Melbourne Airport Rail Link

 
  justarider Chief Train Controller

Location: Stuck on VR and hoping for better.
Tudge is the only one that's said anything about it running via MM1. The Hun (here: https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/scott-morrison-daniel-andrews-give-melbourne-airport-rail-link-green-light/news-story/79a5c8ac7331410e29726ccff441aca3?login=1) says it will 'link to the Metro Tunnel' but there's no source for that.

I'm hoping they don't run it via MM1. MARL will need to be high (10 minute?) frequency to compete with options like Skybus and private transport, which takes capacity away from the Sunbury and Cranbourne/Pakenham lines.
res1psaloqu1tur
oh come on - "high (10 minute?) frequency" - really !  10 is NOT high frequency.

MM1 is being built for 2 minute frequency. Do you honestly believe that Sunbury requires all that ? ( about 3 times the existing).

Sharing MARL with MM1 equates to about 1/5 of the potential trains at peak time. During off-peak the "extra" load is miniscule.

The alternative is sharing with Melton or Wyndham Vale. Those WOULD create a strain.

cheers
John

Sponsored advertisement

  res1psaloqu1tur Station Staff

@justarider

10 minutes is indeed high frequency as far as airport rail goes. The Hong Kong airport express has a frequency of 10 minutes. Toronto, Heathrow and Sydney are every 15 or lower.

I take your point about the immediate need for 2 minute frequency not being there on the Sunbury line, but isn't the idea to add capacity rather than take it away? Running MARL through MM1 takes away capacity that could be needed in the future. Increased capacity attracts more pax and can spur more transit oriented development.

Moreover, if you have MARL running through MM1 that reduces redundancy. If lines running through MM1 were to be suspended or be delayed for some reason that could cascade to MARL and affect airport services.
  justarider Chief Train Controller

Location: Stuck on VR and hoping for better.
@justarider

10 minutes is indeed high frequency as far as airport rail goes. The Hong Kong airport express has a frequency of 10 minutes. Toronto, Heathrow and Sydney are every 15 or lower.

I take your point about the immediate need for 2 minute frequency not being there on the Sunbury line, but isn't the idea to add capacity rather than take it away? Running MARL through MM1 takes away capacity that could be needed in the future. Increased capacity attracts more pax and can spur more transit oriented development.

Moreover, if you have MARL running through MM1 that reduces redundancy. If lines running through MM1 were to be suspended or be delayed for some reason that could cascade to MARL and affect airport services.
res1psaloqu1tur
@res1 ; your'e on the wrong train to Heathrow.
15 minutes frequency for the overpriced Express.
That gets you to Paddington, and then have to change to go anywhere you actually want. A bit like terminate at SCS.

The real Heathrow underground is the Piccadilly line, every 4 minutes. Now that is what I call frequent.

Really ! saving up a surplus capacity of 30tph just for Sunbury,
just in case a train will break down sometime,
or the suburb population explodes more than Melton, WDV, Wallan etc by a factor of X3

Doesn't exist, nor planned, anywhere else. Not even Dandenong with MM1 - that is sharing with Pakenham & Cranbourne

On your basis, let's build a stand-by tunnel for every other line.
I'm sure every other part of the network would be delighted to have an 50-80% over capacity, that gets used just enough to stop the rails going rusty.

cheers
John
  reubstar6 Chief Train Controller

Really ! saving up a surplus capacity of 30tph just for Sunbury...
justarider
The point is that the Melton line, which is needed ASAP, will share this capacity with the Sunbury line. It also seems that the Wyndham Vale line may also run through the Metro Tunnel. Squeezing the airport line in that is not a good idea. Part of the point of the Metro Tunnel is to relieve the strain on the Northern Loop, where three lines meet. Having the airport line, as well as the Melton, Wyndham Vale and Sunbury lines all competing for the Metro Tunnel seems like a recipe for disaster. The airport line is the last line where you want regular disruption, since this will potentially have a knock-on effect to airlines who continue to wait for late-running passengers.
While access to more of Melbourne is an admirable component of running airport trains through the Metro Tunnel, I would argue stopping at Southern Cross and Sunshine will ensure that virtually all people can access the airport line with a maximum of 1 change of trains.
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland

The airport line is the last line where you want regular disruption, since this will potentially have a knock-on effect to airlines who continue to wait for late-running passengers.
reubstar6
Correction, Airlines don't wait for passengers running late to the airport !
  justarider Chief Train Controller

Location: Stuck on VR and hoping for better.
Really ! saving up a surplus capacity of 30tph just for Sunbury...
The point is that the Melton line, which is needed ASAP, will share this capacity with the Sunbury line. It also seems that the Wyndham Vale line may also run through the Metro Tunnel. Squeezing the airport line in that is not a good idea. Part of the point of the Metro Tunnel is to relieve the strain on the Northern Loop, where three lines meet. Having the airport line, as well as the Melton, Wyndham Vale and Sunbury lines all competing for the Metro Tunnel seems like a recipe for disaster. The airport line is the last line where you want regular disruption, since this will potentially have a knock-on effect to airlines who continue to wait for late-running passengers.
While access to more of Melbourne is an admirable component of running airport trains through the Metro Tunnel, I would argue stopping at Southern Cross and Sunshine will ensure that virtually all people can access the airport line with a maximum of 1 change of trains.
reubstar6
Everybody wants to share. I get that, but be realistic.

Current: Melton 5tph + Wyndham Vale 10tph +Sunbury  9ph = 24tph

Squeezing those 3 together on today's volumes is damn tight. Flying cross overs, the lot.
Absolutely no chance of managing the expected future numbers. Double the above easy.

Maybe Sunbury + Melton might fit, but WDV no way Jose.

I never suggested Airport + Melton + WDV + Sunbury. Clearly that will not fit. Hence 2 pathways will be required.

That begs the question why MARL instead of Melton to share with Sunbury ?
1. MARL has money & timeline committed. Melton sparks does not.
2. Melton sparks has to cross the stream to get to Sunbury/MM1 line (but not fight the WDV line).
   A spaghetti nightmare. Under/over/tunnels ouch ouch ouch !!!!

and "regular disruption" ? - an absolute crock when no other excuse works, and is a very low opinion of the new MM1 line.
What happens when the roof falls in on an exclusive MARL tunnel ? or the bridges over the Maribyrnong collapse ?

Reminds me of the disaster plan back at the old Telecom data centre.
"If Atom bomb hits here, we are backed up in Sydney". My response - who gives a F*** about phone bills, the world is stuffed.

cheers
John
  reubstar6 Chief Train Controller

Correction, Airlines don't wait for passengers running late to the airport !
Nighfire
Not in my experience, unfortunately. I have had multiple occasions where one guy is running late so the whole flight has had to wait for him.
  John.Z Chief Train Controller

Correction, Airlines don't wait for passengers running late to the airport !
Not in my experience, unfortunately. I have had multiple occasions where one guy is running late so the whole flight has had to wait for him.
reubstar6
Running late to the airport does not equate to running late for a flight.

If you haven't checked in on time, the Airline won't wait for you.

If your bags are already on the flight, but you are late to the gate (too long in the lounge, connecting from another flight, got lost in duty free), Airlines will generally try and find and wait for you, because it's quicker than finding your bags and amending the paperwork.
  ptvcommuter Train Controller

Geelong and Ballarat fast Trains via new tunnel

Airport and WV use RRL between Southern Cross and Sunshine

Melton and Sunbury use Metro Tunnel

It’s isnt that hard
New tunnel would be better off for the fast trains would allow them to run quicker without being stuck behind the slower Airport Trains.

We don’t need Sunbury, Melton, Airport and WV all running through the Metro Tunnel
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

Geelong and Ballarat fast Trains via new tunnel

Airport and WV use RRL between Southern Cross and Sunshine

Melton and Sunbury use Metro Tunnel

It’s isnt that hard
New tunnel would be better off for the fast trains would allow them to run quicker without being stuck behind the slower Airport Trains.

We don’t need Sunbury, Melton, Airport and WV all running through the Metro Tunnel
ptvcommuter
Correction the government's plan is this:

-> Melton and WV via new tunnel
-> Geelong and Ballarat express rail via RRL
-> Airport and Sunbury use Metro Tunnel.

Yes Dan said himself "the Airport trains may use the Metro Tunnel"

Please note the details are still in debate though, though people love discussing this until the end of time. Until it's been repeated so many times that the discussion becomes meaningless. Can you wait another few years?

To ptv commuter:
The new tunnel isn't any quicker than the RRL (which already bypasses 4 out of the 6 stops btw Sunshine and SC)
It is hard, because diesel trains using a tunnel would require good ventalisation system in place. This would add to the cost.

"We don’t need Sunbury, Melton, Airport and WV all running through the Metro Tunnel"
No-one is suggesting this. No-one in the right mind would put 4 frequent services to converge onto just 2 tracks.
  Goose13 Beginner

Correction the government's plan is this:

-> Melton and WV via new tunnel
-> Geelong and Ballarat express rail via RRL
-> Airport and Sunbury use Metro Tunnel.

Yes Dan said himself "the Airport trains may use the Metro Tunnel"

Please note the details are still in debate though, though people love discussing this until the end of time. Until it's been repeated so many times that the discussion becomes meaningless. Can you wait another few years?

To ptv commuter:
The new tunnel isn't any quicker than the RRL (which already bypasses 4 out of the 6 stops btw Sunshine and SC)
It is hard, because diesel trains using a tunnel would require good ventalisation system in place. This would add to the cost.

"We don’t need Sunbury, Melton, Airport and WV all running through the Metro Tunnel"
No-one is suggesting this. No-one in the right mind would put 4 frequent services to converge onto just 2 tracks.
True Believers
This may well prove irrelevant, but wouldn't exclusively making use of the new tunnel that has mainly been reported on as the "Airport Train Tunnel" for Melton and WV exclusively following electrification be a tad strange?

It feels like at the very least, that the "MM1 tunnel potentially being used for airport trains" comment may be in relation to its use before the tunnel section itself has been completed far away in 2030.

And if the new tunnel is only as fast as the RRL, does that mean we'll be seeing airport trains making the last leg to the airport itself in the 4 minutes they have left after the RRL to meet the claimed 20m SCS->airport travel times? (assuming the 16 from current vline timetabling)

(Edit: and also the fact that this would mean not having WV or Melton services serve any stations between SCS and Sunshine, or that all the stations between would have to be rebuilt for the tunnel if they did?)
  Lockie91 Train Controller

@true believer

Please go and read up on the governments “western rail plan” and brush up a little

RRL was designed to be one day sparked. Just not as soon as was expected. Melton and WV will use the current infrastructure and RRL. The governments western rail plan includes fast rail to Geelong and possibly Ballarat in the distant future. This means a new standard of track capable of delivering the governments desired speeds.

I would suspect that regional as well as Airport services will use the new tunnel into the city. V/Line allows 18 minutes from Sunshine to SCS. With trains at 80/100km with no stop at Footscray this could easily be cut in half.

Melton and WV will easily have 30+ minutes travel time from Sunshine to their respected terminus. (Remember there are still a few stations that are yet to be built!) A 45 minute trip fron Melton to SCS is not a bad outcome. Sunbury line does the heavy lifting between Sunshine and North Melbourne (née Arden) Melton and WV can interchange at Footscray for MM1 services.

So you end up with
Airport and Regional services via MARL, Express Sunshine > SCS
Melton and WV Via RRL, Express Sunshine > Footscray > SCS
Sunbury via MM1 SAS

It is possible that MARL services could run via MM1 until construction of the MARL tunnel is complete. The construction of the tunnel, reconfiguration of SCS and the Reconfiguration of Sunshine are going to take the most amount of time. This would allow the government to deliver the project a few years earlier.
  tayser Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
^ that would be ideal - and when the tunnel is complete, offer two levels of service - direct from the city and trains to the south-east (i.e Westall or Dandenong to Airport (SAS) - 4TPH, SX -> Sunshine -> Airport - 4TPH).
  tayser Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
Another thing to be mindful of - and it is quite minor / easy to miss, but on the publicly available maps for the SRL, it shows the MARL section terminating in Broadmeadows, not the airport (thereby making the airport line also useful with a 1 train change to people living from about Moonee Ponds northwards all the way out to Craigieburn).  Crossing fingers this is the case for day 1 of MARL.
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

Why would you have diesel trains running through the tunnels and the electric lines run above ground.

Wouldn't it make sense if the tunnels were for the electrified lines, and the above ground RRL reserved for fast regional services.
  reubstar6 Chief Train Controller

Considering the MARL tunnel will probably mostly follow the current rail reservation, I would propose the following:
  • Sunbury and Melton via MM1
  • Airport and Wyndham Vale via MARL
  • Regional via RRL
This at least avoids the need for the expensive ventilation. The Ballarat line could eventually use MARL if necessary (if/)when it is electrified. I still hope the Geelong line with run via MM2 one day. This would eventually mean (let's say in 2050):

  • Sunbury (>16TPH) and Melton (>8TPH) via MM1
  • Airport (>6TPH) and Ballarat (>6TPH) via MARL
  • Bendigo (>6TPH)/Beyond Wallan (>3TPH) e.g. Seymour (both standardised) + Albury/NSW Trainlink via RRL (2 TPH)
  • Independent freight line for Inland Rail and whatever other dual gauge freight exists
  • Wyndham Vale direct services abolished due to SRL or the extension of the Werribee line? Otherwise can use MARL.


Yes, this will be incredibly expensive, but 2050 is plenty of time to get this stuff done, especially since quite a lot of it could be done in the Western Rail Plan.
  Lockie91 Train Controller

The western rail plan hints and sparking Geelong and also Ballarat. So I don’t think we will be seeing Vlos via MARL. Remember that this plan stretches out over 10 years. The original Vlos will be reaching the end of there life by then.

Ventilation is not that expensive, there are no unground stations besides a possibility of underground platforms at Sunshine this could be solved with Platform screen doors. Road tunnels are built with Ventilation even the City Loop was for the occasional V/line that gets lost.

This also plays into the MM1 comment, MARL services could run via MM1 for a few years with the massive job of sparking Geelong and Ballarat occurs, along with Geelong HSR and the new rolling stock that would require.

The reason RRL will not accomodate HSR its simple maths. Track geometry and gradients. These allow for 160km running in some sections. If the government wants trains at 250km or 300km/h then the maths needs to be re done. The current track geometry will not be able to allow for speeds that high. Building and new greenfield line will be cheaper and have a better outcome than trying to convert the current class 1 track.
  chomper Junior Train Controller

How locked in is the Sunshine option? After reading this article, I'm not convinced it's the only option in play:

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/it-would-be-a-problem-for-us-airport-wants-answers-on-station-site-20190320-p515wb.html
  Crossover Train Controller

Location: St. Albans Victoria
How locked in is the Sunshine option? After reading this article, I'm not convinced it's the only option in play:

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/it-would-be-a-problem-for-us-airport-wants-answers-on-station-site-20190320-p515wb.html
chomper
I cannot see  the Sunshine Option changing in any significant way now that BOTH the state and federal governments have "locked it in ".
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
With some people talking up the Idea of the airport rail link going via Metro 1 ! How Is that going to work, with one of the private Investors being the operator of Southern Cross Station (bypassed by Metro 1)

Southern Cross Station also happens to be the largest station In Melbourne, with by far the most amount of transport connections (though not the busiest station In Melbourne)
  The Vinelander Minister for Railways

Location: Ballan, Victoria on the Ballarat RFR Line
How locked in is the Sunshine option? After reading this article, I'm not convinced it's the only option in play:

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/it-would-be-a-problem-for-us-airport-wants-answers-on-station-site-20190320-p515wb.html
chomper

I still am.

M.
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

See the article I posted in the Geelong thread. New tracks are a definite, as is the Sunshine option, as is Geelong sharing the new tracks.
  Gauntlet Chief Commissioner

Location:
So common sense has finally prevailed and the airport line will now run along the Upfield line.
It will branch off just after Gowrie, continue along the southern side of Western Ring Road and then join the goods line at Jacana.
To improve running time Fawkner and Brunswick stations will close when the airport line opens.
A shuttle service will operate between Gowrie and Upfield.
It will be run by the two Hitachi carriages (295M and 1994T(formerly 355D)) that are at North Bendigo and are currently being refurbished.
  ptvcommuter Train Controller

With some people talking up the Idea of the airport rail link going via Metro 1 ! How Is that going to work, with one of the private Investors being the operator of Southern Cross Station (bypassed by Metro 1) Southern Cross Station also happens to be the largest station In Melbourne, with by far the most amount of transport connections (though not the busiest station In Melbourne)
Nightfire


I prefer this option but I’d rather there be no underground platforms at Southern Cross. Make the Airport Line run direct through to another line so that it services Flinders St and Richmond connecting to either the Glen Waverley or Sandringham Lines. You could even terminate it at South Yarra as Platform 5 and 6 won’t be used when the Metro Tunnel opens.
  62440 Chief Commissioner

So common sense has finally prevailed and the airport line will now run along the Upfield line.
It will branch off just after Gowrie, continue along the southern side of Western Ring Road and then join the goods line at Jacana.
To improve running time Fawkner and Brunswick stations will close when the airport line opens.
A shuttle service will operate between Gowrie and Upfield.
It will be run by the two Hitachi carriages (295M and 1994T(formerly 355D)) that are at North Bendigo and are currently being refurbished.
Gauntlet
Posted 14 minutes too early. All fools day starts at midnight

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: