Cross River Railway, Mk3

 
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Cross River Rail back on the drawing board.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-07/cross-river-rail-unveiled-queensland-government/7307326

Under former ALP Govt CRR (lite), similar to this proposal but I think tunnel nth to Exkka line,

Then later Anna Bligh convinced it wasn't expensive enough on borrowed money and extended it further south close to Yerrongpilly to save a few houses and thus building underground stations in low density housing areas.

All attempts to build it relied on getting +$5B from the Feds and offering $1B of money they didn't have in return. The Fed ALP saw right through this and offered lower interest rates and not a cent more and that vote of confidence from a fellow ALP govt that knew it had zero chance of surviving the next election only months away.

Then Major Newman came along, couldn't allow a good idea to get in the way of politics so they tried a few stupid options on the public to see if they would listen before settling a combined tunnel with buses with no passenger interchange to Cleveland line at Park Road and at one stage proposed closing Dutton Park until protests convinced them otherwise and cut the northern and southern terminus back to as steep as grades as possible. Still with no money to build it he pushed the start date into a 3rd term of govt (hahaha). And of course failure to proceed was automatically thrown at Tony (I hate Suburban Rail) Abbott.

Now back with ALP in Qld again and with "no asset sales" as their motto, no mining boom, no slush fund of extra revenue from real estate sales unlike their southern country parts and more debt that the Eastern Block European countries still eating away at their income stream we are back to a version of CRR Lite. To fund it they have continued the Qld govt tradition for suburban rail of triple tier govt funding (note: statement that Qld govt will need to borrow the money, surprise, not!)  and added private funding into the mix just to make sure the schedule for starting in 2016 is that much harder.

Yes I'm skeptical the CRR will start in 2016.

But seriously overall on the project,
It would appear they intent to build a dedicated pair of tracks from Bowen Hills station which would see new platforms added to the an another pair of tracks on the Ekka line Corridor. Then parallel a revised Ekka line corridor including a new station at Ekka around to close to Roma Street before taking a dive for a station under Roma Street. I suspect the dive will be in the old Normanby yard where there is plenty of width and excess trackage.

The corridor from Bowen Hills to Ekka is at times on 2 tracks and questionable on how this could be expanded. Potentially this would mean a shared corridor with the new line or maybe squeeze a middle track for other users?

Maybe its the way its presented but I would have thought a new station at Ekka then just after the station dive (plenty of room in the railway corridor and swing to the left in the dive to head towards Roma Street station under Spring Hill.

Rising at Dutton Park is fine, but from Dutton Park to Salisbury there will be a need for four NG tracks to cater for future traffic needs and potentially the future Green Bank line.

I suspect this plan retains the GC traffic on the bridge and Beenleigh line traffic will use the tunnel and feed a northern line?

Sponsored advertisement

  locojoe67 Assistant Commissioner

Location: Gen X purgatory/urban Joh-land
Like many transport 'solutions', the plan simply appears to be an expensive means of moving the choke points around and sharing the blame for the consequent delays from heavy rail traffic.

As you mentioned, Dutton Park to Salisbury will still be a difficult corridor to transit and adding a fourth track will be expensive and complex. Resumptions would likely be needed at some key points.

There is ample room in the Norman Park yard for a dive or dedicated tracks, with a recent cycle that way suggesting many of the extant tracks are disused. The four tracks through the cutting near the school under the road bridge were reduced to three some years ago but the cutting can still take four.

Bowen Hills to the Ekka might be less of an issue, but the problem I see is where to from there northwards? The tracks join the western pair of northern suburbs lines, so trains to Ferny Grove are ruled out, and applying current operations would mean trains coming north via the Ekka would not continue on to the Airport, Shorncliffe or Doomben lines either.

Despite this, the funding issue is what is likely to be the stalling point. As discussed elsewhere, banking stress in Austria, Italy, Deutschebank and elsewhere across the Eurozone is likely to breed contagion, with credit becoming more difficult to source.

Much as I think CRR has its merits, I think its too late in this part of the cycle of credit expansion.

A more expensive signalling system on the bridge will be presented as the stopgap solution, but they may eventually just have to duplicate the Merivale bridge as it might be all they can afford to borrow, a choice that has its own complications and drawbacks and is not without its own engineering challenges.

