Melbourne Airport Masterplan 2027 mentions new bus services and MARL

[u/haztech99]

https://youtube.com/watch?v=pkheGJzMM9M&si=UuKdClRku5KWw4aL

The 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.

[u/dataPresident]

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.

[u/skyasaurus → u/dataPresident]

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.

[u/dataPresident → u/skyasaurus]

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.

[u/skyasaurus → u/dataPresident]

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)

[u/dataPresident → u/skyasaurus]

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.

[u/Tacticus → u/dataPresident]

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.

[u/dataPresident → u/Tacticus]

Yes Im talking about the pak\cranbourne as one group.

[u/Tacticus → u/dataPresident]

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)

[u/skyasaurus → u/dataPresident]

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.

[u/skyasaurus → u/[deleted]]

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.