Article : Sleeping on rail concern

[somebody]

I've never checked. But my view was that his complaint was that even if they did alternate, its still not a combined frequency as you have to either wait on the busway platform or the rail platform. If your bus is late and a train pulls in, you'd have to run like a mad person to try and get on it in time.

Not only that, but there is no PID on the Concourse for the buses away from UQ.  This is quite annoying actually.

Most buses also go through Buranda. 

I think you will find that while a number bus services traverse Buranda, a large portion do not serve it.  130/135/134/155/140/150 all non stop Buranda, and if you are waiting there off peak you will probably see 2-3 go by before one actually serving Buranda stops there.

[HappyTrainGuy]

I've never checked. But my view was that his complaint was that even if they did alternate, its still not a combined frequency as you have to either wait on the busway platform or the rail platform. If your bus is late and a train pulls in, you'd have to run like a mad person to try and get on it in time.

That's also providing that the displays at bus stops are actually displaying the correct time... coughromastreet coughculturalcentre

[Golliwog]

I've never checked. But my view was that his complaint was that even if they did alternate, its still not a combined frequency as you have to either wait on the busway platform or the rail platform. If your bus is late and a train pulls in, you'd have to run like a mad person to try and get on it in time.

That's also providing that the displays at bus stops are actually displaying the correct time... coughromastreet coughculturalcentre

coughALL bus displays in Brisbane. None of them are real time. Yet.

Also Simon, theres no rail display down on the busway platform. Which is annoying for northbound rail passengers who prefer either a short wait at Park Rd, or a covered wait at Central.

[somebody]

Also Simon, theres no rail display down on the busway platform. Which is annoying for northbound rail passengers who prefer either a short wait at Park Rd, or a covered wait at Central.

I can live with that.  Look at the rail display before heading down to the bus platform.  Nothing will change that significantly.  More annoying is the lack of detailed PIDs at theoretically a major station like Park Rd.

[Gazza]

Ho hum .... there is an opportunity to use/flag fall cost on the fares.  Once you are on board there is a progressive reduction in cost/km according to the distance travelled.  This is basic economics and is how most things in life are costed,

Its still a bit unfair though. Imagine someone living in Sherwood taking a train to Indroopilly to do some shopping, quite reasonable and the sort of trip we should theoretically be able to 'win' away from the private car. Of course, there's the other benefits of getting trips like this (avoiding localised congestion, cold engine starts, the blight of massive multideck car parks like Indroopillys etc)

That's a 2 zone trip, and costs $3.11. The distance is 3.3km, so you're paying $1.06 per kilometre.
By comparison, driving a Commodore is 86 cents per kilometre (total ownership costs according to the RACQ)
If you drive one of the popular small cars, its around 50c a kilometre.

I did a post about this a little while ago (But it's too difficult to find again) but from memory, PT can actually be uneconomical for trips under 6km, and of course becomes better and better value for money the more you travel....

And I see this as the main failing of the fare structure, above every other issue, because the huge number of short car trips is what kills cites. Congestion is at its worst in the inner suburbs, and these are trips that need to be won.

and fares costed all over.

Not in Europe and Japan. In these places, trips on the Metro tend to be quite cheap compared to Australia, and long distance rail more expensive compared to Australia. They have it right.

Dont like spending the time and money? Then move closer. Sure, not everyone can afford to live in the inner suburbs, but there are plenty of non inner suburbs that are cheaper and still much closer to the CBD.

Exactly. So maybe not Toowong, But are you telling me the rent is too expensive in places like Darra, Mt Gravatt, etc.

The fact is people are encouraged to live all over, to not do that would simply mean unmanageable cost of living pressures for all.  10 or more students crammed into a suburban house is not an economic model I would touting.

Cramming 10 people into one house is bad, but what we can do is stack 10 houses on top of each other, and put several of these things close to train stations. Doing this would not cause unmanageable living pressures. Developers would see that inner city living was growing in popularity, and would respond by building more flats.

[HappyTrainGuy]

That's also providing that the displays at bus stops are actually displaying the correct time... coughromastreet coughculturalcentre

coughALL bus displays in Brisbane. None of them are real time. Yet.

Really? I would have thought that would have been the first thing to sort out when running a scheduled transportation service 

Something really has to be done about them if thats the case. There's about a 7-8 min delay when compared to the rail displays at Roma Street.

[Golliwog]

Also Simon, theres no rail display down on the busway platform. Which is annoying for northbound rail passengers who prefer either a short wait at Park Rd, or a covered wait at Central.

I can live with that.  Look at the rail display before heading down to the bus platform.  Nothing will change that significantly.  More annoying is the lack of detailed PIDs at theoretically a major station like Park Rd.

Sorry, should have been clearer. I meant when you're coming on a bus from UQ already. Particularly a problem in peak as you miss all the Roma St starters if you change at Park Rd, so you would want to know if they were going to be along shortly or if you would be better just going to the city.

[somebody]

Really? I would have thought that would have been the first thing to sort out when running a scheduled transportation service 

Yes well the rail PIDs don't seem to handle cancellations.  My experience supports this also.

The bus PIDs are useless, and as Jonno has observed, should be turned off to save electricity.  The exceptions would be Roma St, King George Square and Queen St bus stations.

Gazza, great example with Sherwood-Indooroopilly.  Having been down to Chelmer yesterday, there was awful traffic congestion on Honour Ave approaching the bridge.  Although your calcs should be 94c/km in peak and (more relevantly) 80c/km off peak.  The 86c/km and 50c/km includes some fixed costs so it is quite a bit more expensive to use PT than the train to Indooroopilly shops.  And you have a walk at both ends doing so.

Also Simon, theres no rail display down on the busway platform. Which is annoying for northbound rail passengers who prefer either a short wait at Park Rd, or a covered wait at Central.

I can live with that.  Look at the rail display before heading down to the bus platform.  Nothing will change that significantly.  More annoying is the lack of detailed PIDs at theoretically a major station like Park Rd.

Sorry, should have been clearer. I meant when you're coming on a bus from UQ already. Particularly a problem in peak as you miss all the Roma St starters if you change at Park Rd, so you would want to know if they were going to be along shortly or if you would be better just going to the city.

Hence RailBoT's support of Clapham stabling and extending all the Roma St starters/terminators on the suburbans to Park Rd and beyond.  That would sort this issue and also discourage people from using the 109 to Park Rd as a number do now.

[justanotheruser]

I've never seen fares fair or any other person on here who has identified as being from the sunshine coast wanting a 5min frequency. However if we are going to bring frequency into this those within 5kms of the city have excellent frequency when trains and buses are considered so perhaps they should pay more for that frequency while those with the crappy frequency get a higher subsidy. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

Yawn. The fact is that 199 users, for example, are propping up other users.  i.e. they get a negative subsidy.

That still does not address my point that there is higher frequency and more services available close into the city and my argument that it is perfectly reasonable to expect to pay for those extra services if as pointed out it is logical to pay for lifestyle choices. If you choose to live close to the city then pay for it is the argument put forth and all I am doing is pointing out there is more than one way of looking at it. If you don't want to see that because you can't counter it with logic then fine continue yawning away.

[ButFli]

I've never seen fares fair or any other person on here who has identified as being from the sunshine coast wanting a 5min frequency. However if we are going to bring frequency into this those within 5kms of the city have excellent frequency when trains and buses are considered so perhaps they should pay more for that frequency while those with the crappy frequency get a higher subsidy. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

Yawn. The fact is that 199 users, for example, are propping up other users.  i.e. they get a negative subsidy.

That still does not address my point that there is higher frequency and more services available close into the city and my argument that it is perfectly reasonable to expect to pay for those extra services if as pointed out it is logical to pay for lifestyle choices. If you choose to live close to the city then pay for it is the argument put forth and all I am doing is pointing out there is more than one way of looking at it. If you don't want to see that because you can't counter it with logic then fine continue yawning away.

The arguement is entirely logical. Inner-city dwellers pay for it with higher rents or ownership costs. We also pay for it by paying fares that are above cost for public transport. People who choose to live a long way from work save money with cheaper rent or ownership costs and also save money by paying fares that are below cost.

If someone from the outer suburbs deserves subsidised public transport then someone from New Farm deserves subsidised rent. After all, the justification being used for subsidising long trips is that it reduces traffic congestion. I reduce traffic congestion by living close to work and uni. Logically, if one is subsidised the other should be too.

Rather than subsidies to encourage things I think we should have taxes to discourage the alternatives. Want to live a long way from work? Have a big fat tax as a penalty. Want to drive to work? Have a big fat tax for the environmental damage and road congestion that you cause. People would soon work out what their priorities are. It is my lay-opinion that taxing bad things is more economically sound and sustains a freer market than subsidising good things.

[justanotheruser]

Ho hum .... there is an opportunity to use/flag fall cost on the fares.  Once you are on board there is a progressive reduction in cost/km according to the distance travelled.  This is basic economics and is how most things in life are costed,

Its still a bit unfair though. Imagine someone living in Sherwood taking a train to Indroopilly to do some shopping, quite reasonable and the sort of trip we should theoretically be able to 'win' away from the private car. Of course, there's the other benefits of getting trips like this (avoiding localised congestion, cold engine starts, the blight of massive multideck car parks like Indroopillys etc)

That's a 2 zone trip, and costs $3.11. The distance is 3.3km, so you're paying $1.06 per kilometre.
By comparison, driving a Commodore is 86 cents per kilometre (total ownership costs according to the RACQ)
If you drive one of the popular small cars, its around 50c a kilometre.

I did a post about this a little while ago (But it's too difficult to find again) but from memory, PT can actually be uneconomical for trips under 6km, and of course becomes better and better value for money the more you travel....

And I see this as the main failing of the fare structure, above every other issue, because the huge number of short car trips is what kills cites. Congestion is at its worst in the inner suburbs, and these are trips that need to be won.

and fares costed all over.

Not in Europe and Japan. In these places, trips on the Metro tend to be quite cheap compared to Australia, and long distance rail more expensive compared to Australia. They have it right.

Dont like spending the time and money? Then move closer. Sure, not everyone can afford to live in the inner suburbs, but there are plenty of non inner suburbs that are cheaper and still much closer to the CBD.

Exactly. So maybe not Toowong, But are you telling me the rent is too expensive in places like Darra, Mt Gravatt, etc.

The fact is people are encouraged to live all over, to not do that would simply mean unmanageable cost of living pressures for all.  10 or more students crammed into a suburban house is not an economic model I would touting.

Cramming 10 people into one house is bad, but what we can do is stack 10 houses on top of each other, and put several of these things close to train stations. Doing this would not cause unmanageable living pressures. Developers would see that inner city living was growing in popularity, and would respond by building more flats.

Are you still maintaining that a car engine does not cold start if it is at darra or ipswich or sunshine coast but rather only at places like toowong and new farm? Come off it. if your not saying that then don't include it in your reasoning. Cold starts happen no matter where the car is turned on.

Darra is hardly inner suburbs. in any case for a place close to the train station such as
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-qld-darra-405149245 is $440/week so still $175 more than what I pay in ipswich. The difference in fares between darra and city aren't that great to justify paying the extra rent. of course darra gets a higher train frequency than ipswich so going back to what I was saying about why not pay for the higher frequency then darra should pay more.

[justanotheruser]

Some people may not be able to afford the rent closer to the city, and the outer areas may be one of the few (or only in some cases) options available.

Disagree with this too. If Uni students, with their very limited incomes are able to live in places like Toowong, St Lucia etc, and make it work, then people with steady jobs should be able to do the same. I mean, if you wanted a 4 bedroom detached home in the inner suburbs with a big backyard, yeah that's going to be very expensive, but there are other housing types out there, and it basically comes down to whether you value commute time versus the size of your house.
And yeah, its not as if housing on the coasts is cheaper than Brisbane, so you cant use that argument.

of course this statement ignores the fact that there is alot of student specific residents in the area where the rent includes meals and is dirt cheap compared to normal housing prices in the area.

That is not true. There are not a lot of student-specific residences where rent include meals. Virtually the only places where this happens is at the on-campus colleges and these are significantly more expensive than housing in the surrounding area. I will agree with the point about students living in squalor, though. I'm sure we've all been there.

Why don't people move to the city, though? Seriously, it's not that expensive. I'm living here in New Farm by myself in a real nice 2 bedroom flat. Yeah it's expensive but it's the price I'm prepared to pay for the convenience of being 15 minutes away from work and Uni.

Well I'm aware of three student residents in the toowong area. As to prices and it not being that expensive here are two links for a 3 bedroom unit (3 rooms is what my family requires)
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-unit-qld-booval-405110426  $320/week
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-unit-qld-toowong-405173257  $595/week
now thats a differnce in rent that is greater than what I pay per week in ipswich! Yet you think $600 is easily affordable??? As you said it is the price you are prepared to pay. However others aren't prepared to pay that price. Our food is more expensive due to allegies of one family member.

In all fairness you did say new farm so a quick search and first places that came up were
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-qld-new+farm-405151408 $550/week
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-unit-qld-new+farm-405184540  $2,000/week

Now assuming ten trips/week in peak there is a ticket price difference of $26-40 on the go card. So even with the more expensive ticketing it is still way cheaper to live further out. If you happen to be on a pension then that surely would have to be a consideration. Lets make some assumptions here. Say paying same rate per km price for ipswich-city $10 and zone 2-city $2 (is that reasonable?) that still makes living at ipswich cheaper than toowong or new farm. of course if you live so close then perhaps you could invest in a bike and you wouldn't have to pay for PT. After all the options for people who ride bikes that are available despite people don't seem to willing to use it.  When I was at toowong and doing graveyard shifts at work twice a week (so no PT) I rode my bike. Some days there was no room at work to get my bike into the basement as the storeroom was filled with 600 cartons of drinks to put away and once again I had no problem paying more to subsidise others. Why? because I want people to use PT. I want things done to stop so many cars going onto the road. I hope they will stop spending so much money on roads like the ipswich motorway upgrade.

[Golliwog]

Sorry, should have been clearer. I meant when you're coming on a bus from UQ already. Particularly a problem in peak as you miss all the Roma St starters if you change at Park Rd, so you would want to know if they were going to be along shortly or if you would be better just going to the city.

Hence RailBoT's support of Clapham stabling and extending all the Roma St starters/terminators on the suburbans to Park Rd and beyond.  That would sort this issue and also discourage people from using the 109 to Park Rd as a number do now.
[/quote]

Whats wrong with using the 109 to Park Rd? Or do you just mean that is Roma St starters were extended via Clapham stabling that there would be no benefit from using a 109 over a 209/139/169?

[justanotheruser]

I've never seen fares fair or any other person on here who has identified as being from the sunshine coast wanting a 5min frequency. However if we are going to bring frequency into this those within 5kms of the city have excellent frequency when trains and buses are considered so perhaps they should pay more for that frequency while those with the crappy frequency get a higher subsidy. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

Yawn. The fact is that 199 users, for example, are propping up other users.  i.e. they get a negative subsidy.

That still does not address my point that there is higher frequency and more services available close into the city and my argument that it is perfectly reasonable to expect to pay for those extra services if as pointed out it is logical to pay for lifestyle choices. If you choose to live close to the city then pay for it is the argument put forth and all I am doing is pointing out there is more than one way of looking at it. If you don't want to see that because you can't counter it with logic then fine continue yawning away.

The arguement is entirely logical. Inner-city dwellers pay for it with higher rents or ownership costs. We also pay for it by paying fares that are above cost for public transport. People who choose to live a long way from work save money with cheaper rent or ownership costs and also save money by paying fares that are below cost.

If someone from the outer suburbs deserves subsidised public transport then someone from New Farm deserves subsidised rent. After all, the justification being used for subsidising long trips is that it reduces traffic congestion. I reduce traffic congestion by living close to work and uni. Logically, if one is subsidised the other should be too.

Rather than subsidies to encourage things I think we should have taxes to discourage the alternatives. Want to live a long way from work? Have a big fat tax as a penalty. Want to drive to work? Have a big fat tax for the environmental damage and road congestion that you cause. People would soon work out what their priorities are. It is my lay-opinion that taxing bad things is more economically sound and sustains a freer market than subsidising good things.

As long as i don't get taxed for living along way from one of my jobs. After all I lived two suburbs away when I got the job but was forced out of the suburb as I couldn't afford it when the place we were living in got knocked down to build townhouses. Also I live close to my other job. You can't penalise people based on what jobs they have and what they can afford. In any case rents have nothing to do with PT subsidy. You still have not addressed the frequency issue. if you had the bus frequency we have here and the train frequency then I would be more sympathetic. However you get a much better service with far more options. Why shouldn't you pay for that if you want a user pays system? What your really saying is you want people further out to subsidise your trips. If you receive more services then obviously that costs more so you should pay for that.  Housing prices are worked out on demand. If a price is too high then the place will not sell or be rented. One place I moved out of they increased the asking price for rent by $110/week. The place stayed empty for 8 months when they dropped the asking price by $60. Just like once upon a time inner city suburbs in sydney were not considered to be very good and price for those places were low considering how close to the city they were and then people decided they liked the convienence and the prices skyrocketed. Demand drives those prices. it is a lifestyle choice. So now your arguing that people shouldn't have to pay for their lifestyle choices. Interesting.

[BrizCommuter]

Back on topic, here is a minor bombshell:
http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/05/long-distance-commuting-part-1.html

Part 2 is coming!

[ozbob]

As you mention Briz, hard to directly compare.  The quality of the rail service is vastly different and you are ignoring the seasonal ticketing.

There was some strategies deliberately implemented in the UK as well to make travel dear (relatively) because of congestion issues.

There are also other considerations in terms of how populations are spread.  Governments in Australia encourage decentralisation and support longer commutes, politically they all keep fares in an equitable range.  Rail systems in NSW and Victoria are well developed for that.  South east Qld is marginal at best.  Most locations in Queensland don't have any real options other than roads.

More valid comparisons with respect to the Australian socio-economic environment are the 'equivalent' services in the other Australian states IMHO.

[ButFli]

However you get a much better service with far more options. Why shouldn't you pay for that if you want a user pays system? What your really saying is you want people further out to subsidise your trips. If you receive more services then obviously that costs more so you should pay for that.

We do pay for the services. The 199 (arguably the best service in Brisbane) runs at a profit. I don't want anyone subsidising my fare. I don't want anyone subsidising any fares. In a user pays system, my fare would be reduced. As it is now, a significant portion of my fare goes to subsidising the fares of outer-suburb dwellers.

it is a lifestyle choice. So now your arguing that people shouldn't have to pay for their lifestyle choices. Interesting.

I think everyone should have to pay for their lifestyle choices. What I am saying is that if I am forced to pay for the lifestyle choices of people living on the Gold and Sunshine Coasts, Ipswich etc then it is only fair and logical that they have to pay for mine. As it is now, you are prepared to take the savings of living in the outer suburbs while expecting everyone else to cover your additional costs.

[ozbob]

User pays sounds great in principle but in reality it is not what Australia is grounded on. We have a government that acts for us all to provide an environment where there is overall support for its citizens.

Arguments that I am subsidising  x rail commuter because I am a regular user of y bus service can be expanded thus.  Why should I subsidise university students (HECS is nothing like the real cost)?  Why should I subsidise the neighbours coronary bypass surgery?  Why should I subsidise the other neighbours child care?  Heck why should Sally receive a baby bonus?  And it goes on ...

Fare structures reflect the socio-economic reality of our society. 

I am happy to pay tax and costs that are balanced overall and give in general terms balance and opportunity for all.  That's life really ...

[BrizCommuter]

OK, here is the bigger bombshell - looks like inner-city commuters are heavily subsidising long distance commuters:
http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/05/long-distance-commuting-part-2.html

[ozbob]

Has always been the case in Australia, and unlikely to change dramatically for a while yet!

