Melbourne Airport Rail Link

 
  BrentonGolding Chief Commissioner

Location: Maldon Junction
OK Brenton, let's accept that Lockie meant share the 33 TPH between 2 sets of tracks.
That's REALLY GOOD light usage, but of course a bunch of hyperbole.

Down to in tacks, your back of envelope is OK as far as it goes,
BUT this discussion is about MARL (you know, the extra line to Airport)
NOT, let's build and extra pair of sparky lines for Wyndham Vale.

cheers
John
justarider
And MARL is exactly what I am talking about - as in where the MARL are they going to shove those extra 6 TPH to/from the airport!

MARL isn't going to be ready to go until what, 2026/27 at which point MM1 should be open for business and the traffic between Sunners and Footscrazy will be a whole lot more than it is now!

Sponsored advertisement

  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
OK Brenton, let's accept that Lockie meant share the 33 TPH between 2 sets of tracks.
That's REALLY GOOD light usage, but of course a bunch of hyperbole.

Down to in tacks, your back of envelope is OK as far as it goes,
BUT this discussion is about MARL (you know, the extra line to Airport)
NOT, let's build and extra pair of sparky lines for Wyndham Vale.

cheers
John
And MARL is exactly what I am talking about - as in where the MARL are they going to shove those extra 6 TPH to/from the airport!

MARL isn't going to be ready to go until what, 2026/27 at which point MM1 should be open for business and the traffic between Sunners and Footscrazy will be a whole lot more than it is now!
BrentonGolding
Mel Airport would only justify 3 trains per hours or 20min frequency, nothing more and nothing less for most of the day. If the service is servicing other destinations, then that's extra that needs to be factored in.
  historian Deputy Commissioner

And this is a framed illustration of why the road lobby run rings around the rail lobby.

The rail lobby wants to get things 'right', the road lobby knows that it's more important to build what you can, even if future growth will cause problems. In fact, the subsequent congestion is a feature. It just shows demand, generates political will, and requires more spending to solve the next problem. This strategy even has a name - the salami technique - and the official history of the CRB admits that this was their strategy in the '60s and '70s. The entire history of the Monash Freeway is a case study.

In this case, there will be plenty of capacity in the MM1 to initially carry the Melton, Sunbury, and Airport services. The Meltons being taken from the RRL will free up capacity for a few more country trains. Good, we've got the Airport line built.

If, by the time the line opens it is obvious (as it will be) that there needs to be more services to Wnydham Vale, Geelong, Ballarat & Bendigo? Good. Clearly there's a demand that justifies spending more money.

But why assume that it will be more tracks through Footscray?

You could build the MM2, and build the planned extension from Werribee to Wyndham Vale. You could get rid of the last loco hauled trains giving higher capacity on the RRL. You could upgrade the signalling on the RRL. Double deck electrified trains to Geelong?
  BrentonGolding Chief Commissioner

Location: Maldon Junction
And this is a framed illustration of why the road lobby run rings around the rail lobby.

The rail lobby wants to get things 'right', the road lobby knows that it's more important to build what you can, even if future growth will cause problems. In fact, the subsequent congestion is a feature. It just shows demand, generates political will, and requires more spending to solve the next problem. This strategy even has a name - the salami technique - and the official history of the CRB admits that this was their strategy in the '60s and '70s. The entire history of the Monash Freeway is a case study.

In this case, there will be plenty of capacity in the MM1 to initially carry the Melton, Sunbury, and Airport services. The Meltons being taken from the RRL will free up capacity for a few more country trains. Good, we've got the Airport line built.

If, by the time the line opens it is obvious (as it will be) that there needs to be more services to Wnydham Vale, Geelong, Ballarat & Bendigo? Good. Clearly there's a demand that justifies spending more money.

But why assume that it will be more tracks through Footscray?

You could build the MM2, and build the planned extension from Werribee to Wyndham Vale. You could get rid of the last loco hauled trains giving higher capacity on the RRL. You could upgrade the signalling on the RRL. Double deck electrified trains to Geelong?
historian
I fully agree Historian. I just don't think that is how it is going to be done.

I don't think that the Airport part of the Air Train consortium will want a bar of any second rate service (be it 3 TPH / shuttle to Sunshine and then all change or running via the suburban or RRL tracks) as they won't be interested in anything that in any way tarnishes the polished image that they are trying to convey.

And if the Gov't flicks the consortium and goes it alone then who knows what we might end up with once that $5Bn ah hang make that $7Bn is out of the frame.

If they built the overground part of the line from Sunners to the Airport ASAP which would not be that hard then your plan would probably work perfectly but I can't see the Feds wanting to put their name to a half arsed plan either. And can the Airport itself veto the plan by refusing to be a part of it at their end if they don't like the plan?

Which takes us back to the all singing, all dancing 24 Carat version. Or something else.......
  justarider Deputy Commissioner

Location: Mister Fact Checker
And this is a framed illustration of why the road lobby run rings around the rail lobby.

...sensible argument about how things really happen....

In this case, there will be plenty of capacity in the MM1 to initially carry the Melton, Sunbury, and Airport services. The Meltons being taken from the RRL will free up capacity for a few more country trains. Good, we've got the Airport line built.

If, by the time the line opens it is obvious (as it will be) that there needs to be more services to Wnydham Vale, Geelong, Ballarat & Bendigo? Good. Clearly there's a demand that justifies spending more money.

..more good stuff...

-- @historian
I fully agree Historian. I just don't think that is how it is going to be done.

I don't think that the Airport part of the Air Train consortium will want a bar of any second rate service (be it 3 TPH / shuttle to Sunshine and then all change or running via the suburban or RRL tracks) as they won't be interested in anything that in any way tarnishes the polished image that they are trying to convey.

And if the Gov't flicks the consortium and goes it alone then who knows what we might end up with once that $5Bn ah hang make that $7Bn is out of the frame.

If they built the overground part of the line from Sunners to the Airport ASAP which would not be that hard then your plan would probably work perfectly but I can't see the Feds wanting to put their name to a half arsed plan either. And can the Airport itself veto the plan by refusing to be a part of it at their end if they don't like the plan?

Which takes us back to the all singing, all dancing 24 Carat version. Or something else.......
BrentonGolding
well sometimes a sensible discussion creeps in.....

The govt giving AirRail consortium $7B the flick ..... hooray what a great idea.
"Airport itself veto the plan", don't think so. Two can play at the bad publicity game. Finally exposed as the self serving rent-seekers they are would give Dan all the ammunition he needs.

"If they built the overground part of the line from Sunners to the Airport ASAP which would not be that hard then your plan would probably work perfectly" - is that a concession that doing a stage one, might lead to stage two.

This part would also fit nicely into the opening of MM1 in 2025, given the business case is due in the next few months and can be half done by the next election.

There is $10B on the table. Plenty enough for
  • Airport Station, new bridge over the Maribyrnong, new track Airport to SUN, clean up the SUN to Albion mess left by RRL,
  • tidy up the Sunshine platforms and entrance, bring the Line between SUN and MM1 up to class1.
  • Quad and sparks to Melton.


And a final b1tch -
Ballarat & Geelong council/big noters are demanding a tunnel so that they can have an exclusive path into CBD.
- WTF do they think that RRL is? Please sir I want some more! Take your place in the queue, you've had first serve.

cheers
John
  tayser Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
No expense should be spared at Sunshine regardless of the direction MARL is taken: flat junctions remained during and post RRL, that should be removed now... ditto Deer Park during the Melton electrification (quad'ing / LX removal project that I fully suspect will all be packaged up together whenever we see the gov actually make a public statement on MARL).
  tayser Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
Just expanding on Justarider's post above and the $10 bil.  Back of the envelope:

$1 bil for Tullamarine (new) and Sunshine (rebuild).  Tulla station probably going to need more than 2 platforms (what's going on with SRL? etc).  Sunshine probably needs another set of platforms + junction rebuild.
$1 bil for electrification + new signaling of Melton
$1.5 bil for quadruplication of Sunshine-Melton (or at least Melton-Deer Park with a brand spanking new Deer Park junction).
$2-3 bil to rebuild Albion junction and the track + catenary + signaling from Albion to Tullamarine
$0.5 bil for topping up the order for HCMTs for Airport + Melton.
$0.5 bil for upgrading Sunshine-Footscray (or MM1 portal) tracks as mentioned by Justarider above.
Use whatever is left for extending the Tulla branch line tracks directly west to just up of Digger's Rest and then remove the Diggers Rest level crossing and quadruplicate a small part around the station to create a fast junction.
Edit: oh and, add platform screen doors to Diggers Rest plus Tottenham/West Footscray/Middle Footscray.

That way Bendigo's only need to share track with Sunbury SAS between Sunbury and Diggers rest (and via Airport and Sunshine). Re-work Sunbury so there's two tracks for Bendigos directly through Sunbury - down the guts of the existing station - and no longer have them stop at Sunbury (they can change at Airport - see below).

Off-peak:

6TPH from Sunbury, + 3 TPH from Watergardens + 3 TPH from Airport + 4TPH from Melton

3TPH Sunshine-Diggers-Watergardens and SAS to MM1 etc.
3TPH Sunbury-Diggers-Airport-Sunshine and express to Footscray then SAS to MM1 etc.
3TPH Watergardens and SAS to MM1 etc
3TPH Airport-Sunshine-express to Footscray and then SAS to MM1 etc.
4TPH Melton-SAS to Sunshine then express to Footscray then SAS to MM1

Peak:

6TPH Sunbury-Diggers-Airport-Sunshine and express to Footscray then SAS to MM1 etc.
6TPH Watergardens-SAS to MM1 etc
4TPH Sunbury-Diggers-Watergardens-SAS to Sunshine express to Footscray then SAS to MM1 etc
6TPH Melton-SAS to Sunshine then express to Footscray then SAS to MM1.

There's your 14-16-ish TPH for Sunbury (Watergardnes) plus 6 TPH for Melton.  10+ years after the opening of MARL, build the tunnel from Sunshine to the City.

Bendigo services would use RRL to Albion, switch over to new MARL track then go via Airport.  Stopping pattern: SX-Footscray-Sunshine-Airport-Clarkefield (or express to Gisborne or Castlemaine/whatever).

$0.02
  tayser Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
A possible day one MM1/Airport/Melton operational plan

Stopping Patterns.

Pakenham-Sunbury & vv.  Pakenham SAS to Caulfield, express to Anzac SAS to Footscray express to Sunshine, SAS to Sunshine via Airport
Cranbourne-Melton & vv.  Cranbourne SAS to Caulfield, express to Anzac, SAS to Footscray, express to Sunshine, SAS to Melton.
Watergardens-Westall & vv. Westall SAS to Caulfield, express to Anzac, SAS to Watergardens via Footscray/Sunshine.
West Footscray-Pakenham or Cranbourne & vv..  West Footscray express to Footscray, SAS to Anzac, express to Caulfield then SAS to Pakenham or Cranbourne.
Westall-Sunbury & vv. Westall SAS to Caulfield, express to Anzac, SAS to Sunbury via Footscray/Sunshine/Watergardens

Off-peak:

4TPH Pakenham-Sunbury (where airport is serviced).  This is a shift from 3TPH to 4TPH for the Pakenham side and shift from 1.5 TPH to 4TPH for the Sunbury side.
4TPH Cranbourne-Melton.  This is a shift from 3TPH to 4TPH for the Cranbourne side and shift from ~2TPH to 4TPH on the Melton side.
4TPH Watergardens-Westall.  This is a shift of 3TPH to 4TPH for stations between Watergardens to Sunshine).  And a smeg more for the city-westall side.

12 TPH between Sunshine-Westall.

Peak:

6 TPH Pakenham-Sunbury (airport is serviced).  This is pretty much a near match - train-for-train - on both Pakenham/Sunbury branch peak timetables.
6 TPH Cranbourne-Melton.
6 TPH Watergardens-Westall

18TPH between Sunshine-Westall

Given it's 5 years away there'll be some growth to Watergardens and then some also around Sunbury (there's a large green wedge between Watergardens and Sunbury - Watergardens/Sydenham area is pretty much built out - Diggers orphaned with the Urban Growth Boundary) we might need to add extra trains (don't forget, like-for-like, the trains get bigger in 2025 for Sunbury and definitely Melton side because of differences from Siemens/Comeng -> HCMT and Vlo -> HCMT).

Slot theses in where needed over time before more trackages is needed:

2 TPH West Footscray-Pakenham.  Pakenham has roughly 6TPH in peak now - this is a new service.
2 TPH West Footscray-Cranbourne.  Ditto from Pakenham remarks above.
2 TPH Westall-Sunbury. Adding more Sunbury capacity but also linking Albion-Ginifer-St Albans-Keilor Plains-Watergardesn with Diggers and Sunbury (which I assume will have very few start/end journeys among those stations).

18TPH + 6TPH = 24TPH between Sunshine-Westall.

Airport gets a bare minimum 4 TPH metro + 1-2 TPH Bendigo regional from day 1 in this scenario too.

Edit x 2: for an overview of the 'spend whatever's left on an Airport-Diggers alignment' from post above this one, [size=3]https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1k-v4Ucx0_1HErzk0JBCH-3IzU_EQ9aTW&ll=-37.70972174944803%2C144.80138940000006&z=13[/size]

Original context of that map from a discussion on SSC - see quoted part [size=3]https://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=165243896#post165243896[/size]

edit x2,345.034: Jesus H Christ, can the admins please fix external links!

  historian Deputy Commissioner

I don't think that the Airport part of the Air Train consortium will want a bar of any second rate service (be it 3 TPH / shuttle to Sunshine and then all change or running via the suburban or RRL tracks) as they won't be interested in anything that in any way tarnishes the polished image that they are trying to convey.

And if the Gov't flicks the consortium and goes it alone then who knows what we might end up with once that $5Bn ah hang make that $7Bn is out of the frame.

If they built the overground part of the line from Sunners to the Airport ASAP which would not be that hard then your plan would probably work perfectly but I can't see the Feds wanting to put their name to a half arsed plan either. And can the Airport itself veto the plan by refusing to be a part of it at their end if they don't like the plan?

Which takes us back to the all singing, all dancing 24 Carat version. Or something else.......
BrentonGolding

To be honest, I don't think Melbourne Airport will care. The main game for them is medium and long term access capacity to the airport. Fundamentally, future growth at the airport (and hence their revenue growth) is expected to be constrained by the capacity of the Tullamarine Freeway to carry passengers to the airport. But there's no further way to economically expand the freeway. Hence the airport's interest in a railway. If they can build it and charge a monopoly rent (the Transurban strategy), that's icing on the cake. But if they can't build it, they'll try and get the State to pay as much as possible of the cost.

(This is also why everyone is ignoring Infrastructure Australia's bleating about improving Skybus. Yes, it's more economic. But the reality is that there is not the freeway capacity at peak time. And if you did make the capacity (by making existing lanes dedicated to Skybus, for example, that are enforced) this would 1) hit Transurban in the hip pocket, and 2) be unpopular.)

As for the Feds, they're already locked in. We have the word on the State opposition leader on this. He was complaining today in The Age that Morrison had no choice but to fund the second rate solution propsed by Andrews.
  GoldenGirl Locomotive Fireman

The number of Three Letter Acronyms per sentence in this thread is amazing, how about expanding them for the benefit of us dumb people.
  Carnot Chief Commissioner

The Private Consortium wants to charge V/line big dollars to use their fancy rail tunnel between Sunshine and the City.  

That won't be popular for obvious reasons, especially if it means higher fares.

The RPV business plan in June will be fun to read.
  ngarner Assistant Commissioner

Location: Seville
PTUA's response to all the media hype over MARL tunnel "now or never". A reasoned answer to the private Airport Consortium's and various others trying to force a fast decision  

PTUA

Neil
  Lockie91 Chief Train Controller

The Age is suggesting that the government is preparing do it alone. Preferring to use the Metro Tunnel to get the project started. It is not willing to let one of the most critical pieces of Transport Infrastructure be privately owned for 40 years.

It will be interesting to see how the rejection of AirTrain plays out with the governments Western Rail Plan to provide Metro services to Melton & WV. As well as the promised HSR to Geelong and Ballarat. Both respective councils are up in arms about it.

It is possible that we may see something staged over the next decade with a dedicated tunnel for future Airport and regional services coming once the Metro Tunnels capacity as be completely exhausted.

The business plan for both MAR & WRP are due shortly with some sort of funding likely to be announced in the May budget.

Or, this could just be more brinkmanship by the government to get AirTrain to scale back there demands. AirTrain could charge access payments to passengers at the airport and dump the fee for additional trains through the tunnel. I’m sure turning down $7 Billion in the current economic climate is not an easy pill to swallow. No easier than Melbourne Airport accepting a mediocre rail service, I’m sure they have no issues charging $20 or $30 a ticket until the end of time.

https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/private-airport-rail-plan-unlikely-to-proceed-20200215-p5415b.html
  ngarner Assistant Commissioner

Location: Seville
and here's another good read on why the government should not give way to the AirLink, or whatever they call themselves, bid

Link

Neil
  LeroyW Junior Train Controller

Location: Awaiting MM2
Surely it's as simple as this:

5bn from the feds and 5bn from the state should be ample to get you Airport station, tracks to Sunshine and some degree of untangling/rebuild once you're there.

None of that precludes you building a tunnel to the city as either part of the original plan or at some point in the future.

If AirTrain think a rail tunnel justifies the investment at that point, let them build it. They can then charge a fortune for special, elite, express airport services that no-one will use - more power to them.

In the meantime, start digging! Start with ripping up the long term car-park for cut and cover and away we go.
  Lockspike Deputy Commissioner

Surely it's as simple as this:

5bn from the feds and 5bn from the state should be ample to get you Airport station, tracks to Sunshine and some degree of untangling/rebuild once you're there.

None of that precludes you building a tunnel to the city as either part of the original plan or at some point in the future.

If AirTrain think a rail tunnel justifies the investment at that point, let them build it. They can then charge a fortune for special, elite, express airport services that no-one will use - more power to them.

In the meantime, start digging! Start with ripping up the long term car-park for cut and cover and away we go.
LeroyW
Right, here's the deal Melbourne Airport Corporation.
We'll have your 5bn, (thanks).
You will not be allowed to operate or control the service*, nor will you get any of the operating revenue.
The amount of profit you receive will be strictly in proportion to your capital contribution.

You will provide free of all cost such space as is required for the airport station and railway operations.
You will not place a surcharge on passengers for the use of said airport station.

The route of the railway will be as is determined by your proposed joint venture partner, as will be the elevation (surface/viaduct/underground).

* MAC will be allowed to provide a 'premium' service, up to a maximum of three trains/hour, and retain any revenue after paying access fees (determined in negotiations with your proposed joint venture partner).
  Upven Locomotive Fireman

Surely it's as simple as this:

5bn from the feds and 5bn from the state should be ample to get you Airport station, tracks to Sunshine and some degree of untangling/rebuild once you're there.

None of that precludes you building a tunnel to the city as either part of the original plan or at some point in the future.

If AirTrain think a rail tunnel justifies the investment at that point, let them build it. They can then charge a fortune for special, elite, express airport services that no-one will use - more power to them.

In the meantime, start digging! Start with ripping up the long term car-park for cut and cover and away we go.
Right, here's the deal Melbourne Airport Corporation.
We'll have your 5bn, (thanks).
You will not be allowed to operate or control the service*, nor will you get any of the operating revenue.
The amount of profit you receive will be strictly in proportion to your capital contribution.

You will provide free of all cost such space as is required for the airport station and railway operations.
You will not place a surcharge on passengers for the use of said airport station.

The route of the railway will be as is determined by your proposed joint venture partner, as will be the elevation (surface/viaduct/underground).

* MAC will be allowed to provide a 'premium' service, up to a maximum of three trains/hour, and retain any revenue after paying access fees (determined in negotiations with your proposed joint venture partner).
Lockspike
The consortium have already stated they would run trains every ten minutes.
  reubstar6 Chief Train Controller

I still don't get how it's costing us $10 billion to get to the airport. The Mernda extension cost what, $600 million or something? Going to the airport should be this plus a bit more for a bridge over the Maribyrnong River and a short tunnel under the airport. How could that possibly be more than $5 billion?
  Engineeringlogic Station Master

Agree reubar6. My guess is maybe the plan to go a bit past the airport and a bit past scs? Either way it’s a lot of cash.
  TOQ-1 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Power Trainger
I still don't get how it's costing us $10 billion to get to the airport. The Mernda extension cost what, $600 million or something? Going to the airport should be this plus a bit more for a bridge over the Maribyrnong River and a short tunnel under the airport. How could that possibly be more than $5 billion?
reubstar6
13km on an active rail line, elevated or diving under roads and freeway in use vs 6km in a reserved corridor.

Probably not quite worth 10 billion, but easy to see where it starts to stack up.
  Crossover Train Controller

Location: St. Albans Victoria
I still don't get how it's costing us $10 billion to get to the airport. The Mernda extension cost what, $600 million or something? Going to the airport should be this plus a bit more for a bridge over the Maribyrnong River and a short tunnel under the airport. How could that possibly be more than $5 billion?
13km on an active rail line, elevated or diving under roads and freeway in use vs 6km in a reserved corridor.

Probably not quite worth 10 billion, but easy to see where it starts to stack up.
TOQ-1
Which includes a very significant bridge over the Maribrynong valley which is very deep at this point.
  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

I still don't get how it's costing us $10 billion to get to the airport. The Mernda extension cost what, $600 million or something? Going to the airport should be this plus a bit more for a bridge over the Maribyrnong River and a short tunnel under the airport. How could that possibly be more than $5 billion?
13km on an active rail line, elevated or diving under roads and freeway in use vs 6km in a reserved corridor.

Probably not quite worth 10 billion, but easy to see where it starts to stack up.
Which includes a very significant bridge over the Maribrynong valley which is very deep at this point.
Crossover
I agree with other posters. I do not see how diving under roads the freeway, a bridge over the Maribyrnong valley and a short tunnel to the airport, which will probably be using the Cut and Cover method is going to cost $10 Billion.

Crossrail is going to cost $36.75 Billion. For that there are 21km of deep twin tunnels, 9 completely new stations which are simply huge. 200 metre platforms with platform doors. Canary Wharf Station alone, is going to cost $1.5 Billion, enhanced signalling and 75 new trains. What are we getting, 10-12 km at the most of new surface railway, a short section of cut and cover tunnel plus 1 new station at the airport. I do hope that they will also get rail construction done elsewhere included for that 10 bill or I would be asking for my money back.

If the airport line is simply going to be shuttle from the City to the Airport, then simply extend the 59 Tram and reroute South of Airport West, using elevated sections.

Michael
  tayser Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
You're forgetting:

- sorting out Sunshine station, new platforms (at least another pair) and the junction - several hundred million dollars off the bat.
- sorting out Albion junction - are trains going to be stuck behind Sunbury's through the platforms at Albion? Dare say no, therefore a bigger junction needs to be built hopefully without any flat crossings.
- related to both points above: separating Bendigo Vlines from the Sunbury tracks between Sunshine and Albion probably needed if we're squeezing a lot of capacity out of the Sunbury-Pakenham/Cranbourne line with new airport services.
- top up on the HCMT fleet order (dare say this might be done in tandem with a Melton electrification project - but you could easily apportion an amount to the fleet to run airport services).

And because big projects tend to lump other works in on top, I wouldn't be surprised if Melton electrification - or at least part of the works (i.e sorting out Sunshine junction) is also part of the package.

Ditto, we don't know what's happening at the airport end yet... the SRL is eventually going to come through the area, will the airport station be 4 platforms? 2?  Will it extend elsewhere? Many questions.

Guessing we're a lot closer to $10 billion now.
  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

@tayser that's my point. They must be doing other works. E.g. rail beyond the airport. Having said that, several hundred million for two side platforms and 1 junction remodel. Again London Bridge junction remodelling a complete re build and expansion of the Station in the middle of London cost a shade under $2 Billion! Come on!

Michael
  TOQ-1 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Power Trainger
@tayser that's my point. They must be doing other works. E.g. rail beyond the airport. Having said that, several hundred million for two side platforms and 1 junction remodel. Again London Bridge junction remodelling a complete re build and expansion of the Station in the middle of London cost a shade under $2 Billion! Come on!

Michael
mejhammers1
You can't really compare like for like international city to international city, it will vary wildly depending on local needs and expertise. The 2nd avenue subway extension in New York cost $4.45 billion for a 3.2km extension and 3 stations. London is in a position where there is a lot of local knowledge about railways, and a lot of different paths and options when one train line is down that means the cost of disruption to other lines is less.

It shouldn't cost $10 billion, but there a lot of other works going on concurrently that are eating up expertise as well as resources. We now have two facilities in the state creating concrete sections for tunnels, one for Melbourne Metro and one for West Gate Tunnel. Facilities like that take time and money to set up.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: