I can only see that coming back to bite him on the bum one way or another.
I can only see Skyrail 2 (parallel to current Skyrail) being the solution for fixing Gippsland services. Who jumped up and down about the original Skyrail?Be an interesting play on words here. Is expanding the existing skyrail sections to four tracks expanding them? Or is introducing addition length of skyrail expanding them?
Digging deeper into the press releases: "This project builds on the previously announced business case for dedicated regional rail lines from Pakenham to Caulfield by funding the design and construction of those lines." It just gets weird now. What's he thinking?
Metro trains do have to do a lot of stop/start which isn't a good mix for expresses. So spend the money on a new express track.in reference to the section between Dandenong and Pakenham where the track speed is higher (115 as opposed to a paltry 80) and the stations a lot more spaced out and where sparks generally cause the least impact to V/Lines services! Does the same principal not apply west of Dandenong where the services are impacted the most? Its not a coincidence that the last down train to Traralgon is the quickest....
BUT of course, then it would be all those pesky cars at 12 LX making the train slow down.I've put this bit in bold and capitals not to be snarky but so people read it as it seems to be getting repeated more and more recently, but TRAINS DO NOT SLOW DOWN FOR LEVEL CROSSINGS. If that was the case there would be very little 160km/h running anywhere in the state.
But then dismiss each as "a few seconds" "don't really affect" - well the accumulation of all those things does add up to a resulting rubbish average speed. Taking the most innocent sounding "restrictive curve... 140kph". It is not just the 20kph difference around the curve, it is the slow down time approaching and the acceleration afterward. 20kph difference for about 4km is 12 minutes lost, an exaggeration I admit, but do you see the point.I'll explain why I dismiss it and why your paper based theory of upgrades and times etc does not translate into the real world.
justarider I started to comment in this thread due to your assertions that 'Traralgon's behind sparks is the least of the lines problems' and that travel times have 'nothing to do with Metro', but now you go on to say thisthanks for the time taken @jakar to read my comments carefully and your reply. Not boring, it is enlightening the complexity that you have detailed. I have reduced down the text on your post for brevity only, I trust that I have not distorted your meaning. Your full post can be read a bit further back.Metro trains do have to do a lot of stop/start which isn't a good mix for expresses. So spend the money on a new express track.in reference to the section between Dandenong and Pakenham ...
Does the same principal not apply west of Dandenong where the services are impacted the most? .........
......but TRAINS DO NOT SLOW DOWN FOR LEVEL CROSSINGS. .....well the accumulation of all those things does add up to a resulting rubbish average speed. ....I'll explain why I dismiss it and why your paper based theory of upgrades and times etc does not translate into the real world.
Its similar situation between Drouin and Warragul but I've gone on long enough and no doubt bored everyone to death.
My point being to @justarider is that yes, minimal improvements can be made in the Pakenham to Warragul section, but unless you can eliminate the terrain or abolish most of the stations your theoretical time savings in comparison to what could be achieved by dedicated lines at a decent speed through the metropolitan area are simply never going to be accomplished.
*edited for a slight wording change and a spelling mistake, no doubt there's still many more!
In all the effort put into sprinkling glitter on Guy's thought bubbles by the Herald Sun etc, there has been no mention that the latest opinion poll was 53-47 in favour of the ALP, and is trending further in that direction. The only time most people heard about state polling in the entire of the last 4 years was the brief moment when the Libs were in front, mid-2017, when the media suddenly made a lot of noise about it. Other than that, literally every other poll has shown Andrews getting back by a comfortable margin.I seem to remember a certain party of which Mr Guy was a member saying they would build lines to Avalon, Rowville , Doncaster last time round . I believe we are still waiting for these projects to commence .
For Guy to win, he would have to flip nearly 10 Labor seats. The regional seats he's throwing cash at are all already safe Lib/Nat territory - it's meat for the base and they aren't going to win him an election. The marginal Labor seats they'd need to be looking at winning are in the suburbs - seats like Carrum, Mordialloc and Frankston, then ones like Yan Yean etc. In spite of the NoSkyRail noise etc, local polling in Carrum for example hasn't changed much from the last election. Plus he'd have to claw back Prahran from the Greens. It's not likely.
Labor will possibly lose Brunswick and Richmond to the Greens, but that isn't going to help Guy's cause either.
I seem to remember a certain party of which Mr Guy was a member saying they would build lines to Avalon, Rowville , Doncaster last time round . I believe we are still waiting for these projects to commence .
Can anyone really believe the Libs are serious this time !
This is one reason why Dan Andrew's Level Crossing Removal commitment worked so well, he didn't just promise to study them, his promise was to build them and that is exactly what he went on to do, removing 29 level crossings in less than 4 years which is quite an achievement...
Interesting observation, historian, a government that consults 101 different groups as well as pandering to all kinds of minority people or a govt, that says, this is what we are going to do and go BANG, get on with the job and get it done.This is one reason why Dan Andrew's Level Crossing Removal commitment worked so well, he didn't just promise to study them, his promise was to build them and that is exactly what he went on to do, removing 29 level crossings in less than 4 years which is quite an achievement...
I quite agree, but I would point out an interesting counterpoint.
The government was able to remove so many level crossings in one term because it didn't undertake a study process, or effectively do any consultation on the general idea.
The approved way of building infrastructure is to first study the problem (congestion, in this case) and come up with possible solutions. The community should be engaged to determine which solutions are preferred, and cost/benefit analyses undertaken. When 'the best' solution has been identified, the government can then begin the job. Done properly, of course, this takes a substantial amount of time.
In this case, the government simply announced a policy (and a detailed list) in opposition, and then got on with the job when in government.
So which is it? Should the government be
* Praised for actually achieving the provision of a significant amount of infrastructure
* Criticized for not following the process and hence not being able to demonstrate achieving the 'best' outcome
This is a really serious question: it is the fundamental tension underneath all of the major infrastructure announcements in this election.
There’s not much hope when the party’s leader says “This is about 6 hours old give me a chance, Nicole” six weeks out from an election. These policies should have been announced at least six months ago.
Mind you, it is nice that the Opposition is having a bidding war against the Government for rail spending. This is a very nice change after decades of reduction of spending (by both parties, it must be said).Absolutely correct hbedriver, although I'm not too sure Dan and his crew are to worried about Matty's troupe, they ( LNP ) have pulled out some vale idea's but I think most people will recognise a lot of it is unachievable.
We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.