Terms of use Privacy About us Media Contact

Poll

Overall performance for 2010.  Consider timetable, congestion, parking, stations, and bus integration.

4 or less
1 (7.7%)
5
6 (46.2%)
6
3 (23.1%)
7
3 (23.1%)
8
0 (0%)
9
0 (0%)
10
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 11

Author Topic: Cleveland  (Read 3641 times)

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 92677
    • RAIL Back On Track
Cleveland
« on: November 28, 2010, 07:13:29 AM »
Have your say!
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20298
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #1 on: November 28, 2010, 08:31:33 AM »
Good
Good integration with bus at Buranda, despite the busway stop being quite a walk.
Goes to show, people will transfer if the routes do not compete with each other and if the services are frequent.

Improvement
All day express pattern is required to overcome the line's indirectness
Poor integration with buses
Duplication required past Manly
Frequency must be increased all day

Infrastructure- possibility exists for a Newstead-Bulimba-Cannon Hill spur line and tunnel which would allow trains into the CBD saving about 15 minutes. This would replace the metro idea for the same area. The main advantage of such a line over a metro would be integration and thus benefits in the form of travel time savings to all stations beyond Cannon Hill, which would then permit line extension. Neither a bus bridge over the river at Newstead/Tennerife or a separate metro would have these benefits.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

STB

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #2 on: November 28, 2010, 02:01:11 PM »
Only problem with expresses is it's one less train that services a station and with the nature of the Cleveland line at least in the medium term, you won't have a 15min off peak frequency along the main part of the line if you turn the current all stoppers into expresses.

Also, I don't really find Buranda a long walk.  Cultural Centre Busway station to South Brisbane Railway station is a lot further!

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20298
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #3 on: November 28, 2010, 02:38:57 PM »
Once CRR comes in, regular UrbanLink services should be possible. Duplication required after manly AIUI.
I think in a previous thread 15 min services were possible as far as Manly, but only for all stations.
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #4 on: November 28, 2010, 03:10:05 PM »
Only problem with expresses is it's one less train that services a station and with the nature of the Cleveland line at least in the medium term, you won't have a 15min off peak frequency along the main part of the line if you turn the current all stoppers into expresses.
I don't follow.  You could easily have expresses from Cleveland combined with Manly starters/terminators.

STB

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #5 on: November 28, 2010, 05:11:35 PM »
Only problem with expresses is it's one less train that services a station and with the nature of the Cleveland line at least in the medium term, you won't have a 15min off peak frequency along the main part of the line if you turn the current all stoppers into expresses.
I don't follow.  You could easily have expresses from Cleveland combined with Manly starters/terminators.

Yes, but that won't allow a 15min frequency between Cleveland and Manly trains between Manly and Buranda by having Cleveland trains run express.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #6 on: November 28, 2010, 05:15:36 PM »
Yes, but that won't allow a 15min frequency between Cleveland and Manly trains between Manly and Buranda by having Cleveland trains run express.
You could have trains running between Manly and the city every 15 minutes stopping all stops and additional trains every half hour to Cleveland running express.  If you wanted to.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20298
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #7 on: November 28, 2010, 05:28:00 PM »
Quote
You could have trains running between Manly and the city every 15 minutes stopping all stops and additional trains every half hour to Cleveland running express.  If you wanted to.

Really? On current infrastructure? Maybe that could become an interim timetable- 15 minutes to Manly, all stops, and every 30 minutes to Cleveland express all day. It's bold!
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #8 on: November 28, 2010, 05:57:22 PM »
Pretty sure I have mocked up a timetable in another thread to show that it is possible on current infrastructure, subject to there being no safeworking constraints.

STB

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #9 on: November 28, 2010, 06:18:57 PM »
I've already worked on a couple of mock timetables to try and replicate that and I've found some major conflicts along the single track running between Manly and Cleveland from outbound trains that catch up to a Manly every 15min all stopper that disallow a pass for the inbound trains to the city along the single line track.  Also, for the Manly all stoppers to allow a path for the expresses and a clear platform at Manly for the Manly train to terminate (the expresses will be riding yellows from Lindum in under a 15min Manly all stopper/Cleveland 30min express pattern using current run times) the Manly trains cannot depart Bowen Hills until 6mins after the Cleveland express.
OUTBOUND

EG - The Express - :01 (Bowen Hills), :20 (Park Rd) - Express - :45 (Manly - longer trip than a standard express due to the train catching up with the all stopper ahead of it from Lindum onwards - allowing a 3 min clearence between the two trains), then :48 (Lota), :51 (Thorneside), :54 (Birkdale), :57 (Wellington Point), :00 (Ormiston), :03 (Cleveland)

EG - The all stopper - :07 (Bowen Hills), :26 (Park Rd), :57 (Manly), min 8 min turnback, to form :11 (any earlier departure at Bowen Hills and subsequent arrival at Manly and there is a conflict previous Manly to City train already on platform - that train would depart Manly at :56, 1min not ideal but that's as tight as I could get it to allow a platform at Manly to be available).

INBOUND

EG - The Express :06 (dep Cleveland - formed by train arriving at Cleveland at :33), :12 (Wellington Pt), :18 (Thorneside - cannot depart until :21 due to outbound train using the single track between Lota and Thorneside - see the above OUTBOUND example), :23 Lota, :26 Manly (conflict - the all stopper would need to depart at :26, the express would need to arrive at :23 but cannot due to a wait for a cross at Thorneside from the outbound train).

So, overall, there are some major conflicts that very difficult to overcome no matter what you do using a 15min freq all stopper Manly to City overlaid with a 30min express from Cleveland to City and vice versa.  And even if you do manage to overcome it, there is no room for error.  FYI, I've used the standard run times between stations that actual train planners work off that are fixed into the timetabling systems.

I hope this makes sense.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20298
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #10 on: November 28, 2010, 06:29:53 PM »
What about 15 minute off peak frequency, all stops, no expresses?
Makes me wonder though how TL is going to get UrbanLink services on that line then...
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline Golliwog

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5025
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #11 on: November 28, 2010, 06:40:35 PM »
I know its not optimum, but would the expresses be able to use the 3rd track (the freight one) to overtake  the all stoppers? Although that peels off at Murrarie doesn't it?
There is no silver bullet… but there is silver buckshot.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

STB

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #12 on: November 28, 2010, 06:42:18 PM »
The best that you can get using the existing infrastructure is 30min Manly to City services (and vice versa), overlaid with 30min Cleveland to City all stoppers (and vice versa) to get a 15min frequency between Manly and Buranda.  Allows time for turnbacks and leaves room for unexpected slight delays (within 4mins).  Also allows departmental trains (eg: Tuition trains to have access without getting bogged down by revenue services running around it).  I think some on here forget that bit as it's easily overlooked by everyday passengers (not seen in public timetables - changes day by day depending on the type of tuition required) but must be factored in by the Planners who are creating the timetables.

STB

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #13 on: November 28, 2010, 06:43:57 PM »
I know its not optimum, but would the expresses be able to use the 3rd track (the freight one) to overtake  the all stoppers? Although that peels off at Murrarie doesn't it?

Three main problems, the freight line is a lot busier than you would think and it's effectively only a single track for the freight trains.  Plus, it's not electrified, would need to be electrified before passenger use.  Might cause some headaches for freight movements into and out of the Port of Brisbane.  Also, it peels off at Lindum.

I've asked in the past to QR about that and they said that it's not operationally viable to do that, would cause some problems for planners putting in freight train paths (and it's common that they don't always run to schedule).
« Last Edit: November 28, 2010, 06:45:33 PM by STB »

somebody

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #14 on: November 28, 2010, 06:45:30 PM »
Here's the link I was thinking of: http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=3317.msg35910#msg35910

Basic idea is that the outbound Manly terminator can use the inbound platform, although I am unsure if the points are signaled for this move, hence my safeworking qualification.

STB

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #15 on: November 28, 2010, 06:48:24 PM »
Sorry, but I've already had a try at recreating that and I didn't find any real benefit with alternating platforms etc at Manly.  

The conflicts still remain (mostly at Thorneside, inbound/outbound, take your pick, using the single track between Lota and Manly. And Manly itself with trains occupying platforms), along with the slow yellow signal running with the expresses catching up with the all stoppers from Lindum in.  Norman Park in if coming into the City.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2010, 06:50:15 PM by STB »

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20298
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #16 on: November 28, 2010, 06:50:59 PM »
Ok, thanks for this STB!  :-t
15 minutes from Manly is better than nothing IMHO!
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #17 on: November 28, 2010, 07:03:19 PM »
Actually, now that I go back and check it, yes I can see you look to be correct.  Looks like I forgot to speed up the expresses on the inbound leg.  Doh!!

But what is that about the yellow running?  What headways does that kick in at?

Maybe 4tph to Lota +2tph to Cleveland would work out.

STB

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #18 on: November 28, 2010, 07:09:05 PM »
Yellow signals line running is approximately when trains are 3-4mins apart.  Any less, and you've got red signals!

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20298
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #19 on: November 28, 2010, 07:25:12 PM »
Quote
Yellow signals line running is approximately when trains are 3-4mins apart.  Any less, and you've got red signals!

So during the morning peak hour trains crossing the Merivale Bridge would all be running on yellow signals?
Sometimes I think that bridge is at capacity NOW... not in 2016...
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

STB

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #20 on: November 28, 2010, 07:29:32 PM »
Quote
Yellow signals line running is approximately when trains are 3-4mins apart.  Any less, and you've got red signals!

So during the morning peak hour trains crossing the Merivale Bridge would all be running on yellow signals?
Sometimes I think that bridge is at capacity NOW... not in 2016...

In my experience, yes!  For the March 2008 timetable the planners were attempting to have trains 4mins apart in line with some professional driver technique the Department of Transport came out with, ie: trains had to run to greens signals only.  You can cut down to two mins in the city due to the signalling setup, although they are all yellows.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20298
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #21 on: November 28, 2010, 07:43:56 PM »
Quote
In my experience, yes!  For the March 2008 timetable the planners were attempting to have trains 4mins apart in line with some professional driver technique the Department of Transport came out with, ie: trains had to run to greens signals only.  You can cut down to two mins in the city due to the signalling setup, although they are all yellows.

Right, that nails it. I would consider yellow running to be an indication that an extra train could not be safely be added IMHO.
The Merivale Bridge is therefore at capacity right now IMHO.

I found something else interesting too- they may have already modelled a Newstead-Bulimba-Cannon Hill Route or something similar to it.
http://statements.cabinet.qld.gov.au/MMS/StatementDisplaySingle.aspx?id=69049

Quote
She said the major feasibility study now underway rejected two routes including an option to duplicate Merivale Bridge and tunnel under the existing corridor to Bowen Hills and an option for an alternative alignment via Newstead.
  :lo  :is-
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline Golliwog

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5025
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #22 on: November 28, 2010, 08:14:04 PM »
No, I don't think so. I think I remember seeing as part of the initial CRR planning stages a number of different routes that were weighed up, one of which was the current planned CRR route but after Albert St it peeled north and had a stop at Newstead before connecting north of Bowen Hills.
There is no silver bullet… but there is silver buckshot.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #23 on: November 28, 2010, 08:40:24 PM »
I think that via Newstead option was the Toowong-Newstead tunnel.

Probably you could do the 4tph Manly all stops + 2tph Cleveland express with a crew swap.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2010, 08:44:30 PM by somebody »

Offline ozbob

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 92677
    • RAIL Back On Track
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #24 on: December 16, 2010, 05:39:46 PM »
Score 6.0
Half baked projects, have long term consequences ...
Instagram   Facebook  @ozbob13@mastodon.social

Offline petey3801

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1564
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #25 on: January 01, 2011, 05:05:30 PM »
On the Cleveland line, after departing Park Road all signals are 3-aspect to Manly and a mixture of 2-aspect and 3-aspect between Manly and Cleveland.

Also, the signals are a fair distance apart after leaving Park Road/Buranda. This means, in order for an express to approach no Red signals, it would need to be at least 3-mins behind the all-stopper in front. Even 3-mins is pushing it, the express would most likely be approaching red signals which step up to yellow as the express gets closer. Some sections are worse than others in this area (Norman Park - Morningside and Murrarie - Hemmant are particularly slow areas).

In contrast, Park Road inbound to the City, in particular the Maryvale Bridge, are 4-aspect signals spaced close together. Many peak hour trains across the bridge are running on yellows (double and single) however there are also some trains on greens. Depends what services, any late running and conflicting movements etc. Therefore, it is possible to get a few more trains across the Maryvale in peak, however these opportunities would be very limited. It is much preferred to have trains running on Greens, however yellows (preferably double yellow) are alright.. The main focus is SPADs.. Drivers can't have a SPAD if they don't hit a Red signal...

As has basically been said previously, a 15-min All Stopper service to/from Manly with 30-min express to/from Cleveland won't work with the current infrastructure.
All opinions stated are my own and do not reflect those held by my employer.

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20298
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #26 on: January 01, 2011, 05:40:24 PM »
Hi there and welcome.

Quote
As has basically been said previously, a 15-min All Stopper service to/from Manly with 30-min express to/from Cleveland won't work with the current infrastructure.

Yes, there are aware of a number of (very frustrating) limitations to the current infrastructure.
All the more reason to focus money on improving the current system before going off and building metro everywhere.

It seems possible that a 15 minute all stations service outside peak hours (no express) would be possible on current infrastructure though, unless
we are missing something?

« Last Edit: January 01, 2011, 05:44:08 PM by tramtrain »
Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

Offline petey3801

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1564
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #27 on: January 02, 2011, 10:42:59 AM »
I can't see why a 15 minute service between Manly and the City (ie: 30-min to Cleveland, 30min to Manly) can't work. Not sure whether it would be worth, or logistically possible, to go all the way to Cleveland with 15-min services at this stage though.
All opinions stated are my own and do not reflect those held by my employer.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #28 on: January 02, 2011, 01:53:07 PM »
I can't see why a 15 minute service between Manly and the City (ie: 30-min to Cleveland, 30min to Manly) can't work. Not sure whether it would be worth, or logistically possible, to go all the way to Cleveland with 15-min services at this stage though.
It can work.  The issue is with 4tph all to Manly + 2tph to Cleveland, express Park Rd to Manly.  We believe this can only work if the express trains are slowed in one direction.

Offline petey3801

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1564
Re: Cleveland
« Reply #29 on: January 02, 2011, 02:23:11 PM »
I can't see why a 15 minute service between Manly and the City (ie: 30-min to Cleveland, 30min to Manly) can't work. Not sure whether it would be worth, or logistically possible, to go all the way to Cleveland with 15-min services at this stage though.
It can work.  The issue is with 4tph all to Manly + 2tph to Cleveland, express Park Rd to Manly.  We believe this can only work if the express trains are slowed in one direction.

Yeah, 4 tph all stations to Manly plus 2x express Buranda-Manly and all stops to Cleveland would be really pushing the two track line to the point where it wouldn't cope. 6tph all stops would work, but no express unfortunately! Mixing Express with All Stoppers at fairly high frequency really needs quadding, if only in certain locations to allow overtaking (ie: Passing lanes of 5 or 6km in strategic locations).
All opinions stated are my own and do not reflect those held by my employer.

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 


“You can't understand a city without using its public transportation system.” -- Erol Ozan