Unless they start running Gold Coast express trains via Corinda!! Now that would be a sight to behold.
  2353 Chief Train Controller

Location: Brisvegas
It's not all that unusual to see Gold Coast trains running between Sherwood and Roma Street now.  They are the first to get diverted around if there is a problem.

As for all the political comment above - this is neither the right place or time.  It's a railway forum.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
It's not all that unusual to see Gold Coast trains running between Sherwood and Roma Street now.  They are the first to get diverted around if there is a problem.

As for all the political comment above - this is neither the right place or time.  It's a railway forum.
2353
On the technical side

You cannot run GC or any other train via Sherwood in peak with 15 to 20 trains per hour running through Bowen Hills on the Suburban tracks. You will have added two flat junctions with frequent crossing paths. Currently this route only has single track connections at both Yerongpilly and Corinda and would need extensive rebuilding and Yerongpilly cann have easy grade seperation due to the road way over pass, but maybe it could have a dive. Going via Corinda is also longer and slower.

Typically the best trains to use the Tennyson route is western trains as it provides a faster direction connection for those working in South Brisbane / South Bank to the west, however with the bridge being at capacity this is not viable for QR. Also unless QR run trains frequently enough, passengers are better off heading to Roma Street to change.

Unfortunately the four tracks from Corinda to Roma Street can never be efficiently uterlised. As currently all western traffic must only use the single pair of tracks, ie 20 trains per hour as crossing the slow junction from the bridge only reduces bridge traffic.

I'm not sure where the CRR would rise at Dutton Park, but the likely outcome is the station shifted nth off the curve. Also there will be a number of property resumptions if they revert to the Anna Blighs CRR lite initial proposal which had numerous resumptions and the main goal to extend the tunnels to Yerongpilly was to avoid this, although expensive work around.

On the nth side,
Maybe the traffic feeding the Cabulture/Kippa lines where you have about 16 to 18t/hr to fully uterlise the tunnels. A new pair of tracks are required to get around the bottle neck between Bowen Hills and FG fly over. This also prevents in crossing paths.

The Western traffic would then (likely reduced if they send a few trains via the Tennyson, Springfield traffic for example) will then feed the Suburban tracks on nth side Shorncliffe and Doomben. Doomben would be upgraded to 4 trains per hour and potentially extended to Hamilton.

Cleveland will then feed the FG line.

The problem with all this is GC to Airport traffic, a natural pair and needs to be retained and NCL interurbans. Both sedrvices now have change sectors so to speak. Maybe you could get the NCL trains to run via Bowen Hills and Ekka station and Normanby and terminate at Roma Street which is aligned with how NSW and Vic interurbans operate. GC traffic would however cross the bridge (no conflicting moving off the tunnel line through the city on same path (note Springfield trains joined at Yerongpilly), but past FG fly over they would need to flat junction across to the new connection from the mains (western trains run via mains through city and then move across to suburbans nth of FG fly over.

On the politics, many threads here refer to politics so no different and most rail infrastructure decisions in Australia are political. Yes there is sarcasm in my comments but how can you take this Press Release as serious. They announce something that will start this year with no funding in place and only some complicated concoction with a threat for the Fed govt coming into an election.

They have back flipped on their own previous ALP govt version which they heavily critised Newman for abandoning of the project and the previous ALP funding requirements from the feds was a joke that even their own party fed govt saw right through and they were facing an election everyone knew they would loose. This means Anthony Albanese who is still in the federal labor party and a man likely to have a strong position in a potential Fed ALP govt should LNP loose the election thought Anna Bligh's previous proposal was a joke. Also very similar approach to the way the former NSW ALP govt's inner NW Metro project was supported by the feds just 2yr before.

