Former Premier announces airport rail line will be built

 
  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

Location: Banned
I think the short distances between some stations on the Melbourne network are a bad thing.

I understand your argument about luggage, but really, there'd be some kind of traveller's aid facilities for the elderly surely? Also, if the station was placed in a central location, discounting the tiger terminal, because for the prices you pay for tiger air fares, you should expect some short commings, then the station would be adequate.
Camster

I would be more likely that elderly passengers would not come to the airport by Public Transport, but by Taxi or being ferried by car by family members.

Michael

Sponsored advertisement

  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
The Government will only justify the cost to build only ONE station as part of the rail link.

No Government Is going to fund to build and commission a station every 1000 metres and run multiple tears of services.
"One station one service !"

The planed rail link to the airport will not be a World Class facility as some are hoping for, It will done on a cheap and just tick the minimal boxes (to be look look Melbourne has a rail link to It's International Aéroport)


But still end up costing a kings ransom 1
  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

Location: Banned
The Government will only justify the cost to build only ONE station as part of the rail link.

No Government Is going to fund to build and commission a station every 1000 metres and run multiple tears of services.
"One station one service !"

The planed rail link to the airport will not be a World Class facility as some are hoping for, It will done on a cheap and just tick the minimal boxes (to be look look Melbourne has a rail link to It's International Aéroport)


But still end up costing a kings ransom 1
Nightfire

Depends on what you mean by a kings ransom. If the solution is to be heavy rail, then the existing infrastructure from Sunshine using the Freight goods line cannot be used, so new bridges will have to be built and new track has to be laid for near the entire length. so $3.5 Billion quoted does not seem unrealistic.

Michael
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
The other issue that has been overlooked is more than 14,000 employees and contractors work at Melbourne Airport. They have to travel from one terminal to another as well as passengers. The number of workers would probably be expected to double as passenger numbers are expected to double from 32 million passengers p.a. to 64 million by 2033.
wxtre

First of all, it is not a given that the passenger numbers will double by 2033, furthermore, that doesn't equal a doubling in the number of people working at the airport. That is just not how it works, yes there will be more people working there, but not by double.

Secondly, and more importantly, Nobody working at the airport that needs to get from T1 to T4 will need or want to use a train to do so, the fact is it isn't that hard to walk that far in a short period of time, Trust me on this, I spent 5 years working at the airport, and never once did I think "Oh gee, I sure do wish there was a train to take me from here to the other side of this terminal" and I'm a fat bastard.

You are looking at this in entirely the wrong way. You are trying like hell to justify the need for 2 seperate stations, unlike the qualified people who design, fund and build these things who will try like hell (although in this case wthey will not have to try that hard) to justify to not need 2 seperate stations.

Trust those who are more qualified than you, there will only ever need to be one single station at Melbourne Airport.

And again remember Albert Einstein said "The definition of insanity is doing something over and over again and expecting a different result." I'm beginning to understand what he meant, this thread proves it.
  The Vinelander Minister for Railways

Location: Ballan, Victoria on the Ballarat Line
If it ever gets built...and I'll probably be dead by then, all the station at the airport requires is where to board at Southern Cross or Sunshine EG:

Pax travelling QANTAS or Jetstar travel towards the front of the train.

Pax travelling VIRGIN or Tiger, travel towards the rear of the train.

The station will have escalators to the surface and the length of the platform and the length of the escalators will have pax very close to their chosen terminal upon alighting from the escalator. Except maybe for tight a$s Tiger pax who can walk a little more, but still less than today from the Skybus stop.

By the time the station is eventually built, it's likely there will also be moving walkway on the surface level.

Mike.
  dthead Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
..... the new proposed passenger terminal depicted in pink goes all the way past Francis -Briggs Road.
Wxtre



The difference between Sydney and Brisbane's airport rail-links is they have planned ahead a for future growth by adding the additional stations. What I said is that in Melbourne if you build the cheap rail-link station/option in 20 years it will be obsolete and will end up costing more. When constructing infrastructure city planners should ask whether in 100 years the rail-link will still hold up.
wxtre




Wxtre, the photo above shows the ping T4 You fsil to realise eavery terminal has a restricted zone and a public zone. The publix zone is where you enter the building. You can walk around all you like. The restricted zone ( my term) is through security and to the gate. Each terminak has this. Each terminal has a limited entry point, where yuo go through security to access the gartes and the walkways to them.

Point is the plan for T4 has the entry point next to T3 and not down at Francis -Briggs Road. On my mud map above where I have written T4 is the public entry point. People can easuly walk from the other terminals to there, and can of course walk from the proposed station.

So a second station there is of use at all. The area shown as T4 is for all the gates and walkways to them. Put another way, can you walk to the end of T1/T2/T3 with a screwdriver, a swiss army knife and bottles right now? No as they would not pass security. Same with T4.

This has been pointed out to me by a respected Jetstar pilot. Others have similar info. And do note these stations cost millions to build, and in the airport area it will be even more so. One station will be built. In fact the real people working on this in reality are planning ONE station, so everything you write here will not change the minds of professional, nor sway the pollies. It is already decided.

Sydney and Brisbane were not clever, they had two seperate terminals, so had to put in two stations. If they could have got away with one they would have.

As to the future, we barely have major planned for 3 years time rather than 100. Waste of time arguing that.
finally I would suggest the idea of a second airport railway station be dropped. We know your view. You know know most of our views.

There's many other aspects of the airport to talk about and report about.

Regards,
David Head

ps post edited several time.......
  Bogong Chief Commissioner

Location: Essendon Aerodrome circa 1980
Well if he opinion polls are correct, the Coalition will lose the election and Labour has made it clear that they aren't going to build any line to Tulla Airport.

So unless the Libs and Nats win, this thread is even more pointless and hypothetical. Rolling Eyes
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Well if he opinion polls are correct, the Coalition will lose the election and Labour has made it clear that they aren't going to build any line to Tulla Airport.

So unless the Libs and Nats win, this thread is even more pointless and hypothetical. Rolling Eyes
Bogong


This could be true.  But things can change and quickly.  The ALP may have a change of heart but it will not happen until the metro rail tunnel (ALP version) is delivered.  Because at present the ALP think this is required.
  dthead Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
I believe you are incorrrect the terminal 4 master plan will be delivered in four construction stages over a 10-year period. The terminal expansion between t3 and t4 is only the first stage. In the future the plan for T4 includes a third runway and all of the pink areas depicted in master plan as passenger terminals. The Airport capacity will be doubled.
wxtre




Tis Tis, now you are getting deperate.  I have explained the T4.  In terms of public entry it will be close to T3, yes expansion will increase the size of the terminal, but in the same way  T1 and T3 were, they too were expanded since the  old days of TAA and Ansett. Yet the public go in the same place !

A third,  forth or fifth runway cannot influence the terminal building, and this the railway station.  What part of the T4 design do ypu not understand,  or do you forget the station will serve people commin to the airport as a whole, and not directly tot he gate, ie they will not step off the train, turn a corner and enter a plane.

As you also correctly pointed out the project will not starty this year, next year or even the year after.  And believe it or not it will cost more than triple it would had they  funded it and started now.  And that means it may be canned and cancelled altogether.

http://dth.railpage.org.au/misc/melb_airport

Yu incorrectly look at Sydney and Brisbane all the time. Well other airports all have solved their expansion. As in my link above Heathrow, a faar busier airport has solved the problems of terminals. Heathrow I believe has three underground stations, and at least one above ground station. Then as I displayed, a underground lightrail from T5 to the 2 outlying island terminal hubs.

Melbourne may have to do that  " in the future" as well. Who know about the future. Step 1 get aline to the airport. /At themoment it'll cost millions and may not even happen. Consider the rest of the line, where it goes, where it goes, where it terminates, and when and how it operates.  

Regards,
David Head


PS  Wxtre if you cannot let this go, I may have to act.
  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

Location: Banned
So you agree that one station will be inadequate.

Unless Melbourne suddenly dies which is unlikely Melbournes population will continue to increase. Growth prediction statistics are evidence based on formulas. Globally air-travel will increase both domestic and international. What is the issue in constructing an airport rail-link now that factors this in. Instead you are proposing an ad-hoc airport plan.
wxtre

Well because of Labor's reluctance to build the Line to the Airport unless the Melbourne Metro is built, and the Liberals I believe will NOT build it I cannot see Rail to the airport happening.

Michael
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
wxtre: Quit trolling! There is no other description for what you are doing here. There are users on this forum that would like to have a genuine discussion about this proposal, not the crap you keep carping on about.

Everybody else: If built, would they likely use existing rolling stock on this line? Or are we likely to see a purpose built EMU for airport trains?
  Bogong Chief Commissioner

Location: Essendon Aerodrome circa 1980
And again remember Albert Einstein said "The definition of insanity is doing something over and over again and expecting a different result." I'm beginning to understand what he meant, this thread proves it.
Gman_86

Forget it, he's one of those stubborn people who thinks backing down would be "losing face".

Perhaps the best way to cope with his behaviour in this thread is to follow these simple directions and repeat as often as necessary.

If you do it often enough, the pain distracts you from being frustrated with his intransigence. Rolling Eyes
  freightgate Minister for Railways

Location: Albury, New South Wales
When offering an airport rail service you need to consider luggage requirements.

Some passengers will be day trippers and others will have luggage. It is not practical to provide an airport rail service with a standard carriage.

New rollingstock with luggage areas will be required.
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
I agree freightgate, they should be considered, but is it actually likely to happen?

The plans are to through route Airport trains to Dandenong and beyond where the emphasis is more likely to be on seats and standing room, can the same trains do both jobs well enough?
  railblogger Chief Commissioner

Location: At the back of the train, quitely doing exactly what you'd expect.
I think they will probably use the metro trains that are in service when it gets built (if ever).
  73LJWhiteSL Deputy Commissioner

Location: South East Melbourne Surburbs
I do not see an issue with using standard rollingstock between the city and the airport. It also means rollingstock is interchangeable with other lines providing flexibility.

I did use the NYC subway to get to the airport with two large cases back in 2010 and it was fine. Sure the subway was quiet when I went to the airport but if your on holidays you can pick the more suitable times to fly. There is no need for specialized rolling stock with bag racks and the like.
  dthead Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
I do not see an issue with using standard rollingstock between the city and the airport. It also means rollingstock is interchangeable with other lines providing flexibility.
73LJWhiteSL


Sydney do not put on special rollingstock, and Brisbane I htink now do not care, though initially they did prefer some units to do the airport to gold coast route. Perhaps they can look into using the  unused cab as luggage space.....

Regards,
David Head
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Sydney do not put on special rollingstock, and Brisbane I htink now do not care, though initially they did prefer some units to do the airport to gold coast route. Perhaps they can look into using the unused cab as luggage space.....

Regards,
David Head
dthead


Brisbane has rolling stock with Luggage areas similar to those found on V/Line services.  Me thinks given the amount of people who would use the service and the likelihood of luggage specialist trains would be a much better idea.

Anyone tried to get on a busy train for Sydney airport?  Luggage all over the ends of the carriages.
  Gman_86 Chief Commissioner

Location: Melton, where the sparks dare not roam!
Anyone tried to get on a busy train for Sydney airport? Luggage all over the ends of the carriages.
bevans


Are the Sydney Airport trains double deck trains? If so, does this exascerbate the issue?

With most Melbourne EMUs now having a 2+2 seating layout, would this provide enough space for most peoples luggage needs?
  dthead Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
some news

http://www.theage.com.au/national/sydney-and-brisbane-tell-melbourne-build-airport-rail-link-20141119-11mkk4.html

Basically poses the question "why hasn't Melbourne got a Rail link to the airport.". To me not a lot of news in ihe article, as it ends with the political parties take. Liberal promice it two decades in the future, and Labor have no plans at all.

Regards,
David Head

ps didn't bother reporting as a news item to keep discussion in one thread.
  Camster Chief Commissioner

Location: Geelong
I would like suitable rollingstock. Maybe bring back the Hitachi's with their longitudinal seating Laughing. However, as other posters have said, Brisbane don't generally tend to care about this anymore. They use their modern EMU's now with mainly forward and backward facing seating. When I first started going up there, they sent the suitable trains on the airport line.
  HardSleeper Junior Train Controller

Location: Route 48
Said it before but for it to be a useful rail link it needs to have dedicated rollingstock with maximum one stop to Southern Cross, something like Hong Kong or Heathrow Express. Just because Sydney and Brisbane does XYZ doesn't mean Melbourne necessarily should. Sure it would cost more, but the funny thing is that people would tend to be happier to pay a premium price if you provide a premium service.
  MelbourneCity Chief Commissioner

Said it before but for it to be a useful rail link it needs to have dedicated rollingstock with maximum one stop to Southern Cross, something like Hong Kong or Heathrow Express. Just because Sydney and Brisbane does XYZ doesn't mean Melbourne necessarily should. Sure it would cost more, but the funny thing is that people would tend to be happier to pay a premium price if you provide a premium service.
"HardSleeper"


Melbourne, nor any other Australian city generates the level of premium customer to warrant a dedicated and more expensive purpose built emu airport train fleet. Such a fleet would mean more expensive prices, and It would make the airport service less viable.

Hopefully if and when the airport line gets built, the operator, Metro or otherwise, try to run the cleanest trains on it.
  simeyau Locomotive Fireman

Location: Sunbury, Victoria
Said it before but for it to be a useful rail link it needs to have dedicated rollingstock with maximum one stop to Southern Cross, something like Hong Kong or Heathrow Express. Just because Sydney and Brisbane does XYZ doesn't mean Melbourne necessarily should. Sure it would cost more, but the funny thing is that people would tend to be happier to pay a premium price if you provide a premium service.
HardSleeper

Heathrow Express has dedicated luggage stowage but that train is a dedicated airport train. The existing tube link to Heathrow has never had any special carriages and people have used and still use it without any issue at all with luggage (including in peak times).

This goes for many other airport links around the world in major hubs such as Frankfurt
  73LJWhiteSL Deputy Commissioner

Location: South East Melbourne Surburbs
The only problem I see between having specialized rolling stock, is it has to be captive to the line, and if there are failures there needs to be stock on hand to ensure the service can be run. The cost for specialized rolling stock I assume would increase the cost of the fare also.

It is true some people are happy to pay a premium for better service, but I would suggest a larger percentage of the travellers just want the cheapest price to get to the airport.

If the fares are cheaper than Skybus you will more than likely get that patronage, however regardless of how good the rolling stock is, if people are happy to pay a premium the railway will never get those who drive to the airport and use a parking service such as Andrews Airport Parking that drops them right out the front of the terminal.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.