Geelong high speed rail and electrification

 
  ZH836301 Chief Commissioner

Location: BleakCity
No reason to hold Geelong on a pedestal - it should simply be run as an extension of existing suburban services, it's a shorter journey than other metro journeys.  Rather, the longer distance suburban journeys (eg. Frankston, Pakenham, etc.) should be considered on the same level as Geelong, with more appropriate rollingstock.  Given there are only three (assuming the useless Aircraft is closed) suburban stops between Newport and Werribee, operating as a separate service makes no sense.

And a local Geelong rail system is bonkers - the rail lines go nowhere near anywhere of interest.

Sponsored advertisement

  True Believers Chief Commissioner

No reason to hold Geelong on a pedestal - it should simply be run as an extension of existing suburban services, it's a shorter journey than other metro journeys.  Rather, the longer distance suburban journeys (eg. Frankston, Pakenham, etc.) should be considered on the same level as Geelong, with more appropriate rollingstock.  Given there are only three (assuming the useless Aircraft is closed) suburban stops between Newport and Werribee, operating as a separate service makes no sense.

And a local Geelong rail system is bonkers - the rail lines go nowhere near anywhere of interest.
ZH836301
Yes I do support a Geelong electrification in its own right to Melbourne but by electrifying the RRL as that itself is a suburban line despite Vlines running on it. No it is 4 stations between Werribee and Newport (assuming aircraft is kept as a useful station to reduce the demand between Laverton and Williams landing.)

A seperate service aka the High speed rail I am proposing is for people from Geelong, Torquay, Colac and Warnambool to have a seperate service direct to the city instead clogging onto a metro service. This would be like terminating the Gippsland service at Pakenham. This is not good for regional commuters past Geelong as it forces them onto a metro style service. Regional and Metro serves two different modes and should be separated when possible.

A local Geelong rail system is for the future, you don't have any vision how Geelong can eventually become an independent city with its own network. It can happen in 30-50 years time, but the provision for it must be provided now before the land all sold up (Torquay line will get land provision).
  x31 Chief Commissioner

Location: gallifrey
No reason to hold Geelong on a pedestal - it should simply be run as an extension of existing suburban services, it's a shorter journey than other metro journeys.  Rather, the longer distance suburban journeys (eg. Frankston, Pakenham, etc.) should be considered on the same level as Geelong, with more appropriate rollingstock.  Given there are only three (assuming the useless Aircraft is closed) suburban stops between Newport and Werribee, operating as a separate service makes no sense.
And a local Geelong rail system is bonkers - the rail lines go nowhere near anywhere of interest.
ZH836301

Kind of agree with the idea of better and longer distance rolling stock for the outer areas such as Pakenham and Geelong area and Frankston (with an electrified extension to Stony Point integrating the entire line with new rollingstock and electrification.  As also mentioned on here Ballarat should be electrified and included into the longer distance rollingstock order.

In terms of Geelong's rail network has consideration been given to running back to the station between Gheringhap and North Geelong?  There is much housing going out that way.

Also to Armstrong Creek and back to Drysdale where there is demand?
  ZH836301 Chief Commissioner

Location: BleakCity
Yes I do support a Geelong electrification in its own right to Melbourne but by electrifying the RRL as that itself is a suburban line despite Vlines running on it. No it is 4 stations between Werribee and Newport (assuming aircraft is kept as a useful station to reduce the demand between Laverton and Williams landing.)
James974

Moaning about it doesn't change the fact that Aircraft is a useless station.

Of the three stations, Williams Landing, Laverton and Aircraft, the latter carries just 8% of the patronage.

If the same spacing was used along the rest of the line there would be 16 stops between Newport and Werribee.  So then you would naturally have to believe then that would be a reasonable number of stations, if you believe Aircraft has such value.  For comparison, the Mandurah line has a station spacing of roughly 5km between Canning Bridge and Warnbro.


A seperate service aka the High speed rail I am proposing is for people from Geelong, Torquay, Colac and Warnambool to have a seperate service direct to the city instead clogging onto a metro service. This would be like terminating the Gippsland service at Pakenham. This is not good for regional commuters past Geelong as it forces them onto a metro style service. Regional and Metro serves two different modes and should be separated when possible.
James974

Rubbish.  Try using just a hint of reasoning if it's indeed possible.

A 54 minute Geelong service as an extension of Werribee services with just 6 intermediate stops between Werribee and Southern Cross (via 'Metro' 2) is not at all equivalent to a Gippsland service plodding on through 24 suburban stops from Pakenham to the city.  

Eliminating the need to quad 30+km of track (Wyndham to Sunshine) at minimum is not something to be scoffed at, especially when you achieve basically the same outcome.  The Wyndham line is likely to see another four suburban stops - traffic through Sunshine will be relatively heavy, whilst Metro 2 will run relatively light, thus it's completely logical that Geelong services should run through Metro 2.


A local Geelong rail system is for the future, you don't have any vision how Geelong can eventually become an independent city with its own network. It can happen in 30-50 years time, but the provision for it must be provided now before the land all sold up (Torquay line will get land provision).
James974

It's called common sense and a grounding in reality.

The railways in Geelong run nowhere near activity centres (unless you think people need to access a refinery) so buses make far more sense.
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
I would be interested to know the rationale behind the idea of high speed trains for Geelong. It's such a piddling short journey anyway. How much time would be saved, and it what cost?
If you want high speed, put it on journeys of reasonable length where time saving might be significant.
  cabidass Chief Train Controller

If you were going to do Geelong, you'd do Frankston as well. The former is 1h 6mins. The latter is 1h 8mins (according to Google)...

The only thing that would make sense in my book is express services from these hubs stopping at no other stations in peak times. But that would only work if there were loops where they could pass the other metro services....

In Geelong, surely a Sprinter Carriage would suffice...? But don't know enough about the line. Maybe they already use them.

But yeah, something that is purely a point to point service with no other stops, to help grow these satellite suburbs....
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
Why don't we close the entire Victorian rail network and just run trains to/from Geelong?

I, for one, am sick of hearing of fanciful, ridiculous and unnecessary schemes to save Geelong commuters 30 seconds here or there plus a God given right to a reserved seat in gold class when compared to the average suburban passenger from Frankston, Pakenham or Craigieburn about whom no one gives a damn.


There is more to Victoria than Geelong.
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
There is more to Victoria than Geelong.
YM-Mundrabilla
Thank heavens for that. I am 100 percent with YM-Mundrabilla - what on God's earth is so special about one particular, short, stretch of railway?
  John.Z Assistant Commissioner

Why don't we close the entire Victorian rail network and just run trains to/from Geelong?

I, for one, am sick of hearing of fanciful, ridiculous and unnecessary schemes to save Geelong commuters 30 seconds here or there plus a God given right to a reserved seat in gold class when compared to the average suburban passenger from Frankston, Pakenham or Craigieburn about whom no one gives a damn.


There is more to Victoria than Geelong.
YM-Mundrabilla
Geelong is Victoria's whipping boy. It's a part of Melbourne when it suits (TV, Radio, VCE zoning etc.) and a part of Regional Victoria when it suits (Feds funding for roads, lack of a regular rail service (better now than it used to be), no electrification etc.). If we are a part of Melbourne, then make us a proper part of Melbourne. That includes a properly funded Bus Network and electrification and duplication through to waurn ponds via Werribee.

Geelong line is the busiest VLine line by far, we prop up the other lines which struggle patronage wise and are a burden to State's pocket. If it wasn't for us, and if you move us to Metro, then you might see some other VLine services reduced due to lack of subsidy.
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
Geelong is Victoria's whipping boy. It's a part of Melbourne when it suits (TV, Radio, VCE zoning etc.) and a part of Regional Victoria when it suits (Feds funding for roads, lack of a regular rail service (better now than it used to be), no electrification etc.). If we are a part of Melbourne, then make us a proper part of Melbourne. That includes a properly funded Bus Network and electrification and duplication through to waurn ponds via Werribee.

Geelong line is the busiest VLine line by far, we prop up the other lines which struggle patronage wise and are a burden to State's pocket. If it wasn't for us, and if you move us to Metro, then you might see some other VLine services reduced due to lack of subsidy.
"John.Z"
Wow! All that paranoia and footy as well.
  ZH836301 Chief Commissioner

Location: BleakCity
I would be interested to know the rationale behind the idea of high speed trains for Geelong.
Valvegear
Foamers seem to think just because its Vline it deserves a better service than suburban locations with longer journey times.
  dthead Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Mod note, removed several  Aircraft station posts as bein totally off topic for a Geelong topic, that station is discussed in another suitable thread.

I will continue to remove posts if needed, without warning.
  trainbrain Chief Commissioner

Mod note, removed several  Aircraft station posts as bein totally off topic for a Geelong topic, that station is discussed in another suitable thread.

I will continue to remove posts if needed, without warning.
dthead
exterminate
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
Why don't we close the entire Victorian rail network and just run trains to/from Geelong?
YM-Mundrabilla
Wasn't this the central idea of the Thompson government's Lonie Report?
  cabidass Chief Train Controller

Why don't we close the entire Victorian rail network and just run trains to/from Geelong?
Wasn't this the central idea of the Thompson government's Lonie Report?
don_dunstan

According to wiki.. yes....

Learn a new thing every day. And to think, the N type carriages I grew up on were built in the 1980s....
A new deal indeed..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lonie_Report
  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

Why don't we close the entire Victorian rail network and just run trains to/from Geelong?

I, for one, am sick of hearing of fanciful, ridiculous and unnecessary schemes to save Geelong commuters 30 seconds here or there plus a God given right to a reserved seat in gold class when compared to the average suburban passenger from Frankston, Pakenham or Craigieburn about whom no one gives a damn.


There is more to Victoria than Geelong.
Geelong is Victoria's whipping boy. It's a part of Melbourne when it suits (TV, Radio, VCE zoning etc.) and a part of Regional Victoria when it suits (Feds funding for roads, lack of a regular rail service (better now than it used to be), no electrification etc.). If we are a part of Melbourne, then make us a proper part of Melbourne. That includes a properly funded Bus Network and electrification and duplication through to waurn ponds via Werribee.

Geelong line is the busiest VLine line by far, we prop up the other lines which struggle patronage wise and are a burden to State's pocket. If it wasn't for us, and if you move us to Metro, then you might see some other VLine services reduced due to lack of subsidy.
John.Z
And some metro lines (Frankston, Werribee, Pakenham, Sunbury) get more patronage than others, your point?

We do not want a sort of rail network that Britain has, based on the amount of revenue they generate in what is supposed to be a service paid in the way of taxes as well as fares. Whereby London and the South East get brand new trains based on entirely new platforms and the North have to make to do with refurbished hand-me downs from the 1980's and crappy pacers. The network as a whole should be modernised.

Michael
  ZH836301 Chief Commissioner

Location: BleakCity
When you only pay twice the weekly fare of Box Hill to travel five times the distance to Geelong it's probably best not suggesting you prop up other services.
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
When you only pay twice the weekly fare of Box Hill to travel five times the distance to Geelong it's probably best not suggesting you prop up other services.
ZH836301
Oh well said. Laughing
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
When you only pay twice the weekly fare of Box Hill to travel five times the distance to Geelong it's probably best not suggesting you prop up other services.
"ZH836301"
Scorecard: ZH 1; Geelong proponents yet to score.
  BigShunter Chief Commissioner

Location: St Clair. S.A.
Why don't we close the entire Victorian rail network and just run trains to/from Geelong?
Wasn't this the central idea of the Thompson government's Lonie Report?
don_dunstan

Interesting article don, a couple of things I found of interest and may explain a bit of the predicament some of the railway system finds it's self in today.

It argued for large-scale deregulation of transport markets, especially by the removal of the current restrictions on the carriage by road of such goods as cement, sawn timber, fertilisers and grain.  The last nail in the railway system coffin ???

The fact that the Lonie Report was written by people with a vested interest in increasing road transport - well this speaks for it's self doesn't it and proves, you can manufacture a report or survey to give the answers you want.

professional planners at universities - not normal people, not the actual people who use the transport system, I wonder what a " professional planner " actually looks like Shocked

The report stated that because of increasing demand, Victoria's major highways should be duplicated. It also argued for the reservation of land to allow the construction of road bypasses around major towns on these highways. Within Melbourne, it argued for extensions to the Eastern and South Eastern Freeways, for the linking of the West Gate Freeway to Port Melbourne, and for the building of a ring road around the city, claiming that these increases in road capacity were needed to meet predicted demand for road transport. It also advocated a road bypass of Lilydale on the Maroondah Highway, and argued for the introduction of clearways on main suburban streets to speed up road traffic. and still trying to catch up with these recommendations Laughing

Also interesting, it seems public backlash prompted a fair step backwards on some of the proposed plans, I wonder if the same reaction would happen today or we all just shrug the shoulders and think, that's something else they've Cocked up ??

BigShunter.
  John.Z Assistant Commissioner

When you only pay twice the weekly fare of Box Hill to travel five times the distance to Geelong it's probably best not suggesting you prop up other services.
ZH836301
And you pay more to go from Southern Cross to Flinders St then Frankston to Lara. It's probably best they fix the way fares are collected before suggesting which services are profitable and which ones are not.
  railblogger Chief Commissioner

Location: At the back of the train, quitely doing exactly what you'd expect.
When you only pay twice the weekly fare of Box Hill to travel five times the distance to Geelong it's probably best not suggesting you prop up other services.
And you pay more to go from Southern Cross to Flinders St then Frankston to Lara. It's probably best they fix the way fares are collected before suggesting which services are profitable and which ones are not.
John.Z
Exactly. The current fare structure gives out so much free travel it's no wonder the government subsidies are so high.

Go distance-based and eliminate the early-bird fare and your cost recovery will increase markedly.
  tazzer96 Chief Commissioner

While higher speed electric trains are a must for the geelong line.  (160km/h).  The biggest thing that can benefit the geelong line is through routing in the cbd.  Ideally by a entirely new line, but even via flinders st would be better.    Get rid of the forced transfer at southern cross.   Its one of the reasons why peak hour north shore/central coast services and weekend south coast services in sydney get such good patronage.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
The government should move to immediately start an electrification programme covering (as mentioned previously) the Geelong and Ballarat Lines with progressive introduction of EMU at 160 km/h to augment current VLocity services.  We need to start this work now.  The state has plenty of money to get this done.

Excess DMU sets can be moved to other routes away from Geelong.  Bendigo and Pakenham.
  cabidass Chief Train Controller

When you only pay twice the weekly fare of Box Hill to travel five times the distance to Geelong it's probably best not suggesting you prop up other services.
ZH836301
I disagree. There is a strong economic case for cross-subsidy. The NBN (and Telecom and SEC before it) utilised this methodology for very good reason. By adding cents to many people, you can avoid forcing a few to pay many dollars.

You should have seen the uproar in the NBN threads a few years back when city people realised that they would be paying say 50cents - to ensure the farmers who provide their food could get internet... It was nonsensical.


Exactly. The current fare structure gives out so much free travel it's no wonder the government subsidies are so high.

Go distance-based and eliminate the early-bird fare and your cost recovery will increase markedly.
railblogger

Sometimes I think people have very short memories. We had a system like that. We had three zones just a short while ago. While I'm happy for any review to be undertaken to eliminate any anomalies, overall the system is designed pretty well.

Affordable Public transport is a necessary underpinning facet of every stable democracy. It's somewhat socialistic in nature, just like the SEC, and Telecom, and PMG before it... 116 years of stability is a pretty good record.

-------

Here's a bit of history from just a decade ago that I'm sure you've all forgotten...

"FORMER premier Jeff Kennett has described his decision not to push for a "single coin" public transport ticket system as his biggest regret in public life.

"He said it would have been either a $1 or $2 coin and commuters would have been able to travel as far or for as long on the train or tram as they liked. "Easy to manage, consumer friendly, you just drop the coin in the box," he said. It would have been a coin and turnstile system.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/jeffs-gutdriven-transport-solution/2006/03/04/1141191889576.html

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

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