Category: train

The cost of rushed projects

Post author By Roger Taylor
Post date 22/04/2022
No Comments on The cost of rushed projects

“Nineteen-story Box Hill tower wins planning approval in path of Suburban Rail Loop. Taxpayers look set to fork out for a multimillion dollar land acquisition bill after a 19-storey hotel was given approval to be built in the path of the Suburban Rail Loop”.KIERAN ROONEY AND MATT JOHNSTON, Herald Sun April 19, 2022.

How could this happen to the State’s largest infrastructure project which has not been fully costed but may cost well in excess of $120 billion? A lay person might be tempted to suggest that someone has been very cunning, very stupid or even corrupt. More likely this is the result of system failure that was bound to happen with a mega project such as this that has been rushed without extensive planning. Whatever the cause it should not have happened and would not have happened if the project had been thoroughly evaluated, planned and developed along traditional lines with the appropriate checks and balances that had been employed in earlier times.

But this may only be the start of many problems that are becoming apparent with this project. Transport experts have already expressed concern about planning and design of station precincts and integration with other elements of the transport network. This will be critical if the SRL is to deliver the quality of service necessary to encourage people to use it in sufficient numbers to justify the huge expense of this project. Often it is the quality of design and attention to detail that determines the outcome and already there are worrying signs of shortfalls in this area.

But the more important question is whether this project can be justified at all. The first question that must be asked is the extent to which this project improves Melbourne’s transport outcomes for the transport system as a whole, and if this is the case whether there are more cost-effective ways of doing this. System improvements are rarely achieved by a single project such as this. It invariably requires multiple actions in many areas – not just the rail network, the need to respond to a rapidly changing world and the environmental imperative to achieve zero emissions by 2035 at the latest.

This project achieves none of the above. The project is an addition to the existing rail network and will provide some integration with the public transport service which caters for only a small proportion of Melbourne’s transport task. The impact on public transport patronage is tiny and is confirmed by the SRL Business Case below.

Greater Melbourne
Weekday trips in 2056	No SRL	With SRL	Difference
Private vehicle	26,803,000	26,197,000	-606,000
Public transport	3,294,000	3,530,000	+236,000
PT share of motorised trips	10.9%	11.9%	+1.0%
SRL boardings		433,700	+433,700

Weekday trip-km in 2056
Private & public together*	252,003,000	249,070,000	-2,933,000
Average km per trip	8.4	8.4
* trip-km are not broken down between private and public

These numbers take into account land use changes the SRL will ‘induce’ in each SRL station precinct. The overall effect is to increase PT’s share of motorised travel by 1% Melbourne-wide. Better integration of the public transport system is necessary but can be achieved much more quickly and cost effectively in other ways.

The SRL will do nothing to address systemic problems that already exist within the transport network as a whole which includes all modes of transport. Any environmental impact will not be realised for many years by which time social, economic and environmental conditions will have necessitated significant changes to the transport task and the way people travel. Given its lack of flexibility there is a high risk this new project will become a stranded asset leaving a legacy of debt that will become an increasing burden for future state governments and the broader community.

The most appropriate transport strategy today is one that focuses on actions and projects that achieve rapid reductions in greenhouse emissions. This requires many actions across the transport network applied to all modes of travel. This will be denied by the SRL which will take the lion share of funding leaving very little for anything else. All of these issues should have been addressed in a feasibility study that should have been carried out before any commitments were made. In this case a rough, back of the envelope assessment should have been sufficient to eliminate it as a worthwhile project.

Tags careless planning

public transport train

The compelling need to operate our country passenger services more efficiently

Post author By Roger Taylