Melbourne Metro Rail Project Revived

 
Topic moved from News by bevans on 16 Feb 2015 17:54
  Altona Loopy Station Master

The negative press highlighting the "concerns" of locals residents and institutions including those of the North Melbourne FC (player safety?) says to me this country has lost its "lets do it" spirit and we get bogged down pandering to self centered minorities.

London have just managed to bore tunnels under buildings 5 times older than ours, lets do it here.

Sponsored advertisement

  woodford Chief Commissioner

Should have built the E**$T-W#$T Link instead.  At least it was funded.
Well that part of being funded is fully true...
I don't how some people can dislike/disagree with my original comment before hand when it's the truth and the facts...
Labor has a disastrous history when it comes to delivering major projects, i don't think we need to go into them all.
You can't commence this project with only having not even half the funding... It makes no sense...
All the preliminary work has to be done then they need full funding before they can even commence... Well that's how it should roll..
At least they start projects and get them going .
How many did Ted Ballieu`s government get off the ground during his term in office ?
An obvious comment on the funding.................

Given the state of politics in Australia in this day and age, ANY political party garranteeing funds for a project that extends past the next election is REALLY living in fairy land, remember at the moment in reality few projects these days have bi-partisan support, the liberals could easily cancel the project.

woodford
If the Liberals got elected in 2018 the project would be too far under construction to stop is the reality.
Given Bailleu and  Napthine did zilch for PT the chances of Liberals getting back in 2018 are  very low.  At least Andrews is getting things done, whereas the Co alition were in a paralysis of inaction for their whole 4 year term .

The East - West  Link is history and  Andrew Bolt and HUN need to get over it .
FACT  East - West link business case was a sham and did not stack up,  METRO business case is very sound .
kuldalai
I understand completely about what Andrews is doing and I greatly applaud it, I am just though making a point that ALL future governments will need to FULLY resource the project, something that has NOT always happened.

woodford
  msilsby Deputy Commissioner

Location: Canberra
Should have built the E**$T-W#$T Link instead.  At least it was funded.
Well that part of being funded is fully true...
I don't how some people can dislike/disagree with my original comment before hand when it's the truth and the facts...
Labor has a disastrous history when it comes to delivering major projects, i don't think we need to go into them all.
You can't commence this project with only having not even half the funding... It makes no sense...
All the preliminary work has to be done then they need full funding before they can even commence... Well that's how it should roll..
At least they start projects and get them going .
How many did Ted Ballieu`s government get off the ground during his term in office ?
An obvious comment on the funding.................

Given the state of politics in Australia in this day and age, ANY political party garranteeing funds for a project that extends past the next election is REALLY living in fairy land, remember at the moment in reality few projects these days have bi-partisan support, the liberals could easily cancel the project.

woodford
If the Liberals got elected in 2018 the project would be too far under construction to stop is the reality.
Given Bailleu and  Napthine did zilch for PT the chances of Liberals getting back in 2018 are  very low.  At least Andrews is getting things done, whereas the Co alition were in a paralysis of inaction for their whole 4 year term .

The East - West  Link is history and  Andrew Bolt and HUN need to get over it .
FACT  East - West link business case was a sham and did not stack up,  METRO business case is very sound .
kuldalai
To far under construction? *cough* dombarton - maldon *cough*
  jdekorte Deputy Commissioner

Location: Near Caulfield Station
I've seen today that Melbourne Metro Authority has made heritage applications to alter St Kilda Rd in order to construct Domain Station.  These applications can be found on this page under 'VHR2359 St Kilda Rd' and mostly relate to temporary traffic and tramway changes.  Some of the construction stages and maps are very interesting (and I have set up a thread in the Tramways section as this is mostly tramway related).

http://www.dtpli.vic.gov.au/heritage/apply-for-heritage-permits/currently-advertised-permits

Also, on one of the maps it indicates the footprint for Domain Station underneath the road/parks.
  drunkill Junior Train Controller

Location: Melbourne, Australia
And to counter the argument about the loss of trees on st kilda road the other month- a video of the location of Domain and why the alternate location would have even more tree losses



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7_cpBN6YLY
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

Wondering if any of you seen any of the business case. I am surprised by the huge amount of planning happened under the metro tunnel authority and it's very detailed. It even analysis each route, the stations, the alignment, the patronage, how to run the services ect. And has other projects listed to happen before and after the tunnel opens. They are very like the ones on the PTV network development plan. Just wondering how much money did they spend on the planning, they definitely did a lot of it to make sure it was worth the money to build the project.
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

What an missed opportunity to connect the Melbourne metro to North Melbourne. Would this be possible if Arden station wasn't included, because the Craigeburn line can't make an easy interchange to the Parkville precinct. Upfeild line can connect to a 59 tram, Werribee and Vline at Footscray, but Craigeburn line is left out. Also is it better for the Craigeburn line to serve Melbourne metro instead of the Sunbury line, since the Craigeburn line is right on a growth corridor.

Anyone wanna discuss this.
  John.Z Chief Train Controller

What an missed opportunity to connect the Melbourne metro to North Melbourne. Would this be possible if Arden station wasn't included, because the Craigeburn line can't make an easy interchange to the Parkville precinct. Upfeild line can connect to a 59 tram, Werribee and Vline at Footscray, but Craigeburn line is left out. Also is it better for the Craigeburn line to serve Melbourne metro instead of the Sunbury line, since the Craigeburn line is right on a growth corridor.

Anyone wanna discuss this.
James974
No. We need to move away from the non-stop journey mentality which hinders the ability for adequate service to be provided (see frankston trains still in the city loop)
  Adogs Chief Train Controller

Wondering if any of you seen any of the business case. I am surprised by the huge amount of planning happened under the metro tunnel authority and it's very detailed. It even analysis each route, the stations, the alignment, the patronage, how to run the services ect. And has other projects listed to happen before and after the tunnel opens. They are very like the ones on the PTV network development plan. Just wondering how much money did they spend on the planning, they definitely did a lot of it to make sure it was worth the money to build the project.
James974

Whilst I haven't actually read it, the original project manager (not working on it anymore) is an old friend of mine and knowing their work it would be pretty thorough.
  Crossover Train Controller

Location: St. Albans Victoria
What an missed opportunity to connect the Melbourne metro to North Melbourne. Would this be possible if Arden station wasn't included, because the Craigeburn line can't make an easy interchange to the Parkville precinct. Upfeild line can connect to a 59 tram, Werribee and Vline at Footscray, but Craigeburn line is left out. Also is it better for the Craigeburn line to serve Melbourne metro instead of the Sunbury line, since the Craigeburn line is right on a growth corridor.

Anyone wanna discuss this.
No. We need to move away from the non-stop journey mentality which hinders the ability for adequate service to be provided (see frankston trains still in the city loop)
John.Z
And do you think that Sunbury /Toolern Vale isn`t  a growth corridor ?
  John.Z Chief Train Controller

What an missed opportunity to connect the Melbourne metro to North Melbourne. Would this be possible if Arden station wasn't included, because the Craigeburn line can't make an easy interchange to the Parkville precinct. Upfeild line can connect to a 59 tram, Werribee and Vline at Footscray, but Craigeburn line is left out. Also is it better for the Craigeburn line to serve Melbourne metro instead of the Sunbury line, since the Craigeburn line is right on a growth corridor.

Anyone wanna discuss this.
No. We need to move away from the non-stop journey mentality which hinders the ability for adequate service to be provided (see frankston trains still in the city loop)
And do you think that Sunbury /Toolern Vale isn`t  a growth corridor ?
Crossover
Not sure if I was meant to be quoted, but Sunbury to gisborne is 100% a massive growth corridor, and I 100% support the efforts of any government to segregate our network into as many end to end running lines operated independently of each other as possible (Whilst still keeping some crossovers for emergencies where feasible).
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

What an missed opportunity to connect the Melbourne metro to North Melbourne. Would this be possible if Arden station wasn't included, because the Craigeburn line can't make an easy interchange to the Parkville precinct. Upfeild line can connect to a 59 tram, Werribee and Vline at Footscray, but Craigeburn line is left out. Also is it better for the Craigeburn line to serve Melbourne metro instead of the Sunbury line, since the Craigeburn line is right on a growth corridor.

Anyone wanna discuss this.
No. We need to move away from the non-stop journey mentality which hinders the ability for adequate service to be provided (see frankston trains still in the city loop)
And do you think that Sunbury /Toolern Vale isn`t  a growth corridor ?
Not sure if I was meant to be quoted, but Sunbury to gisborne is 100% a massive growth corridor, and I 100% support the efforts of any government to segregate our network into as many end to end running lines operated independently of each other as possible (Whilst still keeping some crossovers for emergencies where feasible).
John.Z
Oops it is a growth corridor, I made a mistake there, but I know Craigeburn is also a growth corridor and have plans to extend to Wallan in the future
  John.Z Chief Train Controller

Craigieburn is well suited to be through routed to either Belgrave/Lilydale or Frankston once they reconfigure the city loop portals (and have it run via the viaducts, not the loop to allow the High capcity trains to run at 10 cars).
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

Check this video out, shows literally a bottle and a tangle in the rail system, and how metro tunnel removes it by putting a new line into the system. Its on the Metro tunnel website now.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJLit9wT2s0
  ElliotProvis Junior Train Controller

Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Hey guys, I know this is a bit off topic, but I was thinking the other day about the sections of track on both the Frankston (to Moorabbin) and Belgrave/Lilydale (To Box Hill) lines that are triple track... I know there are plans afoot to quad the Belgrave/Lilydale Line to Blackburn, but I was thinking about the use of bi-directional running and having the loop there to quickly turn around some of the services... Considering that sections of Frankston and Belgrave/Lilydale are triple-tracked, your above suggestion could work.

I've been trying to do some research, but can't seem to find any evidence of the pitfalls of having three sets of tracks with one set being bi-directional. Could someone please direct me to some empirical evidence that reflects the pros/cons of such an arrangement?

Sorry to be off-topic, and thanks in advance!
  Radioman Chief Train Controller

Dear Elliot and others,

the VR was keen on reversible running utilizing a third line as it met the then peak period traffic flow demand.

However , over the last ten years or so peak period reverse flow ( ie AM outbound , PM inbound ) is now significantly heavier than it was for the VR , and Third Line reversibility is probably no longer the solution it once was.

When i have spoken to older spark drivers re peak period reverse flows they have all commented on how heavy this passenger loading now is .

In looking at current traffic flows and density , quadruplication is now ( in my opinion ) justifiable and it does allow for train services to run whilst adjacent lines are under engineering occupation.

The greater use of bi-directional running would make the wider system more flexible than currently , however i do not know what the additional cost , compared to a single direction line would be , nor do i know if the extra expense would be agreeable to the Treasury , who ultimately recommend the expenditure.

best wishes and regards, Radioman.
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
Radioman - Melbourne has badly needed quadrupling on the trunk routes for some time. Regional Rail Link gave that to the western lines at least to Sunshine so that metro and suburban services are fully separated but really I think that the more pressing need was probably on the other side of town where the conurbation stretches almost 70km from the CBD and where the growth is undeniably ferocious. Melbourne is over 100km at its longest points and it continues to stretch its tentacles out - there should have been some more advanced planning on the need for more tracks and faster trunk services.
  TOQ-1 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Power Trainger
The question we need to be asking is do we want more trains, or more express trains?

With two tracks if all trains have the same stopping pattern investing in a High Capacity Signalling system (and automation) will allow trains to run closer together. Once you start varying in the stopping patterns, this falls apart.

With three tracks you can run more express trains in the peak direction, but given all trains converge in the City Loop or Flinders St, the ability to run more trains overall doesn't exist. You either need dedicated platforms at Flinders St and/or a large stabling facility at the end of the line to hold the peak direction expresses if they are to be additional services. This is what currently happens on the Burnley group with the four lines and Blackburn short hauls acting differently at different times of the day.

With four tracks you can run both all stoppers and express trains more frequently (provided both have the same or similar stopping patterns). This also requires dedicated platforms or a large amount of stabling at each end of the line to have room to turn the trains back. What is also needed with quadding is the provision of extra platforms to allow turn backs without eating the capacity of other lines.

Much like adding lanes to the freeway, more tracks does not necessarily mean better travel times if the trains have nowhere to go when they get to the city...
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

Three tracks are not really suitable in currently for express travel, quadruplication is required, but the routes that need quadruplication right now are not on the three track sections. The Dandenong line needs quadruplication between Caulfeild and Dandenong first. Second importance is separating the Wyndham Vale and Tarniet off the RRL, by extending the Werribee to connect to Wyndham Vale and Quadruplicate between Sunshine and Tarneit/Tarneit West. Finally quadruplication between Somerton and Craigeburn for the future Wallan line via Upfield connection.

Quadruplication on Burnley may happen or not but will be at least 30 years even before considering it. Metro 2 tunnel is essential with an extra two tracks to seperate the Clifton Hill group and Newport group. Finally City Loop configuration would help reshuffle the train line so they all connect into seperate lines.

Metro 1 tunnel itself will provide so much benefit to the whole system (exception to the burnley group and the Clifton Hill group), seperating the two busiest lines and serving crucial precincts for our future. The next project in the pipeline would be either a Melton electrification, upgrades to the RRL or planning for quad the Dandenong line. Airport line is uncertain and the extension to Clyde should happen sooner rather than later.
  Radioman Chief Train Controller

Hello All ,

my personal opinion is that automation does not necessarily deliver on its promises , in that it is usually very expensive , requires a lot of maintenance , and usually , though not always , a failure can shut down a significant length of route. Additionally , a lot of modern equipment only lasts 20 years and spares production can end before the 20 years is up . Compare that to mechanical and early electrical systems whose lifespan frequently exceeded 60 + years .

In relation to Melbourne Suburban , in my view an upgrade using additional trains of existing design , either Xtrapolis or Networker is preferred to buying a third new train with all new equipment . The new train option just increases overall costs and for a very marginal benefit.

In relation to the Pakenham corridor , the existing  track circuits were designed to take additional signals to reduce headways , therefore upgrading the existing track circuitry and adding additional signals would , in my view , be better value for money than what is now being implemented.

I also think that the idea of having only two control motors ( M cars ) per 6 car set has merit due to the fact that 6 car sets are now only split for maintenance . Further on from that increased capacity with a nine car Xtrapolis or Networker therefore also makes sense , though the existing track circuiting in some locations may not be able to cope with the additional 3 car add on .

Best wishes and regards,

Radioman
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

But the new trains are much longer and are capable of able to be modular. Which mean extra carriages can be added on to the train. The other fleet don't have that sort of flexibility or capacity needed for the Pakenham line.
  Radioman Chief Train Controller

Dear James 974 and others ,

with respect multiple unit trains are by definition modular . The existing Xtrapolis and Networker sets could expanded by additional T or MT cars if desired , the Vlocity and the Tait trains has demonstrated this in the past,

Best wishes and regards,

Radioman
  railblogger Chief Commissioner

Location: At the back of the train, quitely doing exactly what you'd expect.
Dear James 974 and others ,

with respect multiple unit trains are by definition modular . The existing Xtrapolis and Networker sets could expanded by additional T or MT cars if desired , the Vlocity and the Tait trains has demonstrated this in the past,

Best wishes and regards,

Radioman
Radioman
Networker sets?
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
The question we need to be asking is do we want more trains, or more express trains?
TOQ-1
Both; there should be a trunk line that crosses Melbourne from (say) Tullamarine all the way to Dandenong but there should be interchanges at major stations between the "stopping all stations" or "limited express" lines and the trunk routes mainly for cross-city express trains and Gippsland passenger services. The need for separated services on that line has been urgent for some time; it's just too slow and congested.

But it probably won't happen for a few decades until Melbourne is hitting 8 million happy residents.
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

Dear James 974 and others ,

with respect multiple unit trains are by definition modular . The existing Xtrapolis and Networker sets could expanded by additional T or MT cars if desired , the Vlocity and the Tait trains has demonstrated this in the past,

Best wishes and regards,

Radioman
Radioman
No I think the existing Comeng, Xtrapolis and Seimens fleet of trains, only can run as 3 or 6 carriages. Does anyone think I am wrong? Yes Vlocity trains used to run 2 cars then this got extended to 3 cars, but I think that was only because they changed the design. Not sure about the Tait trains.

Also Wtf is the Network train??

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: