Victorian RRL (Regional Rail Link)

[jobeli]

Why is there no RRL out to the East of Melbourne?

I think that an additional express rail line would be far more beneficial to the outer SE and Gippsland region, more so than to the west IMHO.

The VFT Traralgon line is extremely restricted once it hits the metro area, which stretches out twice as far as the west.

Massive population out there in the SE too.

Is it because Gov knows it has no hope of winning any seats in Gippsland?

While Bendigo/Geel/Ballarat are marginal seats.

[tayser]

RRL: 3 regional lines that each see more services individually than the La Trobe valley line.

3 lines on one track pair.

3 to 1, West wins.

[Melb_aviator]

Originally Posted by jobeli

Why is there no RRL out to the East of Melbourne?

I think that an additional express rail line would be far more beneficial to the outer SE and Gippsland region, more so than to the west IMHO.

The VFT Traralgon line is extremely restricted once it hits the metro area, which stretches out twice as far as the west.

Massive population out there in the SE too.

Is it because Gov knows it has no hope of winning any seats in Gippsland?

While Bendigo/Geel/Ballarat are marginal seats.

There are 3 lines that will use the RRL in the west. A RRL to the east would only have 1 train using he lines. I think that more lines are required though to the east to cope with the line congestion, but at this point in time, the west is suffering more. The current transport issues there are just too big to ignore.

[jobeli]

I did remember reading somewhere (not sure where) that a third rail line could be built out to Dandenong for around 1 Billion, so it is on a much smaller price scale than the RRL. Don't forget the massive population and growth in SE corridor also.

[Gobillino]

South east growth opportunities are much lower than the west. They have major environmental and infrastructure constraints that are seeing that growth corridor tap turned off, in much the same way as eastern growth was curtailed 25-30 years ago. Plus La Trobe Valley popn is barely growing, while Geelong, Ballarat and Bendigo are all experiencing strong growth rates, projected to continue into the long term

[John_Proctor]

SE Subrubs are at the end of their growth cycles and the Latrobe Valley towns aren't as desirable as particularly Ballarat and Geelong for Melbourne 'commute' travel. all three of Ballarat (95k), Bendigo (95k) and Geelong (150k) have similar populations to Moe/Morwell/Traralgon/Warrugal (~100k?) combined.

as has been discussed elsewhere there is some chance that when the Eddingtunnel is extended to Caufield they will Quad between Caulfield and Westall or Dandenong to allow express trains to pass stopping trains in the middle suburbs.

better signalling would be the cheapest way to improve service frequecny and speed on Dandenong corridor though. would allow either more trains or the existing trains to run at higher speeds/closer togethor.

[crazyknightsfan]

level crossings...

[L2]

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

SE Subrubs are at the end of their growth cycles

As in what? Green fields development? I think there's still plenty more to come, not including any urban infill that may happen.

Not that I see any point in building new RRL tracks for Gippsland trains though, it's just a single line and really not very busy. Numerous individual suburban stations on that line get more passengers per day than V/line carries through the line.

I think their best hope is that if any track amplification happens for the benefit of suburban express trains that the Moe bogans can leech off that capacity.

[John_Proctor]

sorry I was speaking strategically. the single SE growth areas have less land available for future development than each of the Wyndham, Melton, Craigieburn and Epping growth areas have in them individually.

so yes. there is still 10-15 years of land supply in Pakenham/Cranbourne. but there is probably 20-25 years land supply in the north and west and 4-5 times more total blocks i those areas. therefore. potential for transpro demand growth is higher on the old northern group.

[Yardmaster]

[B]

Originally Posted by tayser

RRL: 3 regional lines that each see more services individually than the La Trobe valley line.

3 lines on one track pair.

3 to 1, West wins.

In terms of traffic, there are 82 daily (weekday, Monday-Thursday) V/Line services out through Footscray each day, versus 17 through Dandenong.

23 of the 82 through Footscray occur in the two hours of the evening peak (4-6pm). Hence, less peak hour trains particularly to Sydenham & more overcrowding.

I'd still support extra track(s) from Caulfield towards Dandenong though.

Originally posted by your truly, August 2007 (I'm having trouble finding the thread ). I have half updated these diagrams: as far as Footscray.

1. At Sunshine:

2007:



2010:



2. Sunshine-Footscray:

2007:



2010:



3. Footscray:

2007:



2010:



4. Between Footscray & North Melbourne:

2010:



5. North Melbourne

Nor this:



A few modifications here required, but mainly to traffic flows rather than layout. The "Goods Lines" are now the "Express (RRL)" tracks, which should run separate & parallel to the high-level cross-over to Kensington. "Flinders Street" means platforms 13 & 14 at Southern Cross; the loop uses platform 11 as now. It's inevitable that some V/Line services will cross over the suburban tracks between North Melbourne & Southern Cross: the original idea of using the current rail overpass drew a blank stare from the people at the "Info Hub" in Footscray when i asked about it this week.

Still sound like a bottleneck? perhaps the V/Line tracks should go over the existing hump prior to reaching their destination

[Daffy]

Thanks for the diagrams and explanation, Yardmaster; do you (or anyone else?) know how the Albury/Wodonga trains are supposed to enter Melbourne - will they use the existing Standard Guage track and overpass between North Melb and Southern Cross or a dual guage RRL from Sunshine? Will the Seymour trains use the RRL or continue to share with Craigieburn trains?

[L2]

Originally Posted by Daffy

Yardmaster; do you (or anyone else?) know how the Albury/Wodonga trains are supposed to enter Melbourne - will they use the existing Standard Guage track and overpass between North Melb and Southern Cross or a dual guage RRL from Sunshine?

They'll come in the same way as the XPT does now, the former.

Originally Posted by Daffy

Will the Seymour trains use the RRL or continue to share with Craigieburn trains?

Seymour line will keep going the way it does now, they aren't doing anything to the Albion-Jacana line. If it was not such an unimportant line to nowhere towns, they could've considered having an RRL spur to Jacana.

I wonder how it will work out at Southern Cross, they say the new platforms 15/16 are for RRL, but if all trains to the lines that run via RRL go from there, plus Traralgon from 13/14 as it does now, the main part of the station under the big roof will be a bit.. lonely

[MisterMarcus]

Some interesting comments over at railpage from a guy who attended one of the information sessions. Addresses some of the questions raised here, albeit most of the answers are variations of "don't know, we haven't thought that far yet"

http://www.railpage.com.au/f-t11356573-0-asc-s45.htm

[John_Proctor]

I just heard that the official government line on RRL is that the alignment is the 'preferred alignment subject to public consultation'.

that is why the locals have heard 'we might be acquiring your house' rather than this is all systems go and you will be acquired.

very very poor handling by the DOT re: announcment. as it stands there half hearted responses sound like 'we don't know' when in fact they are 'subject to final approvals and consultation'.

It might be that the public/political backlash from all this means some subtle alignment changes to save a couple of houses... potentially they might purchase a couple of extra houses that are 'islands' post project as well.

[SamTheMan]

Originally Posted by L2

I wonder how it will work out at Southern Cross, they say the new platforms 15/16 are for RRL, but if all trains to the lines that run via RRL go from there, plus Traralgon from 13/14 as it does now, the main part of the station under the big roof will be a bit.. lonely

This is a very good point and it's been raised here and on Railpage only a few times and I believe hasn't really got the coverage it deserves.

I can't see how they can have all trains arriving from the RRL to platforms 15 and 16 or even on to 13 and 14 then through to Gippsland and have platforms 1-8 just sitting there for the XPT, Albury services and Seymour. It seems like a massive under utilisation.

[tayser]

Thinking out loud... on how the RRL tracks could eventually work with a Tullamarine airport link sometime down the track (read: 10 years away and pardon the pun).

I assume the speed limit is likely to be 100-120kph for the majority of the journey (North Melbourne-Sunshine):

1 hour block, 100kph speed, you could fit 20 trains in each direction with 3 minute headways (5km spacing between the trains).
1 hour block, 120kph speed, you could fit 24 trains in each direction with 2.5 minute headways (5km spacing between each train), and for shits and giggles:
1 hour block, 160kph speed, you could fit 30 trains in each direction with 2 minute headways (5km spacing between each train)

How many paths are going to be required for Geelong/Ballarat/Bendigo in peak hour? (Melton/Sunbury will be metro and running on a different set of tracks by then - here's hoping)

A train every 15 minutes to Ballarat/Bendigo and a train every 10 minutes to Geelong (total 14 paths)? too pessimistic? optimistic?

6tph Geelong (currently 4)
4tph Ballarat (currently 2)
4tph Bendigo (currenty 2, almost 3)

Considering there's going to be still a fair bit of capacity on the low end of the scale (14 paths taken up @ 100kph / 3 minute headways) - there's still space for a 15 minute service to the airport using the track...

For instance using the same Vlocity trainsets as Bendigo/Ballarat/Geelong (as they're geared toward passengers carrying large amounts of luggage as opposed to any standard metro train config) with a new dedicated track pair from Sunshine to the airport with a tunnel at the airport end to get into the terminal.

Might need an extra platform or two at Sunshine so trains from all 4 (new Tulla line + 3 existing regional lines) lines can converge more efficiently on the RRL line to the city (1 platform pair for Geelong/Ballarat 1 platform pair for Bendigo/Airport).

Thinking something like:

Clockface service to the airport every 10 minutes (15 off-peak) 00 10 20 30 40 50
Clockface service to Geelong every 10 minutes (15 off-peak) 05 15 25 35 45 55
Clockface service to Ballarat every 15 minutes (30 off-peak) 02 17 32 47
Clockface service to Bendigo every 15 minutes (30 off-peak) 07 22 37 52

What are the restrictions on DMUs using tunnels/underground lines?

The way I see it, with Tullamarine's passenger growth, increased skybus services in the immediate future leading to more demand for city-airport services, this RRL is killing a lot of birds with one stone when you project forward:

City <-> Regional access (The RRL project as it is)
City <-> Airport access (Something like what I've described above)
Regional <-> Airport access (changeover at Sunshine rather than Southern cross for everyone except Seymour and La Trobe Valley lines).

Can many stations fit a 9 carraige V/Locity set? (as a way to increase capacity without having to result to more frequency of service - to any of the lines).

20 questions I know. Feel free to pick it apart, yes I know there's a big what if on the demand for a city-airport rail service given that skybus is underutilised, but just putting it out there for all you long-term thinkers.

[Alphaville]

Widening the cutting between Footscray station and the Nicholson St bridge (which includes shops) is going to be immense.

I wish the buck went further and there was a cut/cover tunnel from the corner of Raleigh/Albert St (just north of the Albert St overpass- with the descent into the shallow tunnel along the current carpark next to the rail current tracks), which continued under Irving St, with platforms below Irving St (or just south, where the shops were demolished last year) that would service the Melton/Sunbury metro lines.

This way, RRL could use the existing Platforms 1 and 2 at Footscray.

The cut cover tunnel would then continue east towards the city, under the existing lines and surface near the Buddhist Temple.

[L2]

Originally Posted by tayser

Regional <-> Airport access (changeover at Sunshine rather than Southern cross for everyone except Seymour and La Trobe Valley lines).

Before any thoughts of a rail link, if so many services are meeting in the one point at Sunshine what about the idea of a bus link from the Sunshine Terminal to the airport once RRL is done?

Originally Posted by tayser

Can many stations fit a 9 carraige V/Locity set? (as a way to increase capacity without having to result to more frequency of service - to any of the lines).

Seymour definitely can (lol maybe not the destination you were hoping for), Ballarat I think can too. But expect all sorts of precautions if they stop anywhere else:

http://railgallery.wongm.com/vline-g..._2977.jpg.html

^ lol, people actually catch trains to go from Marshall to South Geelong?

[John_Proctor]

not too bad a plan Tayser.

I would think in a slightly longer timeframe (maybe 30 years) you'll either Quad to Newport form Footscray or have a Newport-SXS tunnel... That would allow you to switch Geelong trains back to the Newport corridor with Werribee trains on an 'express track pair' and then LAverton/Willi's sharing a stopping track pair.

That would free up additional space on the RRL track pair for your airport link. potential to run airport trains every 5 minutes (12) interspersed with Bendigo/Ballarat trains (6 each)

no reason you can't run DMU's in a tunnel it would just require better exhaust systems... the alternative would be to electrify the line for Airport services and just run DMU's from Bendigo/Ballarat on it as occurs now for all lines.




RE: RRL.

one of the alternative plans for RRL voiced recently was to keep Geelong train running up the Altona corridor to Newport then using the Newport-Tottenham goods corridor to connect to the dedicated RRL track pair between Sunshine and Tottenham stations. This would be instead of the Tarneit link...

you would need to rebuild Newport Station (probably needed anyway!!) and also build extra track(s) on the Newport-Tottenham goods corridor but I would have thought this would be a cheaper solution with more benefits for the existing network.

Obviously the project will go ahead in its present form now but would like to know the cost difference on this option. The government would probably say they are reserving the Tarneit corridor for a future electric line anyway so its cheaper to use it for RRL or something.

[Yardmaster]

Originally Posted by Daffy

Thanks for the diagrams and explanation, Yardmaster; do you (or anyone else?) know how the Albury/Wodonga trains are supposed to enter Melbourne - will they use the existing Standard Guage track and overpass between North Melb and Southern Cross or a dual guage RRL from Sunshine? Will the Seymour trains use the RRL or continue to share with Craigieburn trains?

I just added another map, which pretty much accords with what I heard at the Community consultation tonight: sorry about the wiggly lines ...



I won't add the last one until further effort, perhaps further thought, & maybe further consultation.

I attended a community consultation session in Footscray Tuesday 20th July: essentially as a result of a mail-out throughout the area (I also have family and friends living in the municipality). Despite the headlines in the local press, most people there seemed to be concerned with the project itself, and I head no flaming rhetoric in the time I was there.

Relating to speculation in this thread above:

Southern Cross.

• There is no intent to run the entirety of V/Line services out of Platforms 15 & 16. One guy said that this would "free up" other platforms for Melbourne Metro use, but when queried about this said he was MOI, not MOT ...
  
• The MOT guy said that the existing terminal facilities at Southern Cross would be retained for V/Line.

Southern Cross/ North Melbourne

• The rail overpass over the suburban tracks was part of the project: it would direct platforms 1-8 at Southern Cross onto the RRL corridor.
  
• (my comments: platforms 1 - 3 at least will deal with SG Sydney, Adelaide & Albury services, and BG Seymour & Shepparton services, which, "won't cross the line!")

North Melbourne

• while there would be additional passenger tracks west of the current station, there was no intention to add additional platforms: it was pointed out to me that Sunbury trains would be running via the Domain tunnel.
  
• traffic from the current rail flyover south of North Melbourne Station- carrying V/Line trains from the eastern platforms of Southern Cross- would dip under the existing Dynon Road Bridge to join the RRL corridor through or immediately west of North Melbourne.
  
• the RRL traffic would be separate from the high level Craigieburn/Racecourse traffic (not sure he entirely understood what I was asking here)

South Kensington/ Footscray

• The RRL line crosses the Maribyrnong River south of the existing tracks, then rises to cross the Werribee tracks.
• Property acquisition is on the south (light industrial) side of the line, rather than on the north (residential) side.
• I asked about which properties were being totally acquired (since this has been an issue in the local papers) and the MOT guy pointed out a number of properties on aerial map(s): some of which he said could be partially acquired; it was up to the landholder

Footscray

• I asked about the footbridge, recently completed. Where the new tracks are meant to go, there seems room enough for 1.5 tracks, tightly, but not for 2.
• I was told the bridge had been planned to be "extendable". It will need to be, because it will at the very least require a new lift well on the Irving Street side.
• I haven't gone right back here, but there is pretty much a complete history of the construction of this footbridge on this site...

Around Middle Footscray ...

• someone else asked: if you're going to put an extra two tracks south of the current ones, what happens at Victoria Street? Good question. Perhaps the closest approximation to Luna Park in the metropolitan area. As I suggested: "raise the (new) rails"
• The local paper, front pages: "Seniors railroaded". Oldies are too traumatized to come and play bingo at the Senior citizen's Centre because it's going to be bulldozed. And it's going to destroy "Meals on Wheels" as well.
• My father (who buys "Meals on wheels" in the area): "Crap". They don't make up the meals there ... in fact, I'm wondering if there's even an office there ...
• last night's ABC news: a guy who's place is not required itself, but the place next door is: how close will the trains come?
• and no, Middle Footscray station will not be demolished and removed, as some have previously rumoured

West Footscray

• all 4 tracks- including the ARTC tracks- will need to be repositioned northwards, because of the constraints under Geelong road
• this means that West Footscray station will be demolished and repositioned ...
• about 300m west.
• a new footbridge to the west.
• current leasees of VicTrack Land to be terminated, new car parks etc. established.
• (my comment: probably makes for a much better PT interchange)

Tottenham

• the new RRL lines will run south of the current Tottenham passenger lines
• no, we won't pinch a few lines off ARTC & relocate the station northwards
• as everybody knows, there's already provision for 1 line on the south to cross Ashley St.: we'll build another
• we're not bridging it: we're filling the current car-park in Sunshine road with fill: you can park up next to Rupert Street

Sunshine

• I may have heard of a 2-level 8-track underground station, with no Hampshire Overpass, but I'm on the wrong the track.
• Four platforms ... pretty much the way I showed it in my last posting.
• Anderson Road grades separations are off the radar for the moment: there are more important level crossings to address.
• SG (Standard Gauge): (1) once there was a platform on the SG tracks, which enabled passengers on the overnight "Overland" to transfer to the "InterContinental Daylight" to Sydney ... when we have almost all of V/Line running through Sunshine, including 3 trains (at present) to Albury + another 2 Countrylink to Sydney, might not this be a good place to transfer?
• ARTC is considering duplicating this track ...
• A platform there & transfers are not in out current plans