BaT - Bus and Train project (was UBAT, was no CRR)

[dancingmongoose]

My post-BaT network:

Ipswich - Kippa Ring
Runs via Exhibition, express Darra - Milton stopping at Indooroopilly
15 minute OP frequency

Shorncliffe - Springfield Central
All stations
15 minute OP frequency

Varsity Lakes - Sunshine Coast
Runs via BaT, express Dutton Park - Helensvale stopping at Beenleigh and Kuraby, Exhibition to Petrie stopping Eagle Junction and Northgate
20 minute OP frequency (2TPH to Landsborough, 1 TPH to Nambour)
Runs to Landsborough under the assumption duplication & realignment is complete by the time BaT is operational

Doomben - Cleveland
Express Buranda to Manly
30 minute OP frequency

Airport - Manly
All stations
15 minute OP frequency

Ferny Grove - Helensvale
Via South Brisbane, express Dutton Park - Kuraby
15 minute OP frequency

Exhibition - Kuraby
Via BaT, all stations
15 minute OP frequency.

Advantages
-Better frequency across all lines except Doomben
-Permanent express services for Ipswich, Cleveland and north of Petrie
-Use of Exhibition station
-Throughrouting of BaT trains
-STB's Helensvale/Kuraby swap to ease Park Road interchange problems

Disadvantages
-Sunshine Coast services stop all stations north of Petrie (except Gympie North train)
--With duplication/realignment and running express all the way to Exhibition any time loss should hopefully be negated
-Yeerongpilly junction probably too congested to fit in a Tennyson service.
-No Doomben line frequency increase.

Thoughts?

[darthcaligula666]

you have ipswich and kippa ring joined as the one corridor, i thought that kippa ring/ moreton bay rail link would be joining with the springfield line, making that a single corridor (making moreton bay line the same blue as springfield on the network map).
if that were the case, i would propose that the ipswich line then runs like the gold coast, whereby the all stations is the springfield (like the beenleigh) and the ipswich stops at selected stations (milton, indooroopilly, darra) like the gold coast does. after darra the ipswich obviously stops all stations through to ipswich, just as the gold coast stops all after beenleigh. would that be a likely possibility?

also while talking about it, i dont know if here is the right place or not, but would there be any consideration to more frequent services on the rosewood line with the upgrade of and the installation of the new generation facility at wulkuraka? the works going on are phenomenal, and essentially stretch from karrabin station to wulkuraka station. it will be epic once it is done. (i seriously need to get a job there!)

[dancingmongoose]

you have ipswich and kippa ring joined as the one corridor, i thought that kippa ring/ moreton bay rail link would be joining with the springfield line, making that a single corridor (making moreton bay line the same blue as springfield on the network map).

It's called rerouting to suit the network better. When the network was electrified, the Ferny Grove line was paired with Darra.

Caboolture line is extended to Landsborough with the duplication works, but because the Ekka line is linked up to both the BaT and the mains to Caboolture, the pairing gets moved.

if that were the case, i would propose that the ipswich line then runs like the gold coast, whereby the all stations is the springfield (like the beenleigh) and the ipswich stops at selected stations (milton, indooroopilly, darra) like the gold coast does. after darra the ipswich obviously stops all stations through to ipswich, just as the gold coast stops all after beenleigh. would that be a likely possibility?

Ipswich - Kippa Ring
Runs via Exhibition, express Darra - Milton stopping at Indooroopilly

[ozbob]

Interesting review ..

Case Study 2: Brisbane BaT (Bus and Train) Tunnel

--> http://blurbanist.wordpress.com/2014/04/20/case-study-2-brisbane-bat-bus-and-train-tunnel/

[STB]

I'm not sure about linking Springfield Central with Shorncliffe - Springfield Central is on the Mains, and Shorncliffe is on the suburbans.

[Stillwater]

"However, had the State Government taken the deal offered by the Federal Government prior to the election (Labor funding for CRR), then it (the State Government) would still be reaping the benefits of the deal on roads as well as asset sales."  Ain't that the truth.

[SurfRail]

The lack of throughrouting is the biggest fault I can see, and I suspect is driven by a desire to keep costs down by not having to spend money north of Victoria Park.

Some of the assumptions built into the EIS are mental (eg rigid buses being limited to carrying 65 passengers and articulated buses to 89 - should be 80 and 120 respectively, and it would be anywhere outside of BT and STA's domain).

[aldonius]

STB: In the CRR reference design operations plan, Airport & Shorncliffe went to Springfield & Ipswich...

[dancingmongoose]

And Shorncliffe used to be paired with Corinda

[STB]

And Shorncliffe used to be paired with Corinda

That was until they separated the two corridors from each other to prevent trains having to cross from one sector to the next.

Re: Cross River Rail, I haven't seen the plans for that in quite a while, although I'm not sure if they had sectorised the network by that time, or they figured out of a way of doing that without causing potential conflicts between trains (barring the Gympie North service which does run on the Subs before running on the Mains, and vice versa).

[#Metro]

The lack of throughrouting is the biggest fault I can see, and I suspect is driven by a desire to keep costs down by not having to spend money north of Victoria Park.

Just change trains at Roma St. I'm not sure about the Gold Coast-CBD-Sunshine Coast through routing idea, given that there is few trips that need to do that (Airport would be more useful) but also reliability. Something goes wrong on the Caboolture line, delay will propagate all the way to Varsity Lakes.

[STB]

The lack of throughrouting is the biggest fault I can see, and I suspect is driven by a desire to keep costs down by not having to spend money north of Victoria Park.

Just change trains at Roma St. I'm not sure about the Gold Coast-CBD-Sunshine Coast through routing idea, given that there is few trips that need to do that (Airport would be more useful) but also reliability. Something goes wrong on the Caboolture line, delay will propagate all the way to Varsity Lakes.

The one thing I like about having the idea of linking the Gold Coast line to the Sunshine Coast line full time via CRR/BaT and assuming the Trouts Road line eventually gets built, is that you could effectively have dedicated proper long distance trains built specifically for that corridor and hence give passengers better comfort through a train designed to go long distance (like the ICE), that can be kept separate from the normal suburban train fleet that frankly needs to be designed to have more standees and to be designed to do shorter travel, stopping frequently.  You'd never see the ICE doing any suburban run, ever, simply because it's not designed to do that (yes I know it did to the Tennyson shuttles back in the late 90s, which IMO was a major mistake getting a train to do something it was never designed for).

[SurfRail]

The lack of throughrouting is the biggest fault I can see, and I suspect is driven by a desire to keep costs down by not having to spend money north of Victoria Park.

Just change trains at Roma St. I'm not sure about the Gold Coast-CBD-Sunshine Coast through routing idea, given that there is few trips that need to do that (Airport would be more useful) but also reliability. Something goes wrong on the Caboolture line, delay will propagate all the way to Varsity Lakes.

The issue is not convenience, the issue is capacity.  There is nothing here for congestion on the northside, which is completely unaffected by this project.

[aldonius]

Re: Cross River Rail, I haven't seen the plans for that in quite a while, although I'm not sure if they had sectorised the network by that time, or they figured out of a way of doing that without causing potential conflicts between trains (barring the Gympie North service which does run on the Subs before running on the Mains, and vice versa).

Definitely sectorised.

As per page 73 of the reference design, the plan was to have the via-Virginia services use the mains until shortly north of the Ferny Grove flyover, where they would diverge to Exhibition (on new, grade-separated track). After that, the ex-Shorncliffe and ex-Airport services would cross onto the mains to Bowen Hills, while ex-Doomben services continued on the suburbans with the ex-Ferny services.

The only shared-sector stretches of track are BH north through EJ north, and Rocklea south through Kuraby.

Am I the only one around here who actually has a readily accessible copy of the reference design or something? 

[dancingmongoose]

Am I the only one around here who actually has a readily accessible copy of the reference design or something? 

I've got it. For anyone else who wants to go back and read it: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/36018794/CRRreferencedesignoverviewcompletedocument.pdf

RE Sectorisation

AM Peak 1 Hour

Off Peak 1 Hour

[ozbob]

Media release 14th September

SEQ: Will the BaT fly?

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers has said there is growing concern with the lack of detailed public information on operational aspects of the Bus and Train (BaT) tunnel.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"Our members have attended consultation sessions for the BaT. They have expressed concerns with the lack of detailed operational information on how this tunnel will work, particularly the bus aspects."

"From the outset there has been concerns from transport planners that the concept is flawed (1)."

"These concerns are not being addressed.  What future proofing is there for the bus component? Clearly single unit buses will not be able to meet the eventual passenger demands. This is a once in a generation opportunity and to paralyse future transport options for Brisbane and south-east Queensland on political whimsy is seriously flawed."

"Brisbane bus issues can be fixed by implementing proper network review, and establishing proper bus priority on the surface network. Why waste billions of dollars?"

"If the BaT goes ahead as it is seem to be planned for, the end point will be a conga line of buses in the bus component similar to the Victoria Bridge bus conga lines.  Really, is this getting anywhere for the longer term?"

"Eventually electric bi-artic buses, or even a rubber tyred metro system will need to operate in the bus component of the tunnel to handle the pax loads. This means there be multiple transfers for bus passengers, the bus network will be forced to operate as a trunk and feeder model. Meanwhile, rail passengers will have seamless rides into the new underground stations."

"A serious question is:  Why is there no combined bus and train tunnel anywhere in the world?"

"The answer is obvious.  No other jurisdiction has been as stupid as Queensland appears to be."

"Questions on the planned operational aspects need comprehensive and detailed explanations before wasting billions of dollars!"

References:

1. Bus and rail tunnel all show and no substance: transport expert
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/bus-and-rail-tunnel-all-show-and-no-substance-transport-expert-20131118-2xrab.html#ixzz3DDY3F0p7


Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[#Metro]

I have no objection to two tunnels provided that the bus component can be replaced with automatic rail. I am taking a mode neutral view here, and the fact that trains and buses are running over the top of each other does not concern me as I am not generally concerned about vehicles, but lines and networks. Generally I am not happy about the Dutton park remaining while leaving out the Park Road station. It should be the other way around. I also think the busway component could enter at Wooloongabba rather than PA/Park Road. Finally, the operational aspects are not clear - will trains be split, that is half via BaT and half via South Bank? If so, this will lead to situations where the frequency is effectively halved at some stations back to 30 minutes (i.e. South Bank - Beenleigh, for example) and potentially send trains to the same stations from different levels (i.e. A passenger wants to go to Fairfield, the next train could be from Roma St or RomaSt BaT)

Building a single rail only tunnel would greatly concern me as I do not believe that it would be significantly cheaper, and it would also mean no hope of a metro on the SEB. Having to bore a second tunnel for a SE Subway later would be cost-prohibitive.

I also think it would be desirable to have two separated tunnels, because in the event of rail conversion, one could expect a SE Subway service perhaps every 3 minutes during peak hour, you don't want to try to be timetableing that in between Gold Coast and Beenleigh trains. Furthermore, a single tunnel would also force rollingstock to be QR trains on the SEB component, along with narrow gauge. Although the SEB is designed for LRT and LRT like vehicles (i.e. rubber tyre metro) I do not believe it will withstand the engineering requirements for QR trains.

I sure hope the design team has thought about standard gauge in the bus component during conversion - has anyone asked them?

[ozbob]

A member was informed yesterday at consultation that the bus component will not be suitable for anything other than buses ... hey ho ... 

I have been advised previously that the bus component would be capable of handling rubber tyred metro. 

Has there been more ' cost cutting ' behind the scenes?

Very concerning is the flippant way questions on how things will actually operate are also dismissed.    One response was ' we can come back and fix it later '  umm, no you can't without massive disruption and cost.

No, sorry LD, this is getting very concerning.  B must be future proofed!

[#Metro]

A member was informed yesterday at consultation that the bus component will not be suitable for anything other than buses ... hey ho ... 

I have been advised previously that the bus component would be capable of handling rubber tyred metro.

Has there been more ' cost cutting ' behind the scenes?

Well with Brisbane Transport on board, who knows! This is the problem with BCC running the buses, it is not entirely free of conflicts of interest. Take the City2Suburbs bus tunnel - it was going to be bus tunnel, no modal choice analysis at all.

On the other hand, if the SEB is converted to subway in the future (12 000 pphd would put it in good stead) the rollingstock will be incompatible with the QR network and hence the need for two separated tunnels. This will be particularly true if the SE Subway is rubber tyred or automatic. Building a second tunnel later for SEB conversion would be cost prohibitive and probably not happen for 40 - 50 years.

There is the option to short terminate the buses (at Say W'Gabba, Park Rd) but then you are going from a situation where fleets of buses are going 90% of the distance to the CBD rather than 100% of the distance to the CBD, so the benefit is marginal IMHO.

Reforming the bus network will be made massively easier if the SEB is ultimately converted to rail (rubber or steel wheel, who cares). It would permit Toronto-style operation with buses terminating at suburban busway (now subway) stations. 98% of bus routes in Toronto go to train stations and very few enter the CBD. Few buses would have to travel into the Brisbane CBD. For this to happen, you'd need that second tunnel (the bus component) for rail conversion. That is not going to happen if one single deck tunnel is built. Hence I have no objection to double decking.

Yes there is scope to do something with brushes and red paint and rationalise the bus network. This can be done now as the tunnel itself will take ages to construct, test and open and there is a need to do something in the interim anyway.

[#Metro]

Rapid transit buses fed straight into the TTC subway system

http://transit.toronto.on.ca/images/gotransit-2111-10.gif

From afar



http://blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist/files/2012/02/Proposed-bus-services-Toronto.jpg


Adapted for Brisbane Conditions: (this is an old image, the alignment within the CBD would be slightly different now)


from http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=6950.msg87888#msg87888

[James]

A member was informed yesterday at consultation that the bus component will not be suitable for anything other than buses ... hey ho ... 

I have been advised previously that the bus component would be capable of handling rubber tyred metro.

Why am I surprised?

I'm sorry, if the bus component is unable to be anything but bus, I think we are better off giving cash handouts to people who want to volunteer to permanently leave SEQ (with a clause that individuals cannot settle in Northern NSW, or continue to work/play in the region). That would be a better plan than building this underfunded mess.

There is no need to build new inner city bus infrastructure! Rationalise the network. Feed passengers to rail if possible. Look at higher capacity vehicles. Exclude all 300 and 400 series routes from the Cultural Centre. Route air parcel services via CCB and keep the trunk BUZ routes via South Bank. Feed routes like the 100 BUZ to rail. Stop sending all these air parcel bus services (415, 417, 430 and 446 to name a few) to the CBD!

[ozbob]

Brisbanites get to name their tunnels – but that doesn't mean they like them

--> http://theconversation.com/brisbanites-get-to-name-their-tunnels-but-that-doesnt-mean-they-like-them-24487

... Within the community there is an overwhelming sense of being duped and of infrastructure opportunities missed. The winners seem to have been the financiers, the political classes, and those close to government delivering the projects.

It seems unlikely that the multi-billion dollar BaT Tunnel project will bring any actual super heroes to the rescue.

[ozbob]

Project Support wins peer review of BaT Project

--> http://projectsupport.com.au/news/34-news/95-project-support-wins-bat-project

Project Support wins peer review of BaT Project

8 May 2014/ Major Project Awarded

Project Support is pleased to announce it has been selected by Transport and Main Roads Queensland to independently review the constructability and pricing of Brisbane's Bus and Train (BaT) Project.

The BaT Tunnel is poised to be Brisbane's most significant public transport infrastructure development of the coming decade, doubling capacity across the Brisbane River.

The team at Project Support, lead by Managing Director Peter Driml, will provide a level of experience and expertise required for a project of this magnitude

[dancingmongoose]

The Cleveland line was going to go up the BUM was well. I think there is a coal freight overpass in the middle of the triangle now. Note that the line dives underground and there is no Park Road station connection. No connection at the time to UQ then...

Would it be worth trying to get a rail spur to Buranda like this in the BaT? Cleveland trains run express via BaT with high frequency all stops to Manly via South Brisbane, both stopping at Buranda. No loss of service for south Brisbane, Woolloongabba picks up the transfers missed at Park Road. Though, would the BaT have the capacity to deal with Cleveland trains as well?

[aldonius]

BaT would be set up for 24? trains per hour per direction.

Beenleigh and Gold Coast lines interact in odd ways. 'Beenleigh' gets at most 7tph (in any 1-hour window) worth of Central arrivals presently in AM, with at most 6tph of departures in PM. Several of these are short-workings (either Kuraby or Coopers Plains). Gold Coast gets at most 6tph in either peak.

Cleveland gets at most 8tph (through Central, over any 1-hour window) at either peak; about half of these services run express between Manly & Morningside.


I would expect BaT to launch utilising about half its initial capacity. Some of that also needs to be earmarked for the future line along the standard-gauge corridor to Flagstone/Beaudesert, which IMHO could reroute a significant fraction of the Mains Rd patronage.

[ozbob]

Fly away BaT ... you are not needed, because ...

Couriermail --> Salisbury inventor David Whittaker hopes his MonoCab can be built in Australian cities including Brisbane

[#Metro]

PRT! Gah!

Bring on Hamilton Hovercraft!

[dancingmongoose]

CRR	BaT
9 Car Platforms	7 Car Platforms
Exhibition Station service	Ekka not serviced
Throughrouting	No Throughrouting
More capacity Yeerongpilly-Bowen Hills	More Capacity Roma Street-Park Road
Albert Street Station	George Street Station
Rocklea, Moorooka, Exhibition, Yeerongpilly station upgrades	Dutton Park station upgrade
Busway interchange at Boggo Road, Roma Street, Gabba	Busway interchange at Roma Street, George Street, Gabba

Speaks for itself...

[pandmaster]

CRR	BaT
9 Car Platforms	7 Car Platforms
Exhibition Station service	Ekka not serviced
Throughrouting	No Throughrouting
More capacity Yeerongpilly-Bowen Hills	More Capacity Roma Street-Park Road
Albert Street Station	George Street Station
Rocklea, Moorooka, Exhibition, Yeerongpilly station upgrades	Dutton Park station upgrade
Busway interchange at Boggo Road, Roma Street, Gabba	Busway interchange at Roma Street, George Street, Gabba

Speaks for itself...

Albert Street is the real winner for me. A station in the heart of the city, taking passengers where they actually want to go! Central, Roma Street and the proposed George Street station do not.

[darthcaligula666]

i think the purpose of george street is for students at qut gardens point. albert street makes more sense to me.

just curious, with the station upgrades at rocklea, moorooka yeerongpilly and the ekka, would those include disabled access? i would hope so, that would make these stations far more accessible. if so i think that is a superior option, though would dutton park close with that proposal?

also at the meeting at dutton park school that i went to, they were saying beenleigh trains will terminate at kuraby. wont that lengthen the travel times in the gold coast line to incorporate stations from kuraby to beenleigh? to me that is counter productive, and im not sure how gold coast commuters would enjoy having to stop at those extra stations.

[ozbob]

Station upgrades now must be DDA compliant.

[SurfRail]

BaT now seems to involve an additional platform face at all stations Salisbury to Dutton Park inclusive to allow the middle track to be the "tidal lane" which means more station upgrades but all of the wrong kind!

[darthcaligula666]

the only reason i ask is because i have completely ruined my knee and need a major operation so will be out of action for a while (heaven help the blog!) and it got me thinking about station access. thanks for that ozbob

[aldonius]

Darth: By "Beenleigh trains terminating at Kuraby", they almost definitely mean there will be 3 service patterns:

• Kuraby via South Brisbane,
• Beenleigh or Helensvale via BaT, express past the innermost stations,
• Varsity Lakes via BaT, express to Beenleigh/Helensvale

[dancingmongoose]

Looking at the Cross River Rail reference design, there were a lot of the sectors are 6TPH during off peak. 6TPH to Darra, 6TPH to Shorncliffe/Aiport, 6TPH to Beenleigh, 7TPH to Petrie (Presumably 1TPH to Nambour, there is a Yeerongpilly terminator). Does anyone know, where the lines all at 20 minute frequency, or was one 4TPH and the other 2TPH?

[aldonius]

Hard to say, but probably 4 and 2 for Airport/Shorncliffe. Point is rather moot now.

[Cam]

I can walk to Moorooka, Rocklea and Salisbury stations but none have lifts or ramps so catch a bus instead when I have the stroller. The foot brake on the stroller engages every few steps which is very frustrating and there is a real chance of losing balance  .

Surely, at least one of these stations will be made compliant for disability access by the time Bat is completed? Different bucket of funding.

CRR is a better proposal in many ways.

[techblitz]

I can walk to Moorooka, Rocklea and Salisbury stations but none have lifts or ramps so catch a bus instead when I have the stroller. The foot brake on the stroller engages every few steps which is very frustrating and there is a real chance of losing balance  .

Surely, at least one of these stations will be made compliant for disability access by the time Bat is completed? Different bucket of funding.

CRR is a better proposal in many ways.

Glad to see someone has noticed the clusterf"@$ that is called salisbury station.....i recently had to watch a physically impaired person spend 5 minutes getting to the top and over....asked him has he mentioned salisbury station to local councellors about getting it upgraded....he said yes he has.....but has not heard anything back about it...

[Cam]

Response to techblitz:

The approach from the western side involves going down stairs and back up again between tracks in addition to the usual rise and fall over a single line.

The Queensland Government is trying to sell the nearby 5 hectare, former Nyanda State High School site, which may house up to a couple thousand people in medium rise units and probable retail outlets. Surely an upgrade or a new station adjacent to the site will be part of the deal.

[James]

I can walk to Moorooka, Rocklea and Salisbury stations but none have lifts or ramps so catch a bus instead when I have the stroller. The foot brake on the stroller engages every few steps which is very frustrating and there is a real chance of losing balance  .

Surely, at least one of these stations will be made compliant for disability access by the time Bat is completed? Different bucket of funding.

CRR is a better proposal in many ways.

Unfortunately, none of these three stations will have any work done to them as part of BaT.

BaT funds the tunnel and the tunnel only. Anything else is not deemed to be "sexy sexy infrastructure" and as such, is being skimped by the Newman government. Additional tracks between Dutton Park and Salisbury? Additional tracks on the Exhibition loop? Through-routing of services? All skimped on by the government. This is why BaT is not a "saving" to anybody, merely half-baking a once in a generation project. It would make far more sense just to build CRR (Heavy) as planned. Capacity expansions, through-routing, possible Trouts Rd connection, the works. And no stupid bus portion.