Melbourne Airport Rail Link

 
  John.Z Assistant Commissioner

As long as the $15B includes Airport-Wallan and Airport-Sunbury/Gisborne (depends on how straight you make the track) for VLine services as well as platforms 17/18 at southern cross I think it will be money well spent. There should be enough space for above ground until Footscray station. No reason it can't dive into a tunnel after the marribynong.
Ah yes, but Sunbury/Gisborne > Bendigo depends on the gauge doesn't it!

SG MARL can take SG'd Seymour / Shepp line trains

BG MARL can take 'em all - Bendigo BG and BG Seymour/Shepp

BG:lol:
BrentonGolding
It depends on how serious the government is about making VLine SG (we know that Metro never will).

If MARL is BG, trains can be throughrouted to Bendigo and beyond, as well as Seymour (And shepparton until SG conversion).

Unless the Government commits to SG the whole Bendigo corridor, or the new "Geelong Express" service, I think MARL will be BG.

@ianb26
Wurundjeri Way currently has a massive median strip that could be cut down.

Additionally IF:
1. Southern Cross/Spencer St's platforms are reconfigured for the eventual MM2
2. Loop rationalisation program
3. RRL to Gippsland
4. Removal of turnback roads as more and more services become DMU+EMU

Then I think there is ample space for additional platforms between Spencer St and Wurundjuri way, even if some end up underground for MM2.

Sponsored advertisement

  n459L1150 Train Controller

Location: at sunbury on a V/line service into melbourne, waiting for thousands of impatient people to get on
Are there any issues with extended high speed tunnel running of VLocitys? Or is it fine as long as ventilation is managed?

What about extended tunnel running at 200km/h for a future electrified Geelong line? Proper high speed trains such as shinkansen are pressurised, to avoid passenger discomfort when smashing in and out of tunnels.
Their will be no stations between the two tunnel portals (Sunshine and SCS) so with correct ventilation this won't present any problems.

I agree that in the long term and with talk of high speed rail a new type of high speed regional rolling stock will be required, however a topic of discussion for another thread.
Lockie91
I've said it once and I'll say it again. BI-MODES ARE THE ANSWER!!

Also, I love all the route planning, the Federal Government hasn't even confirmed the route yet.
  True Believers Chief Commissioner

@John.Z
Wurundjeri Way currently has a massive median strip that could be cut down.

Yeah that's not gonna last when the West Gate Tunnel project comes along and widen that road, removing the wide median. And put flyovers at the Dudley intersection.
  John.Z Assistant Commissioner

@John.Z
Wurundjeri Way currently has a massive median strip that could be cut down.

Yeah that's not gonna last when the West Gate Tunnel project comes along and widen that road, removing the wide median. And put flyovers at the Dudley intersection.
True Believers
Forgot about that. removing the median would only give an extra track width at most anyway. Removing loco roads in platforms 1-8 would yield more space for platforms.
  Carnot Minister for Railways

@John.Z
Wurundjeri Way currently has a massive median strip that could be cut down.

Yeah that's not gonna last when the West Gate Tunnel project comes along and widen that road, removing the wide median. And put flyovers at the Dudley intersection.
True Believers
I'm not surprised that horrible traffic sewer will make things more complicated for rail at SCS.  What a boondoggle!
  SamTheMan79 Assistant Commissioner

Location: Geelong
I wouldn't be surprised if there were 4 new platforms, all underground at Southern Cross for MARL & MM2.
  BrentonGolding Chief Commissioner

Location: Maldon Junction
Something that had passed me by unnoticed until now, listening to a talking head from IFM Investors who are part of the AirRail consortium - they already own Southern Cross station and a big chunk of Melbourne Airport as well.

https://www.ifminvestors.com/investment-capabilities/infrastructure/asset-portfolio

BG
  justarider Deputy Commissioner

Location: Free at last, free at last
As long as the $15B includes Airport-Wallan and Airport-Sunbury/Gisborne (depends on how straight you make the track) for VLine services as well as platforms 17/18 at southern cross I think it will be money well spent. There should be enough space for above ground until Footscray station. No reason it can't dive into a tunnel after the marribynong.
Ah yes, but Sunbury/Gisborne > Bendigo depends on the gauge doesn't it!

SG MARL can take SG'd Seymour / Shepp line trains

BG MARL can take 'em all - Bendigo BG and BG Seymour/Shepp

BG:lol:
BrentonGolding
I like your thinking BG. Simple works for me.
The more complex (expensive $15B) "solutions" become, the more stupid.

BG (broad gauge) to Bendigo via Airport and Clarkefield should be a given. A simple route that solves so many problems.
Essentially a detour of Sunbury to Sunshine that rejoins RRL straight into SCS.

SG Albury via Airport and Wallan is a relatively simple detour. The route already goes via the Albion loop/Sunshine as will MARL.

The tricky bit is what to do about Shepparton/Seymour.

Once we assume that Albury SG will be via the Airport, then just send the Seymour trains down the SG track instead of BG. There are plenty of time-slots available at SCS platforms 1&2 to accommodate all Albury/Sydney and Seymour trains.

What to do about poor old Shepparton BG passengers?
Either: for those passengers wanting to go to Airport/Sunshine or beyond, then change at Seymour or Wallan.
OR
make all trains originate at Seymour as SG. Shepparton/Seymour is just a shuttle.
Plus and Minus for both, ask the customer which works better.

Issues arise with number of SG and BG tracks between Seymour and Wallan to handle the different mix.
ARTC negotiations sound like fun.
Personally I would also send Inland Rail via Airport (avoiding the station) to get freight off the metro network, but that's another chapter.

As for MARL itself, just stick to Airport feed into MM1 like we assumed a month ago.
Sunbury and Airport sharing the end of MM1 is not a big load.
What is this Extra squillion dollar tunnel from the consortium going to achieve?
Only becomes a problem when Wyndham Vale, Melton, upper kumbuketer west get shoved in for no good reason.

cheers
John
  justarider Deputy Commissioner

Location: Free at last, free at last
Something that had passed me by unnoticed until now, listening to a talking head from IFM Investors who are part of the AirRail consortium - they already own Southern Cross station and a big chunk of Melbourne Airport as well.

https://www.ifminvestors.com/investment-capabilities/infrastructure/asset-portfolio

BG
BrentonGolding
"they" say money talks. Now it is positively SHOUTING.

cheers
John
  John.Z Assistant Commissioner

@justarider

You start off so well, but if you believe that Wyndham Vale/Lara/Melton/Bacchus Marsh are best served by VLine not Metro then you don't understand the cost to the taxpayer that running 6 car VLos at high frequency is.
  justarider Deputy Commissioner

Location: Free at last, free at last
@justarider

You start off so well, but if you believe that Wyndham Vale/Lara/Melton/Bacchus Marsh are best served by VLine not Metro then you don't understand the cost to the taxpayer that running 6 car VLos at high frequency is.
John.Z
I don't think that I condemned WDV etc to VLine Vlos.

Metro is the preferred end game, but why is it assumed that MM1 is the ONLY solution for ALL of them.
IF they all get off RRL then what the hell will that path do with it's wasted space.

Balance of all requirements is what is needed.
Sparks for WDV etc is on the cards, but where to has not been decided/explained.

cheers
John
  Rossco T Chief Train Controller

Location: Camberwell, Victoria
As long as the $15B includes Airport-Wallan and Airport-Sunbury/Gisborne (depends on how straight you make the track) for VLine services as well as platforms 17/18 at southern cross I think it will be money well spent. There should be enough space for above ground until Footscray station. No reason it can't dive into a tunnel after the marribynong.
Ah yes, but Sunbury/Gisborne > Bendigo depends on the gauge doesn't it!

SG MARL can take SG'd Seymour / Shepp line trains

BG MARL can take 'em all - Bendigo BG and BG Seymour/Shepp

BG:lol:
BrentonGolding
I think we can assume that the new MARL tracks are going to be BG given that the new tunnel section east of Sunshine is going to be shared by Ballarat, Geelong and Bendigo trains in addition to Airport Trains.  The CEO of IFM said as much when discussing the project on radio this afternoon.  It is only for the fact that the tunnel will also be used by all these other services that makes it stack up economically.

Diverting Ballarat, Geelong and Bendigo trains to the new MARL tracks, allows the existing RRL tracks to be electrified and used for SAS Melton and Wyndhamvale suburban services.

The question is will the new MARL tracks also provide electric traction?

Ross
  Lockie91 Chief Train Controller

Oh my oh my.

@n459L1150

Bi Modes are not required, single section of tunnel with correct ventilation can handle fumes. No different to the 100,000 cars and trucks that travel in the Burnley and Domain tunnels everyday.

@John.Z

The $15 Billion will not include re routing regional service out at Gisbourne or Donnybrook just yet. The government could ask them to tack this on to the proposal as it progress through the assessment stages. Alternatively the government of the day 10 - 20 years down the track could do this, The most expensive bit of infrastructure would have already been built. One of the big things that would be holding this back is sparking regional service, that will cost a lot of dosh.

@TOQ-1

Emergency egress plays no part in TPH, the city loop currently has 24TPH. Their is no emergency gangway in the loop. A lot of money is currently being spent upgrading emergency lighting and extraction to get it as safe as possible in the event of the worst. New tunnels like MM1 have a maintainence gangway to one side of the tunnel and a wider egress gangway to the other side. MM1 is planed to run 34TPH I would expect no different of the MARL tunnel.

@ BrentonGolding

It was mentioned in The Age article that IMF owned a stake in both sites, makes sense that they would be behind it. Improves revenue as two of their biggest investments. One would hope this would lead to better integration like being able to check in at Southern Cross for your flight. One likes to dream.


  Lockie91 Chief Train Controller

@justarider

You start off so well, but if you believe that Wyndham Vale/Lara/Melton/Bacchus Marsh are best served by VLine not Metro then you don't understand the cost to the taxpayer that running 6 car VLos at high frequency is.
I don't think that I condemned WDV etc to VLine Vlos.

Metro is the preferred end game, but why is it assumed that MM1 is the ONLY solution for ALL of them.
IF they all get off RRL then what the hell will that path do with it's wasted space.

Balance of all requirements is what is needed.
Sparks for WDV etc is on the cards, but where to has not been decided/explained.

cheers
John
justarider
@justarider

MM1 was never the solution to Wyndham Vale, this is what RRL was always designed to do... Be sparked. RRL will hopefully be sparked at the same time as MARL comes on line and a long with Melton. A Sh*t tone of reconfiguration needs to be done at Sunshine to enable MARL to have above or underground Platforms, New Platforms and flyovers for Melton service (VIA MM1) and upgrades for Platforms 3 & 4 once RRL is Sparked. Then include the track work to get Geelong and Ballarat services into the new MARL tunnel without conflicting with METRO services. Then throw in the SRL. I Think I count 10 platforms compared to the 4 that are their now. MM1 is not the end game, just the first piece of a vert big puzzle.  


____

Their is also no real need to add additional platforms at Southern Cross, 1 thru 8S for Airport and Regional services and 9 thru 16 for Metro.
Platforms 15 & 16 become new terminating platforms for Wyndham Vale services.
Metro continues as is currently.
V/line needs to stop stabling V/Lo's on platforms during the day. I don't see why their is any need for a train to arrive at SCS and wait 4 or 5 hours until it next scheduled service.
Keep platform 1 for SG services and give MARL platforms 2 & 3.
Im sure Vline can mange with 5 platforms. 10 if you count A & B.
  woodford Chief Commissioner

Now I have not been following this much as up till now its all been just "talk", but this 15billion$ proposal appears to be a genuine attempt to get something done. But at this stage the proposal would appear to be basicly a "wish" list on what the parties involved would like to see. We will NOT know what will actually (if anything) is done untill engineering get involved and we see some design studies of what ACTUALLY can be built for the funds availible.

If Seymour gets converted to SG as the result of this then the SG access to SC simply MUST be improved, the current access being quite unsuitable for the amount of traffic from all the Seymour services, plus 8 (4 each way) albury services, plus any NSW and Adelaide services. This would then very likley require a third platform as the current track work allows for.
Note: the Shepparton line going to SG will ONLY make the current system worse so this would need to be allowed for in this design.

My impression at this stage is that they are trying to do an awfull lot with the 15billion dollars, both a decent station at the airport and modifying Southern cross will both cost BIG dollars.

woodford
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

Metro continues as is currently.
V/line needs to stop stabling V/Lo's on platforms during the day. I don't see why their is any need for a train to arrive at SCS and wait 4 or 5 hours until it next scheduled service.
Keep platform 1 for SG services and give MARL platforms 2 & 3.
Im sure Vline can mange with 5 platforms. 10 if you count A & B.
Lockie91

They don't have anywhere else to put them. See similar discussion in other threads. They can't just stop doing it without somehow getting stabling close to SCS that doesn't impede mainline paths to access the platforms. (If only there was some sort of large goods yard nearby that could be converted. Just imagine if the city fathers had been that perceptive! Rolling Eyes )

It would be flat out insane to put services on 2&3 and create even more path conflicts in some awful yard reorganisation with a tunnel portal to boot. It's like reusing a gangrenous bandaid.

The whole yard area has to be razed and rebuilt, so to speak. One idea I had was to close the workshops (move them out to Dynon, compensate Bombardier, whatever) and rebuild the Bank Sidings and the workshop site as a dedicated interpeak stabling yard, with fuel points, cleaning facilities, and whatever else. That enables the Railmotor Depot to go and the space to be used to create a simple and flexible platform entry scheme that minimises inbound and outbound conflict (maybe even some flyovers, I'm really dreamin' here) and totally avoids any interaction with shunting.

I'm sure plenty of people will be able to tell me everything that's wrong with this.
  BrentonGolding Chief Commissioner

Location: Maldon Junction
I know it has been raised before but how many platforms will Metro need at Southern Cross once Sunbury / Cranbourne services start running via MM1?

And take it another step and add MM2 into the mix with a new underground station.

I agree with PIMM that the whole thing needs to be re-done but maybe they are waiting for some of this to play out first?

P15/16 access from RRL is brilliant, if they could do some work to get Metro lines under or over the regionals (as they have to cross over to get from city side North Melbourne to Docklands side Southern Cross) they could really start to unscramble the egg.

Yes it would be expensive but think of the time savings and the maintenance cost reductions if you could get rid of half those points, crossovers and signals. Anyone who has ever been on a train from the flyover into P7A, 7B, 8 or the dreaded 8 South can attest to how complicated some of these moves are, you can feel the train rocking and rolling over every point and crossing.

BG
  justarider Deputy Commissioner

Location: Free at last, free at last
@justarider

You start off so well, but if you believe that Wyndham Vale/Lara/Melton/Bacchus Marsh are best served by VLine not Metro then you don't understand the cost to the taxpayer that running 6 car VLos at high frequency is.
--@John.Z--
I don't think that I condemned WDV etc to VLine Vlos.

Metro is the preferred end game, but why is it assumed that MM1 is the ONLY solution for ALL of them.
IF they all get off RRL then what the hell will that path do with it's wasted space.

Balance of all requirements is what is needed.
Sparks for WDV etc is on the cards, but where to has not been decided/explained.

cheers
John
@justarider

MM1 was never the solution to Wyndham Vale, this is what RRL was always designed to do... Be sparked. RRL will hopefully be sparked at the same time as MARL comes on line and a long with Melton. A Sh*t tone of reconfiguration needs to be done at Sunshine to enable MARL to have above or underground Platforms, New Platforms and flyovers for Melton service (VIA MM1) and upgrades for Platforms 3 & 4 once RRL is Sparked. Then include the track work to get Geelong and Ballarat services into the new MARL tunnel without conflicting with METRO services. Then throw in the SRL. I Think I count 10 platforms compared to the 4 that are their now. MM1 is not the end game, just the first piece of a vert big puzzle.  
....
Lockie91
Lockie.  It's not me that suggested WDV goes via MM1. It has been postulated in many other threads including this one, and my comment was
Sunbury and Airport sharing the end of MM1 is not a big load.
What is this Extra squillion dollar tunnel from the consortium going to achieve?
Only becomes a problem when Wyndham Vale, Melton, upper kumbuketer west get shoved in for no good reason.
justarider

I still stand by that. Regional trains (take your pick) diesel or spark have more options than MM1 to path into Melbourne.
=> RRL, Werribee line, former Sunbury line, new tracks, lastly maybe MM1. Still no pressing argument for an extra tunnel.

I agree that Sunshine will need a lot of work to achieve platforms for all the envisioned services.

What I don't get is why you think that Ballarat/Geelong trains will go into a MARL tunnel. I presume you mean they are travelling UP to Melbourne. (and not DOWN to the Airport)
The amount of spare real estate between Sunshine and SCS is huge. It's just the crazy line layout evolved (eg: the "S" bend) that pushes people into thinking we have to build more and more and more - yet achieve no lasting benefit.

Potato said it best
They don't have anywhere else to put them. See similar discussion in other threads. They can't just stop doing it without somehow getting stabling close to SCS that doesn't impede mainline paths to access the platforms.

(If only there was some sort of large goods yard nearby that could be converted. Just imagine if the city fathers had been that perceptive! Rolling Eyes

It would be flat out insane to put services on 2&3 and create even more path conflicts in some awful yard reorganisation with a tunnel portal to boot. It's like reusing a gangrenous bandaid.

The whole yard area has to be razed and rebuilt, so to speak. ...
potatoinmymouth
PS: there was talk of re-developing Ethiad. I have a suggestion - bulldoze it and give the land back to it's proper purpose.Twisted Evil

The upshot of my rant is that the $15B consortium big build is total crap, designed to make them a lot of money at our expense.
Better and cheaper solutions are abundant.

cheers
John
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

I know it has been raised before but how many platforms will Metro need at Southern Cross once Sunbury / Cranbourne services start running via MM1?

And take it another step and add MM2 into the mix with a new underground station.

I agree with PIMM that the whole thing needs to be re-done but maybe they are waiting for some of this to play out first?

P15/16 access from RRL is brilliant, if they could do some work to get Metro lines under or over the regionals (as they have to cross over to get from city side North Melbourne to Docklands side Southern Cross) they could really start to unscramble the egg.

Yes it would be expensive but think of the time savings and the maintenance cost reductions if you could get rid of half those points, crossovers and signals. Anyone who has ever been on a train from the flyover into P7A, 7B, 8 or the dreaded 8 South can attest to how complicated some of these moves are, you can feel the train rocking and rolling over every point and crossing.

BG
BrentonGolding
I don't think there's any logical way to reduce Metro's platform allocation even if MM1 and MM2 go ahead. There will still be the requirement for Clifton Hill loop line (9), Burnley loop line (10), Northern loop line (11), Caulfield loop line (12 - remember the plan is for all Frankston services to return to the loop) and Cross-City lines (13/14 - after MM1, Werribee/Willy-Sandy, after MM2, just Willy-Sandy. Even if the decision is taken in 2025 to not through-run this group - the sensible option IMHO given there's plenty of spare trackage and platforms at Flinders St to terminate W/W at 8/9, terminate Sandy at 12/13 and run Gippsland services through 9A and stop at 10 - two platforms will be required at SC for this group in the forseeable future). If you take away any of this allocation you lose some of the benefits of the new tunnels by creating new conflicts.
  Dangersdan707 Chief Commissioner

Location: On a Thing with Internet
And a Response about the Pressing Issue of the gauge

Hello Dangersdan707's REAL NAME (censored for amoninity),
Thank you for your interest in our proposal for a world-class Melbourne Airport Rail Link. Our proposal is for a premium solution operating on a dedicated broad gauge track, however will evaluate with government the opportunity to deliver dual gauge tracks. Our proposal will now go through a detailed assessment by the Victorian Government. There are several stages in this assessment process but we expect more information will be available before the end of 2018. Thanks for your interest in this exciting proposal for Victoria.
Kind Regards, AirRail Melbourne
Email from Airport Rail Mob
  Lockie91 Chief Train Controller

You want to know what happens when you decide to build your airport tunnel on the cheap?

https://Railpage.com.au/news/s/perth-airport-link-tunnel-floods-sinkhole-closes-roads

“Oh Perth is building a tunnel for $200m a KM” You get what you pay for, even when we talk about major projects and construction. Geotechnical works should of for shadowed this.
  chomper Junior Train Controller

In my opinion, the airport link needs to come to life as an end to end metro service. Yes, it needs to kill many birds with one stone, but it can do that as a metro service running along a far more optimal route than via Scumshine using existing corridors. It will be able to have several points of interchange with the existing rail network.

If done right, it could be one of several metro lines that Melbourne desperately needs.
  Lockie91 Chief Train Controller

@chomper

Have to disagree on that one. Needs to be quick and convenient or people won’t use it. Metro train sets are not going to work for people with luggage, nor do people coming off a plan want to contend with peak hour through the suburbs.

Tying it up with regional services is a good idea to start unlocking more capacity in our western suburbs.

But I do agree that the area around Keilor and Highpoint needs some form of rapid transit.
  chomper Junior Train Controller

@chomper

Have to disagree on that one. Needs to be quick and convenient or people won’t use it. Metro train sets are not going to work for people with luggage, nor do people coming off a plan want to contend with peak hour through the suburbs.

Tying it up with regional services is a good idea to start unlocking more capacity in our western suburbs.

But I do agree that the area around Keilor and Highpoint needs some form of rapid transit.
Lockie91
Trying to shove the airport link into the existing mess won't deliver a convenient and quick service. There is no reason why a metro style solution can't be quick or convenient. It is one of the benefits of an essentially greenfield approach. This fixation on Scumshine won't deliver a good outcome.
  justarider Deputy Commissioner

Location: Free at last, free at last
@Lockie91

Have to disagree with your disagree. Nothing strange about airport passengers on a Metro train.

Try the Piccadilly line from Heathrowe. Busiest line in London, 50 year old rolling stock, no luggage racks.
And yet.... it's a pretty good service.

Passengers getting off plane have one big advantage. Can get a seat, and park luggage in the disability spots.
Don't laugh it works. Only an issue if wheelchair gets on (only on 1st carriage in Melbourne).

Removing a row of seats in an Xtrap makes plenty more space for the relatively few passengers,
And it is already an issue for all passengers wanting to go Metro to Regional with luggage.

Besides, even IF build wiz bang express to SCS - then the passenger has to change train to Metro to go anywhere else. What advantage is that?

cheers
John

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: