Melbourne Public Transport

[Yardmaster]

Originally Posted by L2

Well the 900 is only a 45 minute route within the south-eastern suburbs and the 903 passes through the south-eastern, eastern, northern & western suburbs, so which one do you think would have to be busier?

I haven't verified it yet but 903 would be coming close to some train lines for patronage. It might be similar to Bayswater-Belgrave inclusive, assuming 17,000 is total boardings and not individual passengers.

If we're going to compare apples with apples here, we need to consider traffic flow rather than total boardings. I'm not an expert on the 903, but what would it's average daily traffic be at any given point along its length? Let me reword that: along its length, how many passengers pass the 1km mark per day, the 2 km mark, & so-on. A long orbital route may have a very impressive tally of boardings, without carying a particularly heavy passenger load along any particular part of its length.

Different topic: Removing the old Footscray footbridge, in the wee small hours of the morning (added 5 am)

[John_Proctor]

I think the 17,000 means its tracking at about 5 million trips per year. assume that is validations though.

comparable to probably about half of Melbourne's tram lines (but over a much longer distance) and comparable to some train track sections.

A more valid comparison if only we had the figures(!!) would be to compare patronage of hte buses from Huntingdale to Monash/Roweville with patronage of branch lines of the train network. eg. Ringwood-Belgrave, Ringwood-Lilydale, Dandenong-Pakenham, Dandenong-Cranbourne, Camberwell-Alamein, even Burnley-Glen Waverley.

Those sections are comparable route distances and operational standards to the 900. (and I guess you could make the same comparison between Doncaster DART Buses and some of those routes).

If the numbers stack up then it becomes a question of money.

[John_Proctor]

I wonder what the overall bus patronage is between Oakleigh Station and Chadstone. there are 8 bus routes between them two of which are Smartbuses.

every bus I've caught between the two has been 'busy' I'd expect it is probably the busiest section of combined bus routes in Melbourne???

[Planks & Sticks]

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

I wonder what the overall bus patronage is between Oakleigh Station and Chadstone. there are 8 bus routes between them two of which are Smartbuses.

every bus I've caught between the two has been 'busy' I'd expect it is probably the busiest section of combined bus routes in Melbourne???

I wouldn't be surprised if the combined routes between Doncaster and Box Hill are not that far behind in terms of patronage levels as they get a lot of boardings between those two points.

Probably a few other locations with the high patronage levels between two points as well.

[invincible]

Originally Posted by MelbourneCity

I suspect that the 903 would have higher patronage than the 900. The several times I have used it from Caulfield to CHadstone or vice versa it is almost empty.

The 900's route between Caulfield and Huntingdale is pretty crap and not by SmartBus standards IMO. From Caulfield to Oakleigh it's stuck in the service lane on Princes Hwy while all the other traffic speeds past at 80km/h. From Oakleigh to Huntingdale it winds through a bunch of back streets (simply because there is no direct route by road). It kind of defeats the purpose of having a limited-stops bus route.

[John_Proctor]

agree. they'd have been better off using the money to extend say the Dandenong-Chadstone Routes (800,802,804,862) through to Caulfield to link Chadstone to Caulfield - this still would have given people with a single seat journey from Caulfield Monash to Clayton Monash if they'd wanted that. (Alternatively they coudl have just upgraded the 624 with an extra bus just running the Caulfield-Chadstone leg that still exists along Neerim Road). Then not bothering with anything Chadstone-Oakleigh-Huntingdale an there are enough buses doing Oakleigh-Chaddy and a train doing Oakliegh-Huntingdale.

Only had the actual Premium Limited Stops service running up and down North/Wellington Roads where it is needed. The savings made above could have gone into running a bus every 10 minutes on this section instead of 15 minutes.

If there was a need for more services between Oakleigh and Huntingdale on the chosen route again - just make the exising 704 service that uses exactly the same roads as 900 run better with an additional bus to lift frequency from 40 minutes to 20 minutes or whatever.

[Yardmaster]

Getting back to the trains, I just updated my spreadsheet of stats on our Metro/ suburban system: quite a difference from 3 years back .

I've broken the traffic down by line, time of day (early morning, morning peak, etc.) and so on: Here's the way the trains run out at the moment:



(there are extra trains Friday nights)

A pie-graph, on train numbers:

• outward ("down") traffic only
• doesn't include late night Friday services
• assumes Albury services are there, even though they're still offline.

And in train-kilometres/day: (the total figure should be roughly twice this, allowing for return traffic, plus a little bit more for going round the City Loop)



Quite some difference from three years back: my figures for traim/km/year are more or less consistent with the official ones from the MoT.

[John_Proctor]

Following on from our 'when are bus reviews coming out' discussion of a few days ago

From Monday 19 April there are new and improved bus services in the Wyndham and Hobsons Bay areas. Five new bus routes have been introduced – 417, 446, 447, 448, 449; and improvements have been made to eight existing routes – 413, 416, 436, 437, 439, 442, 443 and 444. The changes will provide 1,365 extra bus trips a week and 120 new bus stops. Most bus routes operate until 9.00 pm, seven days a week.

Press Release
http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/compon...icle/9556.html

Bus Review Page
http://www.transport.vic.gov.au/DOI/...2?OpenDocument

Wyndham Bus Routes map (all) with new routes:
http://www.metlinkmelbourne.com.au/a...52_Wyndham.pdf

[John_Proctor]

Yardy - I'm extremley surprised that Glen Waverley and Sandringham have such high service levels. I suppose its because they are a long section of line for themselves so the 'inner stations' aren't getting the benefit of two lines of trains stopping at them (like Dandenong-Caulfield has with Cranbourne/Pakenham).

can you explain the difference between 'change of trains required' and 'starts outside CBD' mean.

I'm assuming 'change of trains required' means Cranborune Services running as a shuttle from Dandenong - but what does that leave 'start outside CBD' for? service starts at Richmond?

[Yardmaster]

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

Yardy - I'm extremley surprised that Glen Waverley and Sandringham have such high service levels. I suppose its because they are a long section of line for themselves so the 'inner stations' aren't getting the benefit of two lines of trains stopping at them (like Dandenong-Caulfield has with Cranbourne/Pakenham).

can you explain the difference between 'change of trains required' and 'starts outside CBD' mean.

I'm assuming 'change of trains required' means Cranborune Services running as a shuttle from Dandenong - but what does that leave 'start outside CBD' for? service starts at Richmond?

Certain parts of the Eastern suburbs have always been a bit spoilt ... but the other explanation is: Sandringham particularly, & Glen Waverley, to a lesser degree, does not compete with other traffic. SE & East are running to 15 minute headways off-peak, so unless you only get every 2nd train ... (and look at poor Hurstbridge: just 31 trains in total!)

I counted the total no. of outbound services: "change of train" basically means just that: i.e. off-peak, to get to Williamstown, you have to change at Newport; & likewise to get to Alamein at Camberwell (and in the evening for Lilydale & Belgrave alternately at Ringwood or at Dandenong for Cranbourne).

The "starts outside CBD" services are those that initiate (on the public timetable) from stabling sidings, generally early in the morning, without any sensible connections: e.g from Springvale & Dandenong to Pakenham & Cranbourne (12 trains), & from Mordialloc to Frankston (3 trains). No connections: it's just where they come on. Also out of Ringwood. When they get Cranbourne sorted out, this won't happen so much. It's a hard call, and maybe more of those early morning services to Belgrave should have been put in that basket.

Incidentally, the timetable at present has just:

• 1 train terminating at St Albans
• 1 at Riversdale
• 1 at Moorabbin
• 2 at McLeod; 2 at Heidelberg; 2 at each of Oakleigh, Mooroolbark & Upper Ferntree Gully

These things shift: 3 years go Carrum & Mordialloc were all the go. There must be equivalent inward trips at night to get them home.

[John_Proctor]

Wyndham Bus Routes map (all) with new routes:
http://www.metlinkmelbourne.com.au/a...52_Wyndham.pdf

NOTE the below rant is about existing routes not the new routes implemented by the bus review:

Have a look at Point Cook Road bus routes 413 (green) and 416 (orange) immediately south of Aircraft Station (both buses terminate at Laverton Station)

why the fvck would both bus routes deviate away from Point Cook Road through teh back streets??? the diversions take them about 400m off the main road (ie. most of the back streets woudl have a 400m or less walk to the main road to get a service), and the routes bypass a primary school and small schopping strip on the main road.

seriously WTF!!!! ridiculous.

[bobman]

Tram route report out soon

REPORT by Max Lay on the feasibility of extending tram route 48 from North Balwyn to Doncaster is expected to be released next week. Manningham Council employed Dr Lay to undertake a peer review of the feasibility study conducted by consultants on behalf of the council last year. Dr Lay was employed by council after a report by consultants GHD recommended the tram extension be abandoned because it was not ‘‘technically feasible’’. The consultants found steep grades, the removal of on-street parking, road space and significant land acquisitions as reasons a tram extension should not proceed.

But councillors voted to fund a peer review of the GHD report because some considered it ‘‘negative’’ and ‘‘misleading’’.

Dr Lay is a professorial fellow at the University of Melbourne’s civil engineering department, director of the university’s transport research centre and former president of the RACV.

Dr Lay said he could not comment on the report before it was released.

[Dark_matter]

Could a tram climb that grade in the wet?

[kichigai]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/vic...-1225856328384

Manually operated gates on New St, Brighton to close permanently

PUBLIC Transport Minister Martin Pakula has ordered the closure of Melbourne's last manually operated railway gates.

The gates on New St, Brighton, have been in limbo since late 2007 after a train went through the crossing while they were open.

But instead of replacing the old facility with modern boom gates, the crossing will be closed permanently.

More than a dozen incidents had been recorded at the site in the preceding three years.

A new turning lane, from Beach Rd into South Rd, will be built in its place and the historic gates will remain at the New St site.

Mr Pakula said the wooden gates, watchman’s hut and signal box would be restored, and new automated pedestrian gates would be installed at the site.

He said the decision to permanently close the crossing was made for safety reasons.

[cowface]

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

Have a look at Point Cook Road bus routes 413 (green) and 416 (orange) immediately south of Aircraft Station (both buses terminate at Laverton Station)

why the fvck would both bus routes deviate away from Point Cook Road through teh back streets??? the diversions take them about 400m off the main road (ie. most of the back streets woudl have a 400m or less walk to the main road to get a service), and the routes bypass a primary school and small schopping strip on the main road.

O_M_G. facepalm to the max.

[John_Proctor]

Originally Posted by Dark_matter

Could a tram climb that grade in the wet?

I know one issue with the grades was being able to provide DDA access at stops not sure if htere was an issue of the actual tram being able to get up the hill or not.

[tayser]

they pull up Bourke St from Elizabeth St to Queen St and Collins St from Swanston St to Russel St just fine. Surely not that much of a difference?

[Planks & Sticks]

Originally Posted by John_Proctor

I know one issue with the grades was being able to provide DDA access at stops not sure if htere was an issue of the actual tram being able to get up the hill or not.

As I pointed out before, with the stops being 500m apart, they should be fine as there are level surfaces outside of Park and Ride, Eastern Golf and Pancake Parlour (it is open 24/7 too!).

Not too sure how or where it will terminate if the proposal becomes serious, but I would prefer if it went all the way to Donvale rather than stopping at the shopping centre.

I have also thought about solving a bit of depot space issues by buying (or reserving) a small plot at the back of the former Eastern Golf Course to store a few trams there near the end of the line.

[Eco-rat]

Originally Posted by Planks & Sticks

As I pointed out before, with the stops being 500m apart, they should be fine as there are level surfaces outside of Park and Ride, Eastern Golf and Pancake Parlour (it is open 24/7 too!).

Xenu and the Thetans will be happy you called.

[L2]

Originally Posted by Planks & Sticks

but I would prefer if it went all the way to Donvale rather than stopping at the shopping centre.

Why not just extend it all the way down Mitcham Rd to Mitcham Station if you were to go that far? Or make it a loop to Knox City to meet an extended 75 to Upper Fern Tree Gully?

We can have two tram routes from the CBD to Upper Fern Tree Gully station, one via the Burwood Hwy (75) and the other via Doncaster Rd and Mitcham (48).

Or maybe you could stop wanting every not-that-important extension to go EVEN FURTHER than is proposed.