Don't be surprised if some of those Geelong trains are only 3 car sets when that 20 minute off peak frequency kicks in.

As for Maryborough, I really think it is time the gov't (which ever party that is after the election) got serious about adding an extra daily service. One train each way per day is pretty poor. Same goes for Echuca.

I thought the Coalition Government agreed to fix the level crossings on the Bendigo to Echuce line and then add additional services?

You can already do so, in a less foamy manner, by road coach.

You can't travel by train from Frankston to Dandenong.  Point?

I thought the Coalition Government agreed to fix the level crossings on the Bendigo to Echuce line and then add additional services?

there were to be as we understand the situation more services to be added but also faster or higher speed services with the crossing upgrades.

has this actually been completed? are the passenger services now faster?

back on maryborough those numbers are about the equivalent of a road coach.

As most of V/line services are 2 or 3 velocity sets, I'm sure most services including Geelong could be run with 1-2 road coaches or at least the outer part of the route. The issue is we all know as soon as you run a bus, you loose a significant portion of your fares.

As most of V/line services are 2 or 3 velocity sets, I'm sure most services including Geelong could be run with 1-2 road coaches or at least the outer part of the route. The issue is we all know as soon as you run a bus, you loose a significant portion of your fares.

and there lies the challenge.  by using rail passenger vehicles patronage grows which if you read the vline annual reports has been happening steadily across the network for a long time.

two issues facing vline moving forward are what to do with the long haul services.  warrnambool, swan hill, bairnsdale, shepparton and albury and mildura (evenutally) as these services cannot and will not be running on vlocity units.

does vline need for sprinter type cars as this would work well in terms of providing additional services on the outer routes. e.g. ballarat to ararat and ballarat to maryborough or ballarat to geelong on an hourly frequency.

and there lies the challenge. by using rail passenger vehicles patronage grows which if you read the vline annual reports has been happening steadily across the network for a long time.

two issues facing vline moving forward are what to do with the long haul services. warrnambool, swan hill, bairnsdale, shepparton and albury and mildura (evenutally) as these services cannot and will not be running on vlocity units.

does vline need for sprinter type cars as this would work well in terms of providing additional services on the outer routes. e.g. ballarat to ararat and ballarat to maryborough or ballarat to geelong on an hourly frequency.

First of all, there is nothing 'eventually' about Mildura, there may possibly, one day, be a slim chance of a return of passenger rail, but it is highly unlikely, let alone the sure thing you insinuate.

What do you mean by "does vline need for sprinter type cars", they already have the Sprinter cars, they're only 20 years old, they are barely half way through their life cycle, remember the DERMs lasted for the best part of 60+ years (albeit with a couple of refurbishments inbetween)

If you mean though newer single car units, why? What exactly is the point of limiting a service to only 1 carriage? The whole idea of the RFR was to boost patronage on the 4 or 5 main interurban lines, something most people would suggest was pretty successful. If the service is never expected to exceed the capacity of a single carriage where exactley is the advantage over a road coach?

As for "Ballarat - Geelong having an hourly frequency"? You have got to be kidding, that will not happen. Not at least for the next 100 years anyway.

I think the best possible* outcome anybody can expect on the topic of the line between Geelong and Mildura is a handful of services each day running between Geelong - Ballarat - Maryborough, running about 3 - 5 times a day.

I agree with others, any service further north of Maryborough should be a coach from either Ballarat, Bendigo or Swan Hill, not Maryborough.

* by best possible I mean exactly that, the best possible outcome, the reality is more likely to be a lot more modest, if anything changes at all.

there were to be as we understand the situation more services to be added but also faster or higher speed services with the crossing upgrades.

has this actually been completed? are the passenger services now faster?

back on maryborough those numbers are about the equivalent of a road coach.

The current Minister announced in November 2011 that $ millions to install bb at 13 lx on Echuca Line and increase line speed to 100 kmh by  June, 2013 .  

Lx upgrades were completed finally in August 2014,  over a year late with no explanation .  Line speed still not increased .

The Minister took 10 weeks to tell me in a response that lx would be completed by 08/14.  On the line speed issue he flick passed that to V/Line to respond to me by 31/10/14 .  As at  03/11/14  I have no response from V/Line.  In my view the Minister should be chasing VLP as to why the line speed has not increased which was obviously a condition of them seeking funding for the lx upgrades.

Recently  announced separate program to replace all wooden bridge decks with concrete between Bendigo - Echuca - Deniliquin .

....back on Maryborough those numbers are about the equivalent of a road coach.

No point running a road coach on a service thats already exceeded the capacity of a road coach and would be turning pax away...

Moreover, where is the capacity to grow patronage on a growing service when the 'bus' is already full

No point running a road coach on a service thats already exceeded the capacity of a road coach and would be turning pax away...

Moreover, where is the capacity to grow patronage on a growing service when the 'bus' is already full

don;t get me wrong mike i believe the rail service required. i was more talking about the fact previous posting over the past year has mentioned the passenger volumes not being enough to fill a road coach. something we all agree is no longer true if it ever was.

with those numbers what plans does vline have to increase daily services.

can i also ask how many vlocity sets are stored overnight in ballarat?

No point running a road coach on a service thats already exceeded the capacity of a road coach and would be turning pax away...

On one of the busiest days of the year, barely. Normal loads would fit a coach easily.

Marybugger is just regional vote grabbing - any sane government wouldn't have ever considered it, given Vline is already a budgetary black hole.

don;t get me wrong mike i believe the rail service required. i was more talking about the fact previous posting over the past year has mentioned the passenger volumes not being enough to fill a road coach. something we all agree is no longer true if it ever was.

with those numbers what plans does vline have to increase daily services.

can i also ask how many vlocity sets are stored overnight in ballarat?

Notwithstanding the above comments of our resident poster Ebenezer Killjoy, I don't know for certain how many trains are stored overnight at Ballarat because I'm in Ballan however the first four trains originate from either Wendouree or Ballarat before the first down train arrives at Ballarat. The fifth train to Melbourne is formed by the up Maryborough; obviously this is different on weekends.

V/Line can't make a decision to increase services as that's a government decision through PTV, however the fact that the afternoon down Maryborough stables overnight at Maryborough instead of running back to Ballarat as a revenue service seems a bit odd, especially as the driver of the morning up from Maryborough has to drive an official car from Ballarat in order to bring the train back.

After to speaking to the conductor on the 16:01 Maryborough train the other day when travelling to Talbot (I was travelling with a well known V/Line driver) she advised the pax numbers are always trending upwards and rarely if ever plateauing or downwards.

Mike.

If what you say is true the Maryborough vline rail service must be the odd service out across the entire network. According to the annual report patronage was up across the network. So why would Maryborough be any different ?

Maryborough could do with additional services to make the service more appealing. Not less.

There is always the option of bus services to augment the existing rail services but we know these are not as popular as rail passenger services.

You can't make statistical observations from a bus load of people.

And who cares if the bus is less popular - they aren't paying for it, so they should take what they're given.

Spending millions more for an extra 10 passengers a service makes absolutely no sense whatsover.

ZH836301, by that logic would you suggest that it would be cheaper to not run trains at all beyond the RFR boundaries (or even beyond the Metro boundaires)? The long-distance services, like every service under VLP, undoubtedly run at a loss but would running 5 coaches to replace an N-set with 5 different drivers on the clock still save money?

We're not comparing five coaches and a full N set, we're talking a half loaded Vlocity to a marginal destination that would fill one coach.

If it were cheaper to run five coaches (at spread intervals) over a train somewhere though, then yes, there would be no logical reason not to.

If a road coach replaced Te service to Maryborough even less people would I believe use the service.

The travelling public prefer robust a train per a bus. Pure and simple.

We need to stop looking at the economics as you cannot JUST look at the economics. You also need to look at the social and community benefits.

If a road coach replaced Te service to Maryborough even less people would I believe use the service.

The travelling public prefer robust a train per a bus. Pure and simple.

We need to stop looking at the economics as you cannot JUST look at the economics. You also need to look at the social and community benefits.

Ebenezer Killjoy, aka ZH83... etc doesn't believe in encouraging induced travel. Hence that posters desire for travel statistics to remain static so a bus can cover the patronage on offer.

Once the trains patronage increases beyond a bus load ZH's rants begin to lose credibility due to being in the realm of two buses, but in reality due to the induced rail travel, patronage could probably be served by one bus.

Yes I know it sounds like a chicken and egg argument...

Mike.

two issues facing vline moving forward are what to do with the long haul services. warrnambool, swan hill, bairnsdale, shepparton and albury and mildura (evenutally) as these services cannot and will not be running on vlocity units.

does vline need for sprinter type cars as this would work well in terms of providing additional services on the outer routes. e.g. ballarat to ararat and ballarat to maryborough or ballarat to geelong on an hourly frequency.

Ignoring the gauge issue, why cannot a Velocity do the job? Even the gauge issue is overcome by getting them made with SG bogies.

And just incase, seats can be changed to be better suited to longer haul and this doesn't explain Warrnambool?

Ebenezer Killjoy, aka ZH83... etc doesn't believe in encouraging induced travel. Hence that posters desire for travel statistics to remain static so a bus can cover the patronage on offer.

Once the trains patronage increases beyond a bus load ZH's rants begin to lose credibility due to being in the realm of two buses, but in reality due to the induced rail travel, patronage could probably be served by one bus.

Yes I know it sounds like a chicken and egg argument...

Mike.

Or maybe he is wondering why large amounts of money are going to spent on a catchment area of about 150,000 tops, when vast areas of Melbourne with some 1 million people cant get even access to decent bus services.


Michael

We need to stop looking at the economics as you cannot JUST look at the economics. You also need to look at the social and community benefits.

I could not agree more.  You have to get beyond the $$$ and statistics to see the bigger social picture, including what is likely to happen in the future but is not happening yet.  

If you took the coldly logical approach, you would raise fares to a point approaching cost recovery, with resultant drop in patronage and transfer of journeys to private cars and buses, and possibly you would also close the budgetary black hole's rail services altogether and provide all services by coach - but still with near cost recovery fares.

If a road coach replaced Te service to Maryborough even less people would I believe use the service.

So?

The travelling public prefer robust a train per a bus. Pure and simple.

So?

We need to stop looking at the economics as you cannot JUST look at the economics. You also need to look at the social and community benefits.

BS.  The social benefit is transport, not rail.  That is perfectly capable of being provided by buses.

Ask residents if they want more medical services or a useless rail service none of them use.

If you took the coldly logical approach, you would raise fares to a point approaching cost recovery, with resultant drop in patronage and transfer of journeys to private cars and buses, and possibly you would also close the budgetary black hole's rail services altogether and provide all services by coach - but still with near cost recovery fares.

We care because...?

I can't see how this is such a difficult concept to grasp - increased patronage is worse if you need to raise the subsidy per passenger to achieve it.

And in this case we're talking about a tiny increase in patronage for a massive increase in cost.

Or maybe he is wondering why large amounts of money are going to spent on a catchment area of about 150,000 tops, when vast areas of Melbourne with some 1 million people cant get even access to decent bus services.

This.

BS. The social benefit is transport, not rail. That is perfectly capable of being provided by buses.

Ask residents if they want more medical services or a useless rail service none of them use.


We care because...?

I can't see how this is such a difficult concept to grasp - increased patronage is worse if you need to raise the subsidy per passenger to achieve it.

And in this case we're talking about a tiny increase in patronage for a massive increase in cost.


This.

I think we are approaching this from the wrong direction. The Rail Revivial Alliance state the community benefits come from Rail not bus transport. Now I hear you say well who are they really?  You need to read a lot of their material to understand where they are coming from.

These guys have done a lot of work writing reports and I tend to agree a town or city is better serviced by Rail over Road but this is especially so when the rail system is of a higher speed.

Do we know the difference in travel time between say Maryborough and Ballarat by bus verses train?

A train would get slaughtered by the Ballarat-Bendigo coach.

It's all just foam - no real justifications, no real business case.

Do we know the difference in travel time between say Maryborough and Ballarat by bus verses train?

Going by the V/Line timetable, the times are (station to station):

53 mins by train
1 hr 9 minutes by bus.

Which would make the time difference 16 mins.

Community services like rail passenger transport should not need a business case.

Bus takes longer as advised above.