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

[ozbob]

Thanks dancingmongoose for the map ^.  Nice!

[#Metro]

The big bombshell for me was the realisation that they are proposing that all BaT trains will go to Mayne Yards and turn around i.e. no connection to any of the northern lines.

The following diagram was on display:

This is an excellent diagram which is very interesting.

1. Buses
Firstly it shows that the BaT does not solve the bus issue. It must be very inefficient to pay ~300 Brisbane Transport drivers/hour driving past the counting point. Not to mention the flood of buses into the CBD. The other thing is how to get the buses to turn around and go home in BaT. The busway was good for 10 years and now it is overcapacity, and grossly overstaffed to operate. An automatic train with zero on board staff could do this job much better I think. Peak hour would need a handful of people in a control centre and a computer.

2. The rail connection (or lack thereof)
I'm not too concerned if the trains in BaT terminate and do not connect beyond Mayne. Interaction with the network beyond this point will be expensive to engineer and potentially introduce conflicts. Non-connection does make it simpler from an operational perspective. People wanting connections can TRANSFER (OMG!!) at Roma Street. In the extremely distant future these lines could be connected via Tunnel to a future Trouts Rd corridor. Who knows, this may be an opportunity for a Coast to Coast Express train service. My basic point is: not building beyond this leaves the door open to different possibilities.

3. Connections

I think this shows that bus feederisation would be possible. For example, Indooroopilly shows just 39 buses in peak going to the CBD. Now that sounds like a lot (and it is) but 40 buses x 65 = 2600 passengers/direction/hour, or about 2.5 train loads. Pooh!! Even if we take the most extreme case, 40 x 85 = 3400 passengers/direction/hour, or just four trains!

For comparison, Melbourne's tram system outside Flinders St Station carries around 10 000 - 12 000 persons/hour/direction in peak hour. In other words, approximately three or four trains could theoretically take the ENTIRE Western Suburbs bus load off the road by interchange. I think this diagram puts paid once and for all time the idea that "ooh, we cannot have bus transfer, the train would be too full!!"

The same with Old Cleveland Rd: 45 x 85 = ~4000, or 4 train loads (and this is under the absolute EXTREME case). Easily done with rail on the SE busway alignment. Indeed, some of Toronto's non-CBD bus routes carry ~40 000 trips per day as feeders into rail (operating 3-4 min in peak, 1000 pax / train capacity).

[Jonno]

I am sorry We are spending how many billions to break a fundamental rule of network planning. So not only do we have a CBD obsessed bus network were are building a rail system to become more so.  Bring back CCR and let BCC fix the bus problem through network redesign not poorly planned infrastructure.

I am sorry but the BaT is smelling very guano like!!!

[#Metro]

I am sorry but the BaT is smelling very guano like!!!

Made my day Jonno, made my day!!

Yes, it looks like BCC will just run the SAME OLD NETWORK through the tunnel. Also noticed that the complimentary OFF-PEAK diagram not seen. Off peak is important if you value the option of travelling outside of a narrow 2 hour window during the day!

Oh and 4 mins travel time 'saving' is chicken feed. Will lose that time saving easily trying to get the bus through the Buranda Bottleneck...

[#Metro]

I also noticed something else about the diagram: it appears to make a motorist's error.  

See, the times that are listed appear to be in-vehicle times only. Motorists only care about in-vehicle driving time because they have no concept of frequency (as the 'frequency' of a car is instantaneous). During peak hour this may be roughly correct if services are frequent enough (i.e. every few minutes) we can probably forgive and ignore, but during off peak this is most definitely not the case.

You need to add the average or worst case (worst case is probably the best as it defines the maximum upper limit to your journey time) of waiting. So 37 minutes to Mt Ommaney might in practice mean (37 minutes bus trip + 30 minute wait = 67 minutes, almost DOUBLE what is listed there).

