Re: Melbourne Double deckers

[ajwright@spam.ozemail.com.au (Ashley Wright)]

On Thu, 04 Nov 1999 06:19:59 GMT, Vaughan Williams 
>
>Melbourne has more lines than other cities like Perth and Sydney and
>the population growth and density is never going to reach a level where
>the existing lines can't handle the traffic. The Paris Metro runs its
>trains at frequencies of more than one a minute and doesn't seem to
>bring down western civilisation in the process.
>
Not a very good comparison. The Paris metro is just that a self
contained metro system. All lines generally run seperate to each other
with very few 'joins', end result you get greater through put. Also
some of the Paris Metro lines basicaly run automaticaly (Metro 1 for
eg but with driver) and the latest line is driverless (Doesn't have a
cab so you can sit right at the front!) which allows more trains
through safely as well.

  Now as you raised Paris lets compare apples with apples and look at
the RER system which is closer to the Melbourne (or Sydney) system
than the metro. Guess what? they are replacing many of their trains
with double deckers because parts of their system were at saturation.
They like Melbourne have trouble with bridges etc, and to overcome the
(perception) of slow boarding they made a protype that had three doors
on each side (Not sure how it worked though!). Admitingly Paris still
does use and have a need for single deckers on some lines, they just
use and invest in DD when and where they need it. 

FYI some parts of RER-A do run more or less automaticly within the
Paris centre but that this is designed to push through more trains
through the central bottleneck than could be achieved through manual
driving and standard type signaling!


>The prototype double decker was a terrible waste of money on both the
>train itself and fiddling all the bridges on the ringwood line to fit
>it under - for the same money they could have done much more worthwhile
>things like build the third track beyond box hill.
>

Prototypes are always more expensive If you don't at least try new
alternaitives you may as well pick up your bat and go away. 

>
>And double deckers ARE slower to board, not only because they have
>fewer doors but because the stairs slow down boarding.

  I can never quite work this one out. If it is slower than only
marginaly slower. What seems to be forgotten is that the doors on the
Sydney double deckers are much wider than Melbourne's three single
doors. About 4 people can and do get off through each door on a Sydney
train and on a melbourne you would get about 2. But on a Sydney train
you have the vestibule and most passengers will make their way to the
door before the station, wheras in Melbourne they are closer to the
doors and wait latter. But I suppose with time Melbourne people could
be trained and any problems sorted out!

>I think theres also an issue with DOO on double deckers - there was a
>long thread on that a while ago but I don't feel qualified to comment.

Paris RER doesn't have any problems with DOO operation. And from what
I saw when I was there in June they operate very simmilar systems to
Melbourne. Ie. Mirrors and TV screens on platforms that look
remarkably like Melbourne's!

>Apart from the furtherence of train buffery and the sexual
>gratification of all you train lovers, double decker trains would serve
>no useful purpose and may even cause more problems. I can think of
>better things to spend the money on.
>

The problems with unions (and I have no problems as such) is that
their main concern is their membership, rather than the overall needs
of the customers or modern fiscal realities. The truth is that if you
run more single deckers you increase capacity but you also increase
the number of people needed to run and maintain them. Running double
deckers where capacity requires it means you need less trains, less
staff which means your cost per seat is reduced. Put simply unless
your traffic has doubled there would be no need for another set when
you could get more gain for better value out of putting in a high seat
capcity train (ie a DD). Of course all this assumes you are running
realistic frequencies to make the services attractive. 

  From my time living in Sydney I had a city bound train every 5
minutes peak and 10 off (from Rockdale which is a 'larger' station 15
minutes from Central). I would think that frequencies from most outer
suburbs should be about 10-15 minutes peak and 20-30 minutes off peak
to be attractive enough to customers. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ashley Wright, Canberra, Australia  ajwright@nospam.ozemail.com.au                                                                           
 www:  http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ajwright   Do not reply to my email. Delete word 'Spam'.                   
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------