POLL: Which upgrades for the Ipswich line should we try for?

[petey3801]

I feel 4tph Ips/2tph RHD is going to end in basically the same way (it will cost a lot more money, as discussed above). 4tph to Richlands is fairly simple to do, as the trains can turnback there out of the way, where they won't be blocking anything. Once we have achieved 4tph RHD/2tph IPS-exp, it's much easier to advocate for the upgrade to 4tph IPS exp, as it won't be much extra cost on top of what would be running already.

This is not guaranteed and is it even technically possible to timetable in 8tph on that line?

Yes, it is, as I illistrated in another thread not too long ago (http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=7111.msg76805#msg76805)

[somebody]

4 tph to Richlands is overkill,

Please stop saying this.

LOL. We could just lie and write the word EXPRESS in big silver letters on the side of the train and then make it stop all stations. It would have the same psychological effect.

Err no.

[Gazza]

TT, you seem to interpret 4tph to a particular terminus meaning the 4tph exists because of that terminus.

Eg that 4tph to Mandurah is apparently really good because it's a place of 70,000 people. No, what it actually is, is a 4tph service for the whole southern suburbs catchment area , and Mandurah is just a logical place to finish it because no major settlement exists beyond it.

Similarly, 4bph to Moggil on the 444 isn't focused on Mogill itself, but rather everyone 'along the way' ("Be on the way") for that whole stretch of the Western Suburbs. And Moggil is the last place it can serve anyway.

4tph, if it were dedicated solely to Richlands (Eg express Roma St – Richlands) WOULD be overkill.

So it's not just for Richlands, its 4tph for the entire inner (dense) part of the Ipswich line, and Richlands (And Springfield in the future) is just a convenient place to terminate such a service.

The people who drew up the Urbanlink/Expresslink/Coastlink plan obviously came to the same conclusion, because the Ipswich line is Expresslink, but the Springfield line is Urbanlink.

[colinw]

Richlands is a PERFECT place to terminate a 4tph service, because it terminates them clear of the mainline on a spur (with grade separated junction) instead of them dwelling on a platform at Darra.

If you saying Richlands doesn't deserve 4TPH then you can extend the same argument to any other relatively small terminus (e.g. Thornlie in Perth).

For that matter, what is at Shorncliffe?  But we want 4TPH there, do we not?

I will go so far as to say that if a rail line is not going to run at 4TPH then it may as well not be a rail line.  The offpeak patronage that is going to be carried on most 2TPH services could easily be handled by buses.  Keep a line like Richlands at 2TPH offpeak, and we may as well just run it as an American style peak only line and run buses (or nothing) in the offpeak.

That argument applies even to major lines like Beenleigh, which is very peaky. This morning I rode my usual 8:20AM route 554 bus to work - which managed an amazing 4 passengers for the entire run.  While waiting at Kuraby station I noticed that the Ferny Grove train that came through had no more than 20 people on it (and we run 6 car trains for that?!!!). THAT is what a 2tph offpeak service causes, and visible even immediately after peak.

[somebody]

Richlands is a PERFECT place to terminate a 4tph service, because it terminates them clear of the mainline on a spur (with grade separated junction) instead of them dwelling on a platform at Darra.

If you saying Richlands doesn't deserve 4TPH then you can extend the same argument to any other relatively small terminus (e.g. Thornlie in Perth).

For that matter, what is at Shorncliffe?  But we want 4TPH there, do we not?

I will go so far as to say that if a rail line is not going to run at 4TPH then it may as well not be a rail line.  The offpeak patronage that is going to be carried on most 2TPH services could easily be handled by buses.  Keep a line like Richlands at 2TPH offpeak, and we may as well just run it as an American style peak only line and run buses (or nothing) in the offpeak.

That argument applies even to major lines like Beenleigh, which is very peaky. This morning I rode my usual 8:20AM route 554 bus to work - which managed an amazing 4 passengers for the entire run.  While waiting at Kuraby station I noticed that the Ferny Grove train that came through had no more than 20 people on it (and we run 6 car trains for that?!!!). THAT is what a 2tph offpeak service causes, and visible even immediately after peak.

Richlands also has the potential to have much improved feeder buses.  There won't be much walk up patronage there, but the feed can make up for it.

[O_128]

That argument applies even to major lines like Beenleigh, which is very peaky. This morning I rode my usual 8:20AM route 554 bus to work - which managed an amazing 4 passengers for the entire run.  While waiting at Kuraby station I noticed that the Ferny Grove train that came through had no more than 20 people on it (and we run 6 car trains for that?!!!). THAT is what a 2tph offpeak service causes, and visible even immediately after peak.

Interesting that Loganlea, coopers plains and Beenleigh are always quite busy throughout the day however...Dont know why that could by hmmm

[Golliwog]

That argument applies even to major lines like Beenleigh, which is very peaky. This morning I rode my usual 8:20AM route 554 bus to work - which managed an amazing 4 passengers for the entire run.  While waiting at Kuraby station I noticed that the Ferny Grove train that came through had no more than 20 people on it (and we run 6 car trains for that?!!!). THAT is what a 2tph offpeak service causes, and visible even immediately after peak.

Interesting that Loganlea, coopers plains and Beenleigh are always quite busy throughout the day however...Dont know why that could by hmmm

I actually don't think the Ferny Grove line is that poorly patronaised in the off-peak, even with 2tph. IIRC, I've been on it heading inbound in the middle of the day (after university has finished I might add) and by the time it has left Windsor, the seats were at least half full. You probably could have carried the load with only a 3 car service, but I expect it would have been much squishier.

[#Metro]

Interesting that Loganlea, coopers plains and Beenleigh are always quite busy throughout the day however...Dont know why that could by hmmm

Is it because... because.... they all have E in the name???

[ozbob]

I think another poll is needed to explicity clarify overall preferences.

1. 4 tph Richlands, 2 tph Ipswich (express pattern Darra <-> CDB)

2. 3 tph Richlands, 3 tph Ipswich (express pattern Darra <-> CBD)

3. 3 tph Richlands, 3 tph Ipswich (all stopping)

4.  2 tph Richlands, 4 tph Ispwich (all stopping).

Any more?

[#Metro]

TT, you seem to interpret 4tph to a particular terminus meaning the 4tph exists because of that terminus.

Eg that 4tph to Mandurah is apparently really good because it's a place of 70,000 people. No, what it actually is, is a 4tph service for the whole southern suburbs catchment area , and Mandurah is just a logical place to finish it because no major settlement exists beyond it.

Similarly, 4bph to Moggil on the 444 isn't focused on Mogill itself, but rather everyone 'along the way' ("Be on the way") for that whole stretch of the Western Suburbs. And Moggil is the last place it can serve anyway.

4tph, if it were dedicated solely to Richlands (Eg express Roma St – Richlands) WOULD be overkill.

So it's not just for Richlands, its 4tph for the entire inner (dense) part of the Ipswich line, and Richlands (And Springfield in the future) is just a convenient place to terminate such a service.

The people who drew up the Urbanlink/Expresslink/Coastlink plan obviously came to the same conclusion, because the Ipswich line is Expresslink, but the Springfield line is Urbanlink.

I want to see 4 tph to IPSWICH first. There are 12 stations after darra along that line. Ipswich also has a population an order of magnitude larger than that of springfield.
The argument that "its not overkill because it serves the inner section too" is also unconvincing as under a 4 tph all stops to Ipswich scheme, these stations would be served anyway.
It is not a point of difference.

Richlands is a PERFECT place to terminate a 4tph service, because it terminates them clear of the mainline on a spur (with grade separated junction) instead of them dwelling on a platform at Darra.

I agree. But they also could terminate at Ipswich.

If you saying Richlands doesn't deserve 4TPH then you can extend the same argument to any other relatively small terminus (e.g. Thornlie in Perth).

Perth has obviously decided on a minimum service level network wide, and that service level is 4 tph regardless.

For that matter, what is at Shorncliffe?  But we want 4TPH there, do we not?

See above.

I will go so far as to say that if a rail line is not going to run at 4TPH then it may as well not be a rail line.  The offpeak patronage that is going to be carried on most 2TPH services could easily be handled by buses.  Keep a line like Richlands at 2TPH offpeak, and we may as well just run it as an American style peak only line and run buses (or nothing) in the offpeak.

Ipswich first, Richlands second.

That argument applies even to major lines like Beenleigh, which is very peaky. This morning I rode my usual 8:20AM route 554 bus to work - which managed an amazing 4 passengers for the entire run.  While waiting at Kuraby station I noticed that the Ferny Grove train that came through had no more than 20 people on it (and we run 6 car trains for that?!!!). THAT is what a 2tph offpeak service causes, and visible even immediately after peak.

I am not arguing that frequency doesn't matter. I am arguing about Ipswich getting improvements first, then followed by Richlands.

[O_128]

The issue is that many people don't believe its possible to run 4tph to ipswich due to freight. The ideal situation is 4tph for both lines but its not going to happen in the next 10 years.

[#Metro]

http://maps.google.com.au/maps?q=Ipswich,+SEQ&hl=en&ll=-27.646279,152.870121&spn=0.101426,0.240154&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&hq=SEQ&hnear=Ipswich+Queensland&t=h&vpsrc=6&fll=-27.626965,152.755966&fspn=0.101444,0.305557&z=13

Compare the size of Ipswich vs Springfield lakes.... yes really!!!

The issue is that many people don't believe its possible to run 4tph to ipswich due to freight. The ideal situation is 4tph for both lines but its not going to happen in the next 10 years.

This is a fair point. But we need to know officially whether it is possible or not. Same with 8tph on all lines.
I don't want to see a situation where we send high frequency to Richlands and Ipswich gets stuck with 2 tph for the next decade, if it can be avoided.

[ozbob]

My own view is that it is possible to run 4 tph to Ipswich, particularly now with the amplification Corinda to Darra.  This is not an expert or official view but my own view based on years of observation of actual train movements on the line.  Freighters would leave Darra outbound 5 minutes in front of the UP pass. (reverse down) That is 4 freight trains per hour, which is more than enough train paths.  That still leaves another 4 tph paths for other stuff, specials and so forth.

Crikey, Melbourne can slot in freight on the Frankston line and that has 6 tph pass.

[somebody]

I think another poll is needed to explicity clarify overall preferences.

1. 4 tph Richlands, 2 tph Ipswich (express pattern Darra <-> CDB)

2. 3 tph Richlands, 3 tph Ipswich (express pattern Darra <-> CBD)

3. 3 tph Richlands, 3 tph Ipswich (all stopping)

4.  2 tph Richlands, 4 tph Ispwich (all stopping).

Any more?

Your option 1 is really my option 1.  I don't think we should put it forward as 2tph; just "express".  We know what they will do though, if we are successful.
Your option 2 is my option 4
Your option 3 is my option 5 (description later clarified, I'll admit)
Your option 4 is my option 8 (added later, I'll admit)

The only reason there might be a need for a new poll is because of the last two options not being clear from the first.

I can see there is some support for solutions involving 20 minute cycles, but it seems to be a minority.

My own view is that it is possible to run 4 tph to Ipswich, particularly now with the amplification Corinda to Darra.  This is not an expert or official view but my own view based on years of observation of actual train movements on the line.  Freighters would leave Darra outbound 5 minutes in front of the UP pass. (reverse down) That is 4 freight trains per hour, which is more than enough train paths.  That still leaves another 4 tph paths for other stuff, specials and so forth.

Crikey, Melbourne can slot in freight on the Frankston line and that has 6 tph pass.

It's not really so much issues for via Tennyson freight, the issue comes in at Roma West Junction IMO.

[Gazza]

Can't save everyone...there will always be winners and losers.

Under a 2tph express, and 4tph to Richlands, there are no losers.

[somebody]

Can't save everyone...there will always be winners and losers.

Under a 2tph express, and 4tph to Richlands, there are no losers.

Even more importantly, it creates a MUCH better base to have further improvements.

[petey3801]

Can't save everyone...there will always be winners and losers.

Under a 2tph express, and 4tph to Richlands, there are no losers.

Exactly. I don't think anyone on this board thinks Ipswich doesn't deserve 4tph, however that's not what we are really discussing.

The main thing being discussed is what option will we have the most success with in the least amount of time, and in my belief, that is 4tph to Richlands and 2tph Ipswich, simply because it is the easiest upgrade that results in faster travel times for the people further out while maintaining the current 15min frequency closer in to the city.

[Gazza]

Out of interest, where did this assumption originate from that any upgrade has only 6tph to play with?

Nothing else is gonna happen with the Ipswich line for a long time really, except for the Redbank triple. CRR wont do anything for it off peak will it.
It is what it is, and nothing is stopping a 4 + 2 Express, or a 4 + 4 express, except for money.

Yeah there is freight, but that should be p%ss easy on a quad line.

[somebody]

Out of interest, where did this assumption originate from that any upgrade has only 6tph to play with?

Nothing else is gonna happen with the Ipswich line for a long time really, except for the Redbank triple. CRR wont do anything for it off peak will it.
It is what it is, and nothing is stopping a 4 + 2 Express, or a 4 + 4 express, except for money.

Yeah there is freight, but that should be p%ss easy on a quad line.

Just because the freight "should" be easy doesn't mean that it is.  Unless you use the suburbans for Ipswich line trains at Roma St West then there is actually only 2 tracks at the worst point.

Better to put forward plans which will receive less resistance from within QR than asking for what they would consider is the moon.

[mufreight]

Working off what is effectively two tracks between Roma Street and Milton the controling factor is not the actual track capacity but the station dwell times for the passenger services working on a three minute frequency that delivers a capability of 20 TPH on a four minute frequency 15 TPH yet the foamers are rabbiting on about 8 TPH over this stretch.
Time for a few slaps here and a bit of reality.

[somebody]

Working off what is effectively two tracks between Roma Street and Milton the controling factor is not the actual track capacity but the station dwell times for the passenger services working on a three minute frequency that delivers a capability of 20 TPH on a four minute frequency 15 TPH yet the foamers are rabbiting on about 8 TPH over this stretch.
Time for a few slaps here and a bit of reality.

All that assumes that freight doesn't cause any capacity limitations.

[mufreight]

Working off what is effectively two tracks between Roma Street and Milton the controling factor is not the actual track capacity but the station dwell times for the passenger services working on a three minute frequency that delivers a capability of 20 TPH on a four minute frequency 15 TPH yet the foamers are rabbiting on about 8 TPH over this stretch.
Time for a few slaps here and a bit of reality.

All that assumes that freight doesn't cause any capacity limitations.

A freight train of 1800 m lengeh would clear the section between the Junction west of Roma Street and the mains at Milton in less than 4 minutes, even allowig for two freight movements pe hour in each direction at worst that still leaves a 13 TPH capacity for passenger services.  That is more than 50% capacity in excess of the 8 TPH that the foamers are rabbiting about through this stretch, obviously another slap and some more reality needed here.         

[somebody]

4 minutes @ 25km/h = 1667m.

Aren't you ignoring signalling headway and operating margin here?

EDIT: And the fact that the train won't be operated exactly to the speed limit.
EDIT 2: 800m @ 20km/h = 2 minutes 24 seconds of fixed point occupation time.  Add the length of the section, operating margin, etc.

[mufreight]

4 minutes @ 25km/h = 1667m.

Aren't you ignoring signalling headway and operating margin here?

EDIT: And the fact that the train won't be operated exactly to the speed limit.
EDIT 2: 800m @ 20km/h = 2 minutes 24 seconds of fixed point occupation time.  Add the length of the section, operating margin, etc.

Recaluclate your figures on the basis of 35 kph as the minimum track speed for the diveging track at Countess Street to the exhibition line was 40kph last time I looked

[petey3801]

4 minutes @ 25km/h = 1667m.

Aren't you ignoring signalling headway and operating margin here?

EDIT: And the fact that the train won't be operated exactly to the speed limit.
EDIT 2: 800m @ 20km/h = 2 minutes 24 seconds of fixed point occupation time.  Add the length of the section, operating margin, etc.

Recaluclate your figures on the basis of 35 kph as the minimum track speed for the diveging track at Countess Street to the exhibition line was 40kph last time I looked

The points from Milton/Maryvale Bridge to Normanby are 25km/h.

[somebody]

The points from Milton/Maryvale Bridge to Normanby are 25km/h.

Thanks very much!

You also have to consider the acceleration of the train to reach that point, as you must assume that sometimes the train will need to come to rest on a red light when coming from Normanby.

[HappyTrainGuy]

The only 40kph speed boards in that area pretty much only when trains leave the station on the Milton end of Roma Street.

[mufreight]

The points from Milton/Maryvale Bridge to Normanby are 25km/h.

Thanks very much!

You also have to consider the acceleration of the train to reach that point, as you must assume that sometimes the train will need to come to rest on a red light when coming from Normanby.

Perhaps we should all simply accept your profound knowledge on train handling characistics and aceleration rates from rest but having had some considerable experience in actual practice I must disagree with your assertion.
I would make the following points.
1.  A train exiting off the exhibition line proceeding to Mooloolibin or Acacia Ridge would in the majority if not all cases be lighter than trains operating in the opposite direction as a large percentage of the containers would be empty returns and as a consequence the acceleration rate even from a stand is fairly high, 30 kph in a train length of 850 m from rest is easily attainedwith either a PN or 2800 class loco so a speed through the points of 25 kph would only apply effectively for the train length with the train then accelerating to the ruling track speed which I understand is 60 kph or over.
2. A train proceeding onto the exhibition loop from Milton has no effect on suburban services on the mains from Roma Street and the slowing to 25kph to pass through the point work to access the exhibition loop would only be for the train length.  The train would not be accelerating from rest but braking.
In either direction at worst the signal blocks would be cleared in less than 4 minutes giving a 15 train per hour capacity.   

[somebody]

I'm just going to let my previous posts stand as a response to that.

[mufreight]

I'm just going to let my previous posts stand as a response to that.

I am surprised, you must have run out of foam, might I suggest you use shaving cream as a useful substitute.       :conf

[Gazza]

So, where is the "Light Metro Conversion" option in this poll