Connecting SEQ 2031 - The rail revolution ...

[dwb]

I just don't see how you are going to get Class B Cultural Centre into Class A without a tunnel and multiple extra stations underground to take that load. If you are going to be transporting very large numbers of pax, class A gives the best reliability.

Bring on the metro, DOWN THE BUSWAY

I guess the real question is, does SEB mainline always have to route via Mater, South Bank and CC.... personally I think the answer is no.

[dwb]

HELP PLEASE

The labyrinthine nature of the various state government strategy / policy documents is confusing.  Supposedly, the SEQIPP plan talks to the Queensland Infrastructure Plan, to the Connecting SEQ 2031 Plan and the Integrated Regional Transport Plan and the Inner City Rail Capacity Study and the CRR EIS .... and so on.  All relate to the Shaping Queensland's Tomorrow document.

Connecting SEQ 2031 is supposed to back up, among other plans, the Wide Bay-Burnett Regional Plan 2011-2031.  http://www.dlgp.qld.gov.au/regional-planning/wide-bay-burnett-regional-plan.html  

When you look at that document, however, it says detailed public transport infrastructure is covered in a Department of Transport and Main Roads document titled a Passenger Network Plan.  It is separate from the Translink Network Plan.

Can anyone tell me where to find the Passenger Network Plan?

Some corrections first:

- SEQIPP doesn't talk to QIP, SEQIPP was discontinued when regional planning extended beyond just SEQ, QIP is the primary Infrastructure Plan, SEQIPP won't be reissued.
- Connecting SEQ 2031 IS the Integrated Regional Transport Plan (It wasn't until Sunday when the finalised draft was released, previously the IRTP was the 1997 document).
- ICRCS (Inner City Rail Capacity Study) was a pre-prefeasibility into CRR EIS (Cross River Rail environmental impact statement)
- Q2 is the Queensland State Government vision, it overlays *all* state documents but is very vague, all plans/policies below it need to explain how they fit in the big picture of Q2 (Shaping Tomorrow's Queensland or whatever slogan you quoted).
- Where did you read that Connecting SEQ2031 is supposed to back up the Wide Bay Burnett Regional Plan? perhaps inso as rail/port intellectual limitations of the State City may impact on that region.
- Connecting SEQ is the outline vision for transport, and other lower level documents will now need to reference this, that won't mean everything is consistent with this document though as things do change... for example CSEQ states it is not a budgetry document, the pollies do them each year deciding what ideas from the basket suit current (political/funding/media/...) issues that are prevalent.

The TMR Passenger Network STRATEGY can be found http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Travel-and-transport/Public-transport/Passenger-transport-strategy.aspx
I'm not sure how it relates to the other strategies, but from when I read it I think I thought it formed an internal capacity building role much more so than the other documents which either perform a outline policy role or a technical role - for example the EIS was undertaken on CRR to give government certainty as to the technical feasibility, design approach, geology, environmental impacts, likely patronage and cost of the project. The EIS is required as it is a "major project" that could send the state broke or have significant environmental/social impacts/consequences. Presumably the EIS will form the basis for the contractor/tenderer to produce their final submission to government to design, build and possibly operate the infrastructure (but it hasn't been tendered yet, cos they're not certain on budget). On other projects an EIS isn't done, for example the Eastern Busway had a "Concept Design and Impact Management Plan" and then is being tendered in sections. The tenderer varies the concept design to make it cheaper/better and/or incorporate changes govt wanted but had difficulty getting in the CDIMP (that is the cynic in me talking).

Clear as mud. Does that help?

[Stillwater]

It is not the case that the situation is as clear as mud, for the mud itself has meaning; and is just as palpable as sublime clarity.  The challenge, always, is to source the purity, which is all the more valuable by virtue of the efforts of the mud purveyors' black craft.  Now there is the chase, dwb.  There is the quest.  And the quest has meaning, the prize a cleansing action.  The enlightenment is the key to new order.

[somebody]

The draft "Connecting SEQ 2031" network map on page 7  http://www.connectingseq.qld.gov.au/Libraries/Publications/Draft_Connecting_SEQ_2031.pdf shows UrbanLink services terminating at Redbank. The draft also shows limited stops for ExpressLink services between Darra and Redbank.

In contrast, the document released yesterday does not have UrbanLink services past Darra on the Ipswich Line & the network map on page 6 shows ExpressLink services stopping all stations between Darra & Redbank.

I would have thought that the stabling yard under construction at Redbank suggests that there will be services originating/terminating at Redbank in the future. Perhaps the trains to be stored at Redbank are going to run dead back to Ipswich or Richlands/Springfield Central.

The document released yesterday also states "ExpressLink rail services will provide fast travel times between Ipswich Central and central Brisbane of about 45 minutes, and to the Brisbane Airport in just over an hour". The current express running time between Ipswich & Brisbane Central is 50 minutes. What are RBOT members' thoughts on how the travel times are going to be reduced by about 5 minutes? Can you see the fat from the timetable being removed by 2031 or will there be significant track upgrades including straightening to allow faster speed limits? How will TransLink ever provide a travel time between Ipswich & Brisbane Airport of just over an hour?

I can only imagine express between Redbank & Darra post the Redbank triple, unless the culture changes significantly.

The Mar 2008 timetable had a PM peak train doing the journey in 43 minutes, leaving Central at 5:27pm, stopping Roma St, Darra, Redbank then all to Ipswich.  Adding Milton & Indooroopilly might slow it to 45 (perhaps 46) minutes.

Good observation.

[achiruel]

Is there any chance of faster suburban rollingstock (110 or 120 km/h) and track to support it?  This might shave a few minutes off the time.

I can't see Central to Airport from Ipswich in 60 minutes though, I'm assuming Ipswich will be running on the mains and Airport on the suburbans, so a change will still be required, and Central <-> Airport alone is 20 minutes.

[somebody]

Is there any chance of faster suburban rollingstock (110 or 120 km/h) and track to support it?  This might shave a few minutes off the time.

I can't see Central to Airport from Ipswich in 60 minutes though, I'm assuming Ipswich will be running on the mains and Airport on the suburbans, so a change will still be required, and Central <-> Airport alone is 20 minutes.

CRR involves connecting Bowen Hills 3 & 4 to Albion 1 & 2.  The mains at Albion are to be connected to CRR.

[colinw]

How will TransLink ever provide a travel time between Ipswich & Brisbane Airport of just over an hour?

Magic fairy dust. From the same place as the funding for this worthless piece of flimflam.

Question - what is the design speed of the Springfield line?  With the long stretch from Richlands to Springfield, surely a speed greater than 100 km/h would be useful?

Ipsiwch to Roma St should be doable in about 45 minutes with a clear run and a decent number of stations skipped inbound from Redbank. I'm  fairly sure I can remember doing it in under 40 on a Helidon Railcar, with one stop at Corinda.

The other place there could be some higher speed running is north of Petrie, and back in the '90s I vaguely remember seeing a 120 board somewhere south of Caboolture.

Trouts Road corridor I would assume will be built with wide station spacing and a design speed higher than 100.

[Stillwater]

Unfortunately, we must regard Connecting SEQ 2031 as an indicative conceptualisation of what might be, for general guidance of state transport planners.  The document says as much.  We must wait until after the election for the mythical Funding Our Public Transport Plan and the Meeting Our Public Transport Targets Plan.

[dwb]

Unfortunately, we must regard Connecting SEQ 2031 as an indicative conceptualisation of what might be, for general guidance of state transport planners.  The document says as much.  We must wait until after the election for the mythical Funding Our Public Transport Plan and the Meeting Our Public Transport Targets Plan.

Yes, no matter how much we may want more, to expect more is quite frankly delirious on our part.

[somebody]

How will TransLink ever provide a travel time between Ipswich & Brisbane Airport of just over an hour?

Magic fairy dust. From the same place as the funding for this worthless piece of flimflam.

Reinstating the previous (2007) running times combined with 45 minutes Ipswich-Central (previously 43 mins fastest trip) and through routing in a post CRR world would see 1h6min Ipswich-International and 1h9min Ipswich-Domestic.

It's not as unachievable as you are implying.

[colinw]

I completely agree that it is not technically unachievable. The limits to achievement in Brisbane are cultural in nature. How else can you explain a timetable that gets slower & fatter with every passing year?

Brisbane's trains were once regarded as fast. A book I have, dating from the 1980s, notes that "Brisbane enjoys Australia's cleanest & fastest system of suburban electric trains". Hmmm....

I find it very hard to be positive when most lines are a few minutes slower than they were when I moved to Brisbane in the 1980s. Even the Ferny Grove line, which has now reversed all improvement in running time from the 1979 electrification - the all stations time to Ferny Grove is now the same as it was with diesels and SX sets.

Seriously - I would like to see a lot less focus on pie-in-the-sky infrastructure plans, and a lot more focus on some sensible service delivery with the infrastructure we already have (plus a few well directed improvements).

Major exception to what I say above is CRR - it MUST proceed otherwise we're stuck.

[HappyTrainGuy]

But alot has changed since then. Most notably traffic volume and the door safety systems (Introduced to EMUs around 93-96). Instead of hearing the guards whistle (Which warned passengers that the doors were about to close), ding ding from the guard then the doors slamming shut they now have the guards whistle (Which now no one takes notice of anymore unless their running late and it becomes the 4 second rule if the guard is standing on the platform), the onboard door release panel light turns off/door lights start flashing and beeping, an onboard warning that the doors are now closing before they close slowly and yet some muffins still get stuck in them. As it is now EMUs still have the fastest opening/closing door times compared to any other generation of rollingstock.

[dwb]

But alot has changed since then. Most notably traffic volume and the door safety systems (Introduced to EMUs around 93-96). Instead of hearing the guards whistle (Which warned passengers that the doors were about to close), ding ding from the guard then the doors slamming shut they now have the guards whistle (Which now no one takes notice of anymore unless their running late and it becomes the 4 second rule if the guard is standing on the platform), the onboard door release panel light turns off/door lights start flashing and beeping, an onboard warning that the doors are now closing before they close slowly and yet some muffins still get stuck in them. As it is now EMUs still have the fastest opening/closing door times compared to any other generation of rollingstock.

I was wondering how much door times and passenger volumes had to do with it.

Given urbanlink in CSEQ2031 proposes 3 doors per carriage side, that presumably will decrease the amount of time required, BUT what about now? Couldn't we just speed up the door opening and closing pattern - people adjust pretty quickly to know what the safety margin is... I reckon atm people might get stuck in the doors bc they know they can run at em and make it... if it buzzed as it was closing, you'd have no chance, you just know if you're at the door you need to get in damn fast... this is much how it seemed to operate in Rio on the metro when I was there... if you weren't at the door when it buzzed you didn't get on the train! (Having said that I did see a couple of people holding doors open, you could push on the door as it was closing to stop it closing, all other doors would keep closing however, it would pause a second and then you'd hear the pneumatic pump thing give it another surge and it would close and lock.

[somebody]

But alot has changed since then. Most notably traffic volume and the door safety systems (Introduced to EMUs around 93-96). Instead of hearing the guards whistle (Which warned passengers that the doors were about to close), ding ding from the guard then the doors slamming shut they now have the guards whistle (Which now no one takes notice of anymore unless their running late and it becomes the 4 second rule if the guard is standing on the platform), the onboard door release panel light turns off/door lights start flashing and beeping, an onboard warning that the doors are now closing before they close slowly and yet some muffins still get stuck in them. As it is now EMUs still have the fastest opening/closing door times compared to any other generation of rollingstock.

I'd wonder if there was any reduction in incidents from these procedures.

I wish we could lobby much more on this issue.

[colinw]

HappyTrainGuy is right - the big slowdown started with the "door closing" announcement. I well remember the chaos on the trains when that was introduced. The timetable basically fell apart overnight.

Another defeat for common sense.

[HappyTrainGuy]

People holding doors happens alot here too (Either tourists but mostly the dregs of society). If enough force is applied to the door release machenism at the top of the door it can be damaged pretty easily on EMUs. The built in failsafe isn't meant to have doors pushed while its closing (so if anyone does get stuck in the door they don't get injured and sue along with alerting the driver that all doors aren't closed). If you see one part of the door that opens/closes slower than the other you can bet your dollar that some low life has forced it to stay open. The IMUs/SMU260s are the slowest just because they operate with push out sliding doors as opposed to the quicker sliding internal doors on EMUs/older SMUs. Great for longer runs with limited stops such as the Gold Coast/Nambour lines but not so good for the all stoppers.

IIRC the public lobied for the warnings in conjuction with QR due to the increasing amount of people running down stairs and along platforms/more people and different age groups catching trains and fearing that they would get stuck in doors/not be able to hear the guards whistle or just plain outright hurt themselves.

[colinw]

My recollection of it was that it was a kneejerk reaction in response to a couple of incidents being beaten up into a scare campaign by the Courier-Fail.  But then I'm a cynical old curmudgeon.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Might have been as people were crying about the doors not giving warnings/not hearing the guards whistle just prior to the SMUs making their deubt. It was over 10 years ago haha.

[colinw]

This seems somewhat relevant to the SEQ 2031 document.  Here come the houses - at Ripley, Flagstone and Yarrabilba:

http://statements.cabinet.qld.gov.au/MMS/StatementDisplaySingle.aspx?id=77237

Attorney-General, Minister for Local Government and Special Minister of State
The Honourable Paul Lucas

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

South East the site for a record number of homes

The State Government has approved three developments set to provide up to 120,000 new homes in the burgeoning South East corner.

Minister for Local Government Paul Lucas said the Urban Land Development Authority projects were also expected to support around 86,000 jobs over their life.

"The State Government has given the green light to these communities because we are committed to providing affordable housing and sustainable communities for Queenslanders," Mr Lucas said.

"Greater Flagstone, Yarrabilba and Ripley Valley have been designed with regions experiencing exponential growth in mind.

"Ipswich and Logan, the regions in which these homes will be built, will undergo an explosion in growth, each reaching an estimated population of 400,000 by 2031.

"The three new communities in these regions will become home to approximately 270,000 Queenslanders as development occurs over the next 20 to 40 years.

"Work has already begun on two of the developments, Greater Flagstone and Yarrabilba, in Logan with construction on Ripley Valley in Ipswich expected to begin before the end of the year.

"We want to give young people, young families and young workers - all of whom find it challenging to enter the housing market - a fair go.

"That is why the price of a quarter of all homes will be set below the affordability target for the region.

"Key workers in Logan and Ipswich on low to moderate incomes of $54,500 and $53,500 respectively will be better placed to enter the housing market."

Mr Lucas said sixty per cent of future residents will be employed in and around the urban development areas (UDA) and rely on the majority of its services.

"We are fast tracking these developments so South East communities can work and play where they live," he said.

"The State Government is also reserving between 25 to 40 per cent of these developments as green space which is substantially greater than what would ordinarily be achieved through none Urban Development areas.

"We understand it's Queensland's beautiful natural environment which draws and keeps people here and we intend keep it that way."

The CEO of the Urban Land Development Authority, Paul Eagles, said the approved developments are the result of ongoing consultation with the Ipswich and Logan City Councils.

"The ULDA will continue to work with local government, land owners and developers as future development takes place in these UDAs," Mr Eagles said.

A copy of the development schemes are available on the ULDA website - www.ulda.qld.gov.au

UDA	HOMES	POPULATION	JOBS
Greater Flagstone	50,000	100,000	35,000
Yarrabilba	20,000	50,000	15,000
Ripley Valley	50,000	120,000	36,000
Total	120,000	270,000	86,000

[BrizCommuter]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/10/connecting-seq-2031-lamelink-to.html
LameLink to UrbanLink?

[O_128]

Wow so work has also begun on the rail to service these areas?

[petey3801]

I don't believe there is any restriction in the vicinity of stations, certainly not a significant one if there is, going from personal experience.

No guarantee that one won't be instituted.  I'm not aware of anywhere on the network that trains pass stations in excess of 100km/h.

I expect that is more a function of service design than of safety.  There are no 100+ stretches on the suburban network, which is currently the only place where you have express running.  Where you do have 100kph+, you have hit the interurban all-stations stretches north of Caboolture and south of Beenleigh.

Evidence from overseas shows us 140kph trains through stations should not be an issue.  If you are doing 100kph, you are generally not going to be able to stop within sight of an obstruction anyway, and I doubt the noise/wind passage would be greatly different to anybody on the platform between the 2 speeds.  If anything, yellow lines might have to be pushed back a bit, but I would not expect anything much more significant.

Effects like the pressure wave in front of the train generally rise with the square of the speed, so I'd say there is a fairly significant difference between 140 & 100 = x2.28 if my square of the speed proposition applies.

Trains are able to pass through platforms at full posted road speed (be it 40km/h or 140km/h or even 160km/h for the Tilts). It is rare for it to happen on the Gold Coast except for empty transfer trains (generally for special events etc.).

[somebody]

I don't believe there is any restriction in the vicinity of stations, certainly not a significant one if there is, going from personal experience.

No guarantee that one won't be instituted.  I'm not aware of anywhere on the network that trains pass stations in excess of 100km/h.

I expect that is more a function of service design than of safety.  There are no 100+ stretches on the suburban network, which is currently the only place where you have express running.  Where you do have 100kph+, you have hit the interurban all-stations stretches north of Caboolture and south of Beenleigh.

Evidence from overseas shows us 140kph trains through stations should not be an issue.  If you are doing 100kph, you are generally not going to be able to stop within sight of an obstruction anyway, and I doubt the noise/wind passage would be greatly different to anybody on the platform between the 2 speeds.  If anything, yellow lines might have to be pushed back a bit, but I would not expect anything much more significant.

Effects like the pressure wave in front of the train generally rise with the square of the speed, so I'd say there is a fairly significant difference between 140 & 100 = x2.28 if my square of the speed proposition applies.

Trains are able to pass through platforms at full posted road speed (be it 40km/h or 140km/h or even 160km/h for the Tilts). It is rare for it to happen on the Gold Coast except for empty transfer trains (generally for special events etc.).

Good point with the Tilts.  These should be passing Elimbah at >100km/h.

[Arnz]

I don't believe there is any restriction in the vicinity of stations, certainly not a significant one if there is, going from personal experience.

No guarantee that one won't be instituted.  I'm not aware of anywhere on the network that trains pass stations in excess of 100km/h.

I expect that is more a function of service design than of safety.  There are no 100+ stretches on the suburban network, which is currently the only place where you have express running.  Where you do have 100kph+, you have hit the interurban all-stations stretches north of Caboolture and south of Beenleigh.

Evidence from overseas shows us 140kph trains through stations should not be an issue.  If you are doing 100kph, you are generally not going to be able to stop within sight of an obstruction anyway, and I doubt the noise/wind passage would be greatly different to anybody on the platform between the 2 speeds.  If anything, yellow lines might have to be pushed back a bit, but I would not expect anything much more significant.

Effects like the pressure wave in front of the train generally rise with the square of the speed, so I'd say there is a fairly significant difference between 140 & 100 = x2.28 if my square of the speed proposition applies.

Trains are able to pass through platforms at full posted road speed (be it 40km/h or 140km/h or even 160km/h for the Tilts). It is rare for it to happen on the Gold Coast except for empty transfer trains (generally for special events etc.).

Good point with the Tilts.  These should be passing Elimbah at >100km/h.

They do indeed.  Theres generally the "an express train will pass this station in approximately 1 minute" warning beep for Elimbah and Beerburrum.

[Jonno]

The ULDA and Government have a great opportunity to show that by actually planning for ~70% of trips to be by active/public transport and freight rail they could actually avoid 80% of the population creating traffic congestion. 

Instead they will hard lock a maximum of around 20% active/public transport plus 0% freight rail and guarentee 80-90% of all trips are by car and stuck in herendous traffic!  Just plain stupid.  They are going to create a problem they will then be forced to spend billions attempting to fix.

A prep-school kid could work out that this is completely stupid!

[dwb]

The ULDA and Government have a great opportunity to show that by actually planning for ~70% of trips to be by active/public transport and freight rail they could actually avoid 80% of the population creating traffic congestion. 

Instead they will hard lock a maximum of around 20% active/public transport plus 0% freight rail and guarentee 80-90% of all trips are by car and stuck in herendous traffic!  Just plain stupid.  They are going to create a problem they will then be forced to spend billions attempting to fix.

A prep-school kid could work out that this is completely stupid!

Many of those workers will be serving the industrial areas, not all will be travelling to Brisbane CBD.

Personally I think the approach spelled out in CSEQ wrt employment self-containment is more pragmatic, ie it is something to aim for, but we should still be planning for people to travel further than we'd like.

Me, I'd build one metro in Brisbane and dump all the development on it... well sort of, that is a bit of a simplification but you get the gist. It is a city, let's not be afraid of all the good things a city can be!

[ozbob]

http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Projects/Name/S/South-East-Queensland-Integrated-Regional-Transport-Plan-1997.aspx

For anyone interested the 1997 IRTP can found via the link above ...

[Gazza]

Flagstone, Ripley and Yarabillba are all pretty hopeless when it comes to locking in good PT usage, with 7, 10 and 9 dwellings per hectare regardless.

My pet city of Almere is at 35 dwellings per hectare, and does that mostly with low rise.

[dwb]

Flagstone, Ripley and Yarabillba are all pretty hopeless when it comes to locking in good PT usage, with 7, 10 and 9 dwellings per hectare regardless.

My pet city of Almere is at 35 dwellings per hectare, and does that mostly with low rise.

I thought their bog standard minimum was 14dw/ha under the regional plan?

Still not great but certainly better than 7dw/ha.

[Gazza]

I was just dividing the dwelling count by the areas.

[dwb]

I was just dividing the dwelling count by the areas.

Ahh ok, gotcha, but possibly not that great a thing to do in highly industrial areas. Also didn't they say they're keeping a fair bit of bush/parkland?

[Arnz]

People holding doors happens alot here too (Either tourists but mostly the dregs of society). If enough force is applied to the door release machenism at the top of the door it can be damaged pretty easily on EMUs. The built in failsafe isn't meant to have doors pushed while its closing (so if anyone does get stuck in the door they don't get injured and sue along with alerting the driver that all doors aren't closed). If you see one part of the door that opens/closes slower than the other you can bet your dollar that some low life has forced it to stay open. The IMUs/SMU260s are the slowest just because they operate with push out sliding doors as opposed to the quicker sliding internal doors on EMUs/older SMUs. Great for longer runs with limited stops such as the Gold Coast/Nambour lines but not so good for the all stoppers.

I would think the ICE doors closing are slower than the ones on the IMUs/SMU260s.  Swing doors that do frequently run into problems when the locking mechanism fails.   Though I would agree the door opening mechanism on the IMUs/SMU260s are slower.

[O_128]

People holding doors happens alot here too (Either tourists but mostly the dregs of society). If enough force is applied to the door release machenism at the top of the door it can be damaged pretty easily on EMUs. The built in failsafe isn't meant to have doors pushed while its closing (so if anyone does get stuck in the door they don't get injured and sue along with alerting the driver that all doors aren't closed). If you see one part of the door that opens/closes slower than the other you can bet your dollar that some low life has forced it to stay open. The IMUs/SMU260s are the slowest just because they operate with push out sliding doors as opposed to the quicker sliding internal doors on EMUs/older SMUs. Great for longer runs with limited stops such as the Gold Coast/Nambour lines but not so good for the all stoppers.

I would think the ICE doors closing are slower than the ones on the IMUs/SMU260s.  Swing doors that do frequently run into problems when the locking mechanism fails.   Though I would agree the door opening mechanism on the IMUs/SMU260s are slower.

Still no excuse. Just get a buzzer none of this please stand clear. Or just have doors closing stand clear.

[Gazza]

more 'fast' examples:





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWIw3mlry0I&feature=related

Such an easy fix to shave a couple of minutes off runs.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Ah yes, I forgot the ICE sets.

Its interesting to note that all the above examples of 'fast' have been during times when it hasn't been busy. Personally I don't see the benefit of modifying all the door warning systems. The plug doors start closing in the middle of the warning and yet their still slower to close than the whole door procedure of the EMUs/SMUs. As long as you have the majority of rollingstock using plug doors they will dictate the minimum dwell time. No different than saying replacing EMU's with 140kph+ IMUs run on the Doomben line to improve running times.... even though EMUs acecelerate faster with shorter gearing with doors that close quicker.

[ozbob]

From the Queensland Times 26th October 2011 page 16

Transport plan ignores fastest-growing areas

[O_128]

Ah yes, I forgot the ICE sets.

Its interesting to note that all the above examples of 'fast' have been during times when it hasn't been busy. Personally I don't see the benefit of modifying all the door warning systems. The plug doors start closing in the middle of the warning and yet their still slower to close than the whole door procedure of the EMUs/SMUs. As long as you have the majority of rollingstock using plug doors they will dictate the minimum dwell time. No different than saying replacing EMU's with 140kph+ IMUs run on the Doomben line to improve running times.... even though EMUs acecelerate faster with shorter gearing with doors that close quicker.

In paris no matter how busy it was the trains would still never dwell more than 30 seconds, People know what they are doing and where they are and are prepared for it. People in Aus just have no common sense or any respect for there surroundings and expect everything to revolve around them.

Also what was the decision behind the plug doors.

[Golliwog]

From my experience in Paris as well, the doors are released before the metro has come to a stop. Does help speed things up, although our timetables do have to allow for wheelchair access which they don't worry about.

[SurfRail]

In paris no matter how busy it was the trains would still never dwell more than 30 seconds, People know what they are doing and where they are and are prepared for it. People in Aus just have no common sense or any respect for there surroundings and expect everything to revolve around them.

Also what was the decision behind the plug doors.

Geeze, cultural cringe much.  I generally find Europeans to be much ruder and pushier on public transport, but that's just me obviously (plus we have a tendency to visit lavatories when we need to engage in some micturation rather than sharing it with everybody else).

The fact you have trains every 2 minutes or better on many lines probably has something to do with that as well.

Plug doors are better for higher-speed operation because it forms a more effective seal (eg for noise mitigation).

[O_128]

From my experience in Paris as well, the doors are released before the metro has come to a stop. Does help speed things up, although our timetables do have to allow for wheelchair access which they don't worry about.

opening the doors and jumping out just as the train stops was pretty fun, I did see a few wheelchair people, none of them seemed to have issues though I think this was on line 14 where its perfectly level.