In short Qld govt has next to no hope of funding this as again today they again said they won't sell assets.
  Mufreight Train Controller

Location: North Ipswich
Hate to disagree with you RTT but three weeks ago in the morning peak two Gold Coast Airporter services and one Beenleigh Service were operated in the AM peak via Tennyson and Sherwood into the city with two Airport to Gold Coast services also operated via Sherwood and Tennyson so it is obvious that the capacity is there to operate at least an additional four services via the Tennyson loop and Sherwood crossing over to the mains to operate into the city without adversely affecting normal operations on the western line.
There was a loaded coal train held at Corinda at the same time.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Hate to disagree with you RTT but three weeks ago in the morning peak two Gold Coast Airporter services and one Beenleigh Service were operated in the AM peak via Tennyson and Sherwood into the city with two Airport to Gold Coast services also operated via Sherwood and Tennyson so it is obvious that the capacity is there to operate at least an additional four services via the Tennyson loop and Sherwood crossing over to the mains to operate into the city without adversely affecting normal operations on the western line.
There was a loaded coal train held at Corinda at the same time.
Mufreight
Thanks MU, yes I know it happens and can happen if needed to, but uni directional traffic, no opposing moves on BL line and they are only going this way because there is a blockage further north so reduced to no opposing moves at Roma Street. Its also in peak with no information on impacts downstream.

Overall its morning peak, you do what you need too to keep trains moving. We also know this route is slower.

If this was a real solution it would have been timetabled years ago.
  Mufreight Train Controller

Location: North Ipswich
In running time it is four minutes slower and it is indeed possible to squeeze four services in each direction in via Tennyson but it is a squeeze over the flat junctions at Sherwood and through the single line Sherwood to Corinda and around the southern fork at Yeeroongpilly, the official reason why it is not used as yet is they like to have that capacity in reserve if they have problems between Yeeroongpilly and Roma Street so they can reroute the Airporter services which says a lot for how they value normal commuter services.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
In running time it is four minutes slower and it is indeed possible to squeeze four services in each direction in via Tennyson but it is a squeeze over the flat junctions at Sherwood and through the single line Sherwood to Corinda and around the southern fork at Yeeroongpilly, the official reason why it is not used as yet is they like to have that capacity in reserve if they have problems between Yeeroongpilly and Roma Street so they can reroute the Airporter services which says a lot for how they value normal commuter services.
Mufreight
The travel time from Loganlea to the city is fairly slow for an express as it is, 4min longer????

.......
Over the weekend I wasted numerous hours playing with different scenarios on how the govt may plan to timetable this tunnel and it seems to be messy (assuming no additional flyovers etc) especially if you want to keep the GC to Airport pair.

What may work is this.

Springfield is currently all to city allowing Ips to run express via the mains.

Instead,
- Springfield will run via Beenlegh line to the tunnel and terminate at Bowen Hills new platforms 5 and 6. At Corinda it will use Platforms 4 and 5 and Oxley will get a 4th platform. Some track work is required at Corinda to match this.

- Corinda will have a new service running all to City via Milton replacing the Spindfield trains, terminating and starting from Platform 3. Spingfield is 8t/hr and this can be reduced for this new service from Corinda allowing more from Ipswich (if required)

- Beenleigh line, four tracks from Yerongpilly to tunnel entrance. 5th track for DG freight which would be a fly over the Yerongpilly junction (aka same Adelaide project).  

- Beenleigh starters would run via the tunnel (8t/hr, increased) (Needs 4th track Kuraby to Salisbury)

- Kuraby starters would run via the bridge (6t/hr) to feed Shorncliffe and Doomben

- GC (6t/hr, up from 5t/hr) would run via Bridge

- Cleveland (10 t/hr, up from 8t/hr) would run via bridge to FG

(So overall boosted numbers for most lines on Sth and West side)

For nth side,
- More trains to FG (8-> 10 t/hr)
- One more train per hour to Shorncliffe
- No other changes
- Its possible to feed more trains onto the suburbans nth of FG flyover, but where do they go? 20t/hr with slow flat junction at Doomben, even those two trains/hr could be an issue, then just after 4 trains/hr to Airport. Ok now you have lost 6t/hr down to 14t/hr, Shorncliffe probably only needs 4t/hr which is an improvement on now 3.

Does the line north of Northgate need more trains? If so then you need to rebuild the junction north of Bowen Hills which was in a previous version of CRR with a flyover as GC trains took the tunnel.
  2353 Chief Train Controller

Location: Brisvegas
In running time it is four minutes slower and it is indeed possible to squeeze four services in each direction in via Tennyson but it is a squeeze over the flat junctions at Sherwood and through the single line Sherwood to Corinda and around the southern fork at Yeeroongpilly, the official reason why it is not used as yet is they like to have that capacity in reserve if they have problems between Yeeroongpilly and Roma Street so they can reroute the Airporter services which says a lot for how they value normal commuter services.
The travel time from Loganlea to the city is fairly slow for an express as it is, 4min longer????

.......
Over the weekend I wasted numerous hours playing with different scenarios on how the govt may plan to timetable this tunnel and it seems to be messy (assuming no additional flyovers etc) especially if you want to keep the GC to Airport pair.

What may work is this.

Springfield is currently all to city allowing Ips to run express via the mains.

Instead,
- Springfield will run via Beenlegh line to the tunnel and terminate at Bowen Hills new platforms 5 and 6. At Corinda it will use Platforms 4 and 5 and Oxley will get a 4th platform. Some track work is required at Corinda to match this.
RTT_Rules
The first problem with the scheme above is that the Springfield trains will be through routed to Kippa Ring.  As well as that Platforms 4 & 5 at Corinda are on the western (St Aiden's) side  with no current connection towards Tennyson.  The timetable for the Caboolture line is going to be interesting with part expresses all day- have a look on the Translink website
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
NSW is building its Mega Metro projects on its own, plus numerous other high cost rail project.
Now Vic has jumped on the band wagon to fund its $10B Metro internally.
Meanwhile in Qld, 8 years later the govt is still waiting for the feds to fund the CRR.....
  phil_48 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Wynnum North
We on the Cleveland line will continue to be the only line to miss out on direct access to the 'Gabba and Inner City stations under all the CRR proposals to date.  None have mentioned an input into the tunnel system for us.  Even some Ipswich line trains could enter/exit the system via Tennyson during major sporting events.
  NBP Junior Train Controller

Location: Brisbane
In running time it is four minutes slower and it is indeed possible to squeeze four services in each direction in via Tennyson but it is a squeeze over the flat junctions at Sherwood and through the single line Sherwood to Corinda and around the southern fork at Yeeroongpilly, the official reason why it is not used as yet is they like to have that capacity in reserve if they have problems between Yeeroongpilly and Roma Street so they can reroute the Airporter services which says a lot for how they value normal commuter services.
The travel time from Loganlea to the city is fairly slow for an express as it is, 4min longer????

.......
Over the weekend I wasted numerous hours playing with different scenarios on how the govt may plan to timetable this tunnel and it seems to be messy (assuming no additional flyovers etc) especially if you want to keep the GC to Airport pair.

What may work is this.

Springfield is currently all to city allowing Ips to run express via the mains.

Instead,
- Springfield will run via Beenlegh line to the tunnel and terminate at Bowen Hills new platforms 5 and 6. At Corinda it will use Platforms 4 and 5 and Oxley will get a 4th platform. Some track work is required at Corinda to match this.
The first problem with the scheme above is that the Springfield trains will be through routed to Kippa Ring.  As well as that Platforms 4 & 5 at Corinda are on the western (St Aiden's) side  with no current connection towards Tennyson.  The timetable for the Caboolture line is going to be interesting with part expresses all day- have a look on the Translink website
2353
2353, Why will the WTT for Caboolture be "interesting" due to the express running?
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The first problem with the scheme above is that the Springfield trains will be through routed to Kippa Ring.  As well as that Platforms 4 & 5 at Corinda are on the western (St Aiden's) side  with no current connection towards Tennyson.  The timetable for the Caboolture line is going to be interesting with part expresses all day- have a look on the Translink website
2353, Why will the WTT for Caboolture be "interesting" due to the express running?
NBP
Need to ignore any current Nth-Sth/West pairs and look to the future and what works with the CRR as proposed in the latest version.

I had platforms numbers back to front by mistake.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
We on the Cleveland line will continue to be the only line to miss out on direct access to the 'Gabba and Inner City stations under all the CRR proposals to date.  None have mentioned an input into the tunnel system for us.  Even some Ipswich line trains could enter/exit the system via Tennyson during major sporting events.
phil_48
Need to be practical. Look at the layout at getting the CL line to connect. You would have to dive before Buranda station (and not have a Buranda station) and do a big loop to the south curving around to the nth to connect plus dive under the CRR south bound track as flat cross is impossible and retain a high frequency service.

Look at the compromise forced on the ECRL to get under the Lane Cove river.

Additionally by doing this you are creating a spaghetti network with multiple lines having multiple routes. Makes timetabling more complicated, reduces reliability and creates more confusion for irregular users.

