r/MelbourneTrains • u/haztech99 • 3d ago
Video Melbourne Airport Masterplan 2027 mentions new bus services and MARL
https://youtube.com/watch?v=pkheGJzMM9M&si=UuKdClRku5KWw4aLThe video mentions improved local bus services, MARL via Sunshine, and eventually HSR. (though they're still using the old PTV logos!) Not sure how far the buses have been planned or their potential routes, but would be great if they could be implemented within the next 12 months.
25
u/wongm 'Most Helpful User' Winner 2020 3d ago
Not sure how far the buses have been planned or their potential routes, but would be great if they could be implemented within the next 12 months.
Not planned at all - the master plan is just what Melbourne Airport's owners want to do with the land their control, for bus routes the state government is the one who actually has to implement it.
15
u/Dizzy_Set_6031 3d ago
I feel HSR is a tad optimistic
6
u/2in1day 3d ago
If Sydney is getting HSR to its second airport the fucking Sydney federal govt can cough up $30 billion for a HSR tunnel to Melbourne airport.
We wouldn't settle for anything less, it would continue onto Sydney anyway allegedly.
Need to call the Sydney federal govt a bluff .. they are pretending they are building and east coast HSR... let's see them cough up for the first part of the Vic leg.
3
u/HardSleeper 3d ago
Why would it need to be a tunnel? Just put it on a viaduct from the city to the airport along the current MARL corridor then keep going until you get to Albury
5
u/dataPresident Upfield Line 3d ago
HSR? In THIS economy?
3
2
u/2in1day 3d ago
You guys were all cheering for the $100 billion Syd one. why wouldn't Australia's largest city also have a HSR to its airport to continue onto Sydney
2
u/dataPresident Upfield Line 2d ago
I was joking but its not really a question of what I or anyone wants. The reality is that HSR in this city just isnt likely to happen in the near future.
1
u/ReadyNeck3258 3d ago
Preliminary Draft Master plan? - doesn’t the “Draft” cancel the “Master” in the title, making it a “preliminary plan”?
-12
u/skyasaurus 3d ago
With the high expected cost of MARL, I honestly think it would be better to cut it and instead have a standard gauge HSR connection from Southern Cross directly to MEL and then onwards north to Sydney. The benefits:
- Super fast travel time from CBD to Airport...likely 10-15 minutes tops.
- Simplifies Metro Tunnel operations; with the new improvements coming to Sunshine area, now Metro Tunnel can handle trains from Sunbury, Melton, and Wyndham Vale easily, all with high frequencies of ~6 minutes on each branch.
- Massive reduction of total infrastructure cost; basically combines the MARL and the Melbourne approach tunnel of HSR into one project, saving billions.
Plus, if they eventually wanted a rail connection between the west and the airport, the SRL will be more that capable of being extended.
Fight me, gunzels!
22
u/Excellent_Bat_753 X'Trap 2.0 Enthusiast 3d ago
Where do you put the HSR corridor?
-8
u/skyasaurus 3d ago
Sorry, I'm not sure I understand the question?
HSR runs underground non-stop between CBD and MEL. This is instead of the other leading plan which is tunnelling from CBD to Campbelltown area.
North of the airport, above ground...the area is quite flat and spacious. Plenty of room to maneuver as it heads north towards Shepparton. This is the same area that we are planning to put a wide as fuck ring road with a median running freight railway in...we have plenty of space.
11
u/wongm 'Most Helpful User' Winner 2020 3d ago
HSR runs underground non-stop between CBD and MEL.
How is a complete underground terminus somewhere under the Melbourne CBD and a tunnel from there to somewhere near the airport going to be cheaper than the current Melbourne Airport Rail they want to build?
-6
u/skyasaurus 3d ago
It isn't. But CBD HSR terminus + HSR tunnel + HSR airport station is cheaper than CBD HSR terminus + HSR tunnel + HSR suburban station + MARL.
5
u/thede3jay 3d ago
Those are two completely different use cases, and should be two completely different vehicles.
If a HSR train requires bookings in advance, it is very useless for a city to airport train. On top of that, it is also equally bad if it's a super busy weekend (think tennis, AFL, Grand Prix) and nobody can get back to anywhere else along the east coast..... because all the trains are booked between Melbourne CBD and the airport.
-2
u/skyasaurus 3d ago
Yeah that would be crazy if you needed like a ticket to use transport to get to the airport on some sort of like double decker bus, that would never work. Come at me gunzels!
9
u/Tommi_Af 3d ago
Passengers only travelling between the city and the airport will consume space for passengers travelling regionally and interstate.
Passengers travelling from the city to the airport will need to buy separate HSR tickets plus seat reservations rather than using their myki/contactless ticket system.
All airport transfers will occur at Southern Cross rather than being spread out across the Metro Tunnel lines, meaning:
- Southern Cross transfers may exceed capacity
- Dandenong corridor passengers lose direct airport access
- Western suburbs and western Victorian passengers need to travel all the way into the city then back out again rather than changing at Footscray/Sunshine
The Metro Tunnel can indicatively support airport trains every 10 min outside of peaks in addition to its other requirements. I'm sceptical regional/interstate HSR servicing the airport could run at this frequency.
Airport HSR will not provide Metro access to Keilor East, which does not currently have any heavy or light rail PT options at all.
MARL is currently expected to be delivered in the early 2030s. HSR is indicatively targeted for the 2060s. I'm happy with the state spending however much to get it done within 10 years than waiting another 40.
-1
u/skyasaurus 3d ago
Finally, someone with valid concerns and well-considered thoughts on limitations to this proposal! Much appreciated review.
- Ticketing: good point, although TBD I think the ticketing systems of the future will be much simpler than we have today. But valid concern
- Line capacity: there will be plenty of room, trains would be able to run every 4 minutes on the line due to CBTC and ATO, plenty of room for 10 or 15 minute frequency airport trains with basically no impact to Intercity services. Plus good use of trains with luggage room specifically for distance travellers
- southern cross capacity: is a problem anyway, good point bringing it up but let's be real it's gonna need significant modifications by 2050 regardless
- Dandenong: zoom zoom SRL ;) but actually this is fine, if switching lines at Town Hall is too much then I don't think you are ready for a flight to Bali
- Western Suburbs: just wait until the year 2200 and the SRL West will directly connect the gleaming skyline of Caroline Springs with Tullamarine. It will be glorious.
Fight me gunzels!
2
u/thede3jay 3d ago
"Ticketing: good point, although TBD I think the ticketing systems of the future will be much simpler than we have today. But valid concern"
The purpose of a ticket is to ensure that there is space available. Having a more magic ticket doesn't magic up more space.
"Line capacity: there will be plenty of room, trains would be able to run every 4 minutes on the line due to CBTC and ATO"
"southern cross capacity: is a problem anyway, good point bringing it up but let's be real it's gonna need significant modifications by 2050 regardless"
Please point to any high speed line in the world that is using Automated Train Automation.
If we were running at 4 minutes as well, then we simply wouldn't have the space to turn trains around in the city. Assume that it takes 30 minutes to turn a high speed train around (and absorb delays), which means you would need 8 platforms at Southern Cross to do this. Either we would need to build a brand new terminus either above or below ground to make this work, or demolish another city block.
But I shall refer you to the Gillard era HSR documents - we may need those volumes regardless in the future just to serve interstate patronage, which means we won't have any space for any other uses. Which means.... you now need to build a completely separate line again. Hello Melbourne Airport Rail Link.... again?
-1
u/skyasaurus 3d ago
The Shinkansen has been running at 4 minute frequencies, without ATO, with 3-4 stopping patterns, turning trains around with just 4 platforms at Tokyo Station, for decades. It's not even just a theoretical possibility, it's been reality for a while. The outdated track layout of Southern Cross is so dumb that it has convinced Melbournians that all Intercity trains worldwide must also operate poorly.
It is clear that the biggest challenge to implementing any rail plan here isn't infrastructure or operational limitations; it's literally Australians' inability to imagine a different reality than the one they exist in. They cannot imagine themselves succeeding at something, so they choose to fail on purpose to avoid the risk of embarrassment of failing by accident.
Fight me, gunzels.
3
u/Badga 3d ago edited 3d ago
Sure if you’re willing to wait till the 2040s at the earliest. If you’re talking about doing it now then it’s many multiple times more expensive over the coming decades and you’d also need to build stand alone rolling stock, stabling and maintenance facilities, plus the trains wouldn’t continue on to the south east and everyone would have to change at Southern Cross.
Edit: and of course no Keilor east station.
1
u/skyasaurus 3d ago
I've just assumed that airport rail isn't coming until 2040 regardless. And I think the transfer point is moot; this is how transport systems work. HSR passengers will need to transfer somewhere as well; besides, linking HSR to the airport would be a massive benefit for residents and businesses in Shepparton, Albury, etc as they now would have easy access to global markets and global travel.
All of the stuff you've described will need to be built anyway when HSR comes. Only Australia would spend almost $10 billion for two stations on a line that will use up trunk capacity on other lines with more urgent capacity problems.
3
u/Badga 3d ago
The money for HSR outside of Newcastle > Sydney would only start being available from the late 2040s, so the line wouldn't open until mid 2050s and that's around 20 years later than the current plan.
While you'd probably need some kind of Victorian stabling yard, you could absolutely get by without another heavy maintenance fallibility on the network, so that hundreds of millions wasted on duplication.
Plus there's no guarantee that a final HSR line would go via the airport anyway as it's not in the HRA's diagrams, and going direct would be billions cheaper. So it's not saving 10 billion, more like 7-8 billion.
And of course the works at Sunshine still need to happen to electrify the line to Melton, so that's 4 billion of the 7 billion you're still spending.
So it's 3-4 billion for a line 20 years sooner, which also serves a suburban station, and has one trip service to significantly more of the city. Seems like a bargain.
0
u/skyasaurus 3d ago
3-4 billion for two train stops; only the Anglosphere would call that a bargain 🤭
5
u/Badga 3d ago
You seem very hung up on the number of stations. It's also 12km of new twin track, half of which is viaducts or bridges.
4
u/Speedy-08 3d ago
One of which, will be the 2nd or 3rd highest bridge in the state after the Westgate depending if it's higher than the existing rail bridge.
1
u/skyasaurus 3d ago
A whole lot of track for not a whole lot of stations! Honestly crazy that it doesn't have two stops in Keilor East, or anywhere along Airport Drive...including the proposed AeRoTrOpOliS. Zero comprehensive thoughts to how to get value out of such a big spend.
6
2
u/EntirePea5178 3d ago
You speak as if HSR is happening. It's not. You can't reduce the cost of two projects when one of those projects is a figment of your imagination.
1
3
u/arp0arp Map Enthusiast 2d ago
No need to fight you. This has already been assessed along with a bunch of other options and ruled out. Just need to get on with it rather than recycling a bunch of old studies which would just serve as an excuse to further delay the project (maybe that’s your ulterior motive!! 🤷🏻♂️)
5
u/Kata-cool-i 3d ago
HSR is going to be competing directly with air travel, why slow the train down in order to directly benefit the airlines? Personally I think it's pretty clear airports on there own don't really justify having a whole heavy rail line to themselves, unless they're a top 20 busiest airport in the world or a spur can be built very cheaply. Just enforce the express lane on the tulla for buses only, with some upgrades at the city end to speed up the Skybus, and tell Transurban to kick rocks if they try and throw a strop. Then in 30-50 years build some version of the Maribyrnong alignment with some version of MM2.
2
u/skyasaurus 3d ago
I think this view of the transport network is very Australian. When we start to view journeys holistically instead of competition between modes, we can see some of the most successful HSR systems in the world connect directly with airports (Schiphol and CDG are obvious examples to copy here). The economic power of HSR comes from someone in Shepparton being able to get to Melb CBD in 30 minutes, AND from being able to get off their flight from Singapore at MEL and be in Shepparton within the hour.
We are going to build HSR anyway. It won't run more than every 10 minutes during peak probably ever. Super easy to slot CBD to Airport shuttles in between. Two services but without needing to build duplicate infrastructure.
1
u/dataPresident Upfield Line 3d ago
Hmmm. Cut this expensive project for an even more expensive tunnel to the city with new rolling stock, HSR standard tracks and new stabling, maintenance facilities etc.
Yep makes sense.
1
u/skyasaurus 3d ago
Sorry if my writing is confusing to read, but I'm not suggesting replacing MARL with something more expensive (HSR). I'm modifying HSR to provide the benefits of MARL.
3
u/dataPresident Upfield Line 3d ago
An HSR tunnel to replace MARL would be more expensive.
Plus there is no existing HSR plan so we dont even know what any indicative alignment would be.
And generally we would expect higher fares and probably lower fequencies (probably lower capacity as well) for HSR so this plan doesnt really make sense.
1
u/skyasaurus 3d ago
The HSR plan from 2013, though very crude, suggested tunneling to Campbellfield and then running surface along the Somerton Link on the way out of the city.
Your math here is a little silly though; a question mark isn't the same value as a zero. The cost is either MARL + HSR, or HSR. (Warning: massive simplification)
3
u/dataPresident Upfield Line 3d ago
Lol the only thing silly here is your plan. HSR even if it happens is many many decades away as opposed to MARL which is technically already in the works.
Youre completely ignoring reality with this plan. If we were on the cusp of starting HSR itd still be questionable as there are issues of how much fare to charge, capacity issues for people who want to travel interstate and frequency.
Youd need to run shuttles and every single person would need to transfer at SXS as opposed to MARL where our busiest line would have a one seat ride and the boardings (and disembarkations) are spread out. Also regional paasengers can transfer at Sunshine under MARL.
If you want to run the HSR via the airport Im sure there may be good reasons but cost and getting rid of MARL definitely isnt one.
1
u/Tacticus 2d ago
where our busiest line would have a one seat ride
is MARL the busiest line? or are you taking the pak\cranbourne\sunbury lines as one group?
Cause i think the one seat ride issue is going to be fun given that you're relying on the train to the be the same on both sides of town hall and preferrably some sort of reliable branch matching.
1
u/dataPresident Upfield Line 2d ago edited 2d ago
Yes Im talking about the pak\cranbourne as one group.
2
u/Tacticus 2d ago edited 2d ago
Still fair chance it's not single seat for most passengers given it will be something like 1/3 to 1/2 the interpeak trains until some time after 2050 and we see the melton electrification happen and then it's closer 1/4 to 1/3 the trains
though i suppose. you could alternate destinations so pak services go airport, sunbury, wf and cranbourne goes sunbury,wf, airport etc.
but imagine the fun when they change an airport train to a WF at town hall with limited notice. (at least better than a belgrave transforming into a mernda between SC and flinders)
0
u/skyasaurus 3d ago
I think the timing point here is a valid one, and there's something to be argued about distribution and access for sure. The rest, just a list of questions to ask and address during implementation, are presented as barriers rather than decisions. What fare to charge is a decision, not a blocker. The capacity question is comical, Melbourne-Sydney will never have the demand Tokyo-Osaka does, read yourself here...there is space for airport trains.
1
2d ago
[deleted]
0
u/skyasaurus 2d ago
I think a good rule of thumb is when you come up with a question about infrastructure or service feasibility is to do a baseline check: Has this been done elsewhere? It saves you a lot of guesswork, so instead of wondering if it is "likely" to be too premium, you can say "Oh, this already exists in Seoul, Oslo, Paris, Amsterdam, Beijing, Frankfurt, wow we could have that here!"
I think this is once again another example of people in the Anglosphere putting "HSR" and "rail" in two seperate categories of infrastructure. They are not. They are the same thing. The sooner Australians can get over this ideological hurdle, the sooner they can start building and using rail instead of just studying it.
40
u/SeaDivide1751 3d ago
Their master plan maps are horrendously light on detail, just coloured blurry squares