There doesn't seem to be any extra trains allocated to the Ferny Grove line. It is 8 trains/hour in peak, or 8000 pphd, rather low of rail (a good railway might get 10 000 - 20 000 pphd). Six trains/hour to Kuraby in peak might suggest that the inner section will be getting 2 trains/hour OFF-PEAK, or half hourly service, depending on the stopping patterns.

[#Metro]

One other possibility for not connecting BaT to the train network beyond Roma St: The Northwestern Suburbs don't have good rail access. As a concept, rail could be extended underneath Kelvin Grove Rd or Waterworks Rd (less likely, but will capture Ashgrove nicely), underneath the Ferny Grove Line at Enoggera (creating a major interchange) and then up into the Trouts Rd alignment.

I stress, very very distant future option.

[petey3801]

A very major flaw with not connecting the BaT to the northern side of the network is that it doesn't fix one of the major current issues - That is, if something happens in the City (power outage, etc), the network basically grinds to a halt (apart from the Gold Coast and Beenleigh lines, which will start from Roma Street). Having the tunnel connect on the northern end of the City allows redundancy, with trains able to travel via the tunnel if required if there is a problem on the current route.

This project really does just keep sinking lower and lower.

[Gazza]

^They would be able to send trains via the tunnel in the event of a disruption petey, but it would require conflicting moves.

The only true solution is a railway line directly down Mains Road,

Warming to this idea a bit actually. Esentially you'd do something like the Richmond branch of the Canada Line.
Have stations at QSAC with an Über park and ride, Sunnybank Plaza, Pinelands, Sunnbank hills. 100% elevated down the median of Mains Road.

[dancingmongoose]

^They would be able to send trains via the tunnel in the event of a disruption petey, but it would require conflicting moves.

You would think so, but only NGR trains can use the tunnel. So you can't just send trains coming from Ipswich via Tennyson and then through BaT, cause they just can't.

[aldonius]

Given that the LNP were never going to spend the money required to do the north-of-Mayne connection properly this is acceptable - now we won't have all the conflicts in regular service.

The problem is that without the Park Road connection we've completely lost the redundancy there. If something goes wrong at say Roma St west, Cleveland is cut off.

Regarding NGR: by the time delivery is halfway through there will be plenty more NGR units than GC & outer Beenleigh require, so the chances are good that they'll be on other lines too.

Regarding Mains Rd: Nope. Not with Flagstone & eventually Beaudesert. Stations at Acacia Ridge (BD Rd nth side), Algester (Yorrell St), Parkinson (Nottingham Rd), Hillcrest (Johnson Rd sth side), Middle Pk, Greenbank...

However, if the SEB ever were to get auto-Metro'd, Mains Rd is the obvious branch for that.

[Gazza]

However, if the SEB ever were to get auto-Metro'd, Mains Rd is the obvious branch for that.

That was what I was implying in that respect.
Have some thoughts on Auto Metroing the SEB now too. Basically you'd build the junction at Boggo Rd with provision for double deck tunnel stubs. Lower deck tunnel stubs would continue through to Yeerongpilly for extra trackage for QR, upper deck tunnel stubs would turn east and do a short connection tunnel (1.5km long) to the SEB at Greenslopes.

Therefore all SEB stations from Greenslopes south would be rubber tyre metro, whilst the eastern busway, south bank, mater hill and cultural center would live on as a legacy surface route.

Auto Metro depot would be located at 8MP or Rochedale or something.

[petey3801]

Ahh, yes, sorry, I was thinking more of if they decided (due to $$) to simply have a Bondi Junction style turnback at Roma Street with no exit portal on the north end.

[James]

Given that the LNP were never going to spend the money required to do the north-of-Mayne connection properly this is acceptable - now we won't have all the conflicts in regular service.

The problem is that without the Park Road connection we've completely lost the redundancy there. If something goes wrong at say Roma St west, Cleveland is cut off.

Regarding NGR: by the time delivery is halfway through there will be plenty more NGR units than GC & outer Beenleigh require, so the chances are good that they'll be on other lines too.

Regarding Mains Rd: Nope. Not with Flagstone & eventually Beaudesert. Stations at Acacia Ridge (BD Rd nth side), Algester (Yorrell St), Parkinson (Nottingham Rd), Hillcrest (Johnson Rd sth side), Middle Pk, Greenbank...

However, if the SEB ever were to get auto-Metro'd, Mains Rd is the obvious branch for that.

Can I say now, I don't like the Flagstone alignment between Salisbury and Browns Plains area.

Firstly, Salisbury - what a wtf place to put a railway junction. It's a station in the middle of nothing. Then railway line going south - instead of going down the Mains Rd corridor, it goes down Beaudesert Rd, a road which doesn't even have service in parts on a weekend! Feeding buses to rail? Pack lunch, PT access into future stations will be awful, and don't forget the NIMBYs. The railway line will do very little to reduce BUZ dependence in this area.

A railway line going straight down Mains Rd from Altandi/Pinelands (if you re-align the Beenleigh line alignment to be not-awful) then down Beaudesert Rd to Browns Plains is the way forward - it allows for effective east-west feeding of buses to railway stations, connects major transport nodes. Pax north can be fed to the busway/rail via buses going between GU/Garden City and the Beenleigh line.

We need to start using the Beenleigh railway line for serious pax haulage instead of just dismissing it as inferior and totally ignoring it.

A metro down the SEB isn't necessary. LRT maybe in 10-15 years time. If you look at the patronage of busway stations based on pax in the catchment area alone, you'll find that a metro could very well be overkill outside peak hour. A lot of people currently Park n Ride at busway stations thanks to the surrounding bus networks being awful.

[#Metro]

A metro down the SEB isn't necessary. LRT maybe in 10-15 years time. If you look at the patronage of busway stations based on pax in the catchment area alone, you'll find that a metro could very well be overkill outside peak hour. A lot of people currently Park n Ride at busway stations thanks to the surrounding bus networks being awful.

LRT would not have the capacity nor automation IMHO. Public transport systems are built to handle peak load (i.e the capacity of 300 BT buses/peak hour) and with a redesigned bus network you'd stimulate patronage directly as well.

The Heavy Rail to Flagstone is not a substitute for a branch of SE Subway down Mains Rd. The location of Mains Rd is far superior and metro services run at a much higher frequency than you can get on QR Commuter Rail. Mains Rd could be done by cut-and-cover methods (cheaper than tunnel boring) and the SEB alignment is already acquired (so cheaper than starting from scratch). For that area I would assign QR trains the long distance travel function, whereas for Mains Rd I would assign an inner city mass transit function. Many cities make a distinction between commuter rail and inner city rail operations.

I did float the idea of rail down Mains Rd (and the SEB) and the advantage is the near-perfect location which goes smack bang through the middle of Sunnybank and shopping centres and down a proven high-load corridor. Everybody said my idea was bad blah blah blah, you know what go to the TMR Website and look at this page http://qld.gov.au/transport/projects/bat/design/future/index.html

Accommodating future buses and trains
Buses

The busway and stations have been designed to accommodate the three main vehicle types in the current bus fleet. The project team is giving consideration to how future higher-capacity vehicles could use the tunnel to increase passenger capacity, including longer buses, rubber-tyred metro systems and changes to vehicle design to allow passengers to board and alight more easily.

[HappyTrainGuy]

LRT isn't needed full stop. Anyway its old technology. We need MAGLEV!



See. Even Maglev catches on fire so it'll fit in perfectly here

[BrizCommuter]

This thread is turning into a foam party!

[ozbob]

" Any chance of monorail, and zip lines for those without a go card? "  says Alfred ...

[ozbob]

This thread is turning into a foam party!

It's Friday, been a long week.  It is not every day that a 'world first' is called a BaT  .... 

[ozbob]

Just found this by chance, didn't know it was up on the web.

Bit dated, but my forecasts were close to the mark ..

Cross River Rail: Looking into the past for Brisbane's transport future

--> http://informatransport.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/cross-river-rail-looking-into-the-past-for-brisbanes-transport-future/

[HappyTrainGuy]

This thread is turning into a foam party!

Oh yeah. After 11 that's when things get rowdy on rbotRAVE hosted by DJbob coming at you live from the bat tunnel.


 

[James]

A metro down the SEB isn't necessary. LRT maybe in 10-15 years time. If you look at the patronage of busway stations based on pax in the catchment area alone, you'll find that a metro could very well be overkill outside peak hour. A lot of people currently Park n Ride at busway stations thanks to the surrounding bus networks being awful.

LRT would not have the capacity nor automation IMHO. Public transport systems are built to handle peak load (i.e the capacity of 300 BT buses/peak hour) and with a redesigned bus network you'd stimulate patronage directly as well.

The Heavy Rail to Flagstone is not a substitute for a branch of SE Subway down Mains Rd. The location of Mains Rd is far superior and metro services run at a much higher frequency than you can get on QR Commuter Rail. Mains Rd could be done by cut-and-cover methods (cheaper than tunnel boring) and the SEB alignment is already acquired (so cheaper than starting from scratch). For that area I would assign QR trains the long distance travel function, whereas for Mains Rd I would assign an inner city mass transit function. Many cities make a distinction between commuter rail and inner city rail operations.

I did float the idea of rail down Mains Rd (and the SEB) and the advantage is the near-perfect location which goes smack bang through the middle of Sunnybank and shopping centres and down a proven high-load corridor. Everybody said my idea was bad blah blah blah, you know what go to the TMR Website and look at this page http://qld.gov.au/transport/projects/bat/design/future/index.html

Once you get past 5 minute frequency, IMHO the frequency of service becomes a moot point and is only really for the purposes of capacity rather than increased frequency for increases beyond that (service bunching and whether one runs or strolls to the stop become the factors which impact wait times).

Parkinson is far from inner city, it should not be given an inner-city solution. If the metro can join up to the Northern busway (or something similar), I might support the proposal.

[#Metro]

Once you get past 5 minute frequency, IMHO the frequency of service becomes a moot point and is only really for the purposes of capacity rather than increased frequency for increases beyond that (service bunching and whether one runs or strolls to the stop become the factors which impact wait times).

Parkinson is far from inner city, it should not be given an inner-city solution. If the metro can join up to the Northern busway (or something similar), I might support the proposal.

First of all, I am not concerned whether Parkinson is inner city or not. What matters is bums on seats in peak hour, whether that is because of high local housing density or because buses have collected and concentrated passengers to such high densities that rail becomes possible.

There is a bus every 30 seconds in peak hour outside Altandi station. That puts throughput at about ~ 5000 pphd through that section. A heavy rail link would get far fewer pax (due to lower frequency and being well away from demand generators like the shopping centres on Mains Rd).

This suggests two things - a subway is a good idea, but there will have to be something before it. The current bus network through that area is a shambles due to the rocket mania that happens in the am peak. That can be simplified by getting larger buses (200 passengers/bus) and having the bus feed the SE Subway, (i.e. TTC Toronto-style network planning).

That would allow capacity to double through that area, perhaps use the median for class B Row as well (not too fancy, just extra lanes in the space). That could theoretically take capacity up to 10 000 pphd (40 buses per hour, a bus every 1.5 - 2 minutes, this is possible with the absolute largest buses possible). You would probably want to start drawing up plans for some kind of rail option around 6000 - 7000 pphd, that's already a train every 8 minutes or so, which is very reasonable for peak hour rail service) because by the time you have sourced funding and done plans etc (takes years) patronage will have climbed to be higher than that.

Who says I don't like buses? 

Feeder bus ? --->

[minbrisbane]

Personally, I don't know why 3 section arctics aren't used on the busway.  I suppose there may be one or two issues i.e. QSBS - KGS / Cultural Centre.

[techblitz]

Firstly, Salisbury - what a wtf place to put a railway junction. It's a station in the middle of nothing. Then railway line going south - instead of going down the Mains Rd corridor, it goes down Beaudesert Rd, a road which doesn't even have service in parts on a weekend.

Lol james...seriously some of your comments defy logic.
Find someone from the 1940's era and ask them why they didnt plan the railway line for mains rd instead of salisbury....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salisbury,_Queensland
Read beofre making silly judgments on past generations and thier town planning skills....

[#Metro]

Personally, I don't know why 3 section arctics aren't used on the busway.  I suppose there may be one or two issues i.e. QSBS - KGS / Cultural Centre

Technology is changing - fast. Independant steering for the axles of the bus - makes turning easier. The manufacturer of the above bus claims that it turns the same as a standard 12m bus. In any case, there are a number of corridors where you could use it. For example, you could operate service into Adelaide St, and a little network tweaking if you wanted to avoid pinch points. Lights can also be re-sequenced to allow the bus to turn so that two opposite flows of traffic are not turning at the same time, and so forth.

Some people may be uncomfortable with the length of the bus - but then again, we run semi-trailers on the roads, trams, and convoys of buses which may bunch up so closely they become moving blocks.

There are often solutions...

[minbrisbane]

These ones operate in normal traffic as well: 

[James]

Lol james...seriously some of your comments defy logic.
Find someone from the 1940's era and ask them why they didnt plan the railway line for mains rd instead of salisbury....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salisbury,_Queensland
Read beofre making silly judgments on past generations and thier town planning skills....

In the 1940s the SE Freeway did not exist. Kessels Rd was a small road. Mains Rd too. Very little development existed out that way - building the railway line was about finding the fastest way to Sydney, not to Browns Plains. In other parts of Brisbane this can also be seen. Back then, Carindale was exactly that... a dale near Carina ('Carin'). Our development has changed, and we need to change our public transport planning to suit that. Back then, terrain was the big issue which we faced when it came to building infrastructure, not where the development is.

I don't know how anybody thinks the railway line to Flagstone will pick up significant patronage between the Logan Motorway and Acacia Ridge - it is simply too removed from the primary suburban catchment areas.

[#Metro]

I don't know how anybody thinks the railway line to Flagstone will pick up significant patronage between the Logan Motorway and Acacia Ridge - it is simply too removed from the primary suburban catchment areas.

It is not going to pick up decent patronage. One or two stations, commuter rail frequency (probably half hourly off peak, shudder), why bother? Peak-hour centric thinking rather than all day frequency.

[aldonius]

Yeah, Flagstone will yet another commuter rail line. So what? Service out there is going to be needed eventually, buses won't cut it, and stations at Algester & Parkinson will take some load off Mains Rd. I estimate 15 minute time savings to the CBD for those stations (Algester & Parkinson) over an equivalent P-Rocket, too - and that's with the rail all stations via the Bridge.

[#Metro]

Yeah, Flagstone will yet another commuter rail line. So what?

It's a coverage service. Rail is enormously expensive so where a fixed budget exists I do tend to favour spending money on rail mass transit in preference over coverage transit, where practical. And especially so if it is within a bus catchment that could be connected to rail by feeder, at least in the interim.

I have to say, it is somewhat annoying for developers to start constructing new suburbs apparently randomly in the middle of nowhere and then agitate for rail extension 40 kilometers from the Brisbane CBD to their ultra-low density anti-public transport development (i.e. disconnected snaking roads for calm traffic also happens to impede buses) at the cost of $100 - $150 million dollars per kilometre (30 km spur x $150 million/km) = $3 - $4.5 billion just so they can run six trains in peak hour and two trains off peak.

[paulg]

There is a new newlsetter on the BaT website:
http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/Projects/U/UBAT/m/ubatnewsletter.pdf
Quite a lot of new info in there.

Cheers, Paul

[Derwan]

There is a new newlsetter on the BaT website:
http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/Projects/U/UBAT/m/ubatnewsletter.pdf
Quite a lot of new info in there.

Confirmed upgrade of signalling with ATP (for the tunnels only).  Possible relocation of Train Control.

Interesting that the building I currently work in at Wolloongabba is shown as a "Development Opportunity Site".

[Fares_Fair]

The BaT (Bus and Train) project is
a critical new link in South East
Queensland's public transport
network.
(from the latest newsletter)


But it isn't an acronym ...   

This is an appalling name for a massive piece of significant civic infrastructure.
We should run a campaign for an appropriate name for it as a web-based group and use it in all communications in lieu.   

[longboi]

There is a new newlsetter on the BaT website:
http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/Projects/U/UBAT/m/ubatnewsletter.pdf
Quite a lot of new info in there.

Interesting that the building I currently work in at Wolloongabba is shown as a "Development Opportunity Site".

I assume you're talking about the Land Centre.

There's no impact from the BaT project. However DSDIP do have their eyes on it.

[#Metro]

But it isn't an acronym ...   

This is an appalling name for a massive piece of significant civic infrastructure.
We should run a campaign for an appropriate name for it as a web-based group and use it in all communications in lieu.   

Even BUM was better!!

[ozbob]

Appalling name, and IT IS AN ACRONYM:  BaT

Oxford Dictionary: An abbreviation formed from the initial letters of other words and pronounced as a word ..

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/acronym

Not to be confused with initialism: An abbreviation consisting of initial letters pronounced separately (e.g. BBC).

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/initialism

Can't sort fares, can't name a tunnel ....

[Fares_Fair]

Yes indeed, it is an acronym and openly admitted so in the latest newsletter.
I guess it sends the message that rules are meant to be broken (by Government).

[Derwan]

I love how they're naming things like "The BaT Control Centre". 

Next we'll have BaT Trains and BaT Buses.  Or maybe just a collective name of BaT mobiles!

Perhaps DC Comics will have something to say about the name!

I assume you're talking about the Land Centre.

There's no impact from the BaT project. However DSDIP do have their eyes on it.

Yep. Wow. Interesting read of the plans in place since 2011.  We only moved into the building in March 2013, so our days at Woolloongabba were always numbered.  (I guess we'll move into 1 William St once it's built.... wishful thinking.... we'll move to Ipswich or just be outsourced.)

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> BaT tunnel shortened, cutting $15 million off price tag

[ozbob]

http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/2014/4/2/innovative-bat-project-briefing

Minister for Transport and Main Roads
The Honourable Scott Emerson

Innovative BaT project briefing

The Newman Government is seeking innovative ideas from the private sector when more than 200 industry and financial representatives are briefed on the draft reference design of the $5 billion BaT project.

Transport and Main Roads Minister Scott Emerson said the three new stations at George St, Woolloongabba and Roma St would be the focus of the briefing with government seeking cutting-edge design and innovation.

"Feedback from the first industry briefing has improved the alignment under Woolloongabba and Kangaroo Point reducing the length by 70 metres, saving more than $15 million," Mr Emerson said.

"We will be looking for similar innovations when industry is briefed for the second time today on key elements including, depth of the stations and how the project will be built and operated.

"By working with the private sector I believe we can deliver better infrastructure through better planning, creating more than 18,000 full-time jobs.

"The industry has shown it has its finger on the pulse and can provide valuable input into the planning process, as well as innovative ways to deliver this once-in-a generation project.

"This is particularly important given the significant engineering work required including stations, tunnels, bridges, new and modified track and rail/bus systems."

Deputy Mayor Adrian Schrinner said this project was on track to revolutionise public transport through the heart of the Brisbane CBD.

"This project delivers a rail and bus solution in a world-first design right here in Brisbane," Mr Schrinner said.

"Ever since the first industry briefing last December there continues to be strong industry interest in this project.

"It was pleasing to see more than 200 people in attendance from the construction, development, engineering and finance sectors."

Community information sessions are currently underway and will be held in April and the environmental impact statement is expected to open for comment later this year.

For more information, please visit www.qld.gov.au/batproject

The project is due to be completed in 2020 and operational in 2021.

[ENDS] 2 April 2014