Cross River Rail Project

[mufreight]

A somewhat disturbing and concerning rumor has surfaced that the consultency that formulated the so called Cleveland Solution has business links to the new Newman/LNP apointee as Director General for Transport Mr M Caltabiano, this raises a number of questions as to the integrity of the Cleveland Solution and the credibility of its costings.
It seems that savings might not be the reason for the espoused preference for this half an intrim solution but more that whichever option might be the most profitable for the Newman supporters.
It is hoped that some common sense and reality might prevail. 
Cross River Rail will need to be constructed of that there is no question and the expendature of two thirds or more of the cost of constructing Cross River Rail as an intrim half baked solution makes little sense when if Cross River Rail is constructed now the major portion of the funding will come from the fedral government purse while Infrastructure Australia would be most unlikely to fund the Clevland Solution as to this time it is little more than a concept without any business case while Cross River Rail has a business case and is shovel ready.

[somebody]

2016 will come and go and the world won't end on the south side crossing, but it won't get better
There will be no further heavy rail, light rail or bus way projects within the next 5 years

Agree with the first point, but I think Kippa-Ring will still go ahead so long as Federal money funds a significant part of it.  Change the Federal govt though too early in the project and that seems unlikely.

I still think that my proposal of adding some stops to the Gold Coast trains is both eminently sensible and achievable.  Watch the Gold Coast people scream about it though.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Kippa Ring is always going to go ahead. Question is what plans are they going to run from. Cheap, ideal or ultimate.

[somebody]

Kippa Ring is always going to go ahead. Question is what plans are they going to run from. Cheap, ideal or ultimate.

After 100 years, how can you be so sure?

[SurfRail]

I still think that my proposal of adding some stops to the Gold Coast trains is both eminently sensible and achievable.  Watch the Gold Coast people scream about it though.

I will be one of them.

There is plenty of room to add more all-stoppers in by making greater use of the dual gauge track.

[ozbob]

Kippa Ring is always going to go ahead. Question is what plans are they going to run from. Cheap, ideal or ultimate.

After 100 years, how can you be so sure?

The LNP have said previously that MBRL is to proceed ( http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=7.msg89703#msg89703 ), but you never know ...

[somebody]

I still think that my proposal of adding some stops to the Gold Coast trains is both eminently sensible and achievable.  Watch the Gold Coast people scream about it though.

I will be one of them.

There is plenty of room to add more all-stoppers in by making greater use of the dual gauge track.

How do you figure?  Tighter headways than 3 minutes in the AM peak?

[HappyTrainGuy]

Kippa Ring is always going to go ahead. Question is what plans are they going to run from. Cheap, ideal or ultimate.

After 100 years, how can you be so sure?

Because there are more constraints on the rail network, road network and PT network than there was 100 years ago. 100 years ago they never had empty trains backing up from Lawnton-Geebung on signals just to start morning peak hour. The morning all stopper Caboolture service is sometimes held up in that mess. 10 years ago it was still empty blocks of land. Northlakes was a small estate made up of about 20 houses with one road in and one road out. I remember the old short give way ramp which was a 300m stretch of road from the highway but now the turn off is about 1.5km long with traffic lights. Murrumba Downs used to be a giant pineapple farm with scrub and vacant land everywhere. Mango Hill actually used to be just a hill but now there are housing estates popping up everywhere. Rothewll used to be a bunch of large properties that slowly dissapeared with housing estates forming within housing estates. Newport started expanding and still is.

[SurfRail]

I still think that my proposal of adding some stops to the Gold Coast trains is both eminently sensible and achievable.  Watch the Gold Coast people scream about it though.

I will be one of them.

There is plenty of room to add more all-stoppers in by making greater use of the dual gauge track.

How do you figure?  Tighter headways than 3 minutes in the AM peak?

Extending and spreading the peak period, making greater use of 3 car sets and soaking up the standing capacity etc.  No need to slow services down, that is counter-productive.

Getting rid of all Beenleigh expresses would probably help too.

[Fares_Fair]

I still think that my proposal of adding some stops to the Gold Coast trains is both eminently sensible and achievable.  Watch the Gold Coast people scream about it though.

I will be one of them.

There is plenty of room to add more all-stoppers in by making greater use of the dual gauge track.

How do you figure?  Tighter headways than 3 minutes in the AM peak?

Extending and spreading the peak period, making greater use of 3 car sets and soaking up the standing capacity etc.  No need to slow services down, that is counter-productive.

Getting rid of all Beenleigh expresses would probably help too.

Given there will be no new rollingstock available (peak), removing or significantly shortening expresses is possibly all that they can do.
That's what happened on the Sunshine Coast line.

[Gazza]

I still think that my proposal of adding some stops to the Gold Coast trains is both eminently sensible and achievable.  Watch the Gold Coast people scream about it though.

Why are you proposing adding stops to GC trains.
But If we were having a discussion about buses, and I suggested putting a stop between BBC and Taringa on the buses to allow other changes to happen there, it's an unthinkable act?

[somebody]

With all due respect, how is temporal spreading a workable solution to the capacity problems?  It's been tried in Melbourne even including free fares and the effectiveness is limited at best.  The fact remains that there is a strong demand to travel at certain times.  I can accept more even spacing of services could be a positive, but it's well achieved with 12 minute cycles.

I don't see 3 cars being very viable either.  I've thought about that a bit for the first services of the Gold Coast, but I don't think it works - the first services are quite busy still and you need to downgrade two services to get another one.  Perhaps on some other lines it might work out.

BTW, It's been suggested over at the Auckland Transport Blog that a surcharge for peak will be more effective than a discount is.  Still, I'll believe it making a big shift when I see it.

I still think that my proposal of adding some stops to the Gold Coast trains is both eminently sensible and achievable.  Watch the Gold Coast people scream about it though.

Why are you proposing adding stops to GC trains.
But If we were having a discussion about buses, and I suggested putting a stop between BBC and Taringa on the buses to allow other changes to happen there, it's an unthinkable act?

Not at all comparable.  There is no Merivale bridge constraint at Toowong, and adding such a stop would compete with walking to the express stop, at the cost of slowing everyone else's service down and therefore reducing its competitiveness.

It would be regrettable to slow down the Gold Coast trains, but I think it is needed.  It was OK to do it to the Sunshine Coast trains, and what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

I don't know why you are arguing with everything I say.

[Gazza]

I don't know why you are arguing with everything I say.

Because it annoys me when the goalposts are constantly moved, or when people change their arguments on the fly to suit themselves.

[SurfRail]

3 car sets? How can we promote 3 cars are better when there is drive to make trains longer.

Of course they aren't, but there doesn't seem to be much choice.  Any timetable review for Sector II will have to involve 3 car sets or fewer trains, unless they defer it until late 2014 or beyond when the next new trains are due.

The ALP really stuffed up the procurement pipeline on these.

[Arnz]

IIRC HTG had said that selected shoulder peak trains on all lines may be reduced to 3 cars to fit in more services on the subs.

[colinw]

The ALP really stuffed up the procurement pipeline on these.

Beats me why we don't just roll on with further 160/260 class orders to incrementally build the fleet with a proven successful design.  This is what Perth are doing with the B series trains.

It ain't broke, so no need to fix it!

[SurfRail]

^ I understand that at least until now, there would have been no point because the procurement timeframe for componentry, body shells etc would have taken us to late 2014 anyway.  The order would need to have been put in 2 years ago for that to have been a solution.  If the NGR timeframe blows out that may not always be the case though.

Of course, there would be little stopping the LNP at looking for another source of rollingstock (except exposing themselves to a real backlash from the Nationals who want them built here, and potential compatibility problems if it is rushed).

[SurfRail]

^ The NGR program will go some way to resolving that.  200 trains at even double the rate of the Bombardier order = a new train every fortnight for around 7 1/2 years.  (Assuming it will be anything like 200 anymore.)

[somebody]

I don't know why you are arguing with everything I say.

Because it annoys me when the goalposts are constantly moved, or when people change their arguments on the fly to suit themselves.

Not sure when you are thinking of that I have done that.

things are not looking good, so yeah I see an Adelaide coming. Order delivery date deffered, And/Or delivery extended in time to say 10 years And/Or reduced in number.

I think it will be reduced in number and rate.

I see no reason why we need to retire the EMUs either.  Perhaps it will eventually reach the stage when we are cannibalising some sets for spares though.

[HappyTrainGuy]

EMU's are still hanging in there but track infrastructure is starting to detirmine to how services are run/organised/timetabled/stabled. If Springfield-Kippa Ring has any 100+kph running EMUs/SMUs would only be limited to Ipswich-Caboolture, Ferny Grove-Beenleigh, Shorncliffe-Cleveland. IMUs/SMU260 would operate Gold Coast-Airport, Nambour-Roma Street, Kippa Ring-Springfield.

They could always modify the software on the SMU220s but they caused way more touble and ongoing problems than good.

[somebody]

EMU's are still hanging in there but track infrastructure is starting to detirmine to how services are run/organised/timetabled/stabled. If Springfield-Kippa Ring has any 100+kph running EMUs/SMUs would only be limited to Ipswich-Caboolture, Ferny Grove-Beenleigh, Shorncliffe-Cleveland. IMUs/SMU260 would operate Gold Coast-Airport, Nambour-Roma Street, Kippa Ring-Springfield.

None of which should be too hard.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Easy in theory, different when applied in real life situations such as peak hour, mtce cycles and so forth. Track speeds aren't the only things the EMUs have to worry about quite frankly.

[somebody]

Easy in theory, different when applied in real life situations such as peak hour, mtce cycles and so forth. Track speeds aren't the only things the EMUs have to worry about quite frankly.

Not too hard though.

[Gazza]

In reality though we'll probably see EMUs down there, just like when they go to Nambour.....

[somebody]

p3 of the current City South News (Quest) has a Cleveland Solution article.

[Golliwog]

Not sure if this had already been put up here, but this is the current home page at the CRR website:
http://www.crossriverrail.qld.gov.au/

Cross River Rail under review

In May 2012, the Queensland Government appointed an expert panel of independent consultants to review the Cross River Rail project to ensure the next major investment in rail is affordable and meets the future needs of South East Queensland.

The objectives of the review are to:

    establish whether the Cross River Rail project best addresses the challenges for the SEQ rail network
    establish that project delivery options have been adequately considered
    identify areas which require additional focus to enhance project outcomes
    identify areas to deliver a better value for money and affordability outcomes.

The panel will deliver a report in mid-June 2012 that will properly analyse and confirm the problems facing the rail system, consider the options available, assess the business case already prepared for the project and provide recommendations for consideration by government.

[BrizCommuter]

State Debt future released by LNP on Saturday.

LNP cancel a ski jump today.

Will the LNP cancel CRR tomorrow?

[ozbob]

Effectively they will.

[#Metro]

Ithink we are being softened up for the Cleveland Solution or the Fairfield Solution!

It's cheaper... but also crapper.

[ozbob]

Cleveland solution is rubbish, and very doubtful if it is cheaper.  Just think about it, complete new 4'8.5" light rail system with tunnels and bridges down the river ... lol.  No, the best you can hope for TT is a couple of platforms at South Brisbane.  I am just hoping that the PB15s come back as well.  May as well enjoy it ...

[Mr X]

Can these light rail vehicles use the same track as freight trains/are they compatible?
Does the Cleveland Solution require new track laid all the way to Cleveland and all the way to Ferny Grove?

[ozbob]

Can these light rail vehicles use the same track as freight trains/are they compatible?
Does the Cleveland Solution require new track laid all the way to Cleveland and all the way to Ferny Grove?

Sure would.  Even if the light rail stuck to 3'6" it would still require a complete new track profile/signalling system etc.  Also the level crossings will need grade separation due to the frequency.  3' 6" light rail vehicles are not standard so there would be an additional premium there as well.

The cost estimate for the Cleveland solution at 2.5$ billion is utter nonsense.

See  --> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=546.msg97440#msg97440  on some rail considerations ...

[somebody]

Ithink we are being softened up for the Cleveland Solution or the Fairfield Solution!

It's cheaper... but also crapper.

I submit that the ICRCS Fairfield solution is superior to the Yeerongpilly portal proposal, so long as Dutton Park is closed, current down is made bi-di and 3 new platforms are built on the DG at Fairfield, Yeronga and Yeerongpilly.

Arguably, you should also build new platforms at Moorooka-Banoon, and quad Fairfield-Banoon, but even omitting those things is no worse than CRR's self knackering at Salisbury.

[ozbob]

Yes, I think Fairfield portal is achievable.  I have always thought that as earlier indicated in this thread.

Not sure though if the present mob would be prepared to push through the nimby back lash.

[somebody]

Not sure though if the present mob would be prepared to push through the nimby back lash.

More prepared than the previous clowns.

[Golliwog]

To me, I'd rather they do nothing and deliver CRR late rather than saying "CRR is good, but we can't afford it so we're going to build the CS instead." I just can't see it stacking up in terms of bang for your buck. It also would mean Cleveland is always going to have the (IMO) horrendous dog leg through South Brisbane to get to the CBD.

[Stillwater]

A straight-talking politician is about as rare as the Yowie, but it would be good to hear Anna Palasczcuk admit that Connecting SEQ 2021 was a con job.

It would also seem that the LNP are looking at all new infrastructure spending, because the extent to which one project or another gets federal funding, that grant money from Canberra is taken into account when Queensland's GST expenditure is calculated.  The GST revenue pie shrinks.

In raising the spectre that MBRL project may be scaled back and that CRR becomes a railway track on bamboo poles over the Brisbane River, the state government is downgrading transport infrastructure to waaaay down the track, behind all the other things it has its hand out to the feds to fund ... such as the Bruce Highway, which the LNP has pledged to upgrade with a $1 billion incentive boost in a bid to get additional federal funding.

The way this state government looks at it ... less fed money into CRR, the more likely there will be fed money for the Bruce Highway.  The way Labor looked at it ... just wait until 2031 when utopia arrives.

[ozbob]

Oh dear,  it is an Oz wide epidemic ...

[SurfRail]

Cleveland solution is rubbish, and very doubtful if it is cheaper.  Just think about it, complete new 4'8.5" light rail system with tunnels and bridges down the river ... lol.  No, the best you can hope for TT is a couple of platforms at South Brisbane.  I am just hoping that the PB15s come back as well.  May as well enjoy it ...

Just as long as they can schlang some C17s down our way!   

[SurfRail]

Fairfield is something I can live with.  In some respects, it is operationally better (all trains can use the tunnel, no need for a surface pattern, cheaper to build, provision for trains to come out of the tunnel and go via Tennyson), in other ways less so (more resumptions, need a wider surface corridor to deliver 5 tracks or otherwise we will have to live with 4, access arrangements for the proposed train stabling depot at Clapham etc). 

Just as long as the Cleveland Solution dies a horrible grisly death.