Priorities for improved off peak rail services

[somebody]

The major constraint to improving off peak rail services is crewing.  Therefore it cannot be done all in one go.  I propose the following phase in for 15 minute frequency:

Phase I: Current Corinda-Shorncliffe trains to be replaced with South Bank-Shorncliffe trains and Corinda-Petrie trains, both at 2tph on weekdays until around 7pm.  Caboolture trains to run express Northgate-EJ & EJ-BH, but synchronise the services such that Albion, Woolowin, Toombul and Nundah have an even 15 minute frequency.  Initially this would run weekdays until around 7pm.
Phase II: Add Ferny Grove-Rocklea at 2tph on weekdays until 7pm
Phase III: Extend Shorncliffe-South Bank trains to Manly
Phase IV: Increase Corinda-Petrie to cover evenings and weekends, if the hand here hasn't been forced by the completion of Richlands already.
Phase V: Ferny Grove-Rocklea to cover evenings and weekends
Phase VI: Manly trains to cover evenings and weekends
Phase VII: extend Rocklea trains to Kuraby
Phase VIII: Add a limited stops Ipswich service at 2tph to complement the all stoppers (Milton, Toowong, Indro, Oxley then all stops, add Corinda if Richlands isn't open yet)
Phase IX: extend Petrie trains to Caboolture

The Shorncliffe line's a bit of a bastard child here, but one option is to fully bustitute Doomben in off peak times, keeping the change at Eagle Junction, and connect the Cleveland trains to Shorncliffe.  If the bus has BUZ frequency, that would surely outweigh any complaints.

I think that's the fairest sequence.

Any comments?  I've left out the Airport line as it's subject to negotiations with the Airtrain company.

EDIT: spelling

[stephenk]

I would say there are too many phases there. 15min off-peak should be introduced with as few phases as realistically possible (given train crew availability), and a big advertising campaign.

I would agree with replacing Doomben with a high frequency Buz bus, and pairing Cleveland with Shorncliffe (if running times permit). This would avoid the need for reversing at South Bank, which may not be possible on weekday daytimes (too many freight trains using the dual gauge track). It would also avoid the need for terminating at Roma Street, although this is less of an issue off-peak. Aside from this, line pairings should stay the same.

Reversing at Rocklea is an interesting idea (with reversing in the siding). This would be option if QRs timetablers can't work out how to mix freight services, 30min Gold Coast services, and 15min Kuraby/Beenleigh services on the same line. Another option would be to run alternate Beenleigh Line services via Tennyson to Corinda. Of course running to Kuraby would be the preferred option.

Edit: Going by the answer to a question I asked at a CRG last week, I wouldn't be too hopeful for 15min off-peak in 2010.

[mufreight]

The reality is that the key to all of these proposals requires more track capacity through the CBD and cross river.
More trains are comming but they not only need crews but also track to operate on and the infrastructure is the bigest capital cost.
Off peak frequencies can be improved by the provision of more trains and more crews but in terms of basic priorities the infrastructure needs to be attended to first.

[somebody]

I would say there are too many phases there. 15min off-peak should be introduced with as few phases as realistically possible (given train crew availability), and a big advertising campaign.

I think many phases would be required due to the train crew considerations.  I can see skipping the Rocklea terminators, and doing weekends and evenings for all lines at once.

I would agree with replacing Doomben with a high frequency Buz bus, and pairing Cleveland with Shorncliffe (if running times permit). This would avoid the need for reversing at South Bank, which may not be possible on weekday daytimes (too many freight trains using the dual gauge track). It would also avoid the need for terminating at Roma Street, although this is less of an issue off-peak. Aside from this, line pairings should stay the same.

There's no SG freights at South Bank.  NG freights can use the main tracks.  And only 2tph shouldn't be too hard to avoid IMO.

If Caboolture is the next line to have a frequency upgrade, I think line pairings need to change.  Roma St starters would need to be staggered to avoid Shorncliffe trains in the core, unless the Shorncliffe trains are using the suburbans.

Edit: Going by the answer to a question I asked at a CRG last week, I wouldn't be too hopeful for 15min off-peak in 2010.

Bugger.  It's not OK.

The reality is that the key to all of these proposals requires more track capacity through the CBD and cross river.
More trains are comming but they not only need crews but also track to operate on and the infrastructure is the bigest capital cost.
Off peak frequencies can be improved by the provision of more trains and more crews but in terms of basic priorities the infrastructure needs to be attended to first.

Not so.  I'm talking about off peak trains here, you can easily improve these frequencies.

[mufreight]

Through the CBD there are no freight operations in the peaks, these are operated mostly in the off peaks hence the reluctance of QR Network to make more train paths avaliable for off peak passenger operations so while there is room to provide more train paths because of the manner of freight operations setting up passenger service operating on increased frequencies around some of these freight movements poses some problems that tend to render a consistent service frequency difficuly and places greater limitations on the freight operations which tend to increase freight costs which in turn we pay and also forces time sensitive freight on to the roads creating more conjestion.
The provision of infrastructure needs to be much better planed than it is at this time so as to cater for the needs of both passenger services and the movement of freight.

[somebody]

Through the CBD there are no freight operations in the peaks, these are operated mostly in the off peaks hence the reluctance of QR Network to make more train paths avaliable for off peak passenger operations so while there is room to provide more train paths because of the manner of freight operations setting up passenger service operating on increased frequencies around some of these freight movements poses some problems that tend to render a consistent service frequency difficuly and places greater limitations on the freight operations which tend to increase freight costs which in turn we pay and also forces time sensitive freight on to the roads creating more conjestion.
The provision of infrastructure needs to be much better planed than it is at this time so as to cater for the needs of both passenger services and the movement of freight.

But 15 minute frequencies to Petrie would have a negligible, if any, effect on freight given the 3 tracks to Lawnton, would it not?  Also to Manly and Kuraby.  The only time I can see that much of a problem is in the latter phases of my original post I suggested extending 15 minute frequencies to Caboolture & Ipswich.  And you have previously agreed with the Railway Digest critique that "making it too hard for freight" is unjustifyable bull in your words.

[somebody]

Thinking some more about this, bustituting Doomben off peak and increasing frequency to Shorncliffe is desirable for other reasons.  It would then be possible to have a 15 minute service at Albion, Wooloowin, Nundah and Toombul with all Caboolture trains running express through those stations.  The Caboolture line is so long that I'd think it deserves some express patterns, even in off peak times, and these can easily be provided without an unnacceptable loss in service if the Shorncliffe line is also running at a 15 minute frequency.

[#Metro]

I would like to see the Doomben line BUZ-tituted, until perhaps possible extension to Northshore Hamilton.
There are better places to use a 6 car train, like on overcrowded lines!

Coming in mid 2010 there will be a BCC CityGlider going to Kingsford Smith Drive.
This might help, but it might also be a good idea to turn something like 300 into a BUZ 300 to maintain service to that area.

[Arnz]

As for the Rosewood Line, I would suggest replacing 3-car EMU shuttle with a 4-car ICE limited stops express that operates every 2 hours, I'm sure that "Zero Harm" will come into effect at Ipswich and the last (4th) carriage will be shut off west of Ipswich.  But a limited express every 2 hours (clockface 2 hours, not eratic like Nambour).

Inbetween the two-hour gap of Limited Stops to Rosewood would be a Railbus service inbetween, similar to the current Caboolture-Nambour weekday off-peak setup.

I think the suggestion may be a good alternative, instead of the official proposal (in the government report) of extending the Ipswich suburbans to Rosewood in 2026 (or later).

Edit: In regard to ICE utilisation, when the ICEs are reliable, 2 configurations are currently used (up to 3 in peak) with 1x 4-car set being spare.  

1x 6-car set is used on Gympie-Brisbane-Cooroy-Brisbane-Gympie
1x4 car set is used on Brisbane-Nambour-Caboolture-Nambour-Caboolture-(3 hours idle)-Nambour-Roma Street.  
A third 6-car set is used on the 6:25am Nambour-Roma Street and 6:12pm Roma Street-Nambour peak service.

[somebody]

As for the Rosewood Line, I would suggest replacing 3-car EMU shuttle with a 4-car ICE limited stops express that operates every 2 hours, I'm sure that "Zero Harm" will come into effect at Ipswich and the last (4th) carriage will be shut off west of Ipswich.  But a limited express every 2 hours (clockface 2 hours, not eratic like Nambour).

Inbetween the two-hour gap of Limited Stops to Rosewood would be a Railbus service inbetween, similar to the current Caboolture-Nambour weekday off-peak setup.

I think the suggestion may be a good alternative, instead of the official proposal (in the government report) of extending the Ipswich suburbans to Rosewood in 2026 (or later).

Edit: In regard to ICE utilisation, when the ICEs are reliable, 2 configurations are currently used (up to 3 in peak) with 1x 4-car set being spare.  

1x 6-car set is used on Gympie-Brisbane-Cooroy-Brisbane-Gympie
1x4 car set is used on Brisbane-Nambour-Caboolture-Nambour-Caboolture-(3 hours idle)-Nambour-Roma Street.  
A third 6-car set is used on the 6:25am Nambour-Roma Street and 6:12pm Roma Street-Nambour peak service.

Not sure why you'd mess too much with the Rosewood line.  It's got a tiny patronage, less than Doomben or Nambour.  The only changes which seem reasonable to me are through services, or bustitution.

The railbuses for the Nambour line are because of capacity issues on the single track.

I would like to see the Doomben line BUZ-tituted, until perhaps possible extension to Northshore Hamilton.
There are better places to use a 6 car train, like on overcrowded lines!

Coming in mid 2010 there will be a BCC CityGlider going to Kingsford Smith Drive.
This might help, but it might also be a good idea to turn something like 300 into a BUZ 300 to maintain service to that area.

So long as they don't just reduce the services, which is what I think they would do if it were proposed.

I thought the CityGlider would just go to the Teneriffe ferry?

[Jon Bryant]

I'm sorry but why should we be considering replacing a line with buses Can you imagine road planners considering replacing an existing freeway with a smaller road! Of course not so why should we.  We need to start identifying the infrastructure solutions to allow high frequency services. That is what the road planners would do. So therefore so should we!!!!  We keep trying to come up with creative ways to improve services on third rate infrastructure.  The solution is to fight for world leading infrastructure not allow our governments to waste money on 1970's road infrastructure.

[#Metro]

So long as they don't just reduce the services, which is what I think they would do if it were proposed.

I'm for a change of mode and higher frequency of that service, and not anything else.
Actually, I am asking for a BUZ. or at least a bus service that has equal or higher frequency than the current train service.

I'm sorry but why should we be considering replacing a line with buses Huh?

For the same reasons as to why we don't invest in a high speed maglev to Doomben.
Allocation matters. We should be maximising benefits and making the best use of the rail assets available.
Running Doomben line trains does not do this!

The trains that are used on that line to serve a handful of passengers would be better allocated and give higher benefits to commuters if they were placed on lines where overcrowding and service gaps are a problem. In other words, if you choose to run trains on the Doomben line, you forgo the substantially greater benefits (IMHO) that you would get by running that train on another line.

[somebody]

I'm sorry but why should we be considering replacing a line with buses

It also addresses the "More lines to the north" problem.

The current arrangements involve half of the Cleveland line trains terminating at Bowen Hills, which means that the city usage isn't optimised.  You could also solve this problem with 2tph to Doomben, but that makes it hard for freights.

[Jon Bryant]

My point was that if this was a road they would add lanes, tunnel or duplicate without a question asked.  Why can't we do this for rail!!!

[somebody]

My point was that if this was a road they would add lanes, tunnel or duplicate without a question asked.  Why can't we do this for rail!!!

I think we all understand that.  Increasing the loss making of rail by running such a crappy service is one of the problems.

[somebody]

Thinking some more about this, there is a case for making Ferny Grove first.  That would prevent any arguments about "making it too hard for freight trains" and also prevent the planning that would be required to swap line pairings.  The latter being the main reason, as I can't see how you can do the Petrie trains without messing with line pairing.

Can Roma St #6 accept a train from the north in a signalled move?  If so, that would be QR's first centre turnback.

What about at Kuraby, how would you do the turnback there?  A dwell on the bi-di track, or something else?

[stephenk]

Can Roma St #6 accept a train from the north in a signalled move? 

It can (and does so regularly), and so can #7.

What about at Kuraby, how would you do the turnback there?  A dwell on the bi-di track, or something else?

Going by the track layout, I would expect that trains can reverse in the Down Southern Main, and possibly the Third Road.