The cost of providing an inner city zone one trip, is not a constant with respect to longer trips.  There are economies of scale to consider and so forth.  There is a flagfall component (to provide the actual rolling stock and so forth) and then a distance component (although with the zonal fare system we have that is strictly always not true).  Inner city types do quite well say with the travelling from a zone 3 station south to zone 3 north for a zone 3 fare.  Someone going from zone 1 to zone 6 pays a higher fare.  There are many ways of a skinning a cat ..

[somebody]

Now assuming ten trips/week in peak there is a ticket price difference of $26-40 on the go card.

Are you now attempting to argue that the amounts of the subsidy aren't much because the ticket price isn't very much different???

If so, I say your argument is wrong and you presumably know it.

Exactly where does the money spent on the Coast commuters' subsidy get spent for a New Farm resident?  New Farm lifestyle is more sustainable than living on the Coast.  I would have thought that would be an axiom.

Whats wrong with using the 109 to Park Rd? Or do you just mean that is Roma St starters were extended via Clapham stabling that there would be no benefit from using a 109 over a 209/139/169?

What's wrong with it is that you are using a bus, which is less efficient form of transport along a train line.  It is the same problem with providing such incentive to use buses Roma St-Taringa as is done at present.

As long as i don't get taxed for living along way from one of my jobs.

I think we all knew this was where you are really coming from.

Why shouldn't you pay for that if you want a user pays system?

What part of "The 199 is profitable" do you not understand?

What your really saying is you want people further out to subsidise your trips.

Incorrect.

So now your arguing that people shouldn't have to pay for their lifestyle choices. Interesting.

Again incorrect.

User pays sounds great in principle but in reality it is not what Australia is grounded on. We have a government that acts for us all to provide an environment where there is overall support for its citizens.

Arguments that I am subsidising  x rail commuter because I am a regular user of y bus service can be expanded thus.  Why should I subsidise university students (HECS is nothing like the real cost)?  Why should I subsidise the neighbours coronary bypass surgery?  Why should I subsidise the other neighbours child care?  Heck why should Sally receive a baby bonus?  And it goes on ...

Fare structures reflect the socio-economic reality of our society. 

I am happy to pay tax and costs that are balanced overall and give in general terms balance and opportunity for all.  That's life really ...

Australia has gone well too far down that path.  It is also far too complicated.  But I wouldn't like to see the savage cuts which apply in NZ and the US.  Perhaps there will be cuts in the budget next week.

Rail systems in NSW and Victoria are well developed for that. 

God forbid that we should have a service like CityRail beyond Berowra, Emu Plains, Macarthur or Waterfall.  All those lines are positively awful.

[somebody]

OK, here is the bigger bombshell - looks like inner-city commuters are heavily subsidising long distance commuters:
http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/05/long-distance-commuting-part-2.html

It must be a cold day in hell.

BrizCommuter and high are in full, and enthusiastic agreement.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Huh? So some people here and the media are ranting on about fare increases and comparing it to other fare systems (on the NCL for example) but yet other places are paying triple for the same distance service.... Well I guess thats the problem that arrises from having busses and trains operating the same fare structure from the NSW border to Gympie.

[somebody]

Huh? So some people here and the media are ranting on about fare increases and comparing it to other fare systems (on the NCL for example) but yet other places are paying triple for the same distance service.... Well I guess thats the problem that arrises from having busses and trains operating the same fare structure from the NSW border to Gympie.

Are you referring to the Sydney MyZone service which charges more for train services, and discounts long distance bus services enormously?

[HappyTrainGuy]

Nah nah, i was just saying how difficult it was to have an even fare structure when trains cover more distances compared to local busses inbetween different sized cities.

[aldonius]

It's occurred to me that local trips could be very easily promoted if the first zone travelled of each journey (for the current go card definition thereof) was free.
That would, however, be messy with paper tickets. Thoughts?

[BrizCommuter]

Nah nah, i was just saying how difficult it was to have an even fare structure when trains cover more distances compared to local busses inbetween different sized cities.

London has different fares for trains and buses, with buses being zoneless and cheaper. A daily tube cap in London will cover bus journeys as well, but a daily bus cap will increase up to a daily tube cap if the tube is used in addition to bus journeys.  
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tickets/14416.aspx

[O_128]

Nah nah, i was just saying how difficult it was to have an even fare structure when trains cover more distances compared to local busses inbetween different sized cities.

London has different fares for trains and buses, with buses being zoneless and cheaper. A daily tube cap in London will cover bus journeys as well, but a daily bus cap will increase up to a daily tube cap if the tube is used in addition to bus journeys.  
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tickets/14416.aspx

I wouldn't mind a flat zone one fare for all BCC buses. It would actually make alot of sense and wouldn't be hard to implement into go cards.  More controversial would be making trains inside the BCC boundary cheaper as well.

[somebody]

I don't support a lower charge for buses than trains.  Buses are more expensive to provide capacity on in general, so encouraging people to use that doesn't seem a good idea.

[Arnz]

If inner commuters are really that concerned about subsidies for outer commuters and coastal commuters, you can either exclude both the coasts and the outer areas (Caboolture, Ipswich, etc) from the TransLink zones, and base TransLink on the BCC boundaries only and merge it to two zones (like Newman proposed pre-TransLink and before he became mayor).

It may save the inner commuter some subsidies and may gain them some cheaper travel, but as a whole would be step back 11 years with un-integrated fares all over South East Queensland.  

To save the inner commuters money, taking into consideration the earlier whining from pollies about BCC subsidising the "outer suburban commuters" travelling on their buses. PT services beyond the BCC boundary be picked up by the "QConnect" system (instead of TransLink).   QConnect and TransLink fares somewhat would have to be in a "similar" agreement to the Airtrain (minus the price gouging) for seamless rail travel on QueenslandRail services (the former Citytrain/QRPassenger) .  However, the lack of integration between the outer suburban/the coasts PT and a "BCC-only 2 Zone TransLink" would be steps backwards integration wise.

[Golliwog]

I don't think anyone was aiming for de-integrating the network. More about where the balance between short distance and long distance fares sits. I'm not going to get into this argument, as I don't see it of major concern, but I will say that I doubt its possible to get a integrated network where one type of passenger doesn't subsidise another.

[Arnz]

Some were advocating for higher fares for coastal commuters in "fancy" maglev-like trains.  I'll consider that as "those people" calling for un-integration (or separation), to some degree.  Putting maglevs on current infrastructure would not likely work and would probably be more expensive if Maglevs were used on a completely new infrastructure than constructing the basic infrastructure upgrades for commuter bus and commuter rail in the outer regions/coasts.

Replacing TransLink with QConnect beyond BCC boundaries may save the inner-commuters some subsidies, but then the issue after that if it ever happens is programming the fares from BCC-TransLink area to BCC-TransLink area being cheaper than QConnect Areas (outer suburban/coasts) to BCC-TransLink area (under a similar agreement with Airtrain (minus the infamous Airtrain price gouging, of course)

[HappyTrainGuy]

One way to make it even is to have a zone system for trains and another zone system for busses. Only problem is that this is now a disadvantage to passengers that catch busses along a similar route that would do the same distance. Although this could then improve bus services to then interchange with train stations and also make trains look more desirable for passerngers.

[somebody]

You are all making something which is simple hard.  Reduce the flag fall and increase the per zone charge.  It isn't difficult at all.

I wouldn't mind a free zone for zone 1-zone 1 trips either, but stations like Auchenflower would have to become zone 2 under that one.

[Stillwater]

What's not factored into the discussion so far is the greater options that inner-city travellers have by way of frequency of services and spread of services across the day.  This is a so-called 'hidden subsidy' to inner-city dwellers.  To compare like with like, assume there are 20 return services a day from Nambour; therefore, the comparision should be on the basis that a commuter at Toowong or Albion also receives 20 return services a day.

If governments tomorrow declared the coasts 'non-habiltable' areas and required and the 1.2 inhabitants to live within the BCC area, that would be akin to the Nazis creating ghettos.  What would the population influx mean for housing prices, the capacity of sewers, traffic congestion and the like?  An inner-city dweller would have to endure costs that he or she does not have to put up with now,  and would not want to put up with, I submit.

There have been some arguments here along the lines of this: that if 10 students can cram into a suburban house and share rent, the rent is reasonable; therefore it is affordable for someone from the coast to live cheek by jowl in inner-suburban Brisbane, presunably two to a bed.

Why not stop there?  All GST collected within a state should be returned to that state.  The cost of sending a letter in the inner-city should be reduced to 10 cents, and the cost of sending a letter to Alice Springs should be $5, because that better reflects the cost structure.  If you break a leg in the inner-city and only have to be conveyed to the Royal Brisbane or the Mater, then the ambulance cost charged to you should be $200, but if you are a stockman who breaks a leg in a remote location, his trip in the Flying Doctor aircraft should result in a bill of $10,000.

A litre of Hepburn Springs natural water should cost $1 if sold within 10 km of the source, $2 if within 1 to 5 km and $100 in Bundaberg.  Close public schools, because they involve a subsidy, send every child to a private school.

Got to eliminate those subsidies.

[Arnz]

You are all making something which is simple hard.  Reduce the flag fall and increase the per zone charge.  It isn't difficult at all.

It ain't hard.  We're giving out suggestions on how to reduce the costs of inner commuters subsidising the longer (Outer/Coast) commuters

If it means commuters out from out of the BCC boundaries getting TransLink replaced with the QConnect system (with QConnect branded GoCards), then do so.

With the suggestion of QConnect replacing TransLink in the outer/coastal areas, outer commuters/coastal commuters making short 1-2 zone trips in their local regions pay the same as a City commuter making a 1-2 zone trip in the City, while at the same time QConnect and TransLink can "increase" the price accordingly for those going from the Coast (or outer suburban) to the City under a similar partnership agreement (like the AirTrain/TransLink agreement minus the Airtrain price gouging). 

It keeps most "integration" together in that case, but splits the fare system to two systems accordingly and charges by distance (eg a QConnect passenger travelling into a BCC-TransLink zone).

Edit: I should mention that QConnect were slowly introducing a Go Card like system in North Qld.  There were some pictures of some Sunbuses in North Qld with a similar Go-Card like equipment.

[O_128]

BCC should have at the max 2 zones after that let the usual zonal system continues. It annoys me that on a Sunday someone who gets a train to ipswich gets a better service frequency when I live 4km from the city near a major arterial, though its a fact of life that we have to subsidies the people further away it shouldn't be done at the expense of people doing the smart thing and living closer to there work to be lugged with a max $4.60 fare for 1 zone.

I also agree that zone 1-1 should be free but only if the current zonal system was kept.

[somebody]

BCC should have at the max 2 zones after that let the usual zonal system continues. It annoys me that on a Sunday someone who gets a train to ipswich gets a better service frequency when I live 4km from the city near a major arterial, though its a fact of life that we have to subsidies the people further away it shouldn't be done at the expense of people doing the smart thing and living closer to there work to be lugged with a max $4.60 fare for 1 zone.

I also agree that zone 1-1 should be free but only if the current zonal system was kept.

No way on the 2 zones.  There'd be too many inequities in that.

Not sure where you could live within 4km of the CBD to have a worse frequency than the Ipswich line.

It ain't hard.  We're giving out suggestions on how to reduce the costs of inner commuters subsidising the longer (Outer/Coast) commuters

Still a straw man argument.  Set up a straw man, then knock it down.

[#Metro]

I don't know. Maybe it is fair.

We are arguing about nominal costs. This is wrong!!

True costs = [(time of waiting x value of time for waiting) + (journey time x value of time for travelling)] + ticket costs

The inner city gets excellent frequency and service. That higher quality of service should come at a higher price. Remember parking in the inner city is expensive...

The outer areas gets garbage. The effective total price is much higher because the journey is longer PLUS you generally have longer waiting times as well. Garbage should be priced lower...

[ozbob]

There is also the notion of greater broader economic benefit generated by longer commute trips on public transport (emissions, road trauma and congestion savings, infrastructure savings).

I don't have a problem with the cheaper fares per distance unit the longer the journey is, which is essentially how the present fare structure is predicated. 

I don't have a problem with pensioners being giving a set top box either, or university students getting a subsidised education at public universities, or the patients undergoing surgery today at the RBWH at public expense.  That is how society in Oz operates for the common good.