Cross River Rail Project

[dancingmongoose]

^ nice dancingmongoose - thanks ..

So you think it's a viable option?

Where do Kippa Ring trains fit into this?

Shuttle to and from Petire to start with.

[SurfRail]

You wouldn't need something that extreme.  There will never be so many Gold Coast (or Tennyson if reinstated) trains via the Merivale Bridge in peak hour that it would be a better proposition to run the other 2 busier lines via the Dutton Park-Buranda fork.

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Coalition puts Cross River Rail back on the table: Emerson

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Coalition puts Cross River Rail back on the table: Emerson

Rippa Rita ...   

[Old Northern Road]

Seeing as CRR is now effectively dead with the new government, this is IMO the best short term option to avoid over-congesting the Merivale Birdge. Please pardon the huge file size.

Passengers for cleveland from the CBD would change at Dutton Park, for beenleigh at yeerongpilly. There would be additional services bowen hills - beenleigh/cleveland during peak hour. This would be a bit inconvenient for people on the cleveland line, but it means only 2 lines cross the bridge other than the XPT and also gives connection between the ipswich/springfield lines and the gc/cleveland/beenleigh lines.

You can see I got carried away and included the entire gold coast line extensions and the rapid transit. Whoops.

You can't run the Caboolture and Ferny Grove lines on the same tracks through the CBD for a start. And forcing 15000 Cleveland and Beenleigh line passengers to change trains at Dutton Park isn't going to solve any problems either.

[Old Northern Road]

Personally, I think sooner or later something has gotta give. If it is not Abbott who funds it, Emerson will come up with the cash eventually. It will just take a while until the books are better. As the transport network gets worse and worse, the benefit from building CRR increases to a point where it starts costing the government in lost revenue and productivity not to do it.

I am generally quite disappointed with both major parties - both on CRR and more generally. Not voting Liberal would have caused another split vote disaster, and I don't think the economy could take another 3 years of Labor. Labor was only offering $715 million - far from a 50:50 funding split. So in my personal opinion, hardly a vote winner, with Rudd making no clear commitment he'd do a 50:50 funding deal on CRR. And techblitz makes a very good point. Australia, off this forum, is still a very car-obsessed country. I know people who live along BUZ routes and still almost never use public transport. It simply doesn't enter their mindset.

Sounds like someone gets all his news from Rupert Murdoch.

[ozbob]

http://annastaciapalaszczukmp.com.au/2013/09/09/time-table-needed-for-cross-river-rail/

Time Table Needed For Cross-River Rail

9 September 2013 by Annastacia Palaszczuk

Opposition Leader Annastacia Palaszczuk says the Newman Government needs to explain how or even if it will fund the Cross-River Rail project essential to the South East Queensland rail network.

"If the Newman Government is confident it can build Cross-River Rail by itself after rejecting $715 million in federal funds, it should declare start and finishing dates for the project," Ms Palaszczuk said.

"Tony Abbott made it clear he will not contribute a single cent to Cross-River Rail, so the Premier needs to explain where he will find the savings to fill the hole left by his refusal to accept the $715 million the Labor government put on the table.

"If job cuts are the way to source $715 million, that means 7,150 more government workers being sacked.

"If the funds are to come through other savings, we need to know exactly what frontline services are to go. Or is the Premier contemplating borrowing the money?

"The bottom line is that if the Premier is so confident of funding the project after rejecting a federal contribution of $715 million he needs to say today when the project will start and when it will finish."

Ms Palaszczuk said the Premier had just three years to build Cross-River Rail to avoid a looming network capacity crisis in 2016.

"The election of an Abbott Government hasn't changed the fact that we are still only three years away from reaching capacity on our SEQ rail network," she said.

"Despite this, Tony Abbott is shamelessly stripping $715m out of the federal budget for Cross River Rail, as well as funds for passenger rail projects in other capitals such as Melbourne, Perth, and Adelaide.

"If Brisbane's Cross-River Rail is not built then the network will hit capacity in 2016 and traffic will worsen as people are forced onto the roads.

"It also means rail passengers facing slower trips, crowded into carriages like sardines, and making more trips standing than sitting especially during peak hours," she said.

[dancingmongoose]

You can't run the Caboolture and Ferny Grove lines on the same tracks through the CBD for a start. And forcing 15000 Cleveland and Beenleigh line passengers to change trains at Dutton Park isn't going to solve any problems either.

There's always an antagonist isn't there?

[SurfRail]

You can't run the Caboolture and Ferny Grove lines on the same tracks through the CBD for a start. And forcing 15000 Cleveland and Beenleigh line passengers to change trains at Dutton Park isn't going to solve any problems either.

There's always an antagonist isn't there?

Well he's right...

[dancingmongoose]

To an extent. The Ferny/Caboolture was cause I didn't want my lines to cross because that looks ugly. If you want have gc trains going to ferny and ipswich to airport, it doesn't matter. The main thing is the beenleigh-cleveland line. Getting passengers to change trains at Dutton Park and Yeerongpilly during offpeak will solve some problems by reducing congestion on the bridge, which is what the whole overcrowding issue is.

[Gazza]

You can't run the Caboolture and Ferny Grove lines on the same tracks through the CBD for a start. And forcing 15000 Cleveland and Beenleigh line passengers to change trains at Dutton Park isn't going to solve any problems either.

There's always an antagonist isn't there?

Have a look at the junction layout at Bowen Hills if you don't believe him:
http://goo.gl/maps/Wcrt5

To have trains from Ferny Grove continue to Ipswich would require them crossing over to the other track pair at grade somewhere in the CBD, which reduces throughput due to the conflicting movement.

Getting passengers to change trains at Dutton Park and Yeerongpilly during offpeak will reduce congestion on the bridge.

But there isn't congestion in the bridge off peak, so what problem are you trying to solve?

[dancingmongoose]

Getting passengers to change trains at Dutton Park and Yeerongpilly during offpeak will reduce congestion on the bridge.

But there isn't congestion in the bridge off peak, so what problem are you trying to solve?

It would the same during peak with some additional services bowen hills-beenleigh/cleveland, but not as many as there atm because not all the trains from are going through the CBD.

Have a look at the junction layout at Bowen Hills if you don't believe him

Go read my post again

[Gazza]

Also, I'm wondering why on your map there is preference given to introducing direct trip across the bridge for Tennyson/Corinda pax, at the expense of the Beenleigh/Cleveland pax?

[ozbob]

Couriermail --> Qld govt could fund Cross River Rail

[HappyTrainGuy]

To an extent. The Ferny/Caboolture was cause I didn't want my lines to cross because that looks ugly. If you want have gc trains going to ferny and ipswich to airport, it doesn't matter. The main thing is the beenleigh-cleveland line. Getting passengers to change trains at Dutton Park and Yeerongpilly during offpeak will solve some problems by reducing congestion on the bridge, which is what the whole overcrowding issue is.

This is basically what you have to chose from when it comes to linking lines to each other. A sector 1 line can not join a sector 2 line and vice versa (this is obviously excluding certain restrictions and allowences such as the Gympie North service and some Nambour/Caboolture services - Nambour/Caboolture services are usually due to present conflicts such as Traveltrains/freight trains staying on the mains but this mostly occurs in off peak). 

Sector 1: Gympie/Nambour/Landsborough, Caboolture, Kippa Ring, Springfield, Ipswich/Rosewood.
Sector 2: Shorncliffe/Sandgate, Airport, Doomben/Pinkenba, Ferny Grove,  Cleveland, Beenleigh, Gold Coast.

That only gets mixed up when other lines go through such as CRR and NWTC. But until then what I posted above is what infrastructure pairings dictate and not what looks good on a map.

I don't like the Dutton Park interchange for Cleveland trains. If there was a island platform layout it would be better but in its current layout its a terrible idea.

[dancingmongoose]

Also, I'm wondering why on your map there is preference given to introducing direct trip across the bridge for Tennyson/Corinda pax, at the expense of the Beenleigh/Cleveland pax?

The whole point is that Cleveland trains aren't going to cross the bridge, they are going to go down towards Beenleigh, along with there being a need for a connection between the ipswich and beenleigh lines. If Beenleigh trains were to go to Corinda (don't even bother with Sherwood, Corinda has both the extra platform and more bus connects) they would use Moorooka, which isn't as equipped as Yeerongpilly to be a junction. The other option is Shorncliffe - Beenleigh and Cleveland - Corinda, which would work just as well if that's what you'd prefer

[dancingmongoose]

This is basically what you have to chose from when it comes to linking lines to each other. A sector 1 line can not join a sector 2 line and vice versa (this is obviously excluding certain restrictions and allowences such as the Gympie North service and some Nambour/Caboolture services - Nambour/Caboolture services are usually due to present conflicts such as Traveltrains/freight trains staying on the mains but this mostly occurs in off peak). 

Sector 1: Gympie/Nambour/Landsborough, Caboolture, Kippa Ring, Springfield, Ipswich/Rosewood.
Sector 2: Shorncliffe/Sandgate, Airport, Doomben/Pinkenba, Ferny Grove,  Cleveland, Beenleigh, Gold Coast.

That only gets mixed up when other lines go through such as CRR and NWTC. But until then what I posted above is what infrastructure pairings dictate and not what looks good on a map.

So you're trying to tell me that the train that I caught today from Ipswich that arrived on platform 6 at Roma Street cannot go to the airport, ferny grove or shorncliffe which leave from the same platform? Sense is not made here

[Gazza]

I just think you have your priorities messed up.

Whats more important?

-A cross town connection between the Ipswich and Gold Coast lines?

-Direct CBD access for Cleveland and Beenleigh passengers?

It's like, you're stuffing things up for people at around 30 stations on two lines, for the benefit of a minority who might stand to benefit from the cross town trip offered through Tennyson.

If you are so worried about capacity on the merivale bridge, then why even reintroduce Tennyson trains? Seems like you are robbing peter to pay paul.

[Gazza]

So you're trying to tell me that the train that I caught today from Ipswich that arrived on platform 6 at Roma Street cannot go to the airport, ferny grove or shorncliffe which leave from the same platform? Sense is not made here

Ferny Grove trains do not leave from Platform 6.

[dancingmongoose]

So you're trying to tell me that the train that I caught today from Ipswich that arrived on platform 6 at Roma Street cannot go to the airport, ferny grove or shorncliffe which leave from the same platform? Sense is not made here

Ferny Grove trains do not leave from Platform 6.

Incorrect: http://jp.translink.com.au/travel-information/network-information/stops-and-stations/stop/600030

[Derwan]

So you're trying to tell me that the train that I caught today from Ipswich that arrived on platform 6 at Roma Street cannot go to the airport, ferny grove or shorncliffe which leave from the same platform? Sense is not made here

It can but it's what's known as a "conflict".  A train from Ipswich has to cross the path of southbound trains (departing platform 8 at Roma St).  This means that during busy periods, trains often have to wait for other trains to cross.  It's extremely inefficient.  This was the main reason they "sectored" the lines.  It removes at least some of the conflict.

This is why trains from Ipswich usually arrive on platform 9 at Roma St and continue on to Caboolture.

[dancingmongoose]

I just think you have your priorities messed up.

Whats more important?

-A cross town connection between the Ipswich and Gold Coast lines?

-Direct CBD access for Cleveland and Beenleigh passengers?

Not only have you failed to read this:

The other option is Shorncliffe - Beenleigh and Cleveland - Corinda, which would work just as well if that's what you'd prefer

The whole point is reducing congestion on the Merivale bridge. 2 lines on it  as opposed to 3 lines and the looming congestion is the point. Tennyson is a bonus

[dancingmongoose]

It can but it's what's known as a "conflict".  A train from Ipswich has to cross the path of southbound trains (departing platform 8 at Roma St).  This means that during busy periods, trains often have to wait for other trains to cross.  It's extremely inefficient.  This was the main reason they "sectored" the lines.  It removes at least some of the conflict.

This is why trains from Ipswich usually arrive on platform 9 at Roma St and continue on to Caboolture.

Everyone's missing the point. The only lines on the map that were decided on on an infrastructure basis was the Cleveland-Beenleigh line, the rest were from a design perspective. How about we all focus on what I'm actually trying to say?

[HappyTrainGuy]

This is basically what you have to chose from when it comes to linking lines to each other. A sector 1 line can not join a sector 2 line and vice versa (this is obviously excluding certain restrictions and allowences such as the Gympie North service and some Nambour/Caboolture services - Nambour/Caboolture services are usually due to present conflicts such as Traveltrains/freight trains staying on the mains but this mostly occurs in off peak). 

Sector 1: Gympie/Nambour/Landsborough, Caboolture, Kippa Ring, Springfield, Ipswich/Rosewood.
Sector 2: Shorncliffe/Sandgate, Airport, Doomben/Pinkenba, Ferny Grove,  Cleveland, Beenleigh, Gold Coast.

That only gets mixed up when other lines go through such as CRR and NWTC. But until then what I posted above is what infrastructure pairings dictate and not what looks good on a map.

So you're trying to tell me that the train that I caught today from Ipswich that arrived on platform 6 at Roma Street cannot go to the airport, ferny grove or shorncliffe which leave from the same platform? Sense is not made here

My answer is in my message that you quoted.

this is obviously excluding certain restrictions and allowances

I'm not having a go at you and its good to see some planning but you have to remember you can design all you like but in the end your designs have to reflect the infrastructure and procedures that are currently available. The infrastructure/plans can easily squash designs if they don't relate back to the infrastructure.

[dancingmongoose]

Then you shouldn't have gone on a tangent about gympie north and left it at that

[HappyTrainGuy]

I mentioned Gympie North as they start on Sector 2 and run in a gap in the timetable allowing them to bypass all stations and merge back into sector 1 at Northgate-Virginia. There's no conflict here due to the design of the merge at Northgate. Nambour trains has the same deal as there could be issues with it traversing Mayne-Roma Street but they generally start from Sector 1/RSP9-10. I mentioned the other part as trains swap tracks for many reasons. TravelTrains, freight trains, track inspections, track work etc.

[dancingmongoose]

I'm not having a go at you and its good to see some planning but you have to remember you can design all you like but in the end your designs have to reflect the infrastructure and procedures that are currently available. The infrastructure/plans can easily squash plans if they don't relate back to the infrastructure.

I'll refer you to the post above your post there

[HappyTrainGuy]

And just to be very clear that is what?

[dancingmongoose]

And just to be very clear that is what?

Everyone's missing the point. The only lines on the map that were decided on on an infrastructure basis was the Cleveland-Beenleigh line, the rest were from a design perspective.

[Derwan]

It can but it's what's known as a "conflict".  A train from Ipswich has to cross the path of southbound trains (departing platform 8 at Roma St).  This means that during busy periods, trains often have to wait for other trains to cross.  It's extremely inefficient.  This was the main reason they "sectored" the lines.  It removes at least some of the conflict.

This is why trains from Ipswich usually arrive on platform 9 at Roma St and continue on to Caboolture.

Everyone's missing the point. The only lines on the map that were decided on on an infrastructure basis was the Cleveland-Beenleigh line, the rest were from a design perspective. How about we all focus on what I'm actually trying to say?

I was merely answering your question. Sorry - I'll try not to do that in future. 

