Undelivered plans and proposals for the network circa 2009

 
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
What could have been



Link to image as showing black on Railpage.

2000px-Melbrail_former_present_proposed.svg.png

Regards
Brian

Sponsored advertisement

  Gauntlet Chief Commissioner

Location:
There's quite a few lines missing.
Altona, Upfield-Somerton, Gembrook, Red Hill, Williamstown Pier, and arguable RRL, the two goods lines, an airport line, and Rosstown Railway.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
There's quite a few lines missing.
Altona, Upfield-Somerton, Gembrook, Red Hill, Williamstown Pier, and arguable RRL, the two goods lines, an airport line, and Rosstown Railway.
Gauntlet

Noticed that.

For those of you unfamiliar with the Rosstown Railway, details can be found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosstown_Railway

Regards
Brian
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
IN 2009 Ted Baillieu went to the election with a map that was not quite that ambitious - nevertheless Doncaster, Rowville and the Airport Line were all there.

Incidentally, I'm not sure if I like the idea of reinstating the old Outer Circle... not to a heavy rail line anyway, I think light rail would do the trick for that route.  But I do like the idea of the Frankston-Ringwood link; we really lack cross-suburban services (compared to Sydney).
  ewokracing Locomotive Fireman

Like all govco plans, squirrel away a few million to your mates for "proposals", build maybe a 10th of it if there's any money left after the proposal "investigation", wash rinse repeat.
  Gauntlet Chief Commissioner

Location:
We could have lost Sandringham, Williamstown, Altona, Eltham-Hurstbridge and Alamein if the Lonie Report had been implemented.
How lucky Upfield to escape conversion to light rail in the 80's?

Sometimes I wonder what would have happened  if they closed the Healesville line in the 60's instead of the Warburton line, or what  if it had been built NG - would Puffing Billy be running from Lilydale now?
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
We could have lost Sandringham, Williamstown, Altona, Eltham-Hurstbridge and Alamein if the Lonie Report had been implemented.
How lucky Upfield to escape conversion to light rail in the 80's?

Sometimes I wonder what would have happened  if they closed the Healesville line in the 60's instead of the Warburton line, or what  if it had been built NG - would Puffing Billy be running from Lilydale now?
Gauntlet
Even Hamer baulked at the extreme agenda of the Lonie Report... this was at time when rail and public transport in general was probably at its lowest ebb and yet even then the Liberals were concerned about restricting future options by not putting enough money into rail.

Not so with today's Liberals.  It's all eggs into one basket... Los Angeles here we come!

In the current term the one thing they were definitely going to deliver was the Avalon Airport Link and even in that instance they've failed unequivocally.  We're nearly twice the size we were in Hamer's day and yet there's effectively a zero expenditure on fixed rail. I can't imagine how congested things will be in another 20 years, it will be horrible.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
IN 2009 Ted Baillieu went to the election with a map that was not quite that ambitious - nevertheless Doncaster, Rowville and the Airport Line were all there.

Incidentally, I'm not sure if I like the idea of reinstating the old Outer Circle... not to a heavy rail line anyway, I think light rail would do the trick for that route.  But I do like the idea of the Frankston-Ringwood link; we really lack cross-suburban services (compared to Sydney).
don_dunstan

The issue with light rail is it is too slow and really only designed for short trips.  Ted was an extreme disappointment to most Victorians which I am sure will have their say at the next election.  Having said that however, Daniels could have been a lot smarter with the Labour plan which does not do a lot for public transport as such, more for publics safety with level crossing removal.
  speedemon08 Mary

Location: I think by now you should have figured it out
The issue with light rail is it is too slow and really only designed for short trips.  Ted was an extreme disappointment to most Victorians which I am sure will have their say at the next election.  Having said that however, Daniels could have been a lot smarter with the Labour plan which does not do a lot for public transport as such, more for publics safety with level crossing removal.
bevans
"One term Ted" and "one term Tony"  seem very.... apt considering how well the people seem to think they are doing.
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
The issue with light rail is it is too slow and really only designed for short trips.  Ted was an extreme disappointment to most Victorians which I am sure will have their say at the next election.  Having said that however, Daniels could have been a lot smarter with the Labour plan which does not do a lot for public transport as such, more for publics safety with level crossing removal.
bevans
The advantage with light rail is the frequency of the stops so it's better suited to areas of greater density like middle-ring shorter runs.  However for longer runs like Upfield I can't see how it would be an advantage - in fact it would be much less efficient.  There's a proposal in Adelaide to convert the Outer Harbour line to mixed light rail and heavy rail operation but I think that's been quietly dumped now.

Daniels is also a great disappointment.  Fair enough that we do need more grade separations but I don't understand the logic of privatising the Port of Melbourne and using ALL the money on grade separation.  There are much more pressing issues to be addressed, like the fact that most of the outer suburbs don't have proper access to the public transport network.  As a compromise why not resolve to do four of the most pressing grade separations every year and spend the rest on extending the light/heavy rail network?

I fear for the future if our choices are "Truck tunnels" Napthine and this dill Daniels...
  gobillino Junior Train Controller

Location: Melbourne
What's the average speed of heavy rail on the Upfield line though, and how would that compare to the average speed achievable with light rail? I would have thought that the advantage probably only exists for the last few stations on the line, and from Batman in, the stations are too closely spaced to make much of a difference.

Just quietly, if I lived in that corridor, I think I'd cop an 200 capacity E class running every 5-6 mins over a 6 car Siemans running no more frequently than every 20 mins any day. Although i know that the Upfield line figures prominently in longer term improved services to growth areas (Wallan) in PTV's Network Development Plan, so conversion may be short sighted (although could quad to Broady to provide tiered services on CB line to Wallan just as effectively)
  AzN_dj Chief Commissioner

Location: Along route 69
What's the average speed of heavy rail on the Upfield line though, and how would that compare to the average speed achievable with light rail? I would have thought that the advantage probably only exists for the last few stations on the line, and from Batman in, the stations are too closely spaced to make much of a difference.
gobillino


This is my analysis - converting the Upfield line would most likely result in light rail vehicles running along Royal Parade to the city instead of via North Melbourne. Because of the not so direct line to the city, the current 19 is almost equal in duration off peak (in Sydney road traffic too) and indistinguishable at the 19 terminus, hence converting the Upfield line would actually result in faster trip times.

However, the capacity is an issue. My calculation was that yes while there would be a faster run, the frequency of a tram bigger than the E class (I used a citadis dualis, one of the biggest vehicles available to purchase) is approximately 1 minute apart in peak ignoring induced demand. So it not patronised enough for heavy rail but too patronised for light rail!

Either multiple corridors could replace the Upfield line, or retain the parallel 19 with its current frequency, or run 3 car trains every ten minutes instead of 6 car trains every twenty minutes

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: speedemon08, wurx

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.