast Queensland by 2018.

The annual TransLink report tabled in State Parliament last week predicts 288 million trips will be taken annually seven years from now - up from 178.6 million in 2010-11.

"The majority of these new journeys will occur on what are already our busiest peak routes, particularly those leading in and out of Brisbane City," read the report.

Already 86 buses a day in Brisbane are forced to ignore waiting passengers because they are full and commuter group Back on Track fears the daily crush will soon be unbearable.

"It would seem this ambitious patronage target is quite unachievable on present policies," said Robert Dow from Back on Track.

"Firstly it would need Cross River Rail to be expedited to have the capacity in the rail system to support the growth."

Projects outlined in the report to provide "a better customer experience" include the extension of the Northern and Eastern Busways, the Moreton Bay Rail Link and the Cross River Rail.

No date has been set for the busways' completion, the 12.6km Moreton Bay Rail Link is not due to be finished until 2016 and the Cross River Rail is unlikely to be ready before 2020.

Mr Dow said southeast Queensland was heading into a "looming transport failure".

"The public is losing patience with failures to implement cheap, practical & obvious solutions," he said.

"What is needed is more frequent off-peak services and later operating hours to increase patronage overall and spread the peak-hour load."

[O_128]

It feels like they are saving things so as to have an even spread of "World class" improvements over the years. Extending the peak by an hour, 15/20 min off peak frequency and the implementation of RBOT "quick fixes" for capacity upgrades would go a long way.

[Mr X]

I'd be very surprised if we run out of "improvements" to do  

[Gazza]

Labor could have had it easy if they had just proposed signalling upgrades at the time of CRRs delay, and said it was going to allow the deferral.

Then LNPs plan would have been nothing special, and you wouldn't have dummies thinking it was an actual full alternative to the tunnel.

[Golliwog]

Labor could have had it easy if they had just proposed signalling upgrades at the time of CRRs delay, and said it was going to allow the deferral.

Then LNPs plan would have been nothing special, and you wouldn't have dummies thinking it was an actual full alternative to the tunnel.

Last i heard, QR are working on the signalling anyway. So, the LNP plan isn't anything new, though seems to be more of a focus.

[Gazza]

So why didn't Nolan say this when LNP made their proposal.

[Golliwog]

So why didn't Nolan say this when LNP made their proposal.

Not sure if QR has a timeline for implementation or anything like that yet. As with most things it's probably subject to funding. Probably didn't want to come out and say "Well, we're already doing that, but we have no idea when we'll have it done by."