[HappyTrainGuy]

So removing Cleveland-City services and forcing the majority of the thousands of passengers of which are going to/from the city to interchange at Dutton Park which isn't the most friendly of places for disabled people to use, with very narrow platforms and nearly as difficult to get to the other platform at Morningside is the answer to reducing congestion across the Brisbane River? Gold Coast trains generally aren't configured to stop at that station. Frequency isn't there. Then you have all the services from Beenleigh to the city picking up large quantity of passengers. Sorry mate but that is just a very flawed idea and would only deter people from using public transport. There would have to be big infrastructure changes just to make it more ideal to even be considered as an option.

[Stillwater]

Folks, just heard Campbell Newman's voice recording on 4pm ABC radio news saying that he has bureaucrats working on what I am calling 'Son of CRR Lite'.  Mr Newman said the cross-river SOLUTION (his term) would address the need to get more trains and buses across the river, so I am thinking of double-decker bridge a bit like the bridge over the Clarence River at Grafton -- train on top and vehicles below.

It's probable that PM Tony may just contribute federal funding to this -- but only the road component obviously.

So, welcome Son of CRR Lite to the whacky planning process in Queensland -- the CRR solution when you can't have CRR.

http://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http://www.caravanparkphotos.com.au/clarence_river_bridges/images/grafton_river_bridge_nsw_2011_11_06_12_05_07.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.caravanparkphotos.com.au/clarence_river_bridges/target9.html&h=600&w=800&sz=76&tbnid=L3bs6gRbfkC4hM:&tbnh=92&tbnw=123&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dgrafton%2B%252B%2Bclarence%2Briver%2Bbridge%2B%252B%2Bimages%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=grafton+%2B+clarence+river+bridge+%2B+images&usg=__UJd7LS27JUgs6bAC9lDbWgcKfQY=&docid=_6g6j8drg66A4M&sa=X&ei=_GUtUoeVGY2TiAfH9YDgDA&ved=0CDwQ9QEwBQ&dur=121

[dancingmongoose]

So removing Cleveland-City services and forcing the majority of the thousands of passengers of which are going to/from the city to interchange at Dutton Park which isn't the most friendly of places for disabled people to use, with very narrow platforms and nearly as difficult to get to the other platform at Morningside is the answer to reducing congestion across the Brisbane River? Gold Coast trains generally aren't configured to stop at that station. Frequency isn't there. Then you have all the services from Beenleigh to the city picking up large quantity of passengers. Sorry mate but that is just a very flawed idea and would only deter people from using public transport. There would have to be big infrastructure changes just to make it more ideal to even be considered as an option.

I'm sorry that coming up with a suggestion has offended you. I won't make any more suggestions anymore.

[Gazza]

I'm sorry that coming up with a suggestion has offended you. I won't make any more suggestions anymore.

I'm sorry that you feel making a suggestion means you don't have to answer to scrutiny.

Why aren't you gradually refining your idea in response to new information and feedback people are providing?

[dancingmongoose]

I'm sorry that coming up with a suggestion has offended you. I won't make any more suggestions anymore.

I'm sorry that you feel making a suggestion means you don't have to answer to scrutiny.

Why aren't you gradually refining your idea in response to new information and feedback people are providing?

1. No criticism has been constructive, it's all just been "that's bad, that won't work" without a single suggestion other than no.
2. I have been refining the idea, go back over the past few pages.
3. I haven't uploaded a new map yet cause I don't have the file on me.

[ozbob]

--> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9972.msg131193#msg131193

Game has changed ...

[ozbob]

Funeral tomorrow, see --> http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9972.msg131205#msg131205

[ozbob]

Twitter

ABC Radio Brisbane @612brisbane  ·  29m 29 minutes ago

.@jackietrad: we can't stick with BAT tunnel, it was solely based on asset sales. We will make Cross River Rail a priority #qldpol #on612now

[ozbob]

[The Reaper]