As long as there there is a change option at Park Road there are no issues with the current proposal leaving the CL solely on the bridge.
  phil_48 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Wynnum North
I understand the change option at Park Road as it is now.  But with the CRR I think Park Road will be above ground as at present, with the tunnel starting at Dutton Park or beyond.  So for us on the CL to get to the Gabba we would have to change at Park Road, get a Beenleigh one station to Dutton Park, or two stations to Fairfield depending on where the tunnel starts, and change again.

Anyway as I am pushing 70 I doubt if I will see the CRR, if the Redcliffe railway is any guide - 100 years of promises.
  2353 Chief Train Controller

Location: Brisvegas
In running time it is four minutes slower and it is indeed possible to squeeze four services in each direction in via Tennyson but it is a squeeze over the flat junctions at Sherwood and through the single line Sherwood to Corinda and around the southern fork at Yeeroongpilly, the official reason why it is not used as yet is they like to have that capacity in reserve if they have problems between Yeeroongpilly and Roma Street so they can reroute the Airporter services which says a lot for how they value normal commuter services.
The travel time from Loganlea to the city is fairly slow for an express as it is, 4min longer????

.......
Over the weekend I wasted numerous hours playing with different scenarios on how the govt may plan to timetable this tunnel and it seems to be messy (assuming no additional flyovers etc) especially if you want to keep the GC to Airport pair.

What may work is this.

Springfield is currently all to city allowing Ips to run express via the mains.

Instead,
- Springfield will run via Beenlegh line to the tunnel and terminate at Bowen Hills new platforms 5 and 6. At Corinda it will use Platforms 4 and 5 and Oxley will get a 4th platform. Some track work is required at Corinda to match this.
The first problem with the scheme above is that the Springfield trains will be through routed to Kippa Ring.  As well as that Platforms 4 & 5 at Corinda are on the western (St Aiden's) side  with no current connection towards Tennyson.  The timetable for the Caboolture line is going to be interesting with part expresses all day- have a look on the Translink website
2353, Why will the WTT for Caboolture be "interesting" due to the express running?
NBP
Ipswich  Caboolture express Bowen Hills to Petrie all day every day (except EJ & Northgate)
Springfield  Kippa Ring express Bowen Hills to Northgate all day every day (Except EJ)

Normally QR don't do expresses to 'commuter' terminals outside peak hour.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Ipswich  Caboolture express Bowen Hills to Petrie all day every day (except EJ & Northgate)
Springfield  Kippa Ring express Bowen Hills to Northgate all day every day (Except EJ)

Normally QR don't do expresses to 'commuter' terminals outside peak hour.
2353
Out of date and needs to change, but running trains of empty people isn't smart either.
  phil_48 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Wynnum North
RTT - Roughly 12 empties pass Wynnum North in each direction weekdays.

3 of these only go to Manly between 0800 and 0915 and are stored there during the offpeak and return empty starting 1345 for the afternoon peak.  A 15 minute weekday off peak service is enjoyed only out as far as Cannon Hill - 30 minutes for the rest of us.  One wonders why these 3 empties stored at Manly over the same period cant be pressed into service to improve the offpeak service.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
RTT - Roughly 12 empties pass Wynnum North in each direction weekdays.

3 of these only go to Manly between 0800 and 0915 and are stored there during the offpeak and return empty starting 1345 for the afternoon peak.  A 15 minute weekday off peak service is enjoyed only out as far as Cannon Hill - 30 minutes for the rest of us. One wonders why these 3 empties stored at Manly over the same period cant be pressed into service to improve the offpeak service.
phil_48
The later has been discussed in the past and I've previously dug into the timetables and its not easy for Manly, sounds imple but when you look at the time table in detail, no. Manly is in the wrong position in the timetable, I think it was actually easier to got to the next station down the line from memory, Lota.

If Manly had say a doc platform in between the current two now we are talking options.
  phil_48 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Wynnum North
A 15 minute service all the way to Cleveland already operates successfully for 3 1/2 hours in the morning peak ending roughly 0900 ( plus an extra only 8 minutes behind a regular one just after 0730 ) , and for 5 1/2 hours in the evening, plus 6 extra services starting at Manly in the morning and 4 extras terminating Manly in the afternoon peak ( the reason for many empties in both directions ).

So my feeling is with a 15 minute service already in vogue before roughly 0900 and after roughly 1430,  the gap could be neatly filled utilizing the 3 stored Manly units in the off peak.
  NBP Junior Train Controller

Location: Brisbane
2353, please do not take my 'question' as misunderstanding on my part, I was aware of the new stopping patterns, have been for quite some time, I was just curious as to the "interesting" wording, almost a lack of trust in QR to manage it...?  

They, the new stopping patterns, are a step in a better direction for commuters and train crew alike!  Even control should have a slightly less stressful peak.

Normally, the GC/Domestic line has always been express, are they not commuter terminals, 2353?  Although I have done an all-stopper from Varsity to BHI after an incident.

That said, "normally" does not apply to a busy railway really, particularly our suburban network.  There isn't much in my experience that I would ever class as "normal" (in reference to "normally").

In fact, the express running will aid in the cause of gaining more line between trains (the expresses as apposed to being stuck behind an al-stopper), but also making it easier to run more trains on said line!  So while we will see more trains, more often (NGR) we will see a "cleaner" run on the Ipswich/Caboolture line and Springfield/Kippa line, notably in peak.

RTT, empties are a part of the railway, there is no feasible way to run a suburban network without empties, they are a byproduct of itself.  They cannot be done-away with, it would create bedlam when crews sign off at mid-depots (Manly/Redbank etc).


Phil, Manly is a crew depot, thus sign-on/off occurs there, they need a means of transport of course...
On top of that, there would need to be extra crews to operate your extra services that you say can fit in neatly...  You may be lucky come the new link,  but when you only have so many apples, you can only make so many apple pies...  If you get me.

Thanks,

N
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
A 15 minute service all the way to Cleveland already operates successfully for 3 1/2 hours in the morning peak ending roughly 0900 ( plus an extra only 8 minutes behind a regular one just after 0730 ) , and for 5 1/2 hours in the evening, plus 6 extra services starting at Manly in the morning and 4 extras terminating Manly in the afternoon peak ( the reason for many empties in both directions ).

So my feeling is with a 15 minute service already in vogue before roughly 0900 and after roughly 1430,  the gap could be neatly filled utilizing the 3 stored Manly units in the off peak.
phil_48
I'll pay that. I haven't looked at the CL timetable for along time (obviously).

I remember having a discussion some years back to a guy in QR giving the reasons why it wasn't possible even though the track was capable.

Double tracking Lota to Thornside and one of the directions from Wellington Point would help.
  phil_48 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Wynnum North
RTT - The current timetable was brought in in Jan 2014.  The two crosses on the single track during the 15 minute services are at Thornside and Wellington Pt.   The timetable prior to that with only 30 minute services saw the crosses at Thornside and Cleveland.  Previously at Cleveland there was always a train in the in the platform for 28 mins which then departed 2 mins after its replacement ( 2 trains there for 2 mins )
.  That does not occur with the new one.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
RTT - The current timetable was brought in in Jan 2014.  The two crosses on the single track during the 15 minute services are at Thornside and Wellington Pt.   The timetable prior to that with only 30 minute services saw the crosses at Thornside and Cleveland.  Previously at Cleveland there was always a train in the in the platform for 28 mins which then departed 2 mins after its replacement ( 2 trains there for 2 mins )
.  That does not occur with the new one.
phil_48
Thanks
Good efficient use of the infrastructure and rolling stock.

Yes you have to wonder why not all day long. On such a timetable if there was a major delay from the city that would interfere with departing trains, they get priority. If the delay is more than allowed to depart CL on time, you terminate early wherever (passing station) and return back on schedule. Advantage of 15min frequency if you have to kick people out for the next train, its not that far behind. If previously there was a wait of 28min, I assume without looking this is now 13min.
  phil_48 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Wynnum North
RTT- That's the gist of my original question, with 3 empties sitting in Manly throughout the offpeak.

Anyway back to the nature of the thread - After the Budget with the railway money heading to Sydney and Melbourne, I now feel sure I won't be around to see the CRR built.  Of course it still sounds like a bit of forcing, started by the previous PM  - sell assets and then be able to access the infrastructure fund, or starve.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: RTT_Rules

Display from:   

Quick Reply

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