| home |
|
| news |
|
| discussions |
|
| content |
|
| site |
|
|
| technical support | Need Help? Lodge a support ticket!
Note: This is for technical support only. General questions about railways should be posted to the Forums.donation 
Please Donate!photo comp Have YOU voted yet on Photo of the Month?
Click Here!
Voting Closes 31/1search |
| |
| Author |
Message |
Roberts0001
Deputy Commissioner
Joined: Jan 18, 2007
Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009
contact
|
post
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:02 am
|
Bad for Claustraphobics? He he he 
|
|
 |
Camster
Deputy Commissioner
Joined: Nov 25, 2004
Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009
Location: Kew by force
contact
|
post
|
|
|
|
Gwiwer
Rt Hon Gentleman and Ghost of Oliver Bulleid
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009
Location: Far away yet close at hand in images of elsewhere
contact
|
post
|
|
| Gwiwer |
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:32 pm
|
Double deck trains always create a certain feeling of claustrophobia.
You can either sit at a normal level and get a rougher ride over the bogies or choose upstairs where you cannot see down properly or downstairs where you get a prize view of waiting passenger's ankles at every stop. Neither of those options are ideal.
I experienced the same feelings that I get in Sydney on the RATP double-deckers around Paris so it isn't confined to just CityRail's designs.
On balance I prefer a single-deck train which is packed to a double-decker which might have a little more floor space. But I also prefer a train which runs and does so on time; if Melbourne could manage that just a little better then a proportion of the present overloading would be eased as some of it relates to trains attempting to carry double loads.
Why MYKI? It isn't mine and it's not a key.
Ferroequinologist. BA Hons (Honourable Bachelor of Aquatarts  )
The wise yet mysterious Sir Gwiwer Greybeard |
|
|
mjja
Sir Nigel Gresley
Joined: Jan 13, 2003
Last Visited: Jan 7, 2009
Location: Mount Waverley, Melbourne
contact
|
post
|
|
| mjja |
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 12:49 pm
|
| Roberts0001 wrote: | | How about this for a thought - why dont we actually ask the commuting public what they want, instead of what the politicians think or the gunzels think. |
Go to the top of the class! Of course the passengers might just say "I don't care how it's done, just give me a good service" but I think a lot of people have forgotten that it's real people we're running the service for and we should be aiming to serve them as best we can.
| Roberts0001 wrote: | | I actually believe that not one solution is the ultimate solution, but a multi pronged attack is what is required. |
Also spot on. We need some measures that can be implemented immediately, and others that take longer to happen but will deliver real benefits that will last for decades. This concept is not understood by many people at all, which is why so many ideas get attacked as the wrong thing to do - long term plans get attacked because the problem is here and now not in 20 years time, and minor patches get attacked because they don't fix the real problem.
| Roberts0001 wrote: | | Double deck trains are a start - recent travel to Sydney has proven to me that this works. |
But will it work here, where we'd be mixing double and single deck fleets? Will platform dwell time increase? That could kill the whole benefit. This is an imponderable.
| Roberts0001 wrote: | | I also tell you, I felt alot safer on a Sydney train than I do here in Melb. We need more services, on time and safe. But again, we need to survey the commuting publics needs, not what a pack of gunzels think - we also need a transport minister with an open mind. A multi pronged attack will be the only solution. Double deck trains, cheaper fares, off peak discounts, free travel for early risers, better and safer parking at stations, a better interconnecting bus and tram network and more transit police patrols - combined, this will make the network far more appealing. |
Absolutely agree, and it's a case of having the cash to implement it.
Happy Gunzelling and remember, "Go by rail!"
Michael Angelico
President, Smart Passengers Inc
(My opinions are my own unless specifically stated.)
|
|
|
tomohawk
Assistant Commissioner
Joined: Nov 05, 2007
Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009
Location: Abbotsford, Melbourne
contact
|
post
|
|
| tomohawk |
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 6:23 pm
|
In some respects Double Deck trains are a good idea, but the reduction in pathways would be a significant issue, as from what I can tell the public prefers a higher frequency service over long wait times with high capacity trains.
THe only way I can imagine double deck trains working would be to adequately instruct passengers that they have to get to the door BEFORE the train arrives at the stop, or the train will leave before they can alight the service.
Reality of this happening? 0.
|
|
|
Speed
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Mar 19, 2007
Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009
contact
|
post
|
|
| Speed |
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 6:50 pm
|
| tomohawk wrote: | | adequately instruct passengers that they have to get to the door BEFORE the train arrives at the stop, or the train will leave before they can alight the service. |
People in Melbourne should be better about this than people in Sydney because you can't get through a door unless you're at the door to open it when the train stops. Cityrail passengers often wait until the doors are open before standing up.
Having said that, the letter from Graeme Madigan of Brighton in Monday's Age suggests that some people can't get to the door unless they're in a Tait car or a car in the normal non-railway sense. People in both cities need to avoid standing around doorways unnecessarily.
Any arrangement which increases the number of people than can fit into individual cars of a train has the potential to increase dwell times. On the other hand, too little space can increase dwell times even more by making it awkward to move on or off the train. With the current level of crowding on Melbourne's suburban trains, it may be that platforms need to be extended regardless of whether double-deck or single-deck with longitudinal seating only trains were introduced.
| penov wrote: | | In Sydney, most of their double deckers are 60 foot cars for the reason that they can only have two sets of doors and it is better to have 8 x 2 sets of doors than 6 x 2 |
I doubt this. Sydney went to double-deck to avoid widespread extensions of platforms. It has the same dimensions of platform and needs to retain the same dimensions of train. Melbourne has changed the dimensions of its platforms to suit new train dimensions (consistent with Europe).
There are European double-deck trains with 3 doors so it is possible to have 6 x 3. I don't know for certain but it would make sense that double-deck X-traps would have 3 doors per car.
| awsgc24 wrote: | | Secondly, pax can walk through to cars 7 and 8, particularly if the gangways between cars are full width |
This quote is from the "4 car trains" thread and its context may be suggesting that end cars be added for bicycles. If you put extra space beyond the end of the platform, all of the passengers for those cars will exit through the 2 doors at either end of the train. If you have a double-deck train, they will be spread more evenly along the length of the platform.
|
|
|
ZH836301
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Apr 26, 2006
Last Visited: Dec 30, 2008
Location: BleakCity
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:08 pm
|
| Speed wrote: | | Having said that, the letter from Graeme Madigan of Brighton in Monday's Age suggests that some people can't get to the door unless they're in a Tait car or a car in the normal non-railway sense. People in both cities need to avoid standing around doorways unnecessarily. |
People will move away from the doors when there is actually room to do so - ie. ditch 5 abreast seating
|
|
|
Gwiwer
Rt Hon Gentleman and Ghost of Oliver Bulleid
Joined: Nov 22, 2003
Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009
Location: Far away yet close at hand in images of elsewhere
contact
|
post
|
|
| Gwiwer |
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:52 pm
|
Experience suggests that this will not be the case.
Passengers still stand in the door aisles when there are seats available on lesser-used trains.
Passengers in other cites and overseas are also in the habit of standing in doorways even if seats or other space is available.
Try as we might we have yet to find a way of successfully manipulating our own behaviour to our advantage.
Why MYKI? It isn't mine and it's not a key.
Ferroequinologist. BA Hons (Honourable Bachelor of Aquatarts )
The wise yet mysterious Sir Gwiwer Greybeard |
|
|
Natronomonas
Train Controller
Joined: Jan 14, 2008
Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009
contact
|
post
|
|
| Natronomonas |
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 10:26 pm
|
The removal of seats on a few of the B2 trams (I've mainly seen them on route 19) seems to have a positive effect for reducing doorway crowding.
People generally move to the 'open' area with bum-rests and handholds/posts rather than stand right in the doorway, as often happens in the 'full seating' trams.
Judicious seat removal on some trains would work fine, IMO, although it would go against the whole 'any train, anywhere' idea that connex is pursuing. Still, you could mainly run the reduced-seats on the busier, shorter lines/runs (say to oakleigh or whatever) but still run them wherever if you had to.
|
|
|
prometheus_au
Chief Train Controller
Joined: Oct 10, 2003
Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009
Location: In a Siemens on the Watergardens line
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 11:02 pm
|
I think it's only a matter time time before Melbourne goes DD. 
I was reading an article in Track and signal (not very well written mind you) concerning DD trains in Melbourne and it's angle was that the move would help congestion. I'm not sure, but the article was full of holes, mentioning the 4D as nothing more than a "slightly" modified Sydney DD set.
Only time and future governments will tell. [/b][/i]
Prometheus
|
|
|
L1150
Locomotive Driver
Joined: Jan 04, 2007
Last Visited: Nov 10, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 12:37 pm
|
Gwiwers comments about visability issues on DD trains reminded me about riding on Sydney trains some time ago and wishing that the station names were painted on the platform edging. Travelling in unfamiliar territory, I found it hard peering through a forrest of legs to see what station we were at! Travelling upstairs wasn't much better as the full width platform awning often also obscured the station name. (You could tell if the guttering needed cleaning out though!) 
|
|
|
ZoomRail
Chief Train Controller
Joined: Jan 31, 2007
Last Visited: Jul 24, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 5:18 pm
|
Ideas...
- Double Deckers trains will probably increase dwell times and are probably not worth it.
- Longer trains won't fit in platform
- Removal of some seats and potentially using sideways seating (maybe even fold-up ones like on Siemens trains)
- Fitting of more hand grabs, etc
- Considering seating layout similar to Hitachis
- Scrap all trains except for one Hitachi and give me personally a private rail service and not let anyone else use Victorian railways
(Okay, maybe not the last one... lol)
Melbourne PT is finally improving. This Brumby guy seems to be doing a good job...
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT + 10 Hours
|
You cannot post new threads in this forum
You cannot reply to threads in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.6 © 2001 phpBB Group
Theme images and concept © 2004 by Michael Greenhill and Railpage, All Rights Reserved.
Version 2.0.6 of PHP-Nuke Port by Tom Nitzschner © 2002 www.toms-home.com
|
|
