Re: New form of rail transportation

["Alex Pout" <alpout@optusnet.com.au>]

Peter Berrett <pberrett@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
ginP5.10733$Xx3.45408@news1.eburwd1.vic.optushome.com.au">news:ginP5.10733$Xx3.45408@news1.eburwd1.vic.optushome.com.au...
>
> Thansk for your comments Peter but I beg to disagree.
>
> Essentially for public transport to be feasibel it must have a competitive
> advantage over using yoru own car whether that be cost, time, comfort or
> some cobinatation of these factors. People have to prefer to use the
system
> rather than using their own car.

Can't help but agree with you there.

> The reason why I selected Springvale road as an example was that it
crosses
> the Dandenong line, passes the terminus of the GlenWaverley line, crosses
> the Lilydale/Belgrave line and will eventually cross the East Burwood tram
> if it is extended. Public transportation along this route would not only
> service the areas along this road but also provide a means of cutting
across
> the suburbs and removing the necessity to travel into the city to get to
> areas across town.

I'm not sure that extending the trams along Burwood Hwy would be that
beneficial.  It's been a while since I've been down there, but I can't
really remember there being a lot of room in the median for it to be placed.
Of course, I could be mistaken, but on the other hand, trams from there to
the city would take too long to be competitive with either cars or trains
along the Belgrave or GW lines.

> Melbourne's train system is crying out for some form of ring railway or a
> form of public transportation to cut across town.Eventually this may to
some
> extent be facilitated by an express bus service running along the ring
road
> and Scoresby freeway but this would not be an optimal solution.

Thank you, that is what I was arguing in the thread about the airport rail
link.  While bus services do the cross-city routes now, the fact is (as you
point out below) that buses (and to a lesser extent trams) still have to
contend with traffic, not exactly something conducive to running a reliable
service.

> The prinicipal issue (as usual) is cost and one of the principal costs is
> land. A suspended railway avoids much of this cost
> by using existing rights of way - eg roads.

But the land is already there, run along the proposed alignment for the
Scoresby Fwy.  The only line that this would miss is the Glen Waverley,
which could be extended to suit.

> You mention that a bus service along Sprinvale Road could have traffic
light
> priority. This would play havoc with traffic diring peak periods and still
> not provide a smooth express service. An optimal service has to have its
own
> right of way.

Exactly.

> Elsewhere an overhead railway that operates in Germany has been mentioned.
> This looks good but after further consideration
> I have concluded that an efficient public transport system must have a
> degree of flexibility as well.
>
> It might be an idea to redesign trains or buses so that they can use the
> overhead suspension system as well as existing railways or roads. Eg One
> might travel by train to Nunawading station at which point the train would
> hook up to the overhead suspension system, lift off the ground and
continue
> suspended down to Springvale. It could then continue down to Cranbourne
> using the rail line. Alternatively I could catch a bus in Donvale. It
would
> then continue to Nuawading where it would switch to the suspension system
> and then run swiftly down to Springvale.
>
> It is even conceivable that both trams and buses could share an overhead
> suspension system. It would take some redesigning though.
>
> cheers Peter
>
> Peter Parker <parkerp@alphalink.com.au> wrote in message
> 3a0d8ae5@news.alphalink.com.au">news:3a0d8ae5@news.alphalink.com.au...
> >
> > Peter Berrett <pberrett@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
> > YH3P5.10589$Xx3.45072@news1.eburwd1.vic.optushome.com.au">news:YH3P5.10589$Xx3.45072@news1.eburwd1.vic.optushome.com.au...
> >
> > >
> > > Has anyone tried such a scheme anywhere in the world as a solution to
> > urban
> > > public transport problems? The principal advantage as I see is that
the
> > > rails would run in the airspace over roads so there is no need to
> purchase
> > > land. Stations would be built in the air and subruban lines could
follow
> > the
> > > airspace above existing roads.
> >
> > Interesting.... But it looks like an expensive solution looking for a
> > problem.
> >
> > In relation to Springvale Rd, a frequent (7 1/2 minute) bus service with
> > traffic light priority would be much cheaper and attract higher
patronage.
> > Main stops could be at Princes Hwy, Wellington Rd, FTG Rd, Waverley Rd,
> > GlenWaverley Stn, Highbury Rd, Burwood Hwy, Canterbury Rd.   The 7.5 min
> > would mesh in with the normal 15min train headway on all three lines
> served.
> >
> > Only people travelling direct from Springvale to Nunawading (relatively
> few)
> > would benefit from the faster travel times of the overhead railway.
> However
> > a frequent bus service would serve the much greater number making trips
> > along the route, especially if fed with frequent east-west feeder buses
> and
> > an extended Burwood Hwy tram. If total trip times are taken into account
> for
> > all who use public transport in the area, frequent buses with bus
priority
> > would speed more people's travel than an overhead rail line with few
stops
> > en-route.
> >
> > The cost of the bus option would be quite modest, and much less than
> either
> > an overhead railway or the Government's ill-conceived and wasteful
> > "Smart-Bus" scheme whose only benefit will be to tell waiting passengers
> > that it's 119 minutes until the next bus (if waiting on a Saturday
> > afternoon)!
> >
> > Overhead railways are fun to think about, but the cost-benefits of one
> along
> > Springvale Rd are dubious, compared to a more modest system based on
> > existing rail lines and a radically overhauled bus system.  Much more
can
> be
> > achieved for much less by considering other low-cost improvements to the
> > transport system, such as timed transfers, bus priority, frequency
> > improvements, straighter routes and better interchanges (not only
between
> > bus and train, but also between bus and bus).
> >
> > Peter
> >
> >
> > Let's do a simple cost-benefit analysis and compare it to a bus running
> > every 7 1/2 minutes down Springvale Rd with traffic light priority (so
> buses
> > would not face red lights en-route) I think
> >
> >
>
>