The Government cant put in any extra tracks until all crossings are eliminated but will make allowances for more tracks once these are built .
Otherwise nearly all Eastern Vline services would terminate at Pakenham and it would't matter which government was in, they wouldn't have a choice.
This practice happens in NSW between Goulburn/Mossvale and Cambletown then suburban train to the city.

But it doesn't happen with Blue Mountains trains between Penrith and the City, nor Central Coast trains between Hornsby and the City, nor with South Coast trains between Waterfall/Sutherland and the City - the difference between the Southern Highlands line and the others is that the Southern Highlands line is lightly patronised whilst the others aren't. "Lightly patronised" is NOT a phrase that can be applied to the Traralgon and other Gippsland services.

Dave

Announced

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-07/melbourne-sky-train-gets-go-ahead-cranbourne-pakenham-line/7146446

It's been in the planning phase for some time - I was interested to see the protest movement against the new line sprung seemingly from nowhere (or perhaps with some help from the Liberal opposition?).

I don't see a practical solution for fixing the capacity woes on that line WITHOUT something like this.

It's been in the planning phase for some time - I was interested to see the protest movement against the new line sprung seemingly from nowhere (or perhaps with some help from the Liberal opposition?).

Methinks Opposition Leader Matthew Guy has been dumping some dynamic lifter on the 'grass roots' movement that seems to have emerged - it's certainly got the right stench.

The Government cant put in any extra tracks until all crossings are eliminated but will make allowances for more tracks once these are built .
Otherwise nearly all Eastern Vline services would terminate at Pakenham and it would't matter which government was in, they wouldn't have a choice.
This practice happens in NSW between Goulburn/Mossvale and Cambletown then suburban train to the city.

Before the level crossings are removed, there simply must be a limit to the train frequency.

I think that out all the options, this one ticks many boxes.  There will always be detractors who will complain about visual intrusiveness of viaducts, however there is the plus factor of improving urban amenity and connection communities.  I noted with interest the artists impression of the Clayton area proposal that had the old (existing) Clayton station building moved to the eastern side underneath the viaduct - but most likely with a new use  - much like the Gardiner signal box.

Yes there will also be a bit of a roller coaster effect with the line raised in three places, at grade in others, and going under the road at Springvale. However, all things considered this probably won't be too much of a problem.  The speculator in me even had a crazy idea of extending the Clayton viaduct west to include Huntingdale with the North Rd overpass returned to grade - but that would be hideously expensive.  

As for track amplification, I think it could be done.  Springvale & Westall were rebuilt with track amplification in mind.  The new viaduct looks like it will be single up & down tracks but there is no reason why this can't be expanded in the future, especially in the sections east of Oakleigh where there is more room. But as others have pointed out, the difficulty lies west of Oakleigh and Caulfield to the city.

I don't think any infrastructure can really be made to look "pretty". Sydney are certainly doing this kind of thing with their skytrain so there is no reason to suggest that with proper design it can't be done here.  And if anyone complains about "ugly" bridges, remind them of CityLink.

Probably the only option where there is a practical-economic trade off. The best option would have probably been to bury three affected areas underneath.

I was pretty surprised they decided to elevate Clayton-Centre Road, could have worked both ways I think - under or over. It would have been less of a roller coaster effect had they buried this section...For the section between Caufield and Carnegie, due to limits of land, there is only one solution!

Having traveled and used Nunawading, Springvale and just today - Gardiner Station, I'm not totally convinced rail under is the answer either. The land on top is useless and pretty much the same effect when rail was at ground level, also the stations whilst relatively well lit at night, you can't help but feel not as secure as there is a large passage of darkness. Having an elevated station, I think you would feel somewhat safer....

Do you know how far the current Clayton viaducts extend to? Drawings indicate that it will start to lower itself to ground somewhere between Prince Charles and Harington Street.

Note that the Sydney skyrail section being built is over empty/sparesly populated land...not built up areas!

It's been in the planning phase for some time - I was interested to see the protest movement against the new line sprung seemingly from nowhere (or perhaps with some help from the Liberal opposition?).

Methinks Opposition Leader Matthew Guy has been dumping some dynamic lifter on the 'grass roots' movement that seems to have emerged - it's certainly got the right stench.

Funny how Mr Skyscraper seems to have developed a sudden allergy to concrete rising out of the ground.

It's been in the planning phase for some time - I was interested to see the protest movement against the new line sprung seemingly from nowhere (or perhaps with some help from the Liberal opposition?).

Methinks Opposition Leader Matthew Guy has been dumping some dynamic lifter on the 'grass roots' movement that seems to have emerged - it's certainly got the right stench.

Funny how Mr Skyscraper seems to have developed a sudden allergy to concrete rising out of the ground.

This stretch of railway line has been a running sore for more than a decade and at least Andrews is now trying to do something about it. Napthine et al had four years of twiddling their thumbs and now they have the temerity to speak out against it? What's their alternative plan?

It's been in the planning phase for some time - I was interested to see the protest movement against the new line sprung seemingly from nowhere (or perhaps with some help from the Liberal opposition?).

Methinks Opposition Leader Matthew Guy has been dumping some dynamic lifter on the 'grass roots' movement that seems to have emerged - it's certainly got the right stench.

Funny how Mr Skyscraper seems to have developed a sudden allergy to concrete rising out of the ground.

This stretch of railway line has been a running sore for more than a decade and at least Andrews is now trying to do something about it. Napthine et al had four years of twiddling their thumbs and now they have the temerity to speak out against it? What's their alternative plan?

To their credit, the Libs under Napthine had a plan which would appease the masses affected by the elevated line. Their plan was 4 xing removals along the line...

It's been in the planning phase for some time - I was interested to see the protest movement against the new line sprung seemingly from nowhere (or perhaps with some help from the Liberal opposition?).

Methinks Opposition Leader Matthew Guy has been dumping some dynamic lifter on the 'grass roots' movement that seems to have emerged - it's certainly got the right stench.

Funny how Mr Skyscraper seems to have developed a sudden allergy to concrete rising out of the ground.

This stretch of railway line has been a running sore for more than a decade and at least Andrews is now trying to do something about it. Napthine et al had four years of twiddling their thumbs and now they have the temerity to speak out against it? What's their alternative plan?

Napthine's plan was much more palatable for the Dandenong corridor and actually had a proper funding process attached to it. There's no real funding for much of Labor's current crossing plans & construction of current ones were all Liberal projects with the exception of Bentleigh & McKinnon.

Now, plenty of left-leaning teenagers here supporting this project.

A little history lesson. Bracks tried to excite the voters over 11 years ago with plans to quadruplicate the Dandenong line. So, Labor had their chance for 11 years to do something. Did nothing at all. Murrumbeena has been a nightmare for well over 15 years.

Hong Lim (member of Clayton, Labor) said there wasn't any need to remove Clayton Road level crossing over the years, despite significant outrage not only by the public, traders but also emergency services who are always held up there heading to Monash or other areas north of the crossing.

Skyrail has only been considered now as Andrews has no money left. The community wasn't even consulted either, so you can expect this project to be significantly delayed & very unlikely to be completed by 2018. Without consultation and due process, you can't call these people "NIMBYs". In fact, one major issue is shading and loss of sunlight including solar panels rendered useless, so off your high horses.

I can see it now - Due to budget cuts on the project etc, savings have been found by reducing the height of the pillars.

As it is with some drivers not knowing the height of their trucks and clipping bridges,  you can imagine all the extras required them or the fools in the world's current security situation being kept at bay.


Add an extra billion or so.

No mention of quadruplication from what I read either. Seemingly, If you take the cars away from slowing trains down,  all is solved by running longer trains closer together. Maybe the freight is getting the flick, and V/Line trains will terminate at Dandenong. Can you imagine if that gets up as a cost saving on the weight the structure has to support? ? Some boffin will have already worked out and floated that idea.

A lot more detail needs to come out on this one.

Regards

Curious to know if this is being funded by the sale of the Port of Melbourne?  

If it is, then probably no surprises that rail freight isn't in the mix since developing Port of Hastings in the short-term could be seen to increase competition and thus reduce the sale price of the current Port.

Is it a case of short-term gain for long-term pain???

As for this new proposal, it's obvious they are aiming for minimal disruption to current services - i.e. build a track either side of the existing track pair.

The Government cant put in any extra tracks until all crossings are eliminated but will make allowances for more tracks once these are built .
Otherwise nearly all Eastern Vline services would terminate at Pakenham and it would't matter which government was in, they wouldn't have a choice.
This practice happens in NSW between Goulburn/Mossvale and Cambletown then suburban train to the city.

But it doesn't happen with Blue Mountains trains between Penrith and the City, nor Central Coast trains between Hornsby and the City, nor with South Coast trains between Waterfall/Sutherland and the City - the difference between the Southern Highlands line and the others is that the Southern Highlands line is lightly patronised whilst the others aren't. "Lightly patronised" is NOT a phrase that can be applied to the Traralgon and other Gippsland services.

Dave

Those services are electrified Dave and vline is a diesel service which is what Gomer was getting at I believe. Why not run vline services to the electric network providing more frequency for regional customers and allowing more electric trains to operate. I believe the same thing should happen with the bathurst bullet. Instead of running a small diesel train into Sydney. Why not run an 8 car v set instead and have the endeavour run shuttle between bathurst and Lithgow instead.

I think that out all the options, this one ticks many boxes.  There will always be detractors who will complain about visual intrusiveness of viaducts, however there is the plus factor of improving urban amenity and connection communities.  I noted with interest the artists impression of the Clayton area proposal that had the old (existing) Clayton station building moved to the eastern side underneath the viaduct - but most likely with a new use  - much like the Gardiner signal box.

Yes there will also be a bit of a roller coaster effect with the line raised in three places, at grade in others, and going under the road at Springvale. However, all things considered this probably won't be too much of a problem.  The speculator in me even had a crazy idea of extending the Clayton viaduct west to include Huntingdale with the North Rd overpass returned to grade - but that would be hideously expensive.  

As for track amplification, I think it could be done.  Springvale & Westall were rebuilt with track amplification in mind.  The new viaduct looks like it will be single up & down tracks but there is no reason why this can't be expanded in the future, especially in the sections east of Oakleigh where there is more room. But as others have pointed out, the difficulty lies west of Oakleigh and Caulfield to the city.

I don't think any infrastructure can really be made to look "pretty". Sydney are certainly doing this kind of thing with their skytrain so there is no reason to suggest that with proper design it can't be done here.  And if anyone complains about "ugly" bridges, remind them of CityLink.

Probably the only option where there is a practical-economic trade off. The best option would have probably been to bury three affected areas underneath.

I was pretty surprised they decided to elevate Clayton-Centre Road, could have worked both ways I think - under or over. It would have been less of a roller coaster effect had they buried this section...For the section between Caufield and Carnegie, due to limits of land, there is only one solution!

Having traveled and used Nunawading, Springvale and just today - Gardiner Station, I'm not totally convinced rail under is the answer either. The land on top is useless and pretty much the same effect when rail was at ground level, also the stations whilst relatively well lit at night, you can't help but feel not as secure as there is a large passage of darkness. Having an elevated station, I think you would feel somewhat safer....

Do you know how far the current Clayton viaducts extend to? Drawings indicate that it will start to lower itself to ground somewhere between Prince Charles and Harington Street.

Note that the Sydney skyrail section being built is over empty/sparesly populated land...not built up areas!

Actually the skyrail in Sydney is near built up areas. It is running alongside a bus t-way once it comes up for sun at bella vista and in reserved parkland for the nearby housing and industrial areas. There is a catchment of probably half a million people along the nw metro.

Those services are electrified Dave and vline is a diesel service which is what Gomer was getting at I believe. Why not run vline services to the electric network providing more frequency for regional customers and allowing more electric trains to operate. I believe the same thing should happen with the bathurst bullet. Instead of running a small diesel train into Sydney. Why not run an 8 car v set instead and have the endeavour run shuttle between bathurst and Lithgow instead.

If you kill same train service, you really kill the desirability for people to use it (plus add to travel time) which will start making people get back in their cars.....

Obvious question.

Why the need to depart from the current way of doing level crossing removal on that line ?

Obvious question.

Why the need to depart from the current way of doing level crossing removal on that line ?

It's cheaper and more appropriate for the grades and ground conditions in those sections.

As for this new proposal, it's obvious they are aiming for minimal disruption to current services - i.e. build a track either side of the existing track pair.

They could save a fortune by not electrifying the new pair (no new stations needed either!) and dedicating it for V-Line and freight services.

The Government cant put in any extra tracks until all crossings are eliminated but will make allowances for more tracks once these are built .
Otherwise nearly all Eastern Vline services would terminate at Pakenham and it would't matter which government was in, they wouldn't have a choice.
This practice happens in NSW between Goulburn/Mossvale and Cambletown then suburban train to the city.

But it doesn't happen with Blue Mountains trains between Penrith and the City, nor Central Coast trains between Hornsby and the City, nor with South Coast trains between Waterfall/Sutherland and the City - the difference between the Southern Highlands line and the others is that the Southern Highlands line is lightly patronised whilst the others aren't. "Lightly patronised" is NOT a phrase that can be applied to the Traralgon and other Gippsland services.

Dave

Those services are electrified Dave and vline is a diesel service which is what Gomer was getting at I believe. Why not run vline services to the electric network providing more frequency for regional customers and allowing more electric trains to operate. I believe the same thing should happen with the bathurst bullet. Instead of running a small diesel train into Sydney. Why not run an 8 car v set instead and have the endeavour run shuttle between bathurst and Lithgow instead.

Diesel v electric is totally irrelevant, it is the numbers that are carried that is the determining factor.

The Southern Highlands line in NSW carries bugger all passengers , unlike the Traralgon line, and any attempt to terminate these trains at Pakenham (or even Dandenong) will cause rioting in the streets and will undoubtedly cause the fall of the government at the next election (note, I am not using hyperbole here).

As for the Bathurst Bullet (note, Bathurst, being a city, should be an upper case B - you might want to correct your post) does not operate during the morning peak in the Up direction, and is right at the very end of the peak in the Down direction, so nothing wrong with it being a through service.

Dave

Waking up this morning I can't help thinking the Andrews government in terms of transport, is lurching from one crisis to the next.  It is not necessarily what ALP governments do as much as how they do it and how they don;t do it properly.  A transport upgrade like the one released this past week should be welcomed by the community but again the way in which the government has gone about it and how they have not "as reported" engaged with the community is the issue.

What should have been a well received set of projects I am sure Andrews will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  They have the vline crisis, they have a good wrap on level crossing works and they have the vline fiasco and an yet to be disclosed Metro trains maintenance issue, now the sky rail issue.

You will see poor delivery and execution on the Mildura SG works is my prediction.

Waking up this morning I can't help thinking the Andrews government in terms of transport, is lurching from one crisis to the next.  It is not necessarily what ALP governments do as much as how they do it and how they don;t do it properly.  A transport upgrade like the one released this past week should be welcomed by the community but again the way in which the government has gone about it and how they have not "as reported" engaged with the community is the issue.

What should have been a well received set of projects I am sure Andrews will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  They have the vline crisis, they have a good wrap on level crossing works and they have the vline fiasco and an yet to be disclosed Metro trains maintenance issue, now the sky rail issue.

You will see poor delivery and execution on the Mildura SG works is my prediction.

Tim Pallas said on an interview on radio that the government had plans to build the elevated rail mid to late 2015, can't help but think the decision was made then and there. All designs were then to be elevated with no option of underground. Hence, there was then no real consultation. Whilst it was not my ideal to go with sky rail, there is really no option but to embrace it somewhat and make the most of a "2nd choice option".

What would the outcome be if they consulted the community? Almost all in the community would have favoured a below ground option with no one or very few favouring the elevated option but the government had already made up its mind, what then, they then would have done a 180 degree turn and shoved the elevated rail anyway?

Best concerns and effort is now devoted to how to ensure security is adequete the land beneath the pylons!

Waking up this morning I can't help thinking the Andrews government in terms of transport, is lurching from one crisis to the next.  It is not necessarily what ALP governments do as much as how they do it and how they don;t do it properly.  A transport upgrade like the one released this past week should be welcomed by the community but again the way in which the government has gone about it and how they have not "as reported" engaged with the community is the issue.

What should have been a well received set of projects I am sure Andrews will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  They have the vline crisis, they have a good wrap on level crossing works and they have the vline fiasco and an yet to be disclosed Metro trains maintenance issue, now the sky rail issue.

You will see poor delivery and execution on the Mildura SG works is my prediction.

I think you're falling for the hype. Journalism nowadays describes everything in catastrophic terms, in order to hold the attention of readers / viewers distracted by their smart-phones. Yes, the V/Line cock-up is pretty bad. But the next election is still two-and-three-quarter years away: by then, it might be said that V/Line - and, by extension, the government - got a timely kick up the smeg about the importance of running services, and not just announcing big new projects. As for 'sky-rail', it's going nowhere as an issue. Who really cares that much about it apart from a few hundred voters in Oakleigh (admittedly a marginal seat)? Even if you assume (incorrectly) that the same approach will be used for every remaining level crossing, that still doesn't really concern *that* many people. Besides, by November 2018, a lot of work will have already been done. That's the lesson Andrews learnt from Napthine: you need something to show for your time in office when you seek re-election.

Query, whats wrong with the line between  West Richmond and Clifton Hill, spends most of this distance on an embankment 5 to 6 metres high with few level crossings!

There will always be people will whinge and moan about things, its easier than doing something constructive.

woodford

Woodford I totally agree with you. As usual.

Waking up this morning I can't help thinking the Andrews government in terms of transport, is lurching from one crisis to the next.  It is not necessarily what ALP governments do as much as how they do it and how they don;t do it properly.  A transport upgrade like the one released this past week should be welcomed by the community but again the way in which the government has gone about it and how they have not "as reported" engaged with the community is the issue.

What should have been a well received set of projects I am sure Andrews will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  They have the vline crisis, they have a good wrap on level crossing works and they have the vline fiasco and an yet to be disclosed Metro trains maintenance issue, now the sky rail issue.

You will see poor delivery and execution on the Mildura SG works is my prediction.

Bevans  I can only agree

Obvious question.

Why the need to depart from the current way of doing level crossing removal on that line ?

It's cheaper and more appropriate for the grades and ground conditions in those sections.

The minimal amount of road and rail shut downs, would be a very Important factor.
It's been said a lot of the construction work can be carried out while trains are still running and the road still open.