Re: [Melb] airport rail link

[Vaughan Williams <ender2000@my-deja.com>]

Yeah, what he said.

I'd also spend the dough to put the station right underneath the
international terminal, not on the other side of the car park. Putting
the station a good 5mins walk away then suggesting super-fast trains to
save 5mins off the city trip is too dumb to be believed. Put the
station right at the terminal and skip the superfast trains and just
use ordinary suburban trains.

I'd also stop them at Essendon and perhaps M.Pds, and Nth Melb for
interchange. Out of hours service could be provided by extending the
regular Broady service to the airport - the Craigieburn service should
go via upfield.

In article <01c08b87$a25502e0$818a17d2@rodsmith>,
  "Roderick Smith" <rodsmith@werple.net.au> wrote:
> Both options are wrong: too much unnecessary engineering, and not
enough
> useful engineering.
> The money should be spent on eliminiating *every* level crossing on
the
> existing Broadmeadows route (benefits to all on line citizens and the
> exiting suburban service), not on providing extra tracks [except of
course
> the Broadmeadows North - airport route via the existing easement,
> maintained as a noise buffer].
>
> As I have said before: an integrated train service should be provided.
> Airport trains should run Flinders St - Broadmeadows - Airport between
> every pair of stopping-all-stations Flinders St - Broadmeadows (and
> eventually Craigieburn) trains, with cross-platform interchange at
> Broadmeadows.
>
> The world's best airport lines are those which are just normal
suburban
> routes, without extortionate fares (just like services to sporting
venues).
>
> With my plans, everyone gains, including the bitter northern
residents who
> witnessed the rape of their freeway and the imposition of tolls: no
wonder
> they don't trust current plans.
>
> An extended tram would be far too slow to be useful.
>
> --
> Regards
> Roderick Smith
> Rail News Victoria Editor
>
>


Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/