QLD Transport talk from: Article: Transportation Jetsons-style

[SurfRail]

I think the M1 alignment is lost, notwithstanding the benefits of it.  We can argue (and have been arguing) the merits of what could have been, but that is purely academic.

Long term we need to make the Beenleigh route work, by:

- Scrapping Runcorn/Altandi/Sunnybank/Banoon and replacing with a single station at Pinelands
- Scrapping Trinder Park/Woodridge and tunnelling from Compton Road to Kingston
- LX removal
- Additional capacity to Loganlea as required (needed if we are going to have an all-stations Loganlea pattern, an express to Loganlea then all to Helensvale pattern and an express to Helensvale and all to Coolangatta layout like I have seen modelled on an informal basis).

Feed as many buses as possible into Fruitgrove, Pinelands, Coopers Plains and Yeerongpilly.

Even just a fourth track from Salisbury to Kuraby would work some wonders.

TT's North-South Subway would be of assistance, yet I've never heard how this could possibly be paid for.

[#Metro]

Would QR run higher frequency services even if it was up to them?  They had decades (before TransLink) to do so, and never chose to.

The cultural, political and institutional environment then was that BT had ZERO incentive to run buses to trains anyway, you have to remember that there wasn't integrated ticketing either until after 2004, so transfer penalties would under this environment would have favoured the direct trip because TransLink didn't exist and modes were competitive. I just can't see 18 000 pphd all getting off a the train station and buying another ticket - at that time you would have not only the inconvenience of transfer (~10 minutes) but a financial penalty to pay as well.

Crystal Ball Stuff.

[SurfRail]

The Gold Coast trains in peak at the moment don't make any stops after departing Beenleigh until they get to Park Road, where they interchange with Cleveland services. Under a SEB as rail scenario, you'd have to have the Gold Coast trains stopping at Mater Hill, Stopping at Buranda, Stopping at Greenslopes, Stopping at Holland Park West, Stopping at Griffith University, Stopping at Garden City, Stopping at Springwood, and it wouldn't be much faster than what the busway does now.

That's the same logic as "all busway services must stop at all stations".  False dichotomies again, you love them!

Even the Mandurah line doesn't work like this in peak, and you know it.

And not only that you'd be stopping at South Bank, Stopping at South Brisbane, need a new bridge over the River and then terminate at Roma Street, which is absolutely suboptimal city location when compared to QSBS, KGSBS and Adelaide Street, and the Financial district around Creek Street.

This comment just proves that you are not reading what I've been saying.  Perhaps I should draw a map (I don't have the time now), but very simply, the route would be:

- Beenleigh to Hyperdome via M1 corridor (presumably flyover in the Holmview area)
- Hyperdome to 8MP via M1 corridor
- 8MP to Buranda via busway corridor
- Buranda to Roma Street via a tunnel more or less matching CRR from the Gabba onwards, so with at least one southern CBD station
- At Roma Street, the line could have terminated, or continued into the Ekka Loop or to Trouts Road
- Crewing/stabling would have been performed by the existing Beenleigh and Gold Coast yards, with expansions as needed (plenty of room at Beenleigh and even now there is room left at Robina). 
- The line could just have easily have gone under Edward Street with a station at Queen/Edward at the bottom of the mall, and one at Spring Hill.

I have very great difficulty believing this would have cost much more than the combined cost of the SEB and INB.  Also would have avoided stupidities like the Gabba being an off-line station and there being non-grade separated junctions at places like Melbourne St.

you'd have to locate the INB somewhere else as well

Yes, as in "nowhere".  With a station at QUT en route to Trouts Rd, you eliminate the capacity issue there, and with a full-time Ekka Station an elevated RBWH station would not have been needed either.  Lots of concrete saved.

[#Metro]

That's the same logic as "all busway services must stop at all stations".  False dichotomies again, you love them!

Even the Mandurah line doesn't work like this in peak, and you know it.

If you introduce two patterns, one express and one all stops, you reduce line capacity. Now we have already determined that the line would be AT maximum capacity RIGHT NOW, so any reduction in capacity would mean problems. You know that both those Perth lines are designed for long distance REGIONAL transportation. You also know that those lines carry FAR less patronage as well.

Remember also that the SEB peak capacities *DON'T* include Beenleigh and Gold Coast pax, so it would be well over capacity - you are looking at something that needs to handle 22 000 pphd in the AM peak .

We've already shown that rail would be equal or worse for the within Brisbane section, so any argument can only now rest on sections beyond Springwood....

[#Metro]

Yes, as in "nowhere".  With a station at QUT en route to Trouts Rd, you eliminate the capacity issue there, and with a full-time Ekka Station an elevated RBWH station would not have been needed either.  Lots of concrete saved.

Freight?

[#Metro]

When I listen to these rather outlandish argument, I can't help but think:


http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/19007839.jpg

You'd have to be God or a higher power to design and forsee all these things...

I will re-iterate, there would be NO advantage for people between Springwood/Garden City between if the SEB were rail.
So any argument has to rest on the patronage after this point - the problem here is that the bulk of pax are from within the
BCC area... so rail would have to be justified on the grounds of benefits to a very small fraction (about 4000 pphd), which only
would make up 18% of passengers in the peak hour...

[#Metro]

- Buranda to Roma Street via a tunnel more or less matching CRR from the Gabba onwards, so with at least one southern CBD station

This would have cost a lot more, and spent even more time in planning. You have to dive underneath Brisbane river and history shows that attempts at doing this since 1970 have failed. IA didn't exist then and the state might have had to go it alone on the funding front. Because the busway is a metropolitan service, not a regional service, we have the option to upgrade it to metro, this would be impossible if it were regional heavy rail.

- At Roma Street, the line could have terminated, or continued into the Ekka Loop or to Trouts Road

Freight issues, plus also Roma Street is a terrible place and location for putting 22 000 pphd in peak hour - its location within the CBD
is very suboptimal. Tunnels are also hugely expensive, so the line would not have gone out very far out of the city.

- The line could just have easily have gone under Edward Street with a station at Queen/Edward at the bottom of the mall, and one at Spring Hill.

There have been attempts to build CRR since 1970, why would it be any different in 1997?

[SurfRail]

If you introduce two patterns, one express and one all stops, you reduce line capacity. Now we have already determined that the line would be AT maximum capacity RIGHT NOW, so any reduction in capacity would mean problems. You know that both those Perth lines are designed for long distance REGIONAL transportation. You also know that those lines carry FAR less patronage as well.

1. A railway would have been a regional solution, yes.  With Brisbane's built form it could easily have supported higher frequencies than Mandurah from day 1, and you could have had short-workings (as the Mandurah line does).

If I don't get some breakdown on that 44 million figure I will feel free to ignore it by the way... I find it VERY hard to believe the busway has a carrying capacity of 18,000 pphd anywhere south of Buranda.  I will happily stand corrected if you can come up with the goods.

Mandurah's capacity is consistent the entire length of the line.

Remember also that the SEB peak capacities *DON'T* include Beenleigh and Gold Coast pax, so it would be well over capacity - you are looking at something that needs to handle 22 000 pphd in the AM peak .

The Beenleigh line would still exist.

We've already shown that rail would be equal or worse for the within Brisbane section, so any argument can only now rest on sections beyond Springwood....

No you haven't.  You've shown that if you run buses every 20 seconds in the core, you get massive congestion and reach the point of failure. 

Rail can move those capacities at a 3 minute headway over the entire distance of the line, ie without even moving to ATP or moving block-signalling - over the entire length of the line.  Add another track or 2 and there is no argument whatseover.

[SurfRail]

- Buranda to Roma Street via a tunnel more or less matching CRR from the Gabba onwards, so with at least one southern CBD station
This would have cost a lot more, and spent even more time in planning. You have to dive underneath Brisbane river and history shows that attempts at doing this since 1970 have failed. IA didn't exist then and the state might have had to go it alone on the funding front. Because the busway is a metropolitan service, not a regional service, we have the option to upgrade it to metro, this would be impossible if it were regional heavy rail.

Define "more".  The State was also in a better financial position at the time - it is a question of financial capacity.

The busway cost more than 40km of railway which involved as difficult heavy engineering - constructing culverts, crossing flood-plains, bridging rivers.  About 3 times as much per km, in fact.

Please don't make me laugh with your last sentence.  Ever heard of the RER?

Freight issues, plus also Roma Street is a terrible place and location for putting 22 000 pphd in peak hour - its location within the CBD
is very suboptimal. Tunnels are also hugely expensive, so the line would not have gone out very far out of the city.

There are no "freight issues" any more than with the CRR proposal.  Furphy.  Plenty of room even now for dedicated passenger tracks.

Roma Street is not going to be the only station in the CBD for God's sake, whether under this notional alternative or with CRR.  Try reading.  (For instance, do you have some major opposition to CRR?)

Tunnels were required for the busway, to which you have no objection?

There have been attempts to build CRR since 1970, why would it be any different in 1997?

We are talking about the relative merits of each option.  It would have been possible - very easily.  Integrated ticketing, tunnelling, buses feeding rail etc - all known within Australia, and all within the state's financial capability, at the time. 

They may not have planned for "44 million" trips, but what makes you think they expected a sub-Joondalup line performance?

[#Metro]

1. A railway would have been a regional solution, yes.

My point is, because there isn't any benefit over and above what a busway can do within the Brisbane area, the case for rail would not be strong enough to justify rail to 8 Mile Plains. A busway in this section would be both cheaper and faster and sufficient. So, no you would not build heavy rail for this section.

So the only justification for heavy raiil would be for those passengers coming BEYOND 8MP/Springwood. Because regional areas tend to have less passenger demands, tacking the GC line on to the Beenleigh line was logical at the time for the demands that they had. Also no-one expected the busway to perform so well. Crystal ball stuff.

With Brisbane's built form it could easily have supported higher frequencies than Mandurah from day 1, and you could have had short-workings (as the Mandurah line does).

Which is nonsense because I have already shown that both Merivale bridges would be at capacity right now, Cross River Rail would have had to be built anyway and that you would have had to handle 22 000 pphd in peak hour, plus you'd have to dump them at Roma Street, which I keep saying is a highly suboptimal location OR you would have to build CRR AND we have had been trying to build CRR since 1970. At that point in time people would have just wanted to move forward.

You can't have short workings because with that amount of capacity, ANY express services would eat up train capacity. For $500 million the SEB does a decent job.

The Beenleigh line would still exist.

Yes, it would but to get to 22 000 pphd, all I did was add 18 000 from the SEB +  4000 pphd from the Gold Coast line during peak hour. 18 000 + 4000 = 20 000, I haven't included beenleigh line patrons... except for maybe any pax that go to the city on Gold Coast trains at Beenleigh already.

If I don't get some breakdown on that 44 million figure I will feel free to ignore it by the way... I find it VERY hard to believe the busway has a carrying capacity of 18,000 pphd anywhere south of Buranda.  I will happily stand corrected if you can come up with the goods.

What exactly about a break down do you need that would invalidate the total yearly patronage of the SEB? Cultural Centre does 9000 pphd in peak hour, I know because I stood at CC one day and counted how many buses in the timetable flush through there in peak hour. We also know that half the buses on the busway are diverted at Captain Cook Bridge. Therefore in peak hour 9000 + 9000 = 18 000.

[Arnz]

Would QR run higher frequency services even if it was up to them?  They had decades (before TransLink) to do so, and never chose to.

The cultural, political and institutional environment then was that BT had ZERO incentive to run buses to trains anyway, you have to remember that there wasn't integrated ticketing either until after 2004, so transfer penalties would under this environment would have favoured the direct trip because TransLink didn't exist and modes were competitive. I just can't see 18 000 pphd all getting off a the train station and buying another ticket - at that time you would have not only the inconvenience of transfer (~10 minutes) but a financial penalty to pay as well.

Crystal Ball Stuff.

There was some (limited) integrated BT/CityTrain integration pre-TransLink, the scheme was called CityTrans in limited areas.  I do recall Centenary suburbs to Darra was one of the routes.  Aside from the (limited) integration in the BCC area, Both coasts and outer metro areas (Caboolture, Ipswich, Birkdale/Capalaba, etc) had integration arrangements (called TrainLink) with the respective private operators in those areas.

