Random observations around the network ...

[mufreight]

Saw a loaded coalie heading away from the port on the flyover at Park Rd.

The additional numbers of crews required for step back change overs would add quite considerable cost, funds better spent of additional services, the additional problem is the loss of buffer or recovery time on the reliability of timetabling and the potential impact on the operation of other services and co-ordination with other services.
With higher frequency services the crew layover times become less of a problem with turnbacks.

Much cheaper than infrastructure upgrades to allow for non-step back change overs.  At Shorncliffe, "step back" change overs seem a completely reasonable proposition to me.  The most reliable solution is to have no services.  Then there is no service interruptions.

What do you mean by this post?

Exactly that, the increase in crew costs to operate step back change overs will require additional crews and while stepback change overs save some time they also  reduce the reliability of timetable operation by removing buffer time when minor faults can be attended to (such as resetting a circut breaker) or with late running for whatever reason wqhen some of that lost time can be recovered.

[HappyTrainGuy]

The whole notion of even mentioning a step back is laughable to me. For starters, If there is a speed restriction in place leaving Roma Street/Bowen Hills that same return service would then automatically be delayed. It wouldn't make it up until it gets back to Roma Street/Central. Not to mention if someone in a wheelchair has to get on and off or during peak.

[Golliwog]

The whole notion of even mentioning a step back is laughable to me. For starters, If there is a speed restriction in place leaving Roma Street/Bowen Hills that same return service would then automatically be delayed. It wouldn't make it up until it gets back to Roma Street/Central. Not to mention if someone in a wheelchair has to get on and off or during peak.

But isn't that why they have padded out the timetable as it is?

I think timetabling on say a 60 second turn around is a bit much, but having a full 8 minutes is also a bit much the other way considering what you can do with a change of crew (in peak anyway).

[mufreight]

During the peaks are when the maximum number of crews are required to operate the services and step back turnbacks would require a considerable number of additional crews possibly only for a 1 hour stint, the costs even using casuals where a minimum of five hours has to be paid would force up fares even further, the reliability factor with services would drop even further.
Neither of these outcomes are positives.   

[somebody]

The whole notion of even mentioning a step back is laughable to me. For starters, If there is a speed restriction in place leaving Roma Street/Bowen Hills that same return service would then automatically be delayed. It wouldn't make it up until it gets back to Roma Street/Central. Not to mention if someone in a wheelchair has to get on and off or during peak.

I don't think anyone was thinking of step back changes at Roma St-Bowen Hills.

Exactly that, the increase in crew costs to operate step back change overs will require additional crews and while stepback change overs save some time they also  reduce the reliability of timetable operation by removing buffer time when minor faults can be attended to (such as resetting a circut breaker) or with late running for whatever reason wqhen some of that lost time can be recovered.

So, how are you going to increase frequency on the Shorncliffe line?  The costs of full duplication would be far more than the extra crew costs, if this amounts to much, I am sure.

[HappyTrainGuy]

@Golliwog, yes, but a padded out timetable still will not guarante a high on time realibility rate. The dwell time at the end of the line guarantes that the next scheduled service would be ready on time. For example if a Ipswich-Caboolture all stations left on time and had to wait at Bowen Hills for an extra 3mins for a freight to pass, pick up and let off 1 wheelchair and had a speed restriction in place from Bald Hills to Strathpine. It might only be 4 minutes late when it arrives at Caboolture but its already 1 minute late for the Caboolture-Ipswich run. Add in the time for a turn around, pick up and let off passengers and its suddenly 3 minutes behind schedule. Then what happens to the buffer if it then has to pick up a wheelchair on the return run at Lawnton and to let them off at Northgate. It might end up being that the only time it can gain anything is when it arrives back at Roma Street/Central for the Ipswich-Caboolture run all because dwell time at the terminus was swapped for a quick return. Its just going to have a follow on effect till they deem its too far behind schedule, cancel and issue a train to replace the service either from Roma Street or Bowen Hills. The only way to sort of eliminate that is having the train leave stations at set times rather than if its safe to do so. All that does is increase the journey times when the train is on time. So who would really be winning out of all of this. Queensland Rail having to hire more drivers and guards or the passengers waiting for/on trains.

@somebody, i wasn't mentioning any changes at Roma Street or Bowen Hills. I was impling that if there were speed restrictions after those places (say 25kph from Roma Street all the way to South Brisbane or Bowen Hills to Albion - It was just easier implying that rather than picking out a specific line and saying between Goodna and Redbank) the next service that it forms could be delayed and it would only potentially gain the time back when it arrives back at Roma Street and Central.

[somebody]

@somebody, i wasn't mentioning any changes at Roma Street or Bowen Hills. I was impling that if there were speed restrictions after those places (say 25kph from Roma Street all the way to South Brisbane or Bowen Hills to Albion - It was just easier implying that rather than picking out a specific line and saying between Goodna and Redbank) the next service that it forms could be delayed and it would only potentially gain the time back when it arrives back at Roma Street and Central.

Fair 'nuff.

But I still don't understand why a "step back" at Shorncliffe would be laughable?  Seems an excellent compromise to me.

[longboi]

@somebody, i wasn't mentioning any changes at Roma Street or Bowen Hills. I was impling that if there were speed restrictions after those places (say 25kph from Roma Street all the way to South Brisbane or Bowen Hills to Albion - It was just easier implying that rather than picking out a specific line and saying between Goodna and Redbank) the next service that it forms could be delayed and it would only potentially gain the time back when it arrives back at Roma Street and Central.

Fair 'nuff.

But I still don't understand why a "step back" at Shorncliffe would be laughable?  Seems an excellent compromise to me.

It restricts flexibility. When crews don't show up for a train at Mayne, you have plenty of other crews to fill in (Including standby crew). It would be a monumental waste of resources to have back-up crews for every out depot as well as at Mayne. Also, as HappyTrainGuy mentioned, if there are any slight deviations to the on-time running, everything else goes out the window.

[somebody]

@somebody, i wasn't mentioning any changes at Roma Street or Bowen Hills. I was impling that if there were speed restrictions after those places (say 25kph from Roma Street all the way to South Brisbane or Bowen Hills to Albion - It was just easier implying that rather than picking out a specific line and saying between Goodna and Redbank) the next service that it forms could be delayed and it would only potentially gain the time back when it arrives back at Roma Street and Central.

Fair 'nuff.

But I still don't understand why a "step back" at Shorncliffe would be laughable?  Seems an excellent compromise to me.

It restricts flexibility. When crews don't show up for a train at Mayne, you have plenty of other crews to fill in (Including standby crew). It would be a monumental waste of resources to have back-up crews for every out depot as well as at Mayne. Also, as HappyTrainGuy mentioned, if there are any slight deviations to the on-time running, everything else goes out the window.

I don't think I said "every" out depot.  Just Shorncliffe, where infrastructure constraints mean it is either squeeze turnaround times, "step back" or improve infrastructure.

I'm sure you, HTG & mufreight would all prefer the latter option, but can you justify the expenditure without the emotion?

[ozbob]

Travelled in onboard EMU01  (yay!) ex Oxley 8.03am (due 8.00am)  moderate loading. Travelled by road from Goodna to Oxley on the Ipswich 'carpark' to see first hand how bad it is - it is horrific!  Scored the very last car park spot at Oxley at 7.40am.  So much for the 'experts' who suggested that parking at Oxley would be relieved by Richlands and lesser extent Darra.  Not so, as we indicated it would be worse due to the flood from over the ridge (Jindalee etc.).  Richlands and Darra are also full, slight reduction in street parking at Darra.

Clearly, station buses are needed.  It is no longer acceptable for the authorities to bull that huge park and rides are the salvation. Not so.

Rocket rail bus Springfield to Richlands will help as well.

So much can be done but the fools blunder on ...

[#Metro]

I have a feeling about this.

They don't seem to like the idea of re-organising existing buses to feed rail.
But if they don't do that, they will have to put on additional buses during peak hour at least to most, if not all stations on the QR network.
That's quite a lot of buses, and if you do this during peak hour, as all buses are used running peak hour services, you must then perform peak hour
bus fleet expansion, at a cost of $500 000 - $750 000 per bus, and you might feed 10 stations or so along the line.

They don't seem to like either option, so the default option- do nothing- seems to be the safest.

Unfortunately, as we saw yesterday, the entire bus system fell over due to rain and congestion and accidents. Rain, congestion and accidents are common events in Brisbane, we are not going to have a useable transport system if it keeps falling over with something as simple as rain, or common road congestion.

[mufreight]

Travelled in onboard EMU01  (yay!) ex Oxley 8.03am (due 8.00am)  moderate loading. Travelled by road from Goodna to Oxley on the Ipswich 'carpark' to see first hand how bad it is - it is horrific!  Scored the very last car park spot at Oxley at 7.40am.  So much for the 'experts' who suggested that parking at Oxley would be relieved by Richlands and lesser extent Darra.  Not so, as we indicated it would be worse due to the flood from over the ridge (Jindalee etc.).  Richlands and Darra are also full, slight reduction in street parking at Darra.

Clearly, station buses are needed.  It is no longer acceptable for the authorities to bull that huge park and rides are the salvation. Not so.

Rocket rail bus Springfield to Richlands will help as well.

So much can be done but the fools blunder on ...

The solutions are obvious, we now have a new Minister for Transport, we now need to also replace (not replicate) Translink, once had a horse that would not perform so we shot it and used it to feed the dogs and brought a tractor to replace it, not as friendly as the horse but decidedly far more efficent even if it was more costly initialy.
If Translink is incapable of providing the services to the public that it was created to provide and not prepared to make the effort to resolve the failings and remains so intransigent that it is not even prepared to listen then like the horse it has outlived its use by date and the same method of replacement is in order.  

[HappyTrainGuy]

@somebody, i wasn't mentioning any changes at Roma Street or Bowen Hills. I was impling that if there were speed restrictions after those places (say 25kph from Roma Street all the way to South Brisbane or Bowen Hills to Albion - It was just easier implying that rather than picking out a specific line and saying between Goodna and Redbank) the next service that it forms could be delayed and it would only potentially gain the time back when it arrives back at Roma Street and Central.

Fair 'nuff.

But I still don't understand why a "step back" at Shorncliffe would be laughable?  Seems an excellent compromise to me.

It restricts flexibility. When crews don't show up for a train at Mayne, you have plenty of other crews to fill in (Including standby crew). It would be a monumental waste of resources to have back-up crews for every out depot as well as at Mayne. Also, as HappyTrainGuy mentioned, if there are any slight deviations to the on-time running, everything else goes out the window.

I don't think I said "every" out depot.  Just Shorncliffe, where infrastructure constraints mean it is either squeeze turnaround times, "step back" or improve infrastructure.

I'm sure you, HTG & mufreight would all prefer the latter option, but can you justify the expenditure without the emotion?

Personally, I wouldn't mind if they just left it as it is.

Well, you can still apply the delays to just the Shorncliffe line. The only places it could gain time back would be when the service arrives at Central or at the other terminus during its dewll time. Its also not just a simple as saying Shorncliffe is now going to have step back drivers. That's when other problems start to arrise. If you have quick turnback times at Shorncliffe, would the next terminus have any problems with too many services? What about the inner city line. Enough gaps for it to swap lines with out impeding on other services? Delays. What could happen if one outbound service is delayed by X amount of minutes and another service is then held up at Sandgate or other services that the train is supposed to do (Roma Street-Shorfcliffe, Shorncliffe-Beenleigh (To replace a hypothetical Bowen Hills-Beenleigh service))? Train faults and problems. Hardly any time to rectify the problem or the guard has to do it on the go? Zero Harm policy? Track speeds? Crews and staff?

Its alright in putting expected delays into the timetable but if there is one small delay it could have a potential major delay on other and future services. That's the main reason why I'm not in favor of using step back drivers and why I find it so laughable.

[somebody]

I don't think I said "every" out depot.  Just Shorncliffe, where infrastructure constraints mean it is either squeeze turnaround times, "step back" or improve infrastructure.

I'm sure you, HTG & mufreight would all prefer the latter option, but can you justify the expenditure without the emotion?

Personally, I wouldn't mind if they just left it as it is.

Well, you can still apply the delays to just the Shorncliffe line. The only places it could gain time back would be when the service arrives at Central or at the other terminus during its dewll time. Its also not just a simple as saying Shorncliffe is now going to have step back drivers. That's when other problems start to arrise. If you have quick turnback times at Shorncliffe, would the next terminus have any problems with too many services? What about the inner city line. Enough gaps for it to swap lines with out impeding on other services? Delays. What could happen if one outbound service is delayed by X amount of minutes and another service is then held up at Sandgate or other services that the train is supposed to do (Roma Street-Shorfcliffe, Shorncliffe-Beenleigh (To replace a hypothetical Bowen Hills-Beenleigh service))? Train faults and problems. Hardly any time to rectify the problem or the guard has to do it on the go? Zero Harm policy? Track speeds? Crews and staff?

Its alright in putting expected delays into the timetable but if there is one small delay it could have a potential major delay on other and future services. That's the main reason why I'm not in favor of using step back drivers and why I find it so laughable.

The current situation is that there is an unacceptable frequency on the Shorncliffe line. This also requires the Caboolture line trains to serve stations which they shouldn't need to.

It's the funny thing about QR that they find the notion that they should be expected to provided a service "laughable".

Oh, and for the record, I never said it was that simple.  There are details which need to be sorted out.

[mufreight]

Without the needed infrastructure it simply does not work and the infrastructure needs have been ignored for too long, it is now long past the time to bite the bullet and provide the needed infrastructure, in some cases it is already too late and the esclating costs to the community not including the actual costs of providing the infrastructure to "CATCH UP" increase day by day.

[#Metro]

2 platforms like every other civilised railway has would be a start.

Parts of the train network seems to be stuck in 1887 it seems.

[Derwan]

Northgate-Shorncliffe closure this weekend.  It's been a hive of activity around Boondall today.  Trackwork between Nudgee and Boondall, replacement of light bulbs in the big lights at Boondall Station, tree trimming between Boondall and North Boondall.  And that's the only part of the line I saw!!

I think we need automated announcements at closed stations every 15 minutes or so.  Saw one guy sitting at Boondall Station.  Told another guy there were no trains.  (He had walked straight past the a-frame sign and another sign.)  The announcements would also be useful during unscheduled closures.

[Golliwog]

True, although they could work on making it harder to avoid the signs saying the trains aren't running. For example, once the closure has started, put an A-frame saying that bus replacements are running, and that sort of info in the middle of the access path, so at Boondall you would put it between the go card posts. Not completely blocking it as people may still need to use on platform facilities (tickets/toilets/drink machine/etc) but in the way enough that you can't not see it. But yes, announcements would be good.

[somebody]

Without the needed infrastructure it simply does not work

How so?  A step back should allow an 8/hour peak frequency, assuming 2 fully operational platforms at Sandgate, rather than the current situation where the second Sandgate platform is only partly operational.  For whatever reason that is.  Sandgate-Shorncliffe-Sandgate is a 4 minute run, and 2 minutes to step in, activate the other cab etc still allows 1.5 minutes of margin.  Not much, admittedly.  

A crew step in at Sandgate, while more expensive, would also allow Sandgate truncations without issues when late running occurs.

Only a small amount of crews time is wasted by a step back isn't it? This is especially true if it only applies in peak.

Many railways around the world do use step backs, in spite of issues, but apparently it would be too hard for QR.  Why?

the infrastructure needs have been ignored for too long, it is now long past the time to bite the bullet and provide the needed infrastructure, in some cases it is already too late and the esclating costs to the community not including the actual costs of providing the infrastructure to "CATCH UP" increase day by day.

Still an assertion.  I asked for an argument. Do you concede the point that the step back would be cheaper?

EDIT: finished 2nd para

[HappyTrainGuy]

I still reckon that margin for error is way to high. You can pretty much kiss that 1.5 minutes goodbye if it starts raining or depending on the driver and how they slow the train/accelerate at stations.

It can be done but would/will it..... Not in my eyes it would. Too many risks.

[ClintonL94]

I travelled along the Beenleigh and Caboolture lines today and here is what I spotted:

EMU 81 with the new logo operating a Ipswich service at Geebung.


Northbound QRN 2843 freight at Strathpine


EMU 12 as a test train heading to Caboolture at Strathpine


EMU 32 operating a Ipswich service at Strathpine


SMU 267 operating a Brisbane Airport service at South Brisbane


I also saw SMU 292 in service - it was on a Gold Coast run.

SMU 236 was a test train today as well.

Photography of Clinton Larsen - 2nd April 2011
Regards,
Clinton

[somebody]

I still reckon that margin for error is way to high. You can pretty much kiss that 1.5 minutes goodbye if it starts raining or depending on the driver and how they slow the train/accelerate at stations.

It can be done but would/will it..... Not in my eyes it would. Too many risks.

I agree not much margin at 8/hour.  6/hour has a more reasonable margin, but that has other issues with coordinating with other services. But we don't even have a 15 minute peak timetable here.  Maybe we should get that first.

I'm not a big fan of Northgate terminators.  I'd wonder about using the second road without a platform at Shorncliffe to turn around.  Is that workable?

Final standing question: Any documentation of costs of:
duplication Sandgate-Shorncliffe - keep single platform
duplication Sandgate-Shorncliffe - two platforms
Two platforms at Shorncliffe only
?

[Stillwater]

Shorncliffe-Sandgate

http://northside-chronicle.whereilive.com.au/news/story/dow-backs-shorncliffe-upgrade/

We should not try and reinvent the wheel, unless necessary.  It is always better to argue QR's own thinking back at it.  How can they object?  They just have to grin and bear the fact that the government is not providing enough money to do what QR is telling the government is needed.

Duplication and station upgrades are planned in 2014 – two years away and with a state election in between.  A perfect opportunity to push the case!  Rather than talk stepbacks and such, concentrate on the plan that is before government.  It is both feasible and doable.

Here is what's proposed – a track duplication; and in 2 years time:

1.4.13 Shorncliffe Corridor: Sandgate to Shorncliffe Duplication

Project Need and Timing

The current single line and single platform limits capacity to four trains per hour
each way. The duplication would enable train frequencies to be increased and
would be required in 2014.

Proposed Solution

The engineering requirements of the duplication are similar in nature to the Ferny
Grove duplications recently completed. Rail systems including signalling and
telecommunications systems would be upgraded to contemporary standards. In
addition to the civil, track and rail systems works, it is expected that Sandgate and
Shorncliffe rail stations would be upgraded.

http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/53f53a86-af70-4902-8384-c43242406cf9/pdf_icrcs_stage_3_technical_pre_feasibility_appendix_i.pdf

[#Metro]

The engineering requirements of the duplication are similar in nature to the Ferny
Grove duplications recently completed. Rail systems including signalling and
telecommunications systems would be upgraded to contemporary standards. In
addition to the civil, track and rail systems works, it is expected that Sandgate and
Shorncliffe rail stations would be upgraded.

TRANSLATION: 1800s style infrastructure will be replaced with civilised infrastructure.

[#Metro]

That's a good article that one.
http://northside-chronicle.whereilive.com.au/news/story/dow-backs-shorncliffe-upgrade/

SHORNCLIFFE: The Shorncliffe line currently has a single platform at Shorncliffe station. To allow more frequent services, ideally starting with trains every 20 minutes and this eventually being upgraded to trains every 15 minutes off peak, upgrades to the line should be considered:1. Duplication of the track between Sandgate and Shorncliffe.2. The construction of a second platform and major station upgrade at Shorncliffe.3. More trains and connecting bus services off peak.
Melbourne has a view to upgrade its heavy rail system to a metro service standard with buses and trains every 10 minutes. Perth also has trains every five to 10 minutes at peak hour. Timetables can be thrown in the bin.
Why can't Brisbane as one of the fastest growing regions in Australia and with more people than Perth match its rail service?
R. Dow,
administrator
Rail Back on Track

[Otto]

There is a nice new Pontoon / CityCat stop at UQ !! 

[somebody]

Shorncliffe-Sandgate

http://northside-chronicle.whereilive.com.au/news/story/dow-backs-shorncliffe-upgrade/

We should not try and reinvent the wheel, unless necessary.  It is always better to argue QR's own thinking back at it.  How can they object?

They can't, but you can take it as read that treasury will.

[Stillwater]

The point is accepted, and illustrated by the fact that major infrastructure projects now come under Mr Fraser's ministerial jurisdiction.

[ozbob]

Noted RM 1901 platform 3 Roma St bit after 9am this morning, seemed to be headed west.

Outbound on SMU236 --> Richlands, going to check out the car parks.

[somebody]

At Yeronga about 5pm on Friday, saw two loaded northbound coalies, about 10 minutes about.  Unsurprisingly, a Gold Coast train heading outbound was using the up main, aka platform 1.

Maybe they are doing a fleeted service on the Toowoomba range to clear the backlog.

[ozbob]

Yes, bit of a back log?   Not unusual to see them chasing each other on the Ipswich line itself either.

[Arnz]

Beerwah to Glasshouse (We pass by the Beerwah Town Centre with an Aldi under construction, with the access road to the sporting fields being surfaced, it was previously a gravel road).  Camera Phone (reasonable quality) was used in this one.

[mufreight]

At Yeronga about 5pm on Friday, saw two loaded northbound coalies, about 10 minutes about.  Unsurprisingly, a Gold Coast train heading outbound was using the up main, aka platform 1.

Maybe they are doing a fleeted service on the Toowoomba range to clear the backlog.

That close together one would have come out of Ebenezzer

[ozbob]

Inbound onboard EMU34 ex 8.46 Goodna. 524 bus 8.12am from near home to station arrival 8.21am (as scheduled).  Bus does not really connect that well does it?  LOL  Lucky I am not in a hurry.

Bit of work going on at Goodna down side, wiring or something.

[ozbob]

Toowong, fair load of pax detrained ...

Good solid load for this time of the morning.

[ozbob]

Outbound EMU45  up sub Chelmer, just passed  by a 'train' of track vehicles on the main up, and moving they were too.  Might pick them up at Sherwood.  Does PASS still get a priority?    MOOo!

[ozbob]

Track vehicle 'train' main up (platform 4) Corinda,  rare sight ..

[Stillwater]

Brisbane-bound Sunlander stopped on siding at Pomona for about 10 minutes today, about 1pm.  It was waiting for the northbound Rockhampton Tilt to cross over on the single track.  The unfortunate thing was that the toilet on board the train stopped right over the pedestrian pathway across the tracks at Pomona station.  Several passengers took advantage of the stationary train to go to the toilet, unimpeded by the rocking motion.  As they flushed, the waste went splat!, right onto the pathway, where a woman was waiting to push her stroller and child through the mess.  The fortunate thing was there were no jobbies among the liquid, at least none that were obvious.  Whatever happened to those signs: 'do not flush toilet while train is stationary'?  Some passengers realised what was going on and smiled that the Sunlander had left a momento for the good people of Pomona.

[ozbob]

Sh%t  happens ...   I just used the convenience at Oxley station which by some miracle was actually open.  Two UP coalies, one on the main up, then a few minutes later another on the up sub.  Bus road is closed at Oxley, buses struggling through ...

[ozbob]

Ha ha ha ,  lucky I went to the loo .. presently on board SMU 243, halted mid way between Oxley and Darra, we are  the main up. Next to us parked, is a coalie, on the up sub. Guard is doing a good job at least informing the punters that there is:

a:  points failure at Wacol

b:  signal up ahead is faulty and waiting for control (assume doing written authority) ... latest  message from guard is that control is 'resetting' signal ..

What is wrong with our network? Constant failures are now unacceptable. Would it be better to go back to signal boxes and mechanical levers and rods?  Clearly, there is a major issue with rail networks all over. Just check out London, or Melbourne, or Sydney twitter feeds ... constant track, signal, and power failures.

BRING BACK STEAM!!  LOL