Melbourne Airport Rail Link

 
  justarider Assistant Commissioner

Location: Stuck on VR and hoping for better.
Justarider I think quadding would only be required to Laverton or Williams Landing if Geelong went through Metro 2.  
I'm not sold on the idea of an underground station being built at Newport because of:
- lack of space
- liklely very high cost
- limited benefit as an interchange (very few pax from Williamston and Altona would likely change).
I see Laverton serving as almost as good an interchange.

Geelong train could follow metro train as long as they can speed up the Metro train to 120k's an hour there would minimal time lost for Geelong pax compared to Quadding to Newport.
John E
yeah nar, @John E

lets not get ahead of ouselves with minor detail.

My point is MM2 is twice as complex in scope and distance as MM1, and will be very expensive.

By the time any govt looks to detail design, the landscape will be very different  - MM1 running, western SRL scoped and partially done,  sparks a lot further out. Who knows, maybe 1/2 of Melbourne will be working from home on the Gold Coast.

cheers
John

Sponsored advertisement

  John.Z Chief Train Controller

As part of MM2, Altona Line really should be extended to the south of point cook, towards sneydes rd before hooking back towards Werribee. That area is a hogwash of 1 and 3 lane roadds that are bottlenecked full of people driving to Williams Landing.

No point Quadding to Laverton if you don't go the full way. Quad to Lara, extend Metro to Lara. Release some land for development in Little River.
  tayser Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
It seems clear a tunnel is required for the airport link unless Metro 2 is built to take geelong trains off the RRL freeing up capacity for airport line trains?

With the state of Victorian finances with the onset of the issues around COVID19 and large investments in the health system and reduced receipts, using a super fund for the tunnel as outlined in https://t.co/ADfg0aUOAs makes a lot of sense to me.  Structure the deal for a buyout if you think it is better.

If this is not doable then take some of the wasted money being planned for the North East Link and put that into the western network capacity in the form of a tunnel.
yerr, nah

the problem with all the tunnel solutions so far, is the dead end at SCS.
The pathetic inabilty of V/line to quickly turn trains around, including RRL, completly strangles the TPH required to move the growing number of pax.
Those tunnels would have the same failing.

That is why I keep banging on about making as many lines as possible go thru MM1.
Just don't stop & turn in the CBD, keep going thru to the other end.
That magnifies the total throughput tremendously (excuse my chanelling of the Donald) .

MM2 may ultimately be the answer, but it has a few very expensive extra components
  • Run through the CBD until meets Mernda line.
  • Quad the Werribee line to Newport
  • Spark the line to Geelong
  • Spark & run backwards Wyndham Vale RRL, or make a loop, or some weird variation
Maybe eventually, but not yet.

I have no issue with a Super Fund being the financier (full disclosure, probably would be my retirement income a benefit)
BUT
I do object to private operators, including IFM, designing & building monster projects with little benefit other than profit gouging the public

cheers
John
justarider

Yeah/Nah it's not clear there's a need for a tunnel - indeed.

The tunnel, if it's required - City to Sunshine or MM2 - is probably a decision for 10 years away.

Everyone who has assumed continued mass population growth needs to cool their jets because for the next 2 years it's going to be well below the last 10 year's average (i.e we're getting a bit of breather) - I've no doubt the powers that be will aim to get it back up there but all population forecasts from the pre-corona period either need to be lengthened re: timeframes or discounted entirely (in a small amount of cases).

Having said that, that shouldn't stop the programme of work that has been set in motion - doubling down during a period of reprieve and very cheap money could be a good thing.

Thanks also for outlining capacity increases through the new trains again justarider, 400% on Melton puts things into perspective with a handful of hourly (6) services.
  LeroyW Junior Train Controller

Location: Awaiting MM2
All this talk about tunnels just seems crazy, unless my maths is way, way out.

There are currently two track pairs into the city from Sunshine right (RRL and Metro)? So with proper investment in signalling, stabling, platforms etc. we should be able to run something close to 48 tph.  Perhaps RRL can only do 20, so call it 44 tph to be fair.

Looking at the current timetable, into Footscray between 7:30am and 8:30am we have:
5 Geelong services + 2 WV short starters
3 Ballarat services + 4 Bacchus Marsh/Melton short starters
3 Bendio services (1 is a Kyneton short starter)
10 Sunbury/Watergardens services

In total, 27 services along two corridors in a hour (way short of 44).  People are saying "but Melton, WV need more capacity" and yes, they do.  But even just by running HCMT instead of VLine, a small service increase will be a huge capacity increase.  It will also take those short starters off RRL.  If you sparked Melton and ran 6 tph, 12 to Sunbury and 4 to Airport (it's good enough for Hong Kong) you suddenly have only 13 trains running on RRL in an hour.  WV gets some extra VLos and wow we've saved billions on a tunnel.
  tayser Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
All this talk about tunnels just seems crazy, unless my maths is way, way out.

There are currently two track pairs into the city from Sunshine right (RRL and Metro)? So with proper investment in signalling, stabling, platforms etc. we should be able to run something close to 48 tph.  Perhaps RRL can only do 20, so call it 44 tph to be fair.

Looking at the current timetable, into Footscray between 7:30am and 8:30am we have:
5 Geelong services + 2 WV short starters
3 Ballarat services + 4 Bacchus Marsh/Melton short starters
3 Bendio services (1 is a Kyneton short starter)
10 Sunbury/Watergardens services

In total, 27 services along two corridors in a hour (way short of 44).  People are saying "but Melton, WV need more capacity" and yes, they do.  But even just by running HCMT instead of VLine, a small service increase will be a huge capacity increase.  It will also take those short starters off RRL.  If you sparked Melton and ran 6 tph, 12 to Sunbury and 4 to Airport (it's good enough for Hong Kong) you suddenly have only 13 trains running on RRL in an hour.  WV gets some extra VLos and wow we've saved billions on a tunnel.
LeroyW

Yes, some people don't seem to get it.  

If Melton and Wyndham Vale are around the 3TPH mark with Vline going to 4TPH Metro/HCMT is an enormous capacity increase as justarider and you have pointed out.  

Some people think that suburbs spring up overnight - they don't - and a full build out scenario along the Melton corridor and the Wyndham Vale corridor is probably a minimum of 2 decades away.

Both branches - with Quad'ing happening progressively over a 10 year period from Sunshine to Melton and Deer Park to West Werribee - sticking with 4TPH in peak/off-peak for the first decade of operations will probably be more than enough capacity.  Ditto Airport @ 4TPH too.

In another 10 year's there'll be another decision point to get even more capacity - for instance MM2 or a Sunshine tunnel to cater for more Geelong, possibly Ballarat, but most definitely suburban (WV/Melton) services.

And the Sunbury/Watergardens peak timetable will barely need to change as well - as it is not going to see the same level of population growth as the Melton and WV corridors.  If the current timetable (peak) is matched like for like, there's a large capacity increase because of the HCMT capacity increase.  Off-peak is a different story - all the branches should be at 15 minute/4TPH frequencies.

I just hope they really open the wallets and sink a lot of cash and get Sunshine right now - including grade separate junctions (as well as doing the Albion junction properly with grade separation).

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: