Make Sunshine Coast trains pick-up or set-down services in metro areas?

[Squalo]

Hi all - new member, although I am a long term commuter. Did 8 years on the Picton to Central route (Southern Highlands) when I was in NSW, and am just on 4 years on the Sunshine Coast line, Palmwoods (or thereabouts) to City.

I wrote this letter to QR last year, around the time of the new timetable introduction. They replied to say they would add it to their list of proposals to consider... thought I would share it here for comment?

---------

Dear QR

I write regarding the problem of people using Sunshine Coast commuter services as express trains to their destinations between City and Caboolture. Inbound trains aren't so much of a problem (although this morning a gentleman got on a city-bound train at Caboolture and proceeded to harrass young people who were seated because he did not get a seat). It is the outbound afternoon trains where we are seeing a real issue, and the problem is steadily increasing. It is extremely difficult for Coast commuters to obtain a seat when catching trains from Central and Fortitude Valley stations, as commuters who catch Coast trains to such suburban stations as Petrie, Northgate and Caboolture are taking seats from regular Elimbah-northwards commuters. The Coast commuters pay a lot more for their service and endure a far longer commute, so this is entirely unfair to Coast commuters.

I spent years doing a similar commute in Sydney on the Southern Highlands route. Due to similar issues with Campbelltown commuters taking seats from long-distance commuters, a policy was introduced to make Southern Highland trains set-down only at Campbelltown (in both directions). Fines are enforced with regular blitzes at Campbelltown to catch afternoon commuters who flout this law. It was very successful in increasing customer satisfaction for the long-distance commuters and patronage increased accordingly. There is no net revenue loss as suburban commuters will continue to use rail services; the only difference being that they now use the appropropriate trains.

The NSW policy can be found here:

http://www.cityrail.info/travelling_with/conditions_of_travel/

The relevant text from the above link:

"The South Coast, Southern Highlands, Blue Mountains and Newcastle & Central Coast regions are serviced by intercity trains.

Some intercity morning and afternoon peak services are pick-up or set-down services only. This is necessary to provide enough capacity for passengers travelling to outer stations with fewer services. These services are indicated by a 'd' or 'u' in the timetable.

Fines apply to customers travelling inappropriately on these services. Customers should use their relevant suburban services."


I respectfully request that the above changes be given due consideration for implementation on Coast services. As per my previous experience in NSW, customer satisfaction is virtually guaranteed to improve and in the longer term a potential increase in patronage is greatly enhanced by this simple and cost-effective change.

I look forward to your favourable response.


Yours sincerely,

[ozbob]

In Melbourne V/Line operates in a similar way as the InterCity in NSW.

Here in SEQ we don't have the clear separation of services at the moment.  I know that is very frustrating for all.  It is unlikely to change for a while as we are nearly at the peak capacity for the northern line, although personally I would like to see the equivalent of V/Line here for the Nambour-Gympie North - Maryborough (to come), Gold Coast and Gatton -Helidon (to come).

A number of years ago there was a special focus group on rolling stock design one night at Roma St.  This need for a decent interurban train service was raised by many then as well.

One suggestion that has been raised in the past is to make a number of Nambour PM peak trains express to Elimbah.

[colinw]

Foam alert.  I'm a big fan of ozbob's suggestion of a separate "Q/Line" operation for true Interurban services.  I also don't think it is even necessary for them to all be electric, although Maryborough might end up being so given it is close to electrified territory and the home of the only manufacturer of narrow gauge electric rollingstock in this country.  For Gatton/Helidon I am not sure that the economics of electrification would ever stack up, and if we ever operate something down the Interstate corridor I'm sure it would not.

I'm sure Bombardier would happily knock up a 1067mm gauge versions of these:


Or 1435mm for that matter, if we wanted to run a peak hours only commuter service to/from Casino as well, something that was seriously suggested by transport minister David Hamill during the early days of the Goss Government. Based on XPT timings, would actually be quicker over the distance than the Gympie North electrics.

I like DMUs. 

Oh, and welcome aboard Squalo.  But, SORRY you have to put up with the Sunshine Coast's miserable excuse for an Interurban rail service.

[SurfRail]

I can't say I am a fan of this one (and I am an interurban commuter).

Anything that reduces the legibility of the service with business rules oriented solely for the benefit of the system is bad in my book. 

The real solution is to fix the capacity crisis so we don't need to resort to rationing like this.  More trains to the Sunny Coast, and more Caboolture express services out of peak.

[somebody]

I'm dead against this idea.  Times infinity.

It's against the interests of the service.  Even on the Sunshine Coast, I'm sure there are a couple of enterprising people boarding outbound at Caboolture.  What you are suggesting is that space should be left on the services for these people.

I would also dismiss this:

The Coast commuters pay a lot more for their service and endure a far longer commute, so this is entirely unfair to Coast commuters.

Coast commuters get the most subsidised service of all.

And especially dismiss this:

There is no net revenue loss as suburban commuters will continue to use rail services; the only difference being that they now use the appropropriate trains.

Well, I say that Beenleigh is a high loading station BECAUSE of the Gold Coast trains serving it.  While some of these people may still use the trains, a number would go back to driving.  It's entirely appropriate for people living more sustainable lifestyles to be favoured against those living the least sustainable by living so far from their workplace.  Not the other way around.

Anything that reduces the legibility of the service with business rules oriented solely for the benefit of the system is bad in my book. 

It's not for the benefit of the system - it's a dis-benefit.  But it's political dynamite!

Comparing to the Southern Highlands Line in Sydney, you are talking about one of the worst performing rail operators in the world, the interurbans being the worst part and the Southern Highlands being the worst of the interurban lines.  I didn't want to work for them.

The only reason why this would be done is in the bottom line of my signature: Voltaire: "In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one class of citizens to give to another."

[ozbob]

It works brilliantly in Melbourne (separation of services), but only because the frequency of the suburban services is adequate, and there is a completely different class of rolling stock for the interurban equivalent.

I have watched many times inbound VLine services at stations like Dandenong (=Ipswich general sense) and no one gets on as a rule. 

Not achievable in SEQ at the moment because of the capacity constraints and the rolling stock as such.

Many people do what I call the 'boomerang' If you normally board at Central/Valley go to Roma St to secure a seat.  I used to do that to get a seat on the Ipswich line, I would head to the Valley to get on! 

Queenslander!

[Stillwater]

I boomerang in peak.

[Gazza]

The Coast commuters pay a lot more for their service and endure a far longer commute, so this is entirely unfair to Coast commuters.

Not really. It's like $3 more to go to Landsborough versus Caboolture.

[wbj]

Swings and roundabouts.  A Nambour commuter is guaranteed a seat all the way in the am and takes pot luck on the pm outbound train, but is still guaranteed a seat before Caboolture for the rest of their outbound journey.  Closer in commuters such as Northgate are guaranteed standing room only in the am peak and pot luck for a seat on the pm peak.  Is one commuter really at a substantial disadvantage compared to the other?

[Fares_Fair]

Swings and roundabouts.  A Nambour commuter is guaranteed a seat all the way in the am and takes pot luck on the pm outbound train, but is still guaranteed a seat before Caboolture for the rest of their outbound journey.  Closer in commuters such as Northgate are guaranteed standing room only in the am peak and pot luck for a seat on the pm peak.  Is one commuter really at a substantial disadvantage compared to the other?

The main (and substantial) difference is the duration of the standing for those travelling further north of Caboolture in the outbound peak.
This is for the best part of an hour, but generally ranges anywhere from 30-55 minutes.

This doesn't occur in the reverse scenario, where standing is for around 20 minutes in the am inbound, which is for no more than half the time of the outbound pm 'peakers.'

A number of my train crew also boomerang when they have time to do so, but the capacity constraints on our predominately single line track north of Beerburrum is a bottleneck that we cannot avoid - and one that the new government seemingly chooses to ignore, perhaps at their own peril.

This while giving priority to improving their own government precinct via redevelopment that the Premier said won't cost taxpayers a cent.

[Golliwog]

I boomerang in peak.

Pretty sure this isn't exclusive to trains either. I think there are a few in peak who do it from Roma St/KGS back to CC to make sure they get on buses on route 385 among others.

[Otto]

I boomerang in peak.

Pretty sure this isn't exclusive to trains either. I think there are a few in peak who do it from Roma St/KGS back to CC to make sure they get on buses on route 385 among others.

My OH does it..  pm trip Twong-Valley-Cleve

[somebody]

It works brilliantly in Melbourne (separation of services), but only because the frequency of the suburban services is adequate, and there is a completely different class of rolling stock for the interurban equivalent.

I have watched many times inbound VLine services at stations like Dandenong (=Ipswich general sense) and no one gets on as a rule. 

The deterred patronage from such rules is an unmeasurable.  So I wouldn't say "brilliantly".

[ozbob]

Disagree, have you seen how the services actually operate?

V/Line is a success.

And many would disagree with your view of the InterCity services in Sydney.

Two layers for different reasons.

[somebody]

And many would disagree with your view of the InterCity services in Sydney.

Really, who?

[Fares_Fair]

And many would disagree with your view of the InterCity services in Sydney.

Really, who?

Respectfully, I'd say Squalo, ozbob, me ... 

[mufreight]

And many would disagree with your view of the InterCity services in Sydney.

Really, who?

Respectfully, I'd say Squalo, ozbob, me ... 

And Me also as well as a quite considerable number of City Rail passengers.  Many them use the system because they have no choice and their usage does not make it user friendly or best operating practice.
With the relatively higher fare fare structure and less than comparabile service frequencies here services operated as you have proposed are even less than optimal or acceptable.

[ozbob]

Yes, where it is practical I don't have a problem with restricted pick up set downs as for V/Line and InterCity. 

There is no room generally on the V/Liners anyway for short haul pax,  the subs are running frequently in any case.

It is a problem in SEQ because of the overall train restrictions in terms of capacity and frequency.  Doesn't mean it won't happen one day.

[somebody]

And many would disagree with your view of the InterCity services in Sydney.

Really, who?

Respectfully, I'd say Squalo, ozbob, me ... 

If Squalo used the Southern Highlands Line he has to be kidding as to it being a good service.  I did not read that in his post at all!  Two through trains per day to Central(i), neither of which in the peak, and 1160 all day station entries for the entire line with incredibly subsidised services.

I do not think many Sydneysiders would share these views, if there are any at all.  Cityrail are loathed, which is why it is politically popular for the minister responsible to bag them pretty intensely.

[wbj]

Swings and roundabouts.  A Nambour commuter is guaranteed a seat all the way in the am and takes pot luck on the pm outbound train, but is still guaranteed a seat before Caboolture for the rest of their outbound journey.  Closer in commuters such as Northgate are guaranteed standing room only in the am peak and pot luck for a seat on the pm peak.  Is one commuter really at a substantial disadvantage compared to the other?

The main (and substantial) difference is the duration of the standing for those travelling further north of Caboolture in the outbound peak.
This is for the best part of an hour, but generally ranges anywhere from 30-55 minutes.

This doesn't occur in the reverse scenario, where standing is for around 20 minutes in the am inbound, which is for no more than half the time of the outbound pm 'peakers.'

Don't be so parochial.  Short distance inbound am peak  pax are guaranteed a 20 minute stand whilst the long distance pax are comfortably seated.  Long distance pax in the pm outbound peak have a 50% probability of being seated from the start of their journey, just like the short distance pax.  100% probability of 20 minute inbound stand = 50% probability of 30-55 minute outbound stand.  Swings and roundabouts.

[Fares_Fair]

Swings and roundabouts.  A Nambour commuter is guaranteed a seat all the way in the am and takes pot luck on the pm outbound train, but is still guaranteed a seat before Caboolture for the rest of their outbound journey.  Closer in commuters such as Northgate are guaranteed standing room only in the am peak and pot luck for a seat on the pm peak.  Is one commuter really at a substantial disadvantage compared to the other?

The main (and substantial) difference is the duration of the standing for those travelling further north of Caboolture in the outbound peak.
This is for the best part of an hour, but generally ranges anywhere from 30-55 minutes.

This doesn't occur in the reverse scenario, where standing is for around 20 minutes in the am inbound, which is for no more than half the time of the outbound pm 'peakers.'

Don't be so parochial.  Short distance inbound am peak  pax are guaranteed a 20 minute stand whilst the long distance pax are comfortably seated.  Long distance pax in the pm outbound peak have a 50% probability of being seated from the start of their journey, just like the short distance pax.  100% probability of 20 minute inbound stand = 50% probability of 30-55 minute outbound stand.  Swings and roundabouts.

It's not parochial, it's the facts.
Your 50% percentage claim is not verifiable, I'd suggest it is less than that anyway.
Nor do I agree with your summation.
Magicly you equate 20 minutes standing as being equal to the 35-55 minutes standing, by your percentage summation.

[wbj]

Swings and roundabouts.  A Nambour commuter is guaranteed a seat all the way in the am and takes pot luck on the pm outbound train, but is still guaranteed a seat before Caboolture for the rest of their outbound journey.  Closer in commuters such as Northgate are guaranteed standing room only in the am peak and pot luck for a seat on the pm peak.  Is one commuter really at a substantial disadvantage compared to the other?

The main (and substantial) difference is the duration of the standing for those travelling further north of Caboolture in the outbound peak.
This is for the best part of an hour, but generally ranges anywhere from 30-55 minutes.

This doesn't occur in the reverse scenario, where standing is for around 20 minutes in the am inbound, which is for no more than half the time of the outbound pm 'peakers.'

Don't be so parochial.  Short distance inbound am peak  pax are guaranteed a 20 minute stand whilst the long distance pax are comfortably seated.  Long distance pax in the pm outbound peak have a 50% probability of being seated from the start of their journey, just like the short distance pax.  100% probability of 20 minute inbound stand = 50% probability of 30-55 minute outbound stand.  Swings and roundabouts.

It's not parochial, it's the facts.
Your 50% percentage claim is not verifiable, I'd suggest it is less than that anyway.
Nor do I agree with your summation.
Magicly you equate 20 minutes standing as being equal to the 35-55 minutes standing, by your percentage summation.

The 50% should be verifiable from Translink's data.  However casual observation on the most crowded services to Nambour is that there are fewer standing pax than seated pax.  Anyone's chance of getting a seat is purely random.  Therefore a long distance pax is just as likely as anyone else to get a seat, something a little over 50% of the time.  So, over numerous trips, a long distance pax will get a seat 50% of the time and have to stand for 35-50 minutes on the other occassions.  Inbound, a short distance pax is going to stand nearly 100% of the time for 20 minutes. 

[SurfRail]

^ That is SO not how it works.  Tell somebody at Ormeau that and see how you go convincing them!

[somebody]

^ That is SO not how it works.  Tell somebody at Ormeau that and see how you go convincing them!

Well you are asking them to accept standing for 30+mins!

[SurfRail]

^ That is SO not how it works.  Tell somebody at Ormeau that and see how you go convincing them!

Well you are asking them to accept standing for 30+mins!

?

[somebody]

You aren't going to convince someone on either coast that it is acceptable for them to have to stand for over 30 minutes.  Simple.

[HappyTrainGuy]

With the current constraints its something that they just have to accept.

[somebody]

With the current constraints its something that they just have to accept.

True, but I still think some minor improvements are possible: Removing Dakabin and Narangba from the Nambour peak trains, extend a couple of Petrie trains.  Indeed, if you removed Petrie as well, you may well solve the overcrowding problem!

While you are at it, knock back the morning peak train from Gympie North, make the 7:43 ex-CAB train express Petrie-Northgate and then continue to Richlands as the 8:45am ex-Roma St train.  That would remove the total of 8 minutes dwelling that the 7:52am ex-PET train does in the CBD.  The 8:10am ex-PET train would also need to start somewhat sooner, around 8:04am

[Mr X]

With the current constraints its something that they just have to accept.

+1. Just because you are travelling for 1.5hr+ doesn't mean you can't stand for part of the journey. Part of life etc..

Commuters on many Brisbane bus services pay more per km travelled than Sunny/Gold Coast users (which are the most subsidised by the way) and often have to stand up for similar periods of time. I know of people who can't get on outbound 130s at Griffith even at 3pm in the afternoon (not even peak hour!) and have had to wait for an emptier bus to arrive. Which at times can be 5-6 full buses (including artics) later. Similar stories with the 150.

We must also remember that interurban express trains eat up paths of trains which could have served Brisbane stations.

[SurfRail]

^Seriously, can we just cut out the class warfare?  My economic activity primarily benefits Brisbane residents and yet my imposition on Brisbane's civic infastructure is limited to a train in and out - swings and roundabouts as has been mentioned above.  It really does not help anything.

[Mr X]

What class warfare? I was commenting on unhappy long distance commuters wanting a seat over residents in Brisbane (who mind you impose the same train service and probably the same benefits). You know full well I support the plight for a better train service to both the coasts. Gosh don't be so defensive.

[Stillwater]

I'm with SurfRail, I wish we didn't have this inequality in a discussion about equality and who is more hard done by than whomever else.  Someone at Northgate has 32 trains inbound every weekday.  And, if you get your mind around the fact that a bus constitutes a train on the Sunshine Coast Line, a Nambour commuter has 18 chances a day to travel to Brisbane.  Eighteen services versus 32 services - is that equality?  What is the taxpayer subsidy on only 18 trains versus the taxpayer subsidy on 32 services?  What about passengers carried per km - is that a valid comparison?  There is no clearcut answer, so we should not speak in absolutes.  The SG must laugh at our internal squabbles 'cos we muddy the waters for ourselves.

[somebody]

I'm with SurfRail, I wish we didn't have this inequality in a discussion about equality and who is more hard done by than whomever else.  Someone at Northgate has 32 trains inbound every weekday.  And, if you get your mind around the fact that a bus constitutes a train on the Sunshine Coast Line, a Nambour commuter has 18 chances a day to travel to Brisbane.  Eighteen services versus 32 services - is that equality?  What is the taxpayer subsidy on only 18 trains versus the taxpayer subsidy on 32 services?  What about passengers carried per km - is that a valid comparison?  There is no clearcut answer, so we should not speak in absolutes.  The SG must laugh at our internal squabbles 'cos we muddy the waters for ourselves.

The way I read it, that post is full of what you are decrying.

[Mr X]

Demand and supply. For an inbound commuter at Caboolture, they shouldn't care whether their service just commenced or whether it came from Nambour. The service is stopping, they are willing to pay their share according to the zonal pricing and if there is space then they have every right to use the service.

In short; I don't agree with this proposal at all. It's akin to stopping Beenleigh commuters using GC trains, or SE Busway users using the 555 and no one is proposing to stop these examples, eh?

[HappyTrainGuy]

With the current constraints its something that they just have to accept.

True, but I still think some minor improvements are possible

Without a doubt there are small ways to improve things but in the overall sense there's a limit on what can be done in terms of running patterns with the higher loads/capacity closer towards Brisbane with the current infrastructure and rollingstock allocation for example. Personally, I would like to see Nambour/Gold Coast trains go back to the old patterns and bypass pretty much everything but for Nambour services that's not going to happen until MBRL is up and running, the current mains Northgate-Bowen Hills become express only during peak hour and with more trains pumped into the subs/Shorncliffe corridor (either via frequency/ex Bowen Hills terminators or a Banyo stabling yard for Northgate/Shorncliffe starters/terminators) to take up the slack. But even then the subs have issues with the Airport, Doomben and Ferny Grove spurs and that's all before the NGR issues and its running partner for the other side of the city are considered.

I'll tell you what though. Since the Nambour services have stopped Northgate-Bowen Hills the morning Petrie-City services haven't been filled to the brim along with the people that crowded around the doors so they could get off at stations prior to or at Bowen Hills as they had been prior to the timetable changes (depending on the service ie City arrival time; if you wanted to get off at Albion you'd sometimes have to start to make your way along the carriage at Eagle Junction if you happened to be pushed down the asile or seated away from the doors).

[Stillwater]

The way YOU read it, yes, Simon.  That's acknowledged.  We should be accepting of others who may quantify the situation differently, and with equal validity.  There is no absolute, and that's the point, nothing more.
 

[somebody]

Personally, I would like to see Nambour/Gold Coast trains go back to the old patterns and bypass pretty much everything but for Nambour services that's not going to happen until MBRL is up and running,

Can't see what difference either CRRlite or MBRL would make.  The difference will come when CRRlite has the connection to the north.

Perhaps if the sector 2 review would provide an adequate service at Nundah and Toombul these trains could take over the service for those stations.  And/or if Airport trains can serve Albion and Wooloowin those stations may be able to be removed from CAB.

[somebody]

The way YOU read it, yes, Simon.  That's acknowledged.  We should be accepting of others who may quantify the situation differently, and with equal validity.  There is no absolute, and that's the point, nothing more.

What is the alternative way of reading it?

[HappyTrainGuy]

MBRL (The Petrie-Lawnton works would also play a part) would remove some of the constraints such as the rail traffic jam that currently can back up Lawnton-Zillmere/Geebung on the signals (the same one that prevents direct morning Roma Street-Nambour services which sometimes can delay the Caboolture all stopper service if there are late running services) along with providing more services heading to the city due to being able to better position rollingstock/larger Kippa Ring stabling and the ability to change running paths during peak hour providing the subs/its partner on the other side of the City can take up the slack eg trains that stop Northgate-Nambour/Kippa Ring could run exp Northgate-Bowen Hills with increased services on the Shorncliffe line or Northgate starters out of the Banyo stabling running to Clapham stabling.

I doubt it'll happen but MBRL does enable services to run exp Northgate-City. Just the $$$ has to be injected into the Shorncliffe corridor along with NGR sets available and stabling to fully allow it.

[somebody]

MBRL does enable services to run exp Northgate-City. Just the $$$ has to be injected into the Shorncliffe corridor along with NGR sets available and stabling to fully allow it.

That's more the sector 2 review isn't it?