Queensland UTC +10
Terms of use Privacy About us Media Contact

Links

Poll

Should the second platform at Ascot be restored?

Yes
0 (0%)
Full duplication of the entire line
5 (62.5%)
Partial duplication
3 (37.5%)
No
0 (0%)
something else - please post
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 6

Voting closed: May 24, 2012, 07:54:12 PM

Author Topic: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?  (Read 3372 times)

somebody

  • Guest
POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« on: May 10, 2012, 07:54:12 PM »
I understand there are asbestos and track issues issues with this.  So not cheap, but it is possible.

I couldn't find where there has been a poll for this before.

Offline petey3801

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1564
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #1 on: May 10, 2012, 08:36:26 PM »
In any other country, the Doomben line would be fully duplicated and running high frequency services to the city all day and late into the night! But here in QLD, it sits there languishing as a slow, mostly single track line at an hourly frequency (with slightly better peak!). Really, the whole line should be duplicated, the corridor is all there, just need to build another platform at Hendra and a couple extra small bridges at Ascot. Should really be much cheaper than a lot of other dup works as it's all pretty much already there!!
All opinions stated are my own and do not reflect those held by my employer.

Offline SurfRail

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7318
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #2 on: May 10, 2012, 10:06:40 PM »
If QR operated at world's best practice at basic things like turning trains around in a timely fashion, you would not even need a second track to operate a 15 minute frequency here.  Only takes 8 minutes to travel the length of the branch, and that can be timetabled around.

About the only things you really want are:

- Replace the operating semaphores!  (Nice to look at, but come on.)

- Make both platforms at Doomben accessible and update the infrastructure so platform 2 can be accessed without somebody having to use a manual lever to open the points

Both items are optional, although item 2 will make operations cheaper, easier and safer.
Ride the G:

colinw

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2012, 09:33:41 AM »
Doomben line I think needs a two stage approach.  Full duplication is unnecessary in order to support extension of the current Cleveland service to full through running with Doomben.

Stage 1: partial duplication and full extension of the Cleveland service so it gets the same service level as Cleveland.  Get rid of 1 in 2 Cleveland trains using Bowen Hills as the terminus, and provide Doomben with a full time service like any other Brisbane line.

Stage 2: Extend to Hamilton North Shore, complete the duplication and go to 4TPH service.

I view Doomben's eventual rule as being something like Brisbane equivalent of Barcelona Line 7, which is a 3 station metro-like spur of a longer regional commuter line, ending at a single track terminus. Despite the single track it gets a full time 4TPH service.

Alternative proposal: put in a 5th platform at Eagle Jct offset slightly toward Doomben, served by a new terminating spur off the Doomben line in this area.  This will get the branch trains clear of the mainline entirely. Combined with a partial duplication you could support a 20-30 minute frequency service, then run a 3 car shuttle service between Eagle Jct & Doomben, Eagle Farm or Hamilton Northshore. Cleveland trains can then run through to somewhere else (Shorncliffe or Ferny Grove).


Current layout at Eagle Jct


        >-------------------------------------------------------------------- Northgate
                      =====================
                      |     platform      |
                      =====================
To City <-------------------------------------------------------------------

        >-----------------------------------------------\------------------- Northgate
                      =====================              \
                      |      platform     |               \
                      =====================                \
To City <--------------------------------------------\------x----------------
                                                      \      \
                                                       \      \-------\
                                                        \              \
                                                         \------------------ Doomben


What I am suggesting:


        >-------------------------------------------------------------------- Northgate
                      =====================
                      |     platform      |
                      =====================
To City <-------------------------------------------------------------------

        >-----------------------------------------------\------------------- Northgate
                      =====================              \
                      |      platform     |               \
                      =====================                \
To City <--------------------------------------------\------x----------------
                                       ____________   \      \
                                       | platform |    \      \-------\
                                       ============     \              \
                                    |----------------------------------------- Doomben


Look at Google Maps.  There's enough room for a terminating track & short platform if you offset it towards Doomben.

The line would then run somewhat like Alamein in Melbourne.  Some peak services to the city, but off peak shuttles.

(Hopefully my ASCII Art above renders for people using different browsers to me - I'm on Firefox 11).
« Last Edit: May 11, 2012, 10:12:43 AM by colinw »

somebody

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #4 on: May 11, 2012, 10:22:02 AM »
If peak services are running to the city, then does the opex savings justify the expense of the 5th platform?

colinw

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #5 on: May 11, 2012, 10:32:51 AM »
That's a bit of a balancing act.  Right now the layout at Eagle Jct does nobody any good - if you want to up the Doomben line to half hourly or better you end up with some nice flat junction conflicts with Doomben bound trains having to cross over the up suburban line carrying Shorncliffe & Airport to city services.  Getting the branch trains off the main line entirely would surely allow higher frequency of Shorncliffe & Airport trains (which are both more important than Doomben IMHO, although maybe NOT after Hamilton Northshore goes ahead and the Racecourse re-develops as a TOD).

I would be quite contented to see it run as a fulltime shuttle, after all there are plenty of trains to change to in Peak. However, I suspect that it will perform better (in terms of passenger loadings) in peak if there are a small number of through services.

I just thought I'd point out that Eagle Jct has the room available to come up with a terminating dock platform for Doomben, so the option exists of getting the branch trains off the mainline entirely and then re-routing Cleveland to somewhere more useful.  If you do what I suggest with the infrastructure & then run the Doomben line as a full time shuttle, then it is as good (operationally) as grade separating the junction, and at lower cost.

Anyone care to give a rough estimate as to how much would it cost to put in a 3 car platform, overbridge, lift and short terminating spur on the site I nominate at Eagle Jct?  Are we talking < $10 million, $20 million, $50 million?

Out of interest, what happens with Carlingford in peak?  Through routing or do all Carlingford pax have to change in peak
« Last Edit: May 11, 2012, 10:50:28 AM by colinw »

somebody

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #6 on: May 11, 2012, 10:49:53 AM »
Out of interest, what happens with Carlingford in peak?  Through routing or do all Carlingford pax have to change in peak
There is a single service running through at around 7am, and nothing in the afternoon, which means no conflicting moves for revenue services.  It also is well wide of the peak of the peak.

I think we need to be pressing for through services, rather than having an interchange which would not be cross platform.  Even if there was 8tph crossing between the Shorncliffe line and the Airport, if there is only 4tph to Doomben, I'd think it could be managed as a flat junction.

I'd hate to attach a flyover rider.

I guess the alternate plan is to have a shuttle full time, but I'm fairly keen to see Albion and Woolowin removed from the Caboolture line, especially in peak.

Offline Golliwog

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4988
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #7 on: May 11, 2012, 12:03:46 PM »
I think if the effort was put in to make it an easy interchange that making Doomben a shuttle service is the way to go. Have it timed to meet Airport services (they should be less crowded than Shorncliffe). I don't see a big deal with the lack of a cross platform transfer.

I do see Colin's point about higher use if it's ever extended to Hamilton, though my opinion is that by then we should have CRR, which could allow for some more flexibility in timetabling through the CBD as Shorncliffe no longer has to merge with Ferny Grove. I'd also think that long term plans could involve doing something more than just merging @ EJ (ie: 5-6 tracks, or giving one of the lines a different route (and therefore a new catchment area)).
There is no silver bullet… but there is silver buckshot.
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

colinw

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #8 on: May 11, 2012, 12:39:47 PM »
I just realised that with the right design, cross-platform interchange for city-bound services would be possible.  Taking my clumsy Ascii drawings above, what about amending things slightly as follows?

        >-------------------------------------------------------------------- Northgate
                      =====================
                      |     platform      |
                      =====================
To City <-------------------------------------------------------------------

        >-----------------------------------------------\------------------- Northgate
                      =====================              \
                      |      platform     |               \
                      =====================                \
To City <--------------------------------------------\------x----------------
                      =====================           \      \
                      |_________ platform |            \      \-------\
                                |==========             \              \
                                |-------------------------------------------- Doomben


This terminates Doomben trains at a 3 car dock platform, with direct cross-platform interchange to City bound trains via an adjacent 6 car platform.

I have actually changed trains at a station with an arrangement like this in the UK.  A long main line platform on one side, and you walk across to a shorter length dock platform on the other side.

This scheme would either switch the side of the city bound suburban platform at Eagle Junction (possibly cutting back the old platform to make room for this scheme), or else would result in the up suburban line having a platform face on both sides.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #9 on: May 11, 2012, 01:09:26 PM »
Yeah, that's possible, but then you have to decide which platform up suburban services are going to use.  Something like this exists at Sydney Olympic Park - 2 side platforms + an island platform with 2 tracks through it.

I just don't see why it should be a shuttle as opposed to a through service.  Conflicting moves can be managed.

colinw

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #10 on: May 11, 2012, 01:41:11 PM »
I don't see why single seat journey on this relatively minor branch is such an important issue. I'd rather up the frequency and at the same time kick the branch service off the main line, so you get a frequency boost & simplified service pattern everywhere.

Having put the 5th platform / shuttle service proposal out there, I should also say that I'd be just as happy with a part duplication and full pairing of the Doomben line with Cleveland so it got the same service standard as the rest of the system.

The name of the game for Doomben is getting it up to a full time service with half decent frequency, which should drive patronage gains and hopefully stimulate the area. Redevelopment of Doomben RC and the Hamilton developments should provide more than enough reason to turn the Doomben line into a real service, rather than the current "joke" service which barely justifies its own existence.

colinw

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #11 on: May 11, 2012, 01:46:09 PM »
Yeah, that's possible, but then you have to decide which platform up suburban services are going to use.

Why not just open the doors on both sides.  Again I've seen that done overseas.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #12 on: May 11, 2012, 02:40:19 PM »
Yeah, that's possible, but then you have to decide which platform up suburban services are going to use.

Why not just open the doors on both sides.  Again I've seen that done overseas.
Wouldn't that slow down dwell times?

Offline #Metro

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19681
  • DON'T SIGN! DON'T RENEW!!
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #13 on: May 11, 2012, 03:02:40 PM »
I think for the Doomben line, all buses should be abolished. Period.
All services should run through as well. Changing is possible, but it is so close to the city and such a short run it isn't worth it IMHO.

Negative people... have a problem for every solution.
Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members. Not affiliated with, paid by or in conspiracy with MTR/Metro.

colinw

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #14 on: May 11, 2012, 03:33:24 PM »
I think for the Doomben line, all buses should be abolished. Period.
All services should run through as well. Changing is possible, but it is so close to the city and such a short run it isn't worth it IMHO.

I'd be happy with that. The 5th platform / shuttle idea was "kite flying" to draw attention to the fact that there's enough room at Eagle Jct to do something if necessary.

But for now, I'd be quite happy with through running of ALL Cleveland line services, and buses only to connect beyond Doomben to Pinkenba/Myrtletown and Australia TradeCoast.

The current arrangement with half bus, half rail is confusing service duplication, and results in neither mode providing an acceptable service.

Offline HappyTrainGuy

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4613
  • My train... My people... My money!
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #15 on: May 11, 2012, 04:17:57 PM »
Rumor has it that Doomben is getting cut to a Roma Street only service and Cleveland pairing up with Shorncliffe during the timetable mods for better rollingstock utilisation.
"What housing crisis?? There are plenty of free mobile apartments rolling around on the rails every day"

somebody

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #16 on: May 11, 2012, 04:31:03 PM »
Rumor has it that Doomben is getting cut to a Roma Street only service and Cleveland pairing up with Shorncliffe during the timetable mods for better rollingstock utilisation.
That's what it looks like to me too.  Otherwise explain the evening SHC-CVN trips (or is it the other way around?).

Probably a good thing to remove a route which would have two precision crosses.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2012, 10:29:27 AM by Simon »

Offline HappyTrainGuy

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4613
  • My train... My people... My money!
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #17 on: May 11, 2012, 05:48:41 PM »
Yep, a bit of both. Currently from pretty much 3pm till last service all Shorncliffe trains continue to Cleveland. It doesn't work Cleveland-Shorncliffe due to the timetables not matching up by less than 10 minutes. In the morning its Cleveland-Shorncliffe from first service till the service departing Cleveland just before 7ish... 6.45 maybe.
"What housing crisis?? There are plenty of free mobile apartments rolling around on the rails every day"

somebody

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #18 on: May 14, 2012, 05:23:56 PM »
I actually don't see what would stop running to Corinda #1 except that there aren't enough Merivale Bridge paths in peak hour.  So you'd need to keep the 104 in peak and have a train replacing it off peak.

There is one other option, and that is running to Rocklea.  I think there might be some issue with Coopers Plains on present timings, but I can't remember exactly what it is.  Perhaps trains happen to occupy the centre track north of the platform at the same time.

colinw

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #19 on: May 14, 2012, 07:41:09 PM »
I actually don't see what would stop running to Corinda #1 except that there aren't enough Merivale Bridge paths in peak hour.  So you'd need to keep the 104 in peak and have a train replacing it off peak.

Doomben to Corinda via South Brisbane was the original through routing when the line was electrified to Eagle Farm in 1988.  From memory, in peak that timetable ran some services from Ipswich through to Doomben or Eagle Farm via South Brisbane, so the peak Merivale Bridge slots weren't wasted on Corinda trains.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #20 on: May 14, 2012, 08:05:53 PM »
I actually don't see what would stop running to Corinda #1 except that there aren't enough Merivale Bridge paths in peak hour.  So you'd need to keep the 104 in peak and have a train replacing it off peak.

Doomben to Corinda via South Brisbane was the original through routing when the line was electrified to Eagle Farm in 1988.  From memory, in peak that timetable ran some services from Ipswich through to Doomben or Eagle Farm via South Brisbane, so the peak Merivale Bridge slots weren't wasted on Corinda trains.
I was really referring to the extra Ferny Grove trains.   A decent service on the inner 4 Beenleigh line stations would also eventuate, at the cost of some conflicting moves.  I think I'd rather pick up the next 4 stations as well though.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2012, 08:36:59 PM by Simon »

colinw

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #21 on: May 14, 2012, 08:21:22 PM »
Sorry Simon, misinterpreted you there.

I'd like to see the 4TPH from Ferny Grove go to Rocklea or Coopers Plains if possible.  It is a shame the Salisbury to Kuraby triple doesn't permit better than that.

somebody

  • Guest
Re: POLL: Fix up Ascot second platform?
« Reply #22 on: May 14, 2012, 08:44:40 PM »
Sorry Simon, misinterpreted you there.

I'd like to see the 4TPH from Ferny Grove go to Rocklea or Coopers Plains if possible.  It is a shame the Salisbury to Kuraby triple doesn't permit better than that.
Not without as was recently proposed using the centre track as a 3rd single track section for the Gold Coast trains so that the Coasties can pass the slower trains in that way.  It's unclear whether they would still be able to extend to the airport in that scenario.  Not sure if the Coomera-Helensvale single track was covered either actually.

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 


“You can't understand a city without using its public transportation system.” -- Erol Ozan