[#Metro]

Define "more".  The State was also in a better financial position at the time - it is a question of financial capacity.

The busway cost more than 40km of railway which involved as difficult heavy engineering - constructing culverts, crossing flood-plains, bridging rivers.  About 3 times as much per km, in fact.

Please don't make me laugh with your last sentence.  Ever heard of the RER?

Yeah, did you know that place is called Paris? Did you know that it has an entirely different urban form to Brisbane? And that it is designed to be a regional service hence REGIONAL Express Rail?  In 1997, if you think you would have rocked up to the Parliamentary Committee and said, "Let's build RER in SEQ" I think they would have looked at you funny.

The busway cost more than 40km of railway which involved as difficult heavy engineering - constructing culverts, crossing flood-plains, bridging rivers.  About 3 times as much per km, in fact.

My understanding is that it only cost 50 million per kilometre. Rail would cost more because you'd need ballast, you'd need more earthworks to keep within 2% grades etc. And as I keep saying, trains along the SEB section would not provide any advantage over and above what the buses do currently, and indeed in all likelyhood, for stations between South Bank and 8 Mile Plains, it might even be worse. There would be no speed advantage IMHO because the station spacing is more concentrated, and there would also be no capacity advantage either you could argue that *invoke crystal ball* that you could have larger station spacing, but you have to concede at this point you now have a tradeoff between a metropolitian service with closer stops and a regional service with fewer. The community would have wanted the spacing that we have today on the SEB because they wanted to access it.

Yes, you could have two patterns, but again, that would eat up line capacity. You can complain all you like about the bus system being at or near capacity, but you neglect the fact that because it *isn't* linked to the GC line, we can increase the capacity of that by upgrading that to automatic metro - something absolutely impossible to do if it were heavy rail and connected to the GC line and also you neglect the fact that the busway is more direct, especially in peak hour and also that even if the bus system is close to or near capacity, the train system in the same situation would *ALSO* be at capacity too.

The bus system is at capacity because it is so well used. I have shown that under a dual Merivale Bridge scenario, trains would *also* be at capacity. So the argument of "rail having higher capacity" cannot be used to justify building the SEB as rail in the first place.

[Gazza]

The Gold Coast trains in peak at the moment don't make any stops after departing Beenleigh until they get to Park Road, where they interchange with Cleveland services. Under a SEB as rail scenario, you'd have to have the Gold Coast trains stopping at Mater Hill, Stopping at Buranda, Stopping at Greenslopes, Stopping at Holland Park West, Stopping at Griffith University, Stopping at Garden City, Stopping at Springwood, and it wouldn't be much faster than what the busway does now.

You could fit 3 tracks within 2 busway lanes, or had passing loops at stations, so thats how you could run GC expresses.

Because regional areas tend to have less passenger demands, tacking the GC line on to the Beenleigh line was logical at the time for the demands that they had.

Doesn't mean you couldn't change it in the long term. This is what Trouts Rd is based around.

For $500 million the SEB does a decent job.

Yeah, but transport planning needs to look long term. Mistakes are very expensive to fix.

My point is, because there isn't any benefit over and above what a busway can do within the Brisbane area, the case for rail would not be strong enough to justify rail to 8 Mile Plains. A busway in this section would be both cheaper and faster and sufficient. So, no you would not build heavy rail for this section.

Transport demand isn't based upon a BCC line in the ground actually.

It's like saying CRR is not needed because its benefits mostly people from further afield GC, SC, CAMCOS, Flagsone)

Trains along the SEB section would not provide any advantage over and above what the buses do currently,

Who cares, its not just about the bloke at Greenslopes.

I don't get it. You say people want a train just because its a train, yet you turn around and say that the SEB carries 44000 a day because its bus


Unfortunatley Tramtrain, you have yet to make a convincing/consistent argument as to why the busway was the better solution.

Crystal ball stuff 

[SurfRail]

I'm inclined to stop talking now, because he clearly isn't reading the counter-arguments.  People do this when they get defensive.

[#Metro]

You could fit 3 tracks within 2 busway lanes, or had passing loops at stations, so thats how you could run GC expresses.

I'm not convinced about this at all. At some point you would have to merge the two patterns. Lower capacity.

Yeah, but transport planning needs to look long term. Mistakes are very expensive to fix.

I don't believe that it is a mistake at all. I certainly enjoy my 2 minute off peak frequency and ending up at QSBS or KGS not Roma Street.
The Beenleigh line is being progressively upgraded as well. And a dual merivale bridge would not have prevented the need for CRR anyway.

Transport demand isn't based upon a BCC line in the ground actually.

There are two different goals here. Transport within the metro area, and transport to long distance areas. These goals conflict because of station spacing requirements. The SEB being rail would not have any additional benefit for anyone at stations between the CBD and 8 Mile Plains. It would purely be for the benefit of the 4000 or so pax on the Gold Coast line in peak.

Who cares, its not just about the bloke at Greenslopes.
I don't get it. You say people want a train just because its a train, yet you turn around and say that the SEB carries 44000 a day because its bus

Of course you don't care, but you know what the SEB went through a huge community process and that's what they decided on. You have to show that rail, for the section between the CBD and 8MP wasn't just equal to the performance of bus, but have a significant advantage OVER it for this section. In peak hour, only 4000 pax come in from the Gold Coast - 4 trains worth.

[#Metro]

I'm inclined to stop talking now, because he clearly isn't reading the counter-arguments.  People do this when they get defensive

At the end of the day, I wasn't an engineer or planner working on that project. This is just a discussion.
If you really want to know and actually have a genuine interest in it, go and find the South East Transit Project documents form 1998 or wherever it was, and look at them to see if you can get a sense of why they chose the options they did. Go and contact Luke Franzmann at Main Roads and Transport or Barry Gyte at GCI

Rail on the SEB
* Would have cost more due to more stringent engineering requirements for rail
* Would require a new Merivale Bridge OR CRR
* Would have no speed advantages or capacity advantages for the bulk of passengers between 8Mile Plains and the CBD
* Would also be at capacity today, which means the need for CRR would not have been diverted anyway
* Would have to transfer, for UQ passengers, twice
* Would require the construction of large interchanges - more cost
* Would be more expensive for passengers before 2004 because there was no proper integration between bus and rail - and I know because an All day South East Rover ticket cost  $10.80 in 2004, for concession - for adults this would be closer to $21
* Would likely be run at 2 tph in the off peak, 4tph in peak and connected to the existing rail line
OR * Even if run every 10 minutes in the off peak, and entirely separate, would still have lower frequency and likely to have lower span, particularly in the evenings when added security staff on trains (4 staff per train) raises the cost of providing evening services.
* Would probably be less reliable due to track faults and rail maintenance on the weekends
* Would have required special advanced knowledge of unprecedented demand carried by the SEB - crystal ball
* Would have required special advanced knowledge so engineers didn't connect the line to the current system, to ensure maximum capacity
* Would dump huge amounts of passengers at an indirect and suboptimal location - Roma Street, overloading the existing rail system at this point
* Would stop one station short of Central Station, which is actually where a lot of passengers want to go to (or would have required CRR)
* Would have precluded siting of the INB - even if it were to replace the INB, passengers from the CBD would have difficulty in reaching it because of the location of Roma Street (again, unless CRR was built).
* Would only really benefit passengers beyond 8 Mile plains
* Would be impossible or extremely difficult to upgrade to proper high frequency metro which can do 90 second headways (vancouver skytrain) - a busway does not exclude this upgrade. A heavy rail service to the GC would have precluded this.
* It is not good enough to show that rail would be equal to busway performance, because rail costs more, you'd have to show that rail was *significantly* better than bus because it would be higher cost PLUS you'd only be doing that to benefit 4000 gold coast commuters... doesn't make sense.

* The Gold Coast line via Beenleigh isn't the best but sufficient, particularly when you consider that only 4000 pphd max comes from there in peak hour. The Beenleigh line can and will be progressively upgraded as funds become available.

We paid $500 million or thereabouts for a service that runs every 2 minutes in the off peak and carries 44 million per year for a metropolitan service.
Perth paid $2 billion or thereabouts for a service that runs every 15 minutes in the off peak and carries 18 million per year for a regional service.

[somebody]

That is true, however what happens when you get to Salisbury?  Where are all these CRR trains going to go, and how fast?  To get full benefit from CRR it is going to require something like a tunnel from Banoon to Runcorn and then another big realignment from about Kuraby to Kingston (how?!). 

Even with CRR up & running, what is going to happen if you try to jam 4tph or better Beenleigh & Gold Coast services through Salisbury - Kuraby - Beenleigh?

I don't think CRR by itself will improve much at all for the Beenleigh/Gold Coast line, other than providing a 10 minute time saving at the city end.

Mind you, I do like the idea of a station at the 'Gabba and a full time Ekka station. Adding major destinations to the system is never a bad thing.

I'm just getting a bit sick of the infrastructure mega-spend without the corresponding increase in service, and don't see how CRR can achieve the service increase by itself.

If CRR is built without the Salisbury to Beenleigh upgrades also required, it will end up being seriously under-utilised.

I await, and hope for, someone to prove me wrong about this.

CRR is needed for one reason: peak capacity.

Everything else is a nice to have.  However, there are a few benefits from CRR - faster services being one, which will be under utilised if the Kuraby trains continue via South Bank as planned.

I think that 4tph may not be possible if the Beenleigh trains will stop all stations.  I think 3tph would be though.

If I don't get some breakdown on that 44 million figure I will feel free to ignore it by the way... I find it VERY hard to believe the busway has a carrying capacity of 18,000 pphd anywhere south of Buranda.  I will happily stand corrected if you can come up with the goods.

I believe the peak is close to that.  The 2007 Lord Mayor's investigation showed 22x buses in the busiest 1 hour through Buranda.  63x220 = 13860 pphd, but add some extra services and some bigger buses and you could reach the 18000 pphd figure.

SEB as rail may have worked out well for some services, but I cannot imagine it would have been good for services like the 120 and 180.  I'd guess these would use the freeway until Cornwall St.  There is no reason to think that if the SEB had been built as rail it would have had better than 2tph services on it.

[Gazza]

I'm not convinced about this at all. At some point you would have to merge the two patterns. Lower capacity.

Not really, because when you reach the CBD the train no longer needs to run express, so therefore less capacity gets eaten up due to express running.
This is how the RER works. But since I've mentioned that I know you'll get pissy for no reason becase "Its Paris", so the Ipswich line is a local example of it in action...An express service and a Richlands service merge to form a 3 minute headway service through the CBD.

I don't believe that it is a mistake at all. I certainly enjoy my 2 minute off peak frequency and ending up at QSBS or KGS not Roma Street.

What about people not on the Busway coridoor itself?

I mean, yeah, you get 2 min frequency, but at the same time people a few km away on the beenleigh line get 30 min frequency because of the opportunity cost.

The Beenleigh line is being progressively upgraded as well. And a dual merivale bridge would not have prevented the need for CRR anyway.

-The beenleigh line would not have these upgrades needed, because you could easily run a high frequency service today on 2 tracks with GC trains out of the way.
-These upgrades cost hundreds of millions. $265 million for Salisbury to Kuraby has had to be spent. Thats half the cost of the Busway, and it still not enough for high frequency. To get to kingston would be at least that amount again, so we've had to spend more than the cost of the busway trying to fix a legacy allignment that will still be slow.

You could have shifted

There are two different goals here. Transport within the metro area, and transport to long distance areas. These goals conflict because of station spacing requirements. The SEB being rail would not have any additional benefit for anyone at stations between the CBD and 8 Mile Plains. It would purely be for the benefit of the 4000 or so pax on the Gold Coast line in peak.

2 Things
-More than 4000 pax would be using GC trains if it followed the M1, because the infrastructure would be faster, and allow higher frequency, which would induce demand and encourage more people to use PT.
Only 4000 use it because its too slow, and you cant really fit many extra trains in peak anyway.

-You can have a line that does both. The Mandurah line serves both suburban pax, and long distance pax, and you can always have passing loops at stations.

The SEB being rail would not have any additional benefit for anyone at stations between the CBD and 8 Mile Plains

Aha, clever wording.
But, so long as it doesn't disadvantage them, then why not do it?

-Benefit of SEB to 8MP:
--------------------------->

-Benefit of seb as rail to 8MP:
--------------------------->

-Benefit of seb as rail to 8MP with GC connection:
------------------------------------------------------------->

And so what if its 4000 pax using the GC trains? Its like 700 that use SC trains in peak, but i stilll fully support the duplication up there, not just because of current pax and freight, but because of the potential to tack CAMCOS on the end, and get even more pax.

[SurfRail]

He's just ignoring the numbers or the queries about numbers now, even after being corrected or queried (eg $2bn for Mandurah, 2% maximum gradient, 44 million passengers).

My last post on the topic.

[#Metro]

Not really, because when you reach the CBD the train no longer needs to run express, so therefore less capacity gets eaten up due to express running.
This is how the RER works. But since I've mentioned that I know you'll get pissy for no reason becase "Its Paris", so the Ipswich line is a local example of it in action...An express service and a Richlands service merge to form a 3 minute headway service through the CBD.

Yes, but that has four tracks doesn't it? You'd need 20 trains per hour to do the local run. If the maximum capacity for line side signalling is a train every 3 minutes, then you've already eaten all the slots up with the all stoppers. If you add an express pattern - 4 trains per hour, you'd presumably be running express from 8MP or Garden City the trains would have to avoid the all stoppers somehow - extra track perhaps? (more cost) I'd like to see a stopping pattern...

What about people not on the Busway coridoor itself?

What the 4000 pphd coming in from the Gold Coast? They only make 18% of the capacity under the SEB-as-Rail scenario.

I mean, yeah, you get 2 min frequency, but at the same time people a few km away on the beenleigh line get 30 min frequency because of the opportunity cost.

Now who was it- was it you or SurfRail that got up at me a few threads ago for me suggesting 15 minute or 10 minute all day frequency to Gold Coast and then I was told "it is really far, they don't need that kind of frequency there isn't that much demand." Hmmm...

That aside, yeah I get 2 minute frequency. And so I should. I don't live at the Gold Coast.

-The beenleigh line would not have these upgrades needed, because you could easily run a high frequency service today on 2 tracks with GC trains out of the way.
-These upgrades cost hundreds of millions. $265 million for Salisbury to Kuraby has had to be spent. Thats half the cost of the Busway, and it still not enough for high frequency. To get to kingston would be at least that amount again, so we've had to spend more than the cost of the busway trying to fix a legacy allignment that will still be slow.

See I am not convinced about this. You've tied the 2 projects together and I question that. See the Beenleigh line is slow anyway and ideally, because there are so many stations on that line you would be running a local and express service on that anyway, so you may have needed those track upgrades in any case. Just like we are trying to get expresses on the Ipswich line all day...

-More than 4000 pax would be using GC trains if it followed the M1, because the infrastructure would be faster, and allow higher frequency, which would induce demand and encourage more people to use PT.
Only 4000 use it because its too slow, and you cant really fit many extra trains in peak anyway.

Yes, but no one between the CBD and 8 Mile plains or wherever you'd make that express service stop would benefit from the higher speed because they'd be on the all stops 'local' service. Only the Gold Coast pax beyond 8MP would benefit from the speed, and as I keep saying, if the number of slots for trains is 20, the all stops would eat up exactly this. So, assuming that double the patronage came in from the Gold Coast - you'd have no slots left in the track for the extra 4 or 8 trains you need to run in peak hour. And that's before we've even taken into account that express services eat up track slots and REDUCE line capacity.

[#Metro]

But, so long as it doesn't disadvantage them, then why not do it?

Because it would cost waay more to do and the disadvantages of terminating it at Roma Street.

[#Metro]

Barry Gyte is the person who did work on the SEB, this is his website, GCI consulting and on it has this:

http://www.gci.net.au/services/transport-planning-and-project-management/south-east-transit-project/

our achievements

    Led the planning, positioning, impact assessment and development of this landmark busway project – now recognised as a world leader in bus rapid transit
    10 years from opening, the busiest section of the South East Busway carries more than 150,000 passengers per day, and in excess of 18,000 passengers in the one-hour morning peak (the equivalent of nine lanes on the adjacent motorway)

So there's my reference. The 2% gradient comes from somewhere in the ICRCS or CRR documentation. I can't remember exactly.  Now if you want a break down or whatever, ring him.

It is not hard to show the SEB does 44 million:

150 000 per day x 52 weeks x 5 days per week = 39 million
plus add a bit of growth since the measurements were taken, new BUZ services 180, 120, 29, 139s, etc and add in weekends, you'd reach 44 million quite easily. The exact place I saw the figure escapes me but if I find it I will reference it.

I hope that answers your questions SurfRail. Pity that Mandurah line and Joondalup lines only do 18 million... makes arguments about the SEB look a little... fanciful...

[somebody]

But, so long as it doesn't disadvantage them, then why not do it?

Because it would cost waay more to do and the disadvantages of terminating it at Roma Street.

Did anyone actually suggest duplicating the Merivale Bridge?  This entire argument has been a straw man argument if not.

I actually think that the bridge should never have been built.  It locked in an awful alignment.

[#Metro]

Did anyone actually suggest duplicating the Merivale Bridge?  This entire argument has been a straw man argument if not.

I actually think that the bridge should never have been built.  It locked in an awful alignment.

Yes, Gazza suggested a second Merivale based on ICRCS drawings.

Simon, I know we often have our planning differences, but I totally agree with you here. In fact, the wilbur smith plan 1970
only wanted that bridge for emergency or service use. The real project was to correct the alignment via wooloongabba. And not only
that, I have already shown that even if we built two merivale bridges they both pretty much would be at capacity during peak hour.

Like I keep saying, bus system has capacity issues, but that's simply because it has such phenomenal patronage. If you'd have trains
you'd still have capacity issues at 'RAIL Cultural Centre' plus you'd have a cr%p alignment into the CBD FOR EVERYONE just to benefit a small fraction of GC pax and dumping people at Roma Street, one stop before where they actually want to go - CENTRAL.

It amazes me just what extreme lengths and assumptions have to be made just to make sure the busway was built with steel wheels. Using Gold Coast line passengers as a vanguard or alibi is also not convincing. And not only that, it performs damn well! Why would you fix something that does such a stellar job or call it 'a mistake'. Where is my crack pipe!?

[#Metro]

I wanted to explore deeper into the idea and what drove the suggestions for rail on the SEB.
I have to give my debating opponents some credit

Let's be clear - rail is not needed for the local service between the CBD and 8MP. It wouldn't be faster, it wouldn't be more frequent for stops along the SEB. Given the volumes carried (20tph just for the local service), 3 tracks would probably not cut it. It would need to be four tracks. Crystal ball/time machine required.

If you want a regional, high speed service, it should be separate so that you can design the service specifically for that goal, and you don't overload the track slots with local services.

The Gold Coast line has problems, I do think catching a bus beyond 8MP is pushing the envelope, but I also don't think having the SEB as rail (or even converting it) would be the answer for it. Much of the alignment down the median of the M1, at least between Beenleigh and 8MP) can still be used I would think for a regional high speed service, if you had the funds to pay for that. It would also free up the Beenleigh line to be split into 2 patterns - express and local, which it probably should be cause there are far too many stops on that line already.

What you would do is build a regional service targeted for Logan and Gold Coast on a new section of rail between Beenleigh to Garden City in the M1 alignment. You'd have stops:

All GC line stations
Beenleigh
Loganholme
Springwood
one at Garden City
and then Wooloongabba
and Albert Street
and Roma Street for interchange purposes.

You could use a tunnel at Annerly near Wooloongabba to get this alignment. This would probably cost a bit, but requires CRR to be built and modified slightly. In fact, because this is a specialised line and the focus can now be on speed rather than both speed and capacity.
Just a thought.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Would QR run higher frequency services even if it was up to them?  They had decades (before TransLink) to do so, and never chose to.

There wasn't any incentive to do so at the time due to the conflicts in ticketing along with a few other minor issues. 4tph is nothing unheard of.

TT. Can we get a breakdown in these massive patronage levels? Every time you keep boasting about the busway all I see is Sunshine railway station having a patronage of 40,000 people daily.

And also, please stop trying to compare a busway to a train line in terms of patronage. Of course its going to be more than a train line when you have every route from Victoria Point to Logan to Browns Plains using it which blows labour costs out of the water compared to stopping and people interchanging to a higher capacity mode. Petrie in afternoon peak is a good example. A bus drops a load of people off, they make the short walk to the platform. A few mins later a train arrives and a majority of people from the train board the multiple buses waiting. If you want to compare route vs route pick one and not the entire south brisbane region. Someone posted a link to some Translink document that had the patronage levels for the SEB. They weren't that crash hot for having 150,000 people using it daily. Compared to train stations I think it was 6-7 outside of the Roma Street-Bowen Hills actually had higher peak patronage than the bus stations daily patronage which goes to show the patronage isn't where the 2 minute frequency is.

[#Metro]

There wasn't any incentive to do so at the time due to the conflicts in ticketing along with a few other minor issues. 4tph is nothing unheard of.

I understand where Gazza and SurfRail are coming from, but you have to understand that politics and paradigms also play a part. In the off peak the local service would be less frequent, at night the operating cost would mean terrible frequency (as proven standard practice all over the QR network and Australia - yes this can be changed but you can see what I am getting at).

It is also worth stating the obvious here - it's all done now as well. Unless someone invents a time machine, we have to move forward regardless.

TT. Can we get a breakdown in these massive patronage levels? Every time you keep boasting about the busway all I see is Sunshine railway station having a patronage of 40,000 people daily.

I don't have the professional capacity to break down the levels - I have as much information I can get from public sources. If people are that interested, I'd suggest all RAILBOT members have it and that would need some higher level liason to get that info IMHO. I didn't build it, and I don't work for TransLink, any of the consulting companies, Tranport and Main Roads or whatever.

And also, please stop trying to compare a busway to a train line in terms of patronage.

I think it is valid- it is an open busway. Would it be valid to delete all the patronage carried in by Gold Coast Buses into Robina, Coomera, Helensvale, Beenleigh? Should we similarly cut the Manduah line patronage by 50% to 7 million to reflect only walk up and car? Personally I think of it as a line, not a busway. It just doesn't look good for people trying to tell me that we should have done a Mandurah, then I point out that Mandurah does 15 mins and carries 18 million and you need transfer, they don't like that because it doen't fit with their rail/bus view of organising the world. If bus does something decent, there *JUST* has to be something wrong with it. Cue all the nitpicking...

During the morning peak hour, the SEB pushes the lower bound of Subway systems. That's quite an achievement for a low density city like Brisbane.
It has frequencies like a metro. It has span like a metro. It is faster than most metro systems I know of. It has big stations like a metro. Congestion can't be used as an argument against it because, built as rail, a heavy rail option would also be congested and at capacity right now - you'd just be moving the congestion from Cultural Centre to Roma Street and the packed buses to packed trains... pointless...

Of course its going to be more than a train line when you have every route from Victoria Point to Logan to Browns Plains using it which blows labour costs out of the water compared to stopping and people interchanging to a higher capacity mode.

The main product of public transport is mobility - speed, capacity, frequency, span of service, cost. That's the terms it should be judged on IMHO. I agree that comparing to Joondalup/Mandurah is not entirely fair because as I keep saying that was designed to be a regional service, the busway isn't designed for that - it works more like a metro- unsurprisingly most services that use it are BCC Buses...

Petrie in afternoon peak is a good example. A bus drops a load of people off, they make the short walk to the platform. A few mins later a train arrives and a majority of people from the train board the multiple buses waiting. If you want to compare route vs route pick one and not the entire south brisbane region. Someone posted a link to some Translink document that had the patronage levels for the SEB. They weren't that crash hot for having 150,000 people using it daily. Compared to train stations I think it was 6-7 outside of the Roma Street-Bowen Hills actually had higher peak patronage than the bus stations daily patronage which goes to show the patronage isn't where the 2 minute frequency is.

I'm not sure what the point is here. Yeah, people get picked up in the suburbs. That's the beauty of it as well. Front door access. Can't replicate that on rail without introducing interchange, which I'm not against, but it is understandable that's why the engineers chose to take that over Light Rail...

If people really really want rail, your opportunity is coming when the tunnel in the CBD for buses study gets done. It won't be regional rail, but you will have your opportunity then to put forward metro conversion for a North-South Subway.

[somebody]

Would QR run higher frequency services even if it was up to them?  They had decades (before TransLink) to do so, and never chose to.

There wasn't any incentive to do so at the time due to the conflicts in ticketing along with a few other minor issues. 4tph is nothing unheard of.

This argument isn't valid.  Nothing has changed on this.  You can equally argue that there still isn't any incentive for QR to run more services.  The public servants still collect their salaries.

Even when they brought in the Corinda 15 minute frequency, they stopped short of the second and third busiest stations on the line while also not upgrading weekend and evening services.  Even the imminent traffic disruption with the Go Between Bridge construction wasn't enough of an incentive to get better services along here.

And also, please stop trying to compare a busway to a train line in terms of patronage.

Why not?  You argue for a feeder and trunk model, which would mean that the same catchment applies.

[#Metro]

Even when they brought in the Corinda 15 minute frequency, they stopped short of the second and third busiest stations on the line while also not upgrading weekend and evening services.  Even the imminent traffic disruption with the Go Between Bridge construction wasn't enough of an incentive to get better services along here.

It should have always been run at 4 trains/hour to Ipswich, or 2 tph all stops and 2tph express. The geography and location of activity centres certainly supported that.

[Gazza]

I'm not sure what the point is here. Yeah, people get picked up in the suburbs. That's the beauty of it as well.

Simple to break down.
Busway has 2 min frequency on the line, so why aren't the SEB stations attracting subway/metro type levels of patronage?

I agree that comparing to Joondalup/Mandurah is not entirely fair because as I keep saying that was designed to be a regional service, the busway isn't designed for that

And what myself and other are arguing, is the SEB should have been a regional service, it would have done more.

Why couldn't you have it the Regional Service is on the SE line, and the local service was Done on the Beenleigh line, and then arrange feeders that way?

And fitting in express tracks would have been entirely feasible IMO because rail lines can be put side by side closer together than bus lanes (trains don't have to allow for margin for error of drivers)

Just of Google Earth.
SEB - 12m wide.
Strathpine - 3 Tracks, 13m wide.

Bugger all difference.

If bus does something decent, there *JUST* has to be something wrong with it.

Don't accuse us of conspiracy theories if you are going to type that....

The SEB is good, but I don't think it does enough. There's so much potential you can't see.

[#Metro]

Simple to break down.
Busway has 2 min frequency on the line, so why aren't the SEB stations attracting subway/metro type levels of patronage?

Why is it important to have the walk up pax more than the flow in pax? Services such as 169/P88/111/160/555 all get full in peak.

And what myself and other are arguing, is the SEB should have been a regional service, it would have done more.

Perth doesn't achieve this. Individual Melbourne Lines don't achieve this. More of what? Serve the 4000 or so GC pax and get the other 18 000 dumped at Roma Street where they don't want to be? Doesn't make sense.
Regional services are not reasons why the SEB should have been rail. Having the SEB with 2 or 3 access points for the bus would not be that great.

And fitting in express tracks would have been entirely feasible IMO because rail lines can be put side by side closer together than bus lanes (trains don't have to allow for margin for error of drivers)

Just of Google Earth.
SEB - 12m wide.
Strathpine - 3 Tracks, 13m wide.

Bugger all difference.

With 20 tph required in the morning peak just for the local service (train every 3 minutes) to fit in the GC trains, i think you might need quad tracks.

If bus does something decent, there *JUST* has to be something wrong with it.

The SEB is good, but I don't think it does enough. There's so much potential you can't see.

I couldn't disagree more... entire SEQ rail does 170 000 per day, SEB does 150 000, it is doing 80% of what the entire rail network is doing at the moment but that just isn't good enough for you.

[Gazza]

I couldn't disagree more... entire SEQ rail does 170 000 per day, SEB does 150 000, it is doing 80% of what the entire rail network is doing at the moment but that just isn't good enough for you.

Thats because the SEB is better resourced.

And no, its not good enough for me, because the line is not serving a regional function, and it should. Guess that makes me a bad person for having that opinion.

More of what? Serve the 4000

So you think no matter what sort of service was provided, the number is fixed at 4000? lol.

[#Metro]

Thats because the SEB is better resourced.

No, it's because you have decent speed, decent frequency, direct service

How much did it cost QR to operate the entire QR network to extract 170 000 trips/day vs the buses the use the SEB to extract 150 000 trips/day? Not a direct comparison because one does a regional function, and the other does metropolitan service, but it would be very interesting to compare.

And no, its not good enough for me, because the line is not serving a regional function, and it should. Guess that makes me a bad person for having that opinion.

It's not about you. But if you want to label yourself as that, I won't stop you. Most buses that use the SEB are from within Brisbane - it's serving the BCC region and a bit from Logan. When the planners were looking at this, they obviously thought the rail would be used for the regional function.

Your argument is that the small fraction of Gold Coast passengers justifies the SEB built as rail the whole way, even though everyone who currently flows through sections between the CBD and 8MP would be dumped at Roma Street, far from where the demand is - Queen Street mall and the Financial district. Your new Merivale bridge would also be maxing out capacity right now as well.

Why not bring the designers of the SEB onto this forum in the chat room and we can ask them about that.

[Gazza]

Im still not convinced by any of your arguments.

How are we paying for the metro conversion of the SEB then?

[#Metro]

Im still not convinced by any of your arguments.

You don't have to be - people vote with their feet. Just compare Mandurah or Joondalup line patronage to that collected by the SEB.

44 million versus 18 million. No contest.
It's more frequent. No contest.
It's more direct- straight into Adelaide Street or QSBS or KGS.

SEB carries more pax hands down. Your argument is that's not good enough. Now, it's not a fair comparison because I keep saying they're serving different goals - the busway is trying
to get people around Brisbane. The Mandurah line is trying to get people to Mandurah and Rockingham... over 80km distances this makes sense.

How are we paying for the metro conversion of the SEB then?

In the morning peak the SEB pushes the lower bounds of subway systems. Since the Mass Transit Report of 2007 which stated that it would be coming up to capacity under the current operational paradigm, something needs to be done (NB: Something would need to be done if it were heavy rail as well, I guess that would be track amplification).

There have been a number of plans for subways in Brisbane and none of them make sense. The busway is the place where the capacity is needed. Of course you'd have to do an alternatives analysis against Bogota style busways, but I suspect a metro option like vancouver or rubber tyred would work best. You'd have to divert the funds from the Eastern Busway and replace that with a bid to IA for replacement of the bus core in the CBD. Ottawa is a precedent for this.

The SEB is also good as you don't have to go dig up the whole thing from scratch - the ROW is already aquired. If what you said yourself is true, you should be able to fit the trains in there. Platforms might need to be extended. Services using skytrain technology or similar can do 90 sec headways.

[#Metro]

Ottawa ---> http://www.bhls.eu/IMG/pdf/1-2-Alain-Mercier-Ottawa.pdf
worth a read

The Ottawa busway does 240 000 riders per day - or 62 million per year.
It doesn't have a heavy rail system bar a diesel LRT service.

The last few slides remind me of Brisbane - we are in the same position and need an upgrade.
The Central City Busway (refuse to call it the City to Suburbs bus link, awkward name) is our chance to get this upgrade.

[Gazza]

Im still not convinced by any of your arguments.

You don't have to be - people vote with their feet. Just compare Mandurah or Joondalup line patronage to that collected by the SEB.

44 million versus 18 million. No contest.
It's more frequent. No contest.
It's more direct- straight into Adelaide Street or QSBS or KGS.

SEB carries more pax hands down. Your argument is that's not good enough. Now, it's not a fair comparison because I keep saying they're serving different goals - the busway is trying
to get people around Brisbane. The Mandurah line is trying to get people to Mandurah and Rockingham... over 80km distances this makes sense.

How are we paying for the metro conversion of the SEB then?

In the morning peak the SEB pushes the lower bounds of subway systems. Since the Mass Transit Report of 2007 which stated that it would be coming up to capacity under the current operational paradigm, something needs to be done (NB: Something would need to be done if it were heavy rail as well, I guess that would be track amplification).

There have been a number of plans for subways in Brisbane and none of them make sense. The busway is the place where the capacity is needed. Of course you'd have to do an alternatives analysis against Bogota style busways, but I suspect a metro option like vancouver or rubber tyred would work best. You'd have to divert the funds from the Eastern Busway and replace that with a bid to IA for replacement of the bus core in the CBD. Ottawa is a precedent for this.

The SEB is also good as you don't have to go dig up the whole thing from scratch - the ROW is already aquired. If what you said yourself is true, you should be able to fit the trains in there. Platforms might need to be extended. Services using skytrain technology or similar can do 90 sec headways.

So then why not just do a rail service in the first place?
You can argue all you want that it has done better than expected and the designers couldn't have foreseen.
But at the same time the line was never going to last 40 years without a capacity boost.

Also, with the Mandurah line, give it a few years anyway. Its carrying half as many passengers now, but SEB has had an 8 year head start to build up patronage, which must be taken into account.

Worth noting too, but Mandurah did have 7.5 min frequency on the inner section for a period before the Libs got in.

The Ottawa busway does 240 000 riders per day - or 62 million per year.

Bear in mind it has more than one line.

entire SEQ rail does 170 000 per day, SEB does 150 000, it is doing 80% of what the entire rail network is doing at the moment but that just isn't good enough for you.

Whats the point of the comparison anyway? A busway is beating a rail network that is one of the worst in Aus.
Trains in Melbourne do 620,000 a day.

[#Metro]

So then why not just do a rail service in the first place?
You can argue all you want that it has done better than expected and the designers couldn't have foreseen.
But at the same time the line was never going to last 40 years without a capacity boost.

I wouldn't have built it as heavy rail to the Gold Coast that's for sure. When I asked the designers at
a forum a few years ago, they wanted that direct trip. It could be staged, used existing buses from day 1
and liked the flexibility. They weren't going to build the rail option as heavy rail, they were going to build
the rail option as light rail.

In 1997, you'd have no idea of the capacity you'd need. Had they connected it to the existing QR network,
it would have been terrible.

Also, with the Mandurah line, give it a few years anyway. Its carrying half as many passengers now, but SEB has had an 8 year head start to build up patronage, which must be taken into account.

Er, no and they serve different functions. How long has the existing QR network with 140+ stations and ten or whatever it is been around? Should we give the busway a 100 year start on that? I wouldn't!

The reason why people feel the need to cut off feeders, give head starts to rail, and do all such nonsense discounts to the patronage is because the figure 44 million and 18 000 pphd is something they don't want to accept.

Worth noting too, but Mandurah did have 7.5 min frequency on the inner section for a period before the Libs got in.

I've got nothing against better rail services in Brisbane. We need frequency boosts on the current network. We need the CFN sorted out so that we can get feeders feeding into it.

Bear in mind it has more than one line.

Yeah, and how many lines does QR have? 8 or so???

Whats the point of the comparison anyway? A busway is beating a rail network that is one of the worst in Aus.
Trains in Melbourne do 620,000 a day.

Yeah, but it's Melbourne. What we have got is a pretty good outcome for a city like Brisbane.

By all means, if you want a rapid rail to gold coast, there are other ways to achieve that.

[ozbob]

entire SEQ rail does 170 000 per day, SEB does 150 000, it is doing 80% of what the entire rail network is doing at the moment but that just isn't good enough for you.

LOL  if the rail network had similar resources thrown at it as has the bus system it would be performing a lot better. It is only lately that we are really starting to see some signs of real signficant improvements.

Any case passenger trips is a bit meaningless without consideration of passenger kilometres. Both valid metrics.

Rail was left to languish during the bus centric phase.  The bus system is now hitting the wall and rail will be the next build up of real capacity.

[Gazza]

Any case passenger trips is a bit meaningless without consideration of passenger kilometres. Both valid metrics.

BAM!