Re: [MELB] City Loop issues

[Peter <railvic@iprimus.com.au>]

Vaughan Williams wrote:
> 
> >So Vaughan from what you just stated above, the Burnley group will be
> >the only one that run direct to Flinders Street than Loop all day.
> >Therefore, I look forward to see Richmond during morning peak - many
> >changing from Burnley to Caulfield group services in order to have
> >direct access to the City Loop.  Also with the current privatisation
> >arrangement, the only services that may run from one side to other side
> >of the town is Caulfield and Northern groups by M>Trains.
> 
> And by happy co-incidence, that works quite nicely.
> 
> Burnley group people would still be able to get to the loop without
> changing,
> just by staying on their train as it runs around the loop after Flinders.
> Flagstaff people would probably save some time, and Spencer/Flinders people
> certainly would.

How about Parliament station customers?  Change at Richmond to have
direct access, you bet they would!

> >So when your suggestion of Loop working becomes reality for Burnley
> >group, we can mention your Association as the one who suggested such an
> >idea to our angry customers who have now lost City Loop services during
> >morning peak.  Let's hope your answering machines can handle all their
> >calls!
> 
> Well, its not specifically PTUA policy to change the direction of that
> particular line. I can't help thinking youre deliberately beating up the
> story. I never suggested removing all Burnley trains from the loop, only
> reversing their direction.

Well Vaughan, I'm not "deliberately beating up the story", because you
have signed off your previous messages as "Secretary of PTUA" which to
me as representing the view of the organisation.  There is no mention
that the view presented in your earlier postings do not represent the
Association.

>   Just let me remind you again that my personal observation for
> >morning peak is 75% City Loop and 25% Flinders Street direct.  In fact,
> >during morning peak, all our services are City Loop.
> 
> So?
> 
> IF youre including Spencer St as City Loop (and how do you make this
> observation, anyway? DOn't you work out at Ringwood or somewhere? How do you
> know where all the passengers get off?) then that figure may be right.
> 
> Lets do a bit of guesswork here:
> Flinders 25% (accepting your figure as correct)
> Melb Central 22.5%
> Parliament 20%
> Spencer 20%
> Flagstaff 17.5%

Vaughan, the 75% component does not add up above - 22.5% + 20% +20%
+17.5% = 80%.  
 
> (Very rough figures based on knowing Flinders then M.Central are the
> busiest,
> and incorporating some anecdotal observations of passenger movement and the
> employment density around there. Spencer is likely to increase with
> Docklands
> development)
> 
> If we say people going to Flinders and Spencer are better off with the
> reversal of direction, and people going to Parliment and M.Central are worse
> off, and Flagstaff about the same, then we see that 45% are better off,
> 42.5%
> worse off, and 17.5% the same.
> 
> We could argue about this all day, though. Finalising any such change would
> need proper market research and adequate consultation with passengers.
> 
> Vaughan Williams
> Secretary
> Public Transport Users Association
> 247 Flinders Lane
> Melbourne 3000
> http://www.ptua.org.au