POLL: 5th track around Milton

[somebody]

Just like it says.

[justanotheruser]

Disclaimer: I have not really looked into the arguments pros & cons and probably have no idea what I'm talking about!!!


The main delay I see with trains at milton is where they have to combine from 4 tracks to 2.  That is the problem. It would seem to me to be better to go with an option of making it three or four tracks from milton to roma st. This would increase capacity imo. I observe all the time trains sitting still in peak while waiting for an outbound train to go past or another inbound train to clear signal to allow next inbound to proceed. Make the bottle top wider rather than making a whole new bottle.

now you can all tell me I'm wrong and why it won't work! yes I am aware this would require property acquisitions at least.

[Jonas Jade]

Do you mean the fifth track like the option in the Inner city rail capacity study? (its been a while since I read that).

[colinw]

What kind of train frequency is the freight task from Normanby toward Milton & vice versa.  How many freight trains per hour are we actually talking here?

And, for that matter, what is the projected future flow of freight and does it involve 1500 metre trains that would take longer to clear the junctions?  (Seems unlikely with current Government inaction on the NCL).

I still find it hard to believe that we cannot run 8 TPH with a quad track main line. My overseas travels lead me to believe we are being fed over-conservative B.S.

[HappyTrainGuy]

If 1.5km trains ran it would be a very tight squeeze to get a 1.5km train plus the extra bits between Milton and Normanby considering its already about 1.5km from the station to around the Normanby bus station area. Personally I reckon they can already cope even with their biggest problem for freights being how long it takes to traverse the multiple points and their realibility considering the distance they travel.

[somebody]

Do you mean the fifth track like the option in the Inner city rail capacity study? (its been a while since I read that).

Yes.

What kind of train frequency is the freight task from Normanby toward Milton & vice versa.  How many freight trains per hour are we actually talking here?

And, for that matter, what is the projected future flow of freight and does it involve 1500 metre trains that would take longer to clear the junctions?  (Seems unlikely with current Government inaction on the NCL).

I still find it hard to believe that we cannot run 8 TPH with a quad track main line. My overseas travels lead me to believe we are being fed over-conservative B.S.

Probably doesn't matter what the frequency is.  If there is one slot every quarter hour cycle in each direction, there would be enough slots.

Not sure what the junction speeds are.  If freights are no longer than present, and 50km/h speeds are doable, junction occupation is < 1 minute.  A bit longer if running from Normanby to Milton #3.

I don't know, when they tried something like this in NSW reliability suffered.  Perhaps for other reasons, but perhaps not.  Any knowledge of a similar network with opposing moves and pax frequency like what is proposed here?

[colinw]

Closest comparable I've seen is RENFE in Madrid, and the freight trains we're talking about there are mostly electric loco hauled, short & relatively fast. They accelerate & clear out quickly, like QR freights used to when they were hauled by 3900 class ELs.  Very different to a western line coalie or a QRN or PNQ north coast container train.

In the UK where I've seen mixed freight & pax it has mainly been on the Great Western Main Line around Bath Spa. We're talking about around 6 tph offpeak service (2tph between London Paddington & Bristol or further west, 4 tph from Cardiff to Portsmouth Harbour via the Wessex Main Line which branches off just east of Bath via a flat junction).   The freights that I've seen squeeze through there are relatively slow moving, heavy hauls for a cement company, and seem to fit themselves through on the heels of the 2tph Intercity 125 departures toward London or Bristol.  So the usual pattern in a direction would be, in each half hour period - Intercity 125, then DMU, then DMU, with a freight sometimes squeezed between the 125 and the first DMU.

On one occasion I just missed a train at Bath heading toward London.  About 5 minutes after the Intercity 125 that I missed, a cement train came through, followed by a couple of Portsmouth harbour DMUs.  I then caught the next Intercity 125, which overtook the cement train at Swindon where there is a long freight refuge.

I mention the Bath Spa example because it is a flat junction, double line, and 4 aspect signalling very similar to Brisbane. (Brisbane suburban area signalling and electrification is based on 1970s UK West Coast Main Line practice, thanks to use of UK consultants by the Bjelke-Petersen Government).

[AnonymouslyBad]

I either haven't seen, or forgotten, what the fifth track proposal actually was - what's the alignment? Based on the discussion here, I'm guessing a direct link between Milton and the freight line, avoiding all the junctions in between Milton and Roma St.

The problem with Milton isn't the four tracks themselves - which are horribly underutilised as far as I can tell - but rather the fact that trains have to get paths in or out of Roma St which is much more difficult.

[Golliwog]

I either haven't seen, or forgotten, what the fifth track proposal actually was - what's the alignment? Based on the discussion here, I'm guessing a direct link between Milton and the freight line, avoiding all the junctions in between Milton and Roma St.

The problem with Milton isn't the four tracks themselves - which are horribly underutilised as far as I can tell - but rather the fact that trains have to get paths in or out of Roma St which is much more difficult.

Yes, that my understanding of the alignment. Passenger services would leave Roma St on the mains, then switch across to the suburbans once past the Merivale junction, and then the 5th track would merge onto both mains. The only problem then becomes getting the freight trains across the suburbans to use the Tennyson loop back to the port.

My opinion is that in the not too distant future, freight trains shouldn't be going via Merivale bridge as they block the mains and suburbans if they're going via exhibition, which will be an issue if we're running proper frequencies like we should be. However, I think we do need to start investing in more dedicated freight tracks along key parts of the passenger network.

[petey3801]

FYI, point speed from the Western Mains around to Normanby is 25km/h.

[#Metro]

I often see containers go north. What's that all about? That's away from the port...

[HappyTrainGuy]

I often see containers go north. What's that all about? That's away from the port...

Its the norm now as its more efficent and quicker to transport considering how powerful the rail freight companies are now. Pacific National bought out the Toll freight company so Toll picks it up from your front door (A container or small package), it gets assigned to a container for the same destination facility, the container travels via PN from Perth to Acacia Ridge, gets loaded onto a PNQ train and continues its journey to Mackay, travels by truck and unloaded at the Toll facility before being split up/driven to the front door step. The same applies for Queensland Rail National as they are made up with a large fleet of trucks too (A couple years ago they went after the FOX road freight network but I can't remember if they bought them). So while its not going on a ship its alot easier to manage and transfer freight nationally across different gauges and facilities.

[somebody]

In a post CRR world, there will still need to be 4tph to Rocklea or beyond + 4tph on the Cleveland line (assuming we are having a reasonable train frequency!).

Will freight be able to use the Merivale bridge in that world?

Alternatively, what about having passenger Ipswich/Richlands line trains on the suburbans through the CBD?  That would nullify the benefit of the 5th track.

[SurfRail]

I have never been given a compelling case for why freight needs to go via South Brisbane at all. 

The transit time difference for going via the west would be negligible, there are fewer trains running when the Merivale move generally occurs (so no issue with capacity on the western line), and putting a moratorium on Merivale Bridge freight means it would only interfere with Sector 1 instead of the entire network.

[somebody]

I have never been given a compelling case for why freight needs to go via South Brisbane at all. 

The transit time difference for going via the west would be negligible, there are fewer trains running when the Merivale move generally occurs (so no issue with capacity on the western line), and putting a moratorium on Merivale Bridge freight means it would only interfere with Sector 1 instead of the entire network.

Getting between Eagle Junction and the port is somewhat longer via Tennyson, but too bad.  I don't think that move is common enough to be a big deal, even though I saw it happen this week.

[Golliwog]

I have never been given a compelling case for why freight needs to go via South Brisbane at all. 

The transit time difference for going via the west would be negligible, there are fewer trains running when the Merivale move generally occurs (so no issue with capacity on the western line), and putting a moratorium on Merivale Bridge freight means it would only interfere with Sector 1 instead of the entire network.

Getting between Eagle Junction and the port is somewhat longer via Tennyson, but too bad.  I don't think that move is common enough to be a big deal, even though I saw it happen this week.

How do you know where it was coming from/to? In terms of numbers, when I was working overlooking South Bank station, freighters went past several times a day, but where they were bound I didn't know. Saw one the other day though that was heading south through Park Rd using platform 3.

[SurfRail]

Vast majority would be just heading to Moolabin and Acacia Ridge.

[somebody]

How do you know where it was coming from/to?

Saw it use the Park Rd-Buranda track.

[somebody]

I have never been given a compelling case for why freight needs to go via South Brisbane at all. 

This is a really good point.

In fact, it's hard to see what stops Bowen Hills-Richlands using the suburbans in that world, when required!  Conflicting moves increased, but hardly to problematic levels.

[SurfRail]

Long term I think there should be a move to up-up-down-down running between just north of Darra and just inbound of Milton. 

It would enable there to be a consistent station layout of a wide centre island at all stations on the inside suburban tracks (except Toowong and Indooroopilly where you would still have 2 islands to allow cross-platform interchanging - maybe Corinda too).  This way you can get rid of the wafer-thin barely/probably not DDA compliant platforms on the mains at most stations in this stretch, and keep freights off of platform faces for the most part. If you want to maintain operational flexibility, you can always have very cheap side platforms serving the main tracks which would now be located on the outside.

I'd like to think the future track layouts could contemplate this arrangement, with some thought given to the layout at Darra and Milton as to how you could do it.  Electrified fourth track Corinda to Darra is a must, but under this arrangement a fourth platform at Oxley would not be, and you could close the abomination that is the new third platform at Oxley and go back to having a good centre island.  Only significant issue is you may need some flyovers or underpasses.

[somebody]

Long term I think there should be a move to up-up-down-down running between just north of Darra and just inbound of Milton. 

It would enable there to be a consistent station layout of a wide centre island at all stations on the inside suburban tracks (except Toowong and Indooroopilly where you would still have 2 islands to allow cross-platform interchanging - maybe Corinda too).  This way you can get rid of the wafer-thin barely/probably not DDA compliant platforms on the mains at most stations in this stretch, and keep freights off of platform faces for the most part. If you want to maintain operational flexibility, you can always have very cheap side platforms serving the main tracks which would now be located on the outside.

I'd like to think the future track layouts could contemplate this arrangement, with some thought given to the layout at Darra and Milton as to how you could do it.  Electrified fourth track Corinda to Darra is a must, but under this arrangement a fourth platform at Oxley would not be, and you could close the abomination that is the new third platform at Oxley and go back to having a good centre island.  Only significant issue is you may need some flyovers or underpasses.

Doesn't sound very likely.

[SurfRail]

Here is what should have happened at Darra.  Cross platform interchange when heading the same direction, so no running up and down stairs like you have to at the moment.

[somebody]

Here is what should have happened at Darra. 

I agree with the proviso that what happens at Corinda would also need attention.

PM peak operations would see all stoppers on the mains Milton->Sherwood.

[SurfRail]

PM peak operations would see all stoppers on the mains Milton->Sherwood.

The outside track pair?  Could work, although I would prefer a single centre island rather than 2 sides.

Indooroopilly and Toowong would still work with an up island and a down island no matter what uses the mains.

[somebody]

PM peak operations would see all stoppers on the mains Milton->Sherwood.

The outside track pair?  Could work, although I would prefer a single centre island rather than 2 sides.

Indooroopilly and Toowong would still work with an up island and a down island no matter what uses the mains.

I can't see Sherwood-Milton reversing direction of two tracks within the Corinda-Richlands projects.  Adds a lot of expense for minimal benefit (people not having to deal with multiple platforms), and isn't it unidirectional signalling?  At least Corinda-Darra is bi-di so that part of the expense isn't added.

So if you assume that Milton-Sherwood will remain as is, suddenly the Ipswich expresses are on the south side of the all stoppers at Darra.

[somebody]

3 lines pax + 1 for freight?  Doesn't work well Corinda-Darra.

I really don't see how it is worthwhile to mess with Milton-Sherwood.

[SurfRail]

3 lines pax + 1 for freight?  Doesn't work well Corinda-Darra.

I really don't see how it is worthwhile to mess with Milton-Sherwood.

It's not a priority - more of an optimisation in the long long term (ie wacky dude thing for a rainy day when we can catch a train to Flagstone via Albert Street...)