Rail Futures Institute report released

 
  chomper Junior Train Controller

https://www.railfutures.org.au/the-melbourne-rail-plan-2020-2050/

Interesting proposals to expand the PT network.

Sponsored advertisement

  Carnot Chief Commissioner

https://www.railfutures.org.au/the-melbourne-rail-plan-2020-2050/

Interesting proposals to expand the PT network.
chomper
Interesting to see most of the Suburban Rail Loop in this report going to other locations (or missing sections) in comparison to the Official route.
  chomper Junior Train Controller

https://www.railfutures.org.au/the-melbourne-rail-plan-2020-2050/

Interesting proposals to expand the PT network.
Interesting to see most of the Suburban Rail Loop in this report going to other locations (or missing sections) in comparison to the Official route.
Carnot

It's because they've done it as a MCT (medium capacity transit) solution. It looks like a single dual track tunnel from Monash Uni to Keon Park station, then using existing roads from there through to Deer Park.

The SRL needs to be heavy rail all the way through, however I like how they've incorporated much more of the western suburbs.
  Lockie91 Train Controller

A lot that is in this report has been in others the RFI has released in the past.

They were vocal critics of the SRL, saying the same benefits could be achieved with a light rail solution at half the cost and time.

Expansion of the exisiting light rail network is needed ASAP. Encouraging more inner and middle ring development, while acting as a pseudo 'metro' network taking pressure off inner city rail stations. This being to the benefit of those outer suburban commuters.

Don't even get me started on the busses, virtually all of Melbournes cross city transport could be solved by buses! Dedicated routes and priority in key areas. All for a fraction of the cost of mega projects. Melbourne could transform its bus network into something world class for a few hundred million.

Unfortunately as with all politicians, billions on a new rail line on the front of the Hun is much more effective they spending money on busses.
  tayser Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
RFI quote the official stats/numbers on SRL, as can be expected because that's all there is at the moment (2050, $50 billion, etc etc) but the reality is planning/design is underway and we might see bits and pieces of what RFI calls MCT incorporated (automated, smaller rail vehicles running on higher frequencies).

The Age might have muddled it a bit but one surprise from reading the report is that RFI, from what I read in their own plan, are calling on the City Loop reconfiguration (Craigieburn-Frankston line linkage) to get done ASAP, starting construction before MM1 opens.

The Age: "The upgrades would only happen once the $11 billion Metro Tunnel opens in 2025"

RFI (page 79): "The construction and operational logistics of this project are such that its only practical timing is for it to effectively become an addition to the MM1 project with construction underway before MM1 is completed. This will enable the necessary works to modify the existing Caulfield and Northern City Loops to be undertaken with minimal disruption prior to the full introduction of post-MM1 services. Therefore, this project needs to be closely coordinated with works to complete MM1."
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Details on the proposal for the reconfiguration of the city loop which appears to involve build in at least some part of the underground network.

https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/calls-for-major-city-loop-upgrade-the-equivalent-to-a-10lane-freeway
  kitchgp Chief Commissioner

What does this mean?
……………………………….....................

Compared to heavy rail, Medium Capacity Transit (MCT) including Light Rail can be more readily “inserted” into the urban fabric, can penetrate the centre of activity precincts and has an activating and revitalization impact on the urban environment.

…………………………………………………………..
Page 44

(Anything you want it to, I guess. Sounds a tad motherhoodish.)
  Engineeringlogic Station Master

Details on the proposal for the reconfiguration of the city loop which appears to involve build in at least some part of the underground network.

https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/calls-for-major-city-loop-upgrade-the-equivalent-to-a-10lane-freeway
bevans
Sounds interesting. And if the pouted benefits are real, i wonder it it will prioritize ahead of MRL and even MM2?
  justarider Assistant Commissioner

Location: Stuck on VR and hoping for better.
Details on the proposal for the reconfiguration of the city loop which appears to involve build in at least some part of the underground network.

https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/calls-for-major-city-loop-upgrade-the-equivalent-to-a-10lane-freeway
bevans
lets see if I have got this correct ???

Frankston trains will run from Richmond to Parliament and around the loop to North Melbourne and out to Craigeburn ??

Now with MM1, there will be no trains from either Dandenong or Franston that actually stop at Flinders St and Southern Cross.

There may be more trains running through the loop but a lot less passengers actually able to get on board.

or is Upfield to Glen Waverley the crazy idea without a FSS stop, FFS. ?

A lot of explaining required.

cheers
John
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

Frankston trains will run from Richmond to Parliament and around the loop to North Melbourne and out to Craigeburn ??

Now with MM1, there will be no trains from either Dandenong or Franston that actually stop at Flinders St and Southern Cross.
justarider
So what? Everyone will still be within one interchange of any CBD station, and assuming you do the logical thing and run Burnley Loop anticlockwise all day, it’ll be more useful than the current setup.

The idea that the Future™️ still involves every train stopping at Flinders St/Town Hall is a pretty silly one. People are going to have to get used to it.
  CraigieburnLineUser Station Master

Details on the proposal for the reconfiguration of the city loop which appears to involve build in at least some part of the underground network.

https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/calls-for-major-city-loop-upgrade-the-equivalent-to-a-10lane-freeway
lets see if I have got this correct ???

Frankston trains will run from Richmond to Parliament and around the loop to North Melbourne and out to Craigieburn ??

Now with MM1, there will be no trains from either Dandenong or Frankston that actually stop at Flinders St and Southern Cross.

There may be more trains running through the loop but a lot less passengers actually able to get on board.

or is Upfield to Glen Waverley the crazy idea without a FSS stop, FFS. ?

A lot of explaining required.

cheers
John
justarider
Dandenong trains will stop at Town Hall (which has a paid concourse connection to Flinders Street Station) so everything you would need to go to Flinders St for you would go to Town Hall and if you need to change trains you use that concourse. Frankston people would change at South Yarra or Richmond for a Sandy, Glen Waverley or Alamein train that would be going direct to Flinders Street and Southern Cross.  There is no shortage of transfer sites. A true metro system is separated lines with high frequency and reliability (as has probably been said a million times on this site). You may need to change trains but trains will be more frequent and you can always use the tram network in the city as an alternative.
  LancedDendrite Chief Commissioner

Location: North Haverbrook; where the monorail is king!
Anyone confused about Medium Capacity Transit (MCT) as referred to in the RFI report should read the actual report. As explained in the report, MCT is a catch-all category that fits between existing heavy rail, buses and predominantly street-running trams. They include:
  • Bus Rapid Transit - on actual busways with either grade separation or total traffic light priority at a minimum
  • Light Rail
  • Rubber-Tyre Metro (e.g Paris Metro, Montreal Metro)
  • Automated Rapid Transit (eg Dubai Metro, Vancouver Skyrail, Dockland Light Railway)
  • Emerging technology like Trackless Trams

The key features common to all MCT technologies are predominant or total grade separation and a smaller infrastructure footprint compared to heavy rail (smaller vehicle profile, lower weight, higher tolerance for tight curves and steep grades).


The important thing about the RFI plan is that they aren’t prescriptive about which MCT technology should be used. What they do is point out transport corridors that are suitable for MCT.

For instance, perhaps by 2040-2050 the (likely heavy rail-based) Suburban Rail Loop might be finished and living up to its traffic demand projections. If it suddenly appeared overnight in 2019 however it might well be a big failure because the demand isn’t quite there yet. The SRL corridor could work very well as an MCT corridor today or within the next 5-10 years. The RFI report suggests starting the SRL corridor almost immediately as a SmartBus-standard bus corridor, then upgrading/replacing it with MCT over time. One possibility (not suggested by RFI) is to upgrade that bus corridor into a median-running BRT system. That could be done easily within 5-10 years if the Government had some intestinal fortitude.
  CraigieburnLineUser Station Master

One thing that surprises me is that there is no mention of duplicating the Altona Loop. 30 more years without duplication would be a nightmare
  kitchgp Chief Commissioner

Under either the Rail Futures Institute’s (RFI) or Public Transport Victoria’s (PTV) future plans, Frankston will through-route with Broadmeadows via Richmond – Parliament – Melbourne Central – Flagstaff – North Melbourne, thus occupying two of the four City Loop tunnels. The other two tunnels will be retained as loops for the Box Hill and Clifton Hill (Hurstbridge only?) lines. Glen Waverley (and Alamein) will through-route with either Upfield - Craigieburn (RFI) or Williamstown & Werribee (PTV) via Richmond – Flinders Street – Southern Cross – North Melbourne.

Frankston/Broadmeadows passengers will have to make two interchanges to access Bendigo, Ballarat and Geelong trains and vice versa (much the same as Sandringham passengers now have to do most of the time on weekdays), although the PTV plan has Geelong trains terminating at South Yarra, at a future date. An unlikely option would be to add platforms for the RRL at North Melbourne and have all trains stop there. Two interchanges will also be required for the Airport line, unless the Airport line runs via North Melbourne, Metro Tunnel 1 or terminates at South Yarra.

Note: The North Melbourne referred to here is the original one, as listed on the Victorian Heritage Database.
  tayser Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
^ Frankston/Broadmeadows line passengers would only have a 1 train change to the airport if the line is built to Broadmeadows from the outset.  Regardless, the SRL makes that moot in the long-run anyhow.

I did a quick check of existing times for journeys such as Bentleigh to Moonee Ponds (measured by Frankston timetable Bentleigh to Flagstaff [morning peak] and Craigieburn timetable Flagstaff to Moonee Ponds [afternoon peak]) and it comes in at around 45 minutes if you add them together.  

Add another 15 minutes to get to Broadmeadows then about 5-10 to get to the airport (5ish interchange/wait time, 5 min journey down to the airport terminal) and making two train changes looks pretty good versus the 1.

Anyhow, 2 train changes might be a PIA now, but as long as all these projects make interchange easy through the combination of high off-peak frequencies (these lines should be 10 minutes or better off peak) and adding flyovers in the right places so two train lines, heading in the same direction, can enter either side of a platform (thus enabling easy walk-to-the-other-side-of-the-platform interchange) then it'll become far less of a hassle.
  chomper Junior Train Controller

What about this new SE heavy rail line they have proposed? The idea is great but the indicative route isn't so crash hot.
  LeroyW Junior Train Controller

Location: Awaiting MM2
What about this new SE heavy rail line they have proposed? The idea is great but the indicative route isn't so crash hot.
chomper
The idea seems a little bit crazy to me (this is the South-East Fast line they talk about).
Tunnels from Southern Cross to Caulfied to Chadstone to Monash to Dandenong I think it was.

For the mega billions it would cost, the big "gains" they seem to trumpet are through routing MARL to the South East for one-seat journeys; extra capacity for express trains/regional on the Dandenong corridor and a station at Chadstone. Do we really need to spend that kind of coin so people from Cranbourne can have a one seat ride to the Airport, and do a spot of shopping on the way? Insanity - it would be cheaper to build a new airport!

Find a way to put an express track on CD9 skyrail: capacity sorted. When MM1 is complete you have one change at Sunshine for the Airport. If Chadstone needs a station that badly, build a tunnel from Oakleigh to Alamein.

Then you can give the $20B I just saved the state to me as a "consultantancy" fee Razz
  TOQ-1 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Power Trainger
The south-east express lines aren't even a rail futures institute original idea - it was in the leaked updated PTV plan last year. The idea is, for what it would cost to construct express tracks alongside the exisiting corridor, you could probably build those tracks somewhere else, providing a limited number of stations along the way and provide express and new connectivity at the same time. New stations also have the potential for value capturing.
  LeroyW Junior Train Controller

Location: Awaiting MM2
The south-east express lines aren't even a rail futures institute original idea - it was in the leaked updated PTV plan last year. The idea is, for what it would cost to construct express tracks alongside the exisiting corridor, you could probably build those tracks somewhere else, providing a limited number of stations along the way and provide express and new connectivity at the same time. New stations also have the potential for value capturing.
TOQ-1
I wasn't aware it was a PTV brain child, thanks for that.  While the idea seems logical to some extent (build the extra tracks somewhere else vs. the current corridor) the cost for that much tunnelling is surely far higher.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: reubstar6

Display from: