A poster on Reddit shows an image of an MTM paper on the Caulfield Loop becoming counterclockwise all day with the introduction of the HCMT's. Two ramifications of this are
- to avoid overcrowding of Burnley group trains with Caulfield group passengers on the Parliament-Richmond sector these will travel express from Parliament to Burnley
- there will be pedestrian overcrowding at Southern Cross because Werribee line and Vline passengers will be able to use Caulfield group trains from City Loop stations to Southern Cross. MTM's response to this overcrowding is not included in the post.

https://www.reddit.com/r/melbourne/comments/djvne7/potential_metro_changes/

Apparently the line will be forced to operate in one direction only as only the signals for the counter-clockwise direction are being moved for sighting by HCMTs. Seems a bit short sighted to me if there was to be a disruption that needed trains to run the other direction, though I generally agree that direction travelled should be consistent in the City Loop.

Skipping Richmond also seems like a bad idea, as it ignores anyone who starts their journey there.

Seems like the tail wagging the dog.

As a Burnley group user, I agree our trains shouldn't be stopping at Richmond on the down.
However, I will quantify that by saying this should ONLY apply to Belgrave and Lilydale services.
As the Glen Waverley and Alamein services through the loop as I've observed are not full, anyone wishing to alight at Richmond should only use these from platform 4 in the loop.
There's plenty of Glen Waverley trains to get on.

Don't mean to be harsh, but if you're not transiting to at least Camberwell, you have no business being on a Belgrave or Lilydale train.
The reality is, those trains should be full of passengers who, I dunno, are actually going there.
That is after all, what it's for.

Regards

Ideally:

Caulfield Loop runs Richmond to Flinders via Loop 24/7
Burnley Loop runs Richmond to Parliament via Flinders 24/7

(With Clifton Loop running Flinders to Parliament 24/7 and Northern Group running North Melbourne to Flagstaff via Flinders 24/7)

Weekdays Peak:
Alamein/Box Hill/Glen Waverley local trains (3min frequency, every 9 minutes to each)
Belgrave/Lilydale Express from Box Hill to Burnley to Flinders (3min frequency, every 6 minutes to each after ringwood, terminating where necessary with infrastructure constraints)

Weekday Off-Peak and Weekends:
10min Frequency to Ringwood, Alamein Shuttle and Glen Waverley
10/20min Ringwood to Belgrave/Lilydale depending on infrastructure constraints, run shuttles like Cranbourne

Ideally:

Caulfield Loop runs Richmond to Flinders via Loop 24/7
Burnley Loop runs Richmond to Parliament via Flinders 24/7

(With Clifton Loop running Flinders to Parliament 24/7 and Northern Group running North Melbourne to Flagstaff via Flinders 24/7)

Weekdays Peak:
Alamein/Box Hill/Glen Waverley local trains (3min frequency, every 9 minutes to each)
Belgrave/Lilydale Express from Box Hill to Burnley to Flinders (3min frequency, every 6 minutes to each after ringwood, terminating where necessary with infrastructure constraints)

Weekday Off-Peak and Weekends:
10min Frequency to Ringwood, Alamein Shuttle and Glen Waverley
10/20min Ringwood to Belgrave/Lilydale depending on infrastructure constraints, run shuttles like Cranbourne

Yeah ideally lets just completely stuff up all the morning peak Pax do you can have a fantasy.

You do remember passengers don't you?

Do you actually watch what goes on at Richmond platforms 7/8 in the morning.

Glen Waverley trains go to Flinders, Camberwell trains go to Parliament.
About 1/3 of pax on each do a 30 second / 2 minute change over so they can actually arrive at the part of CBD they want to go to.

Your plan is that those 1/3 are forced to go the wrong way around to what they need. Another 10 minutes yeah brilliant!

And don't give any BS about "oh they could change over to Caulfield'
In those tunnels, during peak - utter madness.

As for 3 minute frequency, you do realise it's already closer to 2 minute ! Like next Monday.

Camberwell

7:59 AM

8:01 AM

8:04 AM

8:07 AM

8:11 AM

8:13 AM

8:16 AM

8:18 AM

8:20 AM

8:23 AM

8:25 AM

8:29 AM

8:32 AM

8:34 AM

8:37 AM

8:39 AM

8:42 AM

8:44 AM

8:49 AM

8:52 AM

8:54 AM

8:57 AM

8:59 AM

Glen Waverley

8:04 AM

8:11 AM

8:18 AM

8:25 AM

8:32 AM

8:39 AM

8:46 AM

8:53 AM

9:02 AM

To a lesser extent, also happens at platforms 9/10 in the evening.

cheers
John

Yeah ideally lets just completely stuff up all the morning peak Pax do you can have a fantasy.

You do remember passengers don't you?

Do you actually watch what goes on at Richmond platforms 7/8 in the morning.

Glen Waverley trains go to Flinders, Camberwell trains go to Parliament.
About 1/3 of pax on each do a 30 second / 2 minute change over so they can actually arrive at the part of CBD they want to go to.

Your plan is that those 1/3 are forced to go the wrong way around to what they need. Another 10 minutes yeah brilliant!

And don't give any BS about "oh they could change over to Caulfield'
In those tunnels, during peak - utter madness.

As for 3 minute frequency, you do realise it's already closer to 2 minute ! Like next Monday.

                                                               

Camberwell

7:59 AM

8:01 AM

8:04 AM

8:07 AM

8:11 AM

8:13 AM

8:16 AM

8:18 AM

8:20 AM

8:23 AM

8:25 AM

8:29 AM

8:32 AM

8:34 AM

8:37 AM

8:39 AM

8:42 AM

8:44 AM

8:49 AM

8:52 AM

8:54 AM

8:57 AM

8:59 AM

Glen Waverley

8:04 AM

8:11 AM

8:18 AM

8:25 AM

8:32 AM

8:39 AM

8:46 AM

8:53 AM

9:02 AM

To a lesser extent, also happens at platforms 9/10 in the evening.

cheers
John

People will have to change trains. Non-issue. Frankston, Sandirngham, Burnley Direct, Newport and some other northern group trains don't go via the loop. Those passengers? They make do. They interchange where it suits.

If the loop is permo one direction it doesn't matter. If you work near parliament, in the morning you get a longer commute, and in the afternoon you get a shorter one. Currently you either get two short or two long commutes, so it spreads the commute time amongst the passengers.

Additionally, unless you live in Hawthorn, an extra 5mins on the train isn't a big deal. First on means at least you'll get a seat.

As a Burnley group user, I agree our trains shouldn't be stopping at Richmond on the down.
However, I will quantify that by saying this should ONLY apply to Belgrave and Lilydale services.
As the Glen Waverley and Alamein services through the loop as I've observed are not full, anyone wishing to alight at Richmond should only use these from platform 4 in the loop.
There's plenty of Glen Waverley trains to get on.

Don't mean to be harsh, but if you're not transiting to at least Camberwell, you have no business being on a Belgrave or Lilydale train.
The reality is, those trains should be full of passengers who, I dunno, are actually going there.
That is after all, what it's for.

Regards

They might have to run more three-carriage, all-stations Ringwood services to and from the city to alleviate overcrowding, just like they do at 8PM.

You do remember passengers don't you?

---justarider

People will have to change trains. Non-issue. Frankston, Sandirngham, Burnley Direct, Newport and some other northern group trains don't go via the loop. Those passengers? They make do. They interchange where it suits.

If the loop is permo one direction it doesn't matter. If you work near parliament, in the morning you get a longer commute, and in the afternoon you get a shorter one. Currently you either get two short or two long commutes, so it spreads the commute time amongst the passengers.

Additionally, unless you live in Hawthorn, an extra 5mins on the train isn't a big deal. First on means at least you'll get a seat.

what planet do you actually live on.

Change platforms via tunnels in peak IS A BIG ISSUE.
"They make do" - of course - there is no other way with the smeg platform designs.
As well a crushing pax into trains, you're also happy to crush load those tunnels.

Tell that to a Sandringham pax who must go to Parliament.
Get crushed in the Richmond tunnel or take an extra 10-15 minutes plus FSS tunnel.

How about you actually read what I wrote about platforms 7/8 at Richmond. Specifically designed to make a seamless change, and the only one.

"Currently you either get two short or two long commutes, so ..."

NO you don't.
Burnley going to FSS, you get short commute AM and PM
Burnley going to Parliament, you get short commute AM and PM.
Rest of the loop, still way quicker via loop AM and PM.

Daily pax do what works best for them everyday.
Putting everybody into a mindless time wasting one-way herd that only benefits a simplistic schedule written by unimaginative planners is definitely NOT customer friendly.

There actually is a small window of opportunity with MM1.
Although change trains at Caulfield will forced upon many commuters, a seamless platform cross-over like Richmond 7/8 would make life a lot simpler for the BUSIEST corridor in Melbourne. They have to do it now if brave enough at the Caulfield tunnel.

cheers
John

I don't really have any issues with this. Simplifying stopping patterns and loop direction is one of the most basic things MTM can do to move towards a metro system.

Running Dandenong Group services in the one direction all day will enable people to access City Loop stations from Richmond all day.

Frankston needs to be removed from the Loop and i imagine this will all happen at the same time. This will finally create a true cross city group, something that the government was hesitant to do in fear of political backlash from the "sand belt" seats. Dandenong Group can have all 24TPH in the loop without interaction with another lines timetable. Frankston can have exclusive use of the Cross City Lines boosting the timetable while also having the benefit of rationalising the timetable on the Werribee line.

The frankly bizarre stopping patterns of the Ringwood Group need to be rationalised. Direct Alamain SAS covers the inner city stations too Camberwell. Ringwood services running express to Camberwell then all too Ringwood. Blackburn Services Express Richmond > Camberwell > Box Hill > Blackburn. Belgrave & Lilydale Express Camberwell > Box Hill > Ringwood > All to Belgrave & Lillydale. Something simple like the above all day everyday. Adjusting the frequencies for peak and weekend. With a constant stopping pattern people know where to interchange to access different stations on the line. Also spreads the passenger loading of the peak over different services, with passengers for stations closer to the city not taking up space for those going to the end of the line. Ie. If a Belgrave passenger needs to go to Mont Albert they know they need to change at Box Hill, if the stopping pattern is always the same they know they will always get a train.

If some services need to skip Richmond to help loadings so be it.

Passengers and Gunzels need to get use to interchanging. The days of one train will take you wherever you want to go is over. If you need to change at Burnley/Richmond/ Footscray to get to the City Loop so be it. As always INDEPENDENT FULLY SEGREGATED LINES.

Passengers and Gunzels need to get use to interchanging. The days of one train will take you wherever you want to go is over. If you need to change at Burnley/Richmond/ Footscray to get to the City Loop so be it. As always INDEPENDENT FULLY SEGREGATED LINES.

It's not so much the interchange per se.

IT IS HOW DIFFICULT those changes are.

WHEN a passenger can be assured of just crossing the platform to alight the other train that is just there, then you have a point.

NOW and into the foreseeable future, pax have to walk down stairs, along tunnel, up stairs and HOPE that there might be a train for them within the next 10 minutes.
All the while a couple of hundred others have the same problem, and it's 2 way traffic.

I'll just keep rabbiting on, Richmond platforms 7/8 and 9/10 actually thought this one out.
My point is that passenger DO interchange when the facilities are there.

Just a quick and dirty fix for the Caulfield group is not a solution it's a band aid that will irritate a LOT of people for no benefit to THEM.

cheers
John

Passengers and Gunzels need to get use to interchanging. The days of one train will take you wherever you want to go is over. If you need to change at Burnley/Richmond/ Footscray to get to the City Loop so be it. As always INDEPENDENT FULLY SEGREGATED LINES.It's not so much the interchange per se.

IT IS HOW DIFFICULT those changes are.

WHEN a passenger can be assured of just crossing the platform to alight the other train that is just there, then you have a point.

NOW and into the foreseeable future, pax have to walk down stairs, along tunnel, up stairs and HOPE that there might be a train for them within the next 10 minutes.
All the while a couple of hundred others have the same problem, and it's 2 way traffic.

I'll just keep rabbiting on, Richmond platforms 7/8 and 9/10 actually thought this one out.
My point is that passenger DO interchange when the facilities are there.

Just a quick and dirty fix for the Caulfield group is not a solution it's a band aid that will irritate a LOT of people for no benefit to THEM.

cheers
John

What a whinge, If the passengers know there will be a service in the next 10 minutes what is the big issue walking down a ramp 20 meters to your left then back up a ramp. Oh how will they ever cope. Passengers do not interchange were 'facilities' are better. It is where it is most convenient to them as part of their daily routine. Ramp, Stairs, Lifts or Cross platform; if they know that is were they change trains that's were it will happen.

Yes, cross platform changes are fantastic. They do require two fly overs somewhere along the line to make it happen. Which is money and frankly a waste of money. The aim of the game is to run more frequent and reliable services. Spending 100million on flyovers so you can cross platform is fanciful.

As with most things in life the benefit is to the many not the few. If some people are inconvenienced so tens of thousands of other passengers can have a more reliable service so be it. It is Public Transport not your own personal service.

I don't really have any issues with this. Simplifying stopping patterns and loop direction is one of the most basic things MTM can do to move towards a metro system.
...
The frankly bizarre stopping patterns of the Ringwood Group need to be rationalised. Direct Alamain SAS covers the inner city stations too Camberwell. Ringwood services running express to Camberwell then all too Ringwood. Blackburn Services Express Richmond > Camberwell > Box Hill > Blackburn. Belgrave & Lilydale Express Camberwell > Box Hill > Ringwood > All to Belgrave & Lillydale. Something simple like the above all day everyday. Adjusting the frequencies for peak and weekend. With a constant stopping pattern people know where to interchange to access different stations on the line. Also spreads the passenger loading of the peak over different services, with passengers for stations closer to the city not taking up space for those going to the end of the line. Ie. If a Belgrave passenger needs to go to Mont Albert they know they need to change at Box Hill, if the stopping pattern is always the same they know they will always get a train.

Yeah some of the stops/expresses are bizarre..

Mont Albert makes no sense with the demise of Zone 1/2 price differential. Hopefully the new station sorts it out.
PS: even in the good old days, stopping there so that pax could get a cheaper fare was plain business dumb.

Blackburn is a bit of a mess until they finally do the 3rd track, and remove all those flat junction crosses. That would really sort out the Express and SAS conflicts and get a few more tph.

My favourite are the 2 evening down that express through Heatherdale. Got caught out many times.
My guess is they need the train at Ringwood asap for the UP.

cheers
John

Passengers and Gunzels need to get use to interchanging. The days of one train will take you wherever you want to go is over. If you need to change at Burnley/Richmond/ Footscray to get to the City Loop so be it. As always INDEPENDENT FULLY SEGREGATED LINES.It's not so much the interchange per se.

IT IS HOW DIFFICULT those changes are.
--JAR

What a whinge, If the passengers know there will be a service in the next 10 minutes what is the big issue walking down a ramp 20 meters to your left then back up a ramp. Oh how will they ever cope. Passengers do not interchange were 'facilities' are better. It is where it is most convenient to them as part of their daily routine. Ramp, Stairs, Lifts or Cross platform; if they know that is were they change trains that's were it will happen.

Yes, cross platform changes are fantastic. They do require two fly overs somewhere along the line to make it happen. Which is money and frankly a waste of money. The aim of the game is to run more frequent and reliable services. Spending 100million on flyovers so you can cross platform is fanciful.

As with most things in life the benefit is to the many not the few. If some people are inconvenienced so tens of thousands of other passengers can have a more reliable service so be it. It is Public Transport not your own personal service.

not the few ??? really. FEW ???

The original article makes it abundantly clear how much of a mess this will make for many passengers, and benefit NO-ONE except the cheapskate that can't figure out how to make the HCMT fit into the loop.

WHICH BTW, HCMT are supposed to be for MM1 not the Loop. Why the rush. Make them 6 car in the interim and all his nonsense goes away.

Would you like the job of getting up in front of a crush load of pax after an hour coming in from Dandenong and tell them
"we just added another 10 minutes because we are so cheap we can't figure out a good usage for our brilliant long/few seated HCMT"

"If you don't like that, then march down the tunnel like the good pack of lemmings that you are, but be careful there's another bunch of angry customers coming the other way."

WHINGE - of course I am. It's a crap idea

PS: $100M for flyover. Now who is fanciful. LXRP are getting real good at putting up bridges.

cheers
John

Changing trains isn’t a problem, I do it every day. As long as the service runs on time and every few minutes connectivity wise than that’s fine.

Every Metro system in the world has people changing trains

The original article makes it abundantly clear how much of a mess this will make for many passengers, and benefit NO-ONE except the cheapskate that can't figure out how to make the HCMT fit into the loop.
WHICH BTW, HCMT are supposed to be for MM1 not the Loop. Why the rush. Make them 6 car in the interim and all his nonsense goes away.


cheers
John

The "rush" is because:
- the oldest Comengs are going to 40 years old in a few years time
- the HCMT's will (eventually) be introduced to release them for retirement (or re-use elsewhere)
- the 7 car HCMT's will fit the loop stations; that's why they aren't introducing the extended versions now as the 10 car sets won't. So the additional three cars aren't going to be added until MM1 is ready to open
- according to an earlier post it is due to signal sighting for the HCMT's & that only being adjusted for one direction which is why this is being proposed


Neil

@justarider

If Caulfield group interchanges at South Yarra, they need to use overpass

If Burnley group interchanges at Burnley, it's cross platform with no flyover needed.

Not sure why you're so steadfast that all Burnley trains need to stop at Richmond, but Caulfield trains don't.

@John.z   South Yarra interchange cease to exist with MM1.
If you belelive that Metro will do this "grand plan" for Caulfield now, and then undo it all again in a couple of years, I have a 2nd hand bridge at Newport to sell.

The Burnley expresses do NOT stop at Burnley. No realitic opportunity to interchange except a few SAS pax UP from Camberwell.

@ngarner - sure signal sighting are the problem because the cheapskates only want to pay doing one end of the platforms.
6 cars would fit without any change and still be new with more capacity. But no, let's just stuff up every pattern and annoy the customers.

I wouldn't mind a complete revamp of the whole timetable and routing if it delivered BETTER results, but this "plan" is a dogs breakfast covered by a band aid, stuffing multiple lines to cover over the mess emerging for one of them.

cheers
John

This reminds me of the resistance to bus reform. Many people will gain by making the routes more direct and logical. However the small group that are used to the indirect and craggy routes will resist the changes.

@justarider the proposal calls for current Box Hill express to stop at Burnley instead of Richmond.

You keep missing this key point.

6 or 7 HCMT cars would have the same sight visibility issues, it's where the drivers are sitting in the cab that causes the issue, not the length of the train.

@John.z you weren't just advocating the "plan" for express to Burnley for the PM peak.

You advocate the complete reversal of the AM.
That's a whole different ball of wax. It is not a missed point.


And sighting is only now an issue of train length.
They have moved the signals into the tunnel so that the drivers cab can intrude, and still leave room for pax doors at the other end of the 7 cars. Drivers can  still observe.
BUT NOT the other direction. That's just doing it cheap.
Do you suggest driver can see 7 cars, but not  6?

So now another band aid to fix that stuff up.
Band aids for decades are what makes the whole mess just that. And now yet another.

cheers
John

Caulfield Loop runs Richmond to Flinders via Loop 24/7.
Burnley Loop runs Richmond to Parliament via Flinders 24/7.


Would it better if they run a two tier train service on the line:

Caulfield Loop :

Richmond to Flinders Street Via the city loop stopping all stations to Blackburn or Alamein.

Flinders Street - Richmond  - Glenferrie  (maybe skip this station*) - Camberwell  - Box Hill -  Blackburn and then  stops all stations to Belgrave or Lilydale

* reason for skipping this station it has both Blackburn or Alamein services stop there.

Surely there would be Myki data to measure customer impact of such proposed changes?

Such as the hypothetical Sandringham to Parliament commuter.

Imagine if decisions were data-driven, rather than emotion-driven! How good would that be?

Surely there would be Myki data to measure customer impact of such proposed changes?

Such as the hypothetical Sandringham to Parliament commuter.

Imagine if decisions were data-driven, rather than emotion-driven! How good would that be?

I give ONE example of an impact for brevity, and some think that is the whole of the argument.

OK - the full version of that ONE example.

any pax on the PM peak to anywhere on the Frankston/Dandenong/Sandringham lines from Parliament/Museum/Flagstaff will be seriously affected.

Doesn't need non-existent miki data to tell you that's its huge.

For a better thought out discussion of the pros and cons have a read of
https://www.danielbowen.com/2019/10/20/city-loo-big-changes-proposed/

He also makes the valid point that SOMEHOW needs to make those trains going through FSS to do it quickly.
Doing the usual 5 minute sit would undo any of the good points of the ideas.

EDIT a bit clock dyslexic today for those that noticed

cheers
John