The Napthine/Mulder  "Claytons Metro" had stations at both  Domain and  South Yarra with a very clever innovative design at South Yarra .  So it can be done an interchange at South Yarra .

Does this mean the Napthine plan had an interchange earmarked at South Yarra and the Melbourne Metro Rail Tunnel does not?  Are they planning to bypass South Yarra for trains into the Metro Tunnel?

How does a future Airport Rail link integrate with the Melbourne Metro Rail tunnel Andrews is building if at all?

Does this mean the Napthine plan had an interchange earmarked at South Yarra and the Melbourne Metro Rail Tunnel does not?  Are they planning to bypass South Yarra for trains into the Metro Tunnel?

How does a future Airport Rail link integrate with the Melbourne Metro Rail tunnel Andrews is building if at all?

That is right, no link between the Metro Tunnel and Sth Yarra/Richmond. But it is not that difficult to change at Caulfield for those services.  And Footy services can still be routed thru South Yarra and Richmond.

As for the Airport Link, with the congestion being reduced in FSS/SSS/NME, they will be able to work something out to the airport.  As for integration, likely to have to change trains at City South or even Footscray.

Sorry, but running multiple paths through the city to the same destinations is just dumb.

It's guaranteed to cause issues with reliability - you want to contain anarchy to one line, not spread it all over the place.

You want to go somewhere else, change trains like the rest of the world.

That is right, no link between the Metro Tunnel and Sth Yarra/Richmond. But it is not that difficult to change at Caulfield for those services.  And Footy services can still be routed thru South Yarra and Richmond.

Why would you do that when there are multiple lines going to Flinders Street?

Not to mention the issues a single delay would cause.

Not being able to access South Yarra or Richmond is no different to not being able to access North Melbourne or Southern Cross, or for that matter, not being able to access the new station at Parkville if coming from say the Frankston or Werribee lines. As others have said, simply change at Caulfield if heading to/ from the South East, and change at Footscray if heading to/ from the West. or alternatively, change at Flinders St/ CBD South. Having some services continuing to use the old lines, and others using the new lines defeats the purpose.

Why would you do that when there are multiple lines going to Flinders Street?

Not to mention the issues a single delay would cause.

If referring to football traffic, why would you run extra services to the football via the tunnel?? It would be logical to run them direct to Richmond like they do now.. (And with the tunnel built there will be the extra capacity to do so.)

Not being able to access South Yarra or Richmond is no different to not being able to access North Melbourne or Southern Cross, or for that matter, not being able to access the new station at Parkville if coming from say the Frankston or Werribee lines. As others have said, simply change at Caulfield if heading to/ from the South East, and change at Footscray if heading to/ from the West. or alternatively, change at Flinders St/ CBD South. Having some services continuing to use the old lines, and others using the new lines defeats the purpose.

Definitely agree. But we all know much people like to complain about changing trains... Good example is when some trains run direct to/from FSS.  Can always change at RMD/FSS for a loop service

If referring to football traffic, why would you run extra services to the football via the tunnel?? It would be logical to run them direct to Richmond like they do now.. (And with the tunnel built there will be the extra capacity to do so.)

Because it is necessary to keep lines separate from each other to avoid reliability issues.

Running the football specials from Richmond means trains would need to cross from the Cross-City group to the metro tunnel group, which then creates a train path conflict at South Kensington when what we really should be doing is removing such conflicts.

Why didn't the tunnel go under the MCG with a station directly below it, or is too logical?

Why didn't the tunnel go under the MCG with a station directly below it, or is too logical?

Because it would of been a colossal waste of money for a station that would get used once, maybe twice a week during the football season and sporadically outside of that.

Because it is necessary to keep lines separate from each other to avoid reliability issues.

Running the football specials from Richmond means trains would need to cross from the Cross-City group to the metro tunnel group, which then creates a train path conflict at South Kensington when what we really should be doing is removing such conflicts.

There are usually two or three additional trains for football traffic for each line.. Three lines will be using tunnel (Pakenham, Cranbourne and Sunbury/Watergardens).  That will not cause a huge issue IMO running them direct to Richmond (and SSS for Etihad games) especially considering the reduction in congestion. Also, the Traralgon services will also be going direct to/from SSS and heading onto same tracks as trains coming from the new tunnel.  (Chances are Traralgon services will end up a lot more frequent by the time the tunnel is built).

Also, if trains are scheduled to terminate at FSS they are likely to go via Richmond anyway.  There may be crossovers coming into City South, but they are likely to want to reduce congestion from terminating trains in the tunnel.

Also if there are issues between South Yarra and Richmond, you may see some Frankston line trains go thru tunnel.  We don't know what kind of redundancies they are planning on building into the line.

Why didn't the tunnel go under the MCG with a station directly below it, or is too logical?

As kapow said, way too expensive to have another tunnel go from Domain to the MCG.

There are usually two or three additional trains for football traffic for each line.. Three lines will be using tunnel (Pakenham, Cranbourne and Sunbury/Watergardens).  That will not cause a huge issue IMO running them direct to Richmond (and SSS for Etihad games) especially considering the reduction in congestion. Also, the Traralgon services will also be going direct to/from SSS and heading onto same tracks as trains coming from the new tunnel.  (Chances are Traralgon services will end up a lot more frequent by the time the tunnel is built).

Also, if trains are scheduled to terminate at FSS they are likely to go via Richmond anyway.  There may be crossovers coming into City South, but they are likely to want to reduce congestion from terminating trains in the tunnel.

Also if there are issues between South Yarra and Richmond, you may see some Frankston line trains go thru tunnel.  We don't know what kind of redundancies they are planning on building into the line.

The aim isn't to provide a better service to the MCG for the footy, its to provide a more consistent service across every line across the board, such as 10 minute Frankston trains or Clifton Hill groups running the same way around the loop. Alternating services only after footy games goes against this.

The plan is for no trains to be terminating in the city, hence the new/improved driver facilities and stabling at Watergardens, Calder Park and Sunbury so that all trains can terminate in the outer suburbs. The only reason for a train to terminate at Flinders is to stable it in the city if its not running straight back out. The Metro lines will be mostly (exclusively?) run by the new order of trains, so they may never terminate in the city .

I'd imagine very few redundancies. With the removal of the Dandenongs between Flinders and South Yarra, this means there are two tracks that can be used for dedicated V/Line services, meaning less interaction with Frankston for them. It is in the Network Development Plan that Geelong trains will eventually run through to South Yarra (probably after a seventh track is added to the viaduct) so I'd imagine they would keep that exclusiveness.

Why didn't the tunnel go under the MCG with a station directly below it, or is too logical?

What, Jolimont and/or Richmond too far for Football Fans!!!

Michael

We don't know what kind of redundancies they are planning on building into the line.

The bean counters have worked very hard to remove all redundancy from the network for many years. The fact that redundancy provides flexibility is not considered when the only thing which counts is costs. So why would they design in redundancy now, at extra cost?

There are usually two or three additional trains for football traffic for each line.. Three lines will be using tunnel (Pakenham, Cranbourne and Sunbury/Watergardens).  That will not cause a huge issue IMO running them direct to Richmond (and SSS for Etihad games) especially considering the reduction in congestion. Also, the Traralgon services will also be going direct to/from SSS and heading onto same tracks as trains coming from the new tunnel.  (Chances are Traralgon services will end up a lot more frequent by the time the tunnel is built).

Also, if trains are scheduled to terminate at FSS they are likely to go via Richmond anyway.  There may be crossovers coming into City South, but they are likely to want to reduce congestion from terminating trains in the tunnel.

Also if there are issues between South Yarra and Richmond, you may see some Frankston line trains go thru tunnel.  We don't know what kind of redundancies they are planning on building into the line.

Those who need to catch a Sunbury train from the footy can change at FSS like the rest of the Northern Group.

The whole thing is designed to remove train path conflicts in the CBD and should remain as such.

There is absolutely no reason to run the trains from Richmond.

There are usually two or three additional trains for football traffic for each line.. Three lines will be using tunnel (Pakenham, Cranbourne and Sunbury/Watergardens).  That will not cause a huge issue IMO running them direct to Richmond (and SSS for Etihad games) especially considering the reduction in congestion. Also, the Traralgon services will also be going direct to/from SSS and heading onto same tracks as trains coming from the new tunnel.  (Chances are Traralgon services will end up a lot more frequent by the time the tunnel is built).

Also, if trains are scheduled to terminate at FSS they are likely to go via Richmond anyway.  There may be crossovers coming into City South, but they are likely to want to reduce congestion from terminating trains in the tunnel.

Also if there are issues between South Yarra and Richmond, you may see some Frankston line trains go thru tunnel.  We don't know what kind of redundancies they are planning on building into the line.

No it is being built as a dedicated  group line  Sunbury/Melton to  Pakenham/Dandenong/Crambourne . You might get some special directs via Richmond for Football tarffic, but certainly not Frankstons using the Metro tunnel .  IIRC Frankston is crossworked to  Newport Group  lines .

Ignoring a connection at South Yarra is daft, as it restricts connectivity and hampers effective passenger distibution.

Not to mention South Yarra expecting massive growth into the future as a auxilliary CBD.

Why didn't the tunnel go under the MCG with a station directly below it, or is too logical?

NSiS.

The bean counters have worked very hard to remove all redundancy from the network for many years. The fact that redundancy provides flexibility is not considered when the only thing which counts is costs. So why would they design in redundancy now, at extra cost?

Redundancy is not flexibility, it is promotion of the same archaic thinking that has continued to plague the system.

Those who need to catch a Sunbury train from the footy can change at FSS like the rest of the Northern Group.

The whole thing is designed to remove train path conflicts in the CBD and should remain as such.

There is absolutely no reason to run the trains from Richmond.

I was not referring to Sunbury trains going to Richmond.  But I WAS referring to Sunbury trains going to SSS for Etihad..

Two or three trains for Pakenham and Cranbourne to/from Richmond after football is not going to make much difference, and will be better for congestion after games on other lines.. If Dandenong group is not going to have any football trains, customers for those lines will have to go on other services.. ie Frankston, or on the CHL group.  It is common sense to be able to run the trains to Richmond.

Ignoring a connection at South Yarra is daft, as it restricts connectivity and hampers effective passenger distibution.

Agree

NSiS.

Can neither agree nor disagree. Wiki suggests NSiS may stand for National Sheep Identification System, ,Network Store Interface Service, Next Steps in Signaling, Nullsoft Scriptable Install System or New Sathorn International School, none of which seem appropriate in this conversation.

NSiS.

No Sense in Stupidity? I'm sorry, but that's about all I could make from that one.

A reminder people on why acronyms are bad. It doesn't take that long to actually punch a few extra keys.

phillipjfry.jpg

phillipjfry.jpg

You're not helping. In the context of your answer, what is NSIS?

You're not helping. In the context of your answer, what is NSIS?

He's trying to be enigmatic, but as always it just comes across as being a tosser.

My insignificant opinion is..... The names CBD South and CBD North are stupid. I am not sure which moron decided to invent new names for stations that are metres away from existing stations.Apparently CBD North will be directly above the existing Melbourne Central Station.
Apparently CBD South will be under the intersection of Swanston and Flinders Streets.
The should be fully integrated with the existing stations.
The imbeciles should look at London stations like Baker St and Waterloo. Londoners didn't invent separate names for the different lines at the one station.

I suppose a compromise could be to call them Melbourne Central North Station and Flinders St East Station. That way it is obvious they are part of the existing stations, but politicians can state they are new stations for political purposes.

It's a bit like what they did in Perth when opening the new Mandurah line platforms in the city.  Despite being physically connected to the existing Perth station by pedestrian tunnels designed to enable interchange, the platforms were given the new name of "Perth Underground".