Melbourne Airport Rail Link

 
  John.Z Chief Train Controller

Ah, I'd imagined Craigieburn and Upfield to keep using 1 and 2 and to not route through Spencer St at all (loop reconfiguration). If the signalling supports 24 tph then that's still way more services than are currently scheduled in peak (~10 for Craigieburn and 3 for Upfield at the moment) and should be viable for a long while yet. Aren't the loop tunnels meant to be able to do 30 haha?

Anyway, I like the thinking about re-using what we have already. How about skyrail over the existing coridoor from Sunshine to MM1 junction Laughing? Lots of skills getting those pylons up good and quick...
LeroyW
As per your original post, you mention the City Loop tunnel reconfiguration which (in the PTV plan) states that:

Frankston to Craigieburn runs via the City Loop and
Sandringham to Upfield runs via the Viaducts.

So they wouldn't be able to share tracks at North (west) Melbourne.

Sponsored advertisement

  Adogs Chief Train Controller

^ Reckon it's possible that actually is what they're thinking about, but they don't want to let on yet that that's the plan?

Quad tracks, but two on the ground and two in the air...  Cheaper and easier than putting the Airport trains into a new tunnel.

Once the Melbourne public are used to Skyrail sections (as those in Singapore, Tokyo, Berlin etc already are) they could do it without too much complaining.
  Carnot Minister for Railways

Sparks currently take 17 minutes from SCS to Sunshine.  I suspect a train trip to the airport in 2028 will involve catchng a HCMT there, all change to Airport train, and arriving after a 30-40 minute journey (total) from CBD.

Is that so bad? If it's cheap?
  TOQ-1 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Power Trainger
@TOQ-1 The $10 Billion does not include fast rail to Geelong. And electrifying Melton and Wyndhamvale does not require the airport line to be built.

Michael
mejhammers1
That is not what I said. There are many projects happening around Sunshine, some of which have aspects of scope that overlap.

My point was that if a new tunnel, paid for as part of the Airport Link, was also able to provide capacity to another line group and allow for future growth, then that is a good thing. It also makes the benefit of using that $10b harder to measure as the benefits are spread over multiple projects with multiple outcomes.
  LeroyW Junior Train Controller

Location: Awaiting MM2
Ah, I'd imagined Craigieburn and Upfield to keep using 1 and 2 and to not route through Spencer St at all (loop reconfiguration). If the signalling supports 24 tph then that's still way more services than are currently scheduled in peak (~10 for Craigieburn and 3 for Upfield at the moment) and should be viable for a long while yet. Aren't the loop tunnels meant to be able to do 30 haha?

Anyway, I like the thinking about re-using what we have already. How about skyrail over the existing coridoor from Sunshine to MM1 junction Laughing? Lots of skills getting those pylons up good and quick...
As per your original post, you mention the City Loop tunnel reconfiguration which (in the PTV plan) states that:

Frankston to Craigieburn runs via the City Loop and
Sandringham to Upfield runs via the Viaducts.

So they wouldn't be able to share tracks at North (west) Melbourne.
John.Z
Blerg good point again. I imagine I'll get my facts straight eventually.

As much as forcing new lines to share tracks is generally bad, I think the idea still has merit if it saves you several billion dollars - ie. Does Upfield to Sandringham need an entire track pair to itself through the core of the city? You'd be able to fit Airport trains in there for decades before you had a problem.
  John.Z Chief Train Controller

Blerg good point again. I imagine I'll get my facts straight eventually.

As much as forcing new lines to share tracks is generally bad, I think the idea still has merit if it saves you several billion dollars - ie. Does Upfield to Sandringham need an entire track pair to itself through the core of the city? You'd be able to fit Airport trains in there for decades before you had a problem.
LeroyW
Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating for/against your position.

I do think that the smartest use of resources to maximise what we already have it look into ways that we can segregate lines as we look to increase frequencies.
  kitchgp Chief Commissioner

Based on current figures Melbourne Airport would only require at most 4 trains per hour (each way). Airport passenger arrivals and departures are intermingled these days, ie the peak is in both directions.

  • 8 x 800-passenger trains per hour = 6400 passengers per hour
  • Allowing for a 60/40 imbalance between arrivals and departures still gives a capacity of about 5300 per hour.
  • For the train to capture 25% of the total airport passengers, there would need to be more than 20,000 airline passengers per hour (4 x 5300 = 21,200).
  • To achieve 20,000 per hour would require 100 takeoffs and landings per hour at an average load of 200 passengers per plane.

Brisbane’s Airtrain has 15-min headways in peak and 30-min in off-peak. Melbourne Airport’s justification is based on projected figures for the mid 2030s. Hindsight phrases such as ‘patronage less than expected’ come to mind.
  justarider Deputy Commissioner

Location: Bored at home
Based on current figures Melbourne Airport would only require at most 4 trains per hour (each way). Airport passenger arrivals and departures are intermingled these days, ie the peak is in both directions.

  • 8 x 800-passenger trains per hour = 6400 passengers per hour
  • Allowing for a 60/40 imbalance between arrivals and departures still gives a capacity of about 5300 per hour.
  • For the train to capture 25% of the total airport passengers, there would need to be more than 20,000 airline passengers per hour (4 x 5300 = 21,200).
  • To achieve 20,000 per hour would require 100 takeoffs and landings per hour at an average load of 200 passengers per plane.

Brisbane’s Airtrain has 15-min headways in peak and 30-min in off-peak. Melbourne Airport’s justification is based on projected figures for the mid 2030s. Hindsight phrases such as ‘patronage less than expected’ come to mind.
kitchgp
EXCEPT your numbers don't count all the airport staff nor family & friends greeting the passengers.

cheers
John
  CraigieburnLineUser Locomotive Fireman

More thoughts as I try to think like a cost-saving public servant...

Imagine a future world with Sunbury/Melton/Wyndham Vale generating 30 electrified TPH into MM1. Imagine you've also gone and done the city loop re-configuration so that Craigieburn and Upfield go from West Melbourne into the loop to Parliament then out to Frankston via Richmond.

You've now got an entirely empty track pair from where MM1 branches off near Footscray most of the way into Southern Cross (I think it shrinks down to one approaching the station).

You could fill this with Airport/Bendigo/Seymour if you wanted, leaving plenty of capacity for Geelong and Ballarat elsewhere. Remind me why we need a super expensive new tunnel again?

Sort out extra capacity from Sunshine to Footscray and it's just about done.
Well the empty track pair is only between South Kensington and North (west) Melbourne junction as the Upfield (plats 1+2), Craigieburn (3+4) and Newport (5+6) would all get their own tracks into/out of Spencer St post MM1.

Between South Kensington and Footscray you'd still need a new track pair.

An idea i've seen floated is for the airport tunnel to take over the exsisting SG allignment between the Flyover and the Sunshine SG railyards, with a new tunnel built for freight to allow for double stacking. Food for thought in terms of how we best use our existing infrastructure
Ah, I'd imagined Craigieburn and Upfield to keep using 1 and 2 and to not route through Spencer St at all (loop reconfiguration). If the signalling supports 24 tph then that's still way more services than are currently scheduled in peak (~10 for Craigieburn and 3 for Upfield at the moment) and should be viable for a long while yet. Aren't the loop tunnels meant to be able to do 30 haha?

Anyway, I like the thinking about re-using what we have already. How about skyrail over the existing coridoor from Sunshine to MM1 junction Laughing? Lots of skills getting those pylons up good and quick...
LeroyW
Currently coming into North (West) Melbourne there are a lot of conflicts at times between Craigieburn, Upfield and Macaulay sidings trains so when MM1 opens it will be much better to sort out platforms at West Melbourne. Also with the loop reconfiguration the idea was to route Upfield to Glen Waverley via Southern Cross so those tracks won't always be free
  kitchgp Chief Commissioner

EXCEPT your numbers don't count all the airport staff nor family & friends greeting the passengers.
justarider
Airport staff start well before or finish well after the peaks. Family & friends don't catch a train to greet friends. They drive to the airport to pick them up or make sure they go. (2 travellers plus 4 well-wishers at Sydney prices ($15 a trip) is $150 - 6 x $15 out; 4 x $15 back.)
  tayser Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
Based on current figures Melbourne Airport would only require at most 4 trains per hour (each way). Airport passenger arrivals and departures are intermingled these days, ie the peak is in both directions.

  • 8 x 800-passenger trains per hour = 6400 passengers per hour
  • Allowing for a 60/40 imbalance between arrivals and departures still gives a capacity of about 5300 per hour.
  • For the train to capture 25% of the total airport passengers, there would need to be more than 20,000 airline passengers per hour (4 x 5300 = 21,200).
  • To achieve 20,000 per hour would require 100 takeoffs and landings per hour at an average load of 200 passengers per plane.

Brisbane’s Airtrain has 15-min headways in peak and 30-min in off-peak. Melbourne Airport’s justification is based on projected figures for the mid 2030s. Hindsight phrases such as ‘patronage less than expected’ come to mind.
kitchgp

Calendar year 2018: 25.8m domestic and 11.4m international passengers went through the terminals.

Simply divided by 365 days in the year thats just over 100k passengers a day.  In reality weekdays would skew slightly higher and weekends would skew slightly lower (except natural peaks like Sunday afternoon/evening).

Rough peak domestic times: 6am-10am (departures) 7am-11am (arrivals) and 4pm-8pm (departures) and 5pm-9pm (arrivals).
Rough peak international times: 6am-10am (arrivals) 8am-11am (departures), 3pm-7pm (departures), 9pm-midnight (arrivals), 10pm-1am (departures).

Airline staff (whether kerbside or airside) shifts generally start from 4am and are staggered throughout the day (flight crew who are on 9am departures don't turn up for work at 4am!).  Other staff (Border Force, AQIS, retail outlets, Airport management etc) would be similar but probably don't have the same shift spread.

If it's 37.2 million passengers now, using a conservative annual patronage growth rate of 3% (in the past 10 years we've seen peaks double that) by the time a MARL might open (gov says 2027 - 8 years away) there will probably be ~45 million passengers a year or 123k per day (again using a simply annual divide 365 calc).

If I were to gaze in a Crystal ball - Weekdays 6am-9pm: 6TPH/10 minute frequencies.  Perhaps 15 or 20 minute frequencies starting from first service around 4:30 until 6am and same from 9pm until a last service around midnight.  Weekends same core 6TPH/10 minute frequencies but probably start 7am or 8am until 8pm or 9pm (except for Sunday nights which is one the busiest times for domestic aviation).

If they're going to be really picky trying to match capacity to the aviation peaks they might pull the frequency back from 10min to 15 min from for 3-4 hours in the middle of each day.

And that assumes an 800 capacity trains, if they're smaller, it'll be higher.  Regardless, here's hoping MARL and SRL is an automated system so capacity can quickly be added when and where it's needed rather than waiting for 6+ month timetable changes.
  The Vinelander Minister for Railways

Location: Ballan, Victoria on the Ballarat RFR Line
EXCEPT your numbers don't count all the airport staff nor family & friends greeting the passengers.
Airport staff start well before or finish well after the peaks. Family & friends don't catch a train to greet friends. They drive to the airport to pick them up or make sure they go. (2 travellers plus 4 well-wishers at Sydney prices ($15 a trip) is $150 - 6 x $15 out; 4 x $15 back.)
kitchgp

Perhaps I'm the exception Question

I'm definitely travelling to the airport this week to meet a friend from O/S.

I'll never drive to the airport again...too expensive to park close by to meet friends and too stressful and expensive to find an undercover space for a longer outbound journey.

Moreover it's 'free' to travel to the airport on the 901. The 901, for intending airport pax travelling from the Craigieburn/Seymour/Albury, Upfield and Mernda lines is the inexpensive BBQ stopper to get to the airport.

Mike.
  Lockie91 Chief Train Controller

@TOQ-1 The $10 Billion does not include fast rail to Geelong. And electrifying Melton and Wyndhamvale does not require the airport line to be built.

Michael
That is not what I said. There are many projects happening around Sunshine, some of which have aspects of scope that overlap.

My point was that if a new tunnel, paid for as part of the Airport Link, was also able to provide capacity to another line group and allow for future growth, then that is a good thing. It also makes the benefit of using that $10b harder to measure as the benefits are spread over multiple projects with multiple outcomes.
TOQ-1
Agreed. Spending Billions for a tunnel that will only carry 6TPH insane waste of money for a gold plated airport train. If that tunnel carries trains from Geelong every ten minutes as well as Bendigo and Ballarat Services every 20 minutes you have a 10 Billion tunnel with 20TPH with room for future growth. Thats getting closer to value for Money. If removing those Ballarat and Geelong services allows Sparking to Melton and Wyndham Vale giving metro services to 100K people then you have value. $10 Billion may not include the capital for these projects but it is a precursor for a major expansion of the metro network in the west.
  justarider Deputy Commissioner

Location: Bored at home
EXCEPT your numbers don't count all the airport staff nor family & friends greeting the passengers.
Airport staff start well before or finish well after the peaks. Family & friends don't catch a train to greet friends. They drive to the airport to pick them up or make sure they go. (2 travellers plus 4 well-wishers at Sydney prices ($15 a trip) is $150 - 6 x $15 out; 4 x $15 back.)
kitchgp
A LOT of assumptions there kitch.

The only ones talking about Sydney prices are the AirRail mob.

The Govt is actually talking about it being part of SRL.
That mean Miki. Effectively free when you're already on the move with PT.

Read what Vinelander has to say about 901, does it all the time.
Not for me at the moment with lots of luggage on bus Broady to Airport, but when there's a train coming from both directions then hell yeah.

Also forgot to add in all the SRL pax going from North to West burbs. The Airport is just an incidental stop, but those pax are already on board. Just sit at the side of the ring road to see the potential.

cheers
John
  TOQ-1 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Power Trainger
With the passenger numbers, they also depend on whether the train allows pick ups and set downs at Sunshine in both directions. If the Airport Rail runs into the Metro Tunnel, at least initially, then I can't see how they can stop city-bound passengers boarding at Sunshine. This gives a lot more patronage to those trains. Same in the down direction.
  chomper Junior Train Controller

How seriously was the idea of extending the Showgrounds spur through Highpoint and onto the airport taken? I'm looking at the pic below from the "The Age" three years ago and it's got me thinking extending the Showgrounds line seems to kill several birds with one stone.

  kitchgp Chief Commissioner

The Govt is actually talking about it being part of SRL.
That mean Miki. Effectively free when you're already on the move with PT.
justarider
Sydney's station surcharge of $14.90 (full fare) is charged through Opal. myki could easily be modified. Brisbane's Airtrain charges about $10, based on construction costs of $220 million.


........................... I'm definitely travelling to the airport this week to meet a friend from O/S. ..........................
The Vinelander
To pop out to Sydney Airport and back would cost upwards of $35.
  CraigieburnLineUser Locomotive Fireman

How seriously was the idea of extending the Showgrounds spur through Highpoint and onto the airport taken? I'm looking at the pic below from the "The Age" three years ago and it's got me thinking extending the Showgrounds line seems to kill several birds with one stone.

chomper
Probably not as seriously as it should've been, that business case was gamed pretty heavily towards the base case. Everything was about regional catchment and that the Airport line was supposed to be single purpose (dedicated trains etc). That Showgrounds route would've been pretty good in giving better public transport options to people around Highpoint, Keilor and Airport West. A problem with that route (and the current Sunshine route) is how you get into the city, at Newmarket where the Flemington line meets the Craigieburn line there is a flat junction and then both lines funnel into North Melbourne. However had they taken that Showgrounds route it probably would've taken quite a bit of pressure off the Craigieburn line (and Sunbury line to some extent) in the long run
  ptvcommuter Train Controller

Changing trains at Sunshine. Costing 15 Billion.
Even the 15 Billion in general is extreme. Just build a direct bus lane/Busway all the way into the city out to the airport. Might as well get on building Metro 2 and the Suburban Rail Loop, two Projects actually worth their money
  Crossover Train Controller

Location: St. Albans Victoria
Sparks currently take 17 minutes from SCS to Sunshine.  I suspect a train trip to the airport in 2028 will involve catchng a HCMT there, all change to Airport train, and arriving after a 30-40 minute journey (total) from CBD.

Is that so bad? If it's cheap?
Carnot
I do not believe this is serious post ???
  Carnot Minister for Railways

I hope I'm not serious.  It's more a case of "what if...?", given the number of half-baked rail projects we've seen in this State in recent years.
  tayser Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
How seriously was the idea of extending the Showgrounds spur through Highpoint and onto the airport taken? I'm looking at the pic below from the "The Age" three years ago and it's got me thinking extending the Showgrounds line seems to kill several birds with one stone.

Probably not as seriously as it should've been, that business case was gamed pretty heavily towards the base case. Everything was about regional catchment and that the Airport line was supposed to be single purpose (dedicated trains etc). That Showgrounds route would've been pretty good in giving better public transport options to people around Highpoint, Keilor and Airport West. A problem with that route (and the current Sunshine route) is how you get into the city, at Newmarket where the Flemington line meets the Craigieburn line there is a flat junction and then both lines funnel into North Melbourne. However had they taken that Showgrounds route it probably would've taken quite a bit of pressure off the Craigieburn line (and Sunbury line to some extent) in the long run
CraigieburnLineUser
If the Showgrounds route were chosen way back when, given the context of LXRA, I dare say Kensington would be rebuilt/grade separated and the Kensington-Newmarket section would have been quadruplicated.

I still think there is still a case for this happening regardless because if we treat the 2018 NDP as a guide (all the normal caveats apply) and the big increase in Craigieburn frequencies do come to fruition (especially if Craigieburn moves to 10 minute off peak/weekend frequencies), in 10 years when the events are on they'll be fighting for fewer paths in that small section as well.
  Carnot Minister for Railways
  chomper Junior Train Controller

ACCC weighs in on how a PPP involving Melb Airport would entrench their monopoly.  No kidding!
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/former-accc-boss-says-melbourne-airport-owners-could-rip-off-airport-rail-passengers-20191023-p533lm.html
Carnot

Paging Captain Obvious.

They should get Repco in to build the rail link...

Ripping
Every
Poor
Customer
Off
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Now believe the only way is via both paths.  Albion and also the direct route via tunnel.

https://www.railpage.com.au/news/s/treasurer-tim-pallas-hoses-down-hopes-for-airport-tunnel

the above article snapshot shows the government is not going to prefer the right way to do things injecting political spin into the project which like most in the state will probably run off the rails and cost 3 times what it should Smile

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: