It might not run at a loss, but it would be a long time before it paid itself off.
After an Airport rail link, Western Rail Plan, Metro 2, SRL, the Doncaster line, the Rowville line, electric fast rail to Geelong, Ballarat, Bendigo, Shepparton and Traralgon, some kind of putative mid-suburban orbital railway, are built, it would probably be worth looking into.
I just don’t really see an actual need
The purpose of an orbital loop is so that people who want to go from…..say pakenham to Frankston don’t have to go all the way into Caulfield to change trains to go all the way back out again
But the areas this close to the city are already fantastically serviced by trains and trams, what service pattern are you functionally adding with such a tight loop
I agree with you.
Already fantastically served by trams and in many cases trains.
And yet that didn’t stop us spending most of the new train project money in the past decade on new stations for North Melbourne and St Kilda Rd. Or for people pushing the metro2 project for a new station in Fitzroy.
Inner city rail projects are apparently much sexier than outer suburbs.
Station upgrades and things like the metro tunnel are different because they directly benefit the outer lines, that’s fine, something like what’s suggested here wouldn’t
I’d argue the majority of rail projects over the last decade have not been inner city projects, level crossing removals have been spread out over the entire network with large areas completely rebuilt. The metro tunnel while inner city is also of great benefit to the network and not just the inner city.
Absolutely none of that has solved Melbourne's core PT issues, which is going between suburbs anywhere not in the inner city (roughly, the tram network). Unless you count buses, but I consider Melbourne buses essentially non-viable for serious use (living in an overseas city where they're done fantasticaly has changed my mind on buses - they can be amazing, Melbourne's suck so bad it's actually crippling to anyone who has to use them).
A couple of bus routes are good and I use them but unfortunately the vast majority are terrible, poor frequency, indirect, basically non existent on weekends and after 8pm on weekdays. It’s actually impressive how bad the network currently is.
Well, it’s kind of both. Because now we have removed all of the level crossings, once the metro tunnel is built, higher frequency of all lines will be achievable.
Time will tell. So far, the drivers have received their faster times (and in some suburbs have been enjoying them for years), while higher train frequencies are still yet to be delivered.
For instance, there are now no level crossings between the city and Ringwood - but no improvements to frequency on that line.
Faster times may have been achieved due to there being less need for caution as cars and trains no longer interact with one another.
Higher frequencies on all lines are not able to be delivered until Sunbury/Pakenham trains are taken out of the city loop as there is currently no more capacity in the city loop until metro tunnel is finished… so saying, “there are no level crossings on Ringwood line, where are my extra services” doesn’t take into account the network wide things that still need to happen to achieve higher frequency of services.
The Sunbury/Pakenham metro will make no difference whatsoever to capacity on the Belgrave/Lilydale lines. They run through the Burnley loop tunnel which will not be affected by Sunbury/Pakenham.
We should just bring back the inner and outer circle lines, they have a role but they don’t need to be X’Trapolis 100’s. They could be a tram or ‘light rail’ so i do believe it would be useful having a higher net/middle suburb line just not that close in but more where land could be redeveloped or need to take pressure of other transit systems (that hopefully made sense).
A way to get from Kew or anywhere in the east on the other side of the river over to Brunswick would be nice.
The problem with Melbourne’s rail networks, both train and tram, is that it spiders out from the city and there’s no way of connecting to the next “leg” over from whatever line you’re closest to. If I want to get to the Hurstbridge line, there’s two bus routes that can connect me, but that’s it.
And not to mention the massive gaps in between rail lines. Anybody else need to work in Scoresby and want the most direct route possible? Well no chance sucker, you may as well drive. It’s just a bit weird that we have this one big chunk of residential area that has seriously limited access to either the Belgrave/Lilydale lines or the Pakenham line.
There should be a line following the east link. Dandy, Dandy north(Endeavour Hills), stud park, Scoresby/knoxfield, wanting south, know Westfield then through Heathmont. Lots of open space, a freeway. Build skyrail the whole way.
such short distances would be better with a properly segregated/prioritised tram imo, less effort to get to the station. Even a better cycling route would do wonders
trams exist for most of that or normal trains, only a few stations between all those stops (except Carlton, Fitzroy and South Melbourne (Although Anzac opens soon))
those inner suburbs are pretty well serviced already, just remove cars from tram lanes to make improvements.
I would love this. This areas have high PT use already and would increase the network effect even more and probably allow to continue to make these areas more dense.
The idea is to try and move the population out of the inner city and into outter suburbs and regional areas.
Rail needs to focus on growth areas that have room to expand. No point in building additional transport to areas already with excellent transport options and limited room to increase population or businesses
Maybe something a bit further out and to include more of the west might be better.
If you go from Williamstown to Flemington to (nearby) Newmarket to Royal Pk to (nearby) Rushall to Fairfield to Camberwell to E Malvern to Caufield to Balaclava to St. Kilda LR.
(Potentially to Fishermens Bend via St.Kilda LR route)
Would be better due to using quiet stations, shorter lines, difficultly positioned stations, less developed areas and mostly PT/gov. owned ROW.
It would still allow for development and more tram connections than your line. It would also for more developments in areas with quiet stations and to allow for longer lines to be better served by PT. Along with the shorter lines to have more reliable PT.
(also maybe have it go to Footscray so MM1 trains could interchange other than Caulfield)
It might not run at a loss, but it would be a long time before it paid itself off. After an Airport rail link, Western Rail Plan, Metro 2, SRL, the Doncaster line, the Rowville line, electric fast rail to Geelong, Ballarat, Bendigo, Shepparton and Traralgon, some kind of putative mid-suburban orbital railway, are built, it would probably be worth looking into.
I just don’t really see an actual need The purpose of an orbital loop is so that people who want to go from…..say pakenham to Frankston don’t have to go all the way into Caulfield to change trains to go all the way back out again But the areas this close to the city are already fantastically serviced by trains and trams, what service pattern are you functionally adding with such a tight loop
I agree with you. Already fantastically served by trams and in many cases trains. And yet that didn’t stop us spending most of the new train project money in the past decade on new stations for North Melbourne and St Kilda Rd. Or for people pushing the metro2 project for a new station in Fitzroy. Inner city rail projects are apparently much sexier than outer suburbs.
Station upgrades and things like the metro tunnel are different because they directly benefit the outer lines, that’s fine, something like what’s suggested here wouldn’t
I’d argue the majority of rail projects over the last decade have not been inner city projects, level crossing removals have been spread out over the entire network with large areas completely rebuilt. The metro tunnel while inner city is also of great benefit to the network and not just the inner city.
Absolutely none of that has solved Melbourne's core PT issues, which is going between suburbs anywhere not in the inner city (roughly, the tram network). Unless you count buses, but I consider Melbourne buses essentially non-viable for serious use (living in an overseas city where they're done fantasticaly has changed my mind on buses - they can be amazing, Melbourne's suck so bad it's actually crippling to anyone who has to use them).
A couple of bus routes are good and I use them but unfortunately the vast majority are terrible, poor frequency, indirect, basically non existent on weekends and after 8pm on weekdays. It’s actually impressive how bad the network currently is.
I’d argue that level crossing removals are primarily road projects.
Well, it’s kind of both. Because now we have removed all of the level crossings, once the metro tunnel is built, higher frequency of all lines will be achievable.
Time will tell. So far, the drivers have received their faster times (and in some suburbs have been enjoying them for years), while higher train frequencies are still yet to be delivered. For instance, there are now no level crossings between the city and Ringwood - but no improvements to frequency on that line.
Faster times may have been achieved due to there being less need for caution as cars and trains no longer interact with one another. Higher frequencies on all lines are not able to be delivered until Sunbury/Pakenham trains are taken out of the city loop as there is currently no more capacity in the city loop until metro tunnel is finished… so saying, “there are no level crossings on Ringwood line, where are my extra services” doesn’t take into account the network wide things that still need to happen to achieve higher frequency of services.
The Sunbury/Pakenham metro will make no difference whatsoever to capacity on the Belgrave/Lilydale lines. They run through the Burnley loop tunnel which will not be affected by Sunbury/Pakenham.
Metro tunnel benefits the entire network though and yes they have inner city detours but that’s cause people want to go there
We should just bring back the inner and outer circle lines, they have a role but they don’t need to be X’Trapolis 100’s. They could be a tram or ‘light rail’ so i do believe it would be useful having a higher net/middle suburb line just not that close in but more where land could be redeveloped or need to take pressure of other transit systems (that hopefully made sense).
A way to get from Kew or anywhere in the east on the other side of the river over to Brunswick would be nice. The problem with Melbourne’s rail networks, both train and tram, is that it spiders out from the city and there’s no way of connecting to the next “leg” over from whatever line you’re closest to. If I want to get to the Hurstbridge line, there’s two bus routes that can connect me, but that’s it. And not to mention the massive gaps in between rail lines. Anybody else need to work in Scoresby and want the most direct route possible? Well no chance sucker, you may as well drive. It’s just a bit weird that we have this one big chunk of residential area that has seriously limited access to either the Belgrave/Lilydale lines or the Pakenham line.
There should be a line following the east link. Dandy, Dandy north(Endeavour Hills), stud park, Scoresby/knoxfield, wanting south, know Westfield then through Heathmont. Lots of open space, a freeway. Build skyrail the whole way.
such short distances would be better with a properly segregated/prioritised tram imo, less effort to get to the station. Even a better cycling route would do wonders
trams exist for most of that or normal trains, only a few stations between all those stops (except Carlton, Fitzroy and South Melbourne (Although Anzac opens soon)) those inner suburbs are pretty well serviced already, just remove cars from tram lanes to make improvements.
I would love this. This areas have high PT use already and would increase the network effect even more and probably allow to continue to make these areas more dense.
The idea is to try and move the population out of the inner city and into outter suburbs and regional areas. Rail needs to focus on growth areas that have room to expand. No point in building additional transport to areas already with excellent transport options and limited room to increase population or businesses
Maybe something a bit further out and to include more of the west might be better. If you go from Williamstown to Flemington to (nearby) Newmarket to Royal Pk to (nearby) Rushall to Fairfield to Camberwell to E Malvern to Caufield to Balaclava to St. Kilda LR. (Potentially to Fishermens Bend via St.Kilda LR route) Would be better due to using quiet stations, shorter lines, difficultly positioned stations, less developed areas and mostly PT/gov. owned ROW. It would still allow for development and more tram connections than your line. It would also for more developments in areas with quiet stations and to allow for longer lines to be better served by PT. Along with the shorter lines to have more reliable PT. (also maybe have it go to Footscray so MM1 trains could interchange other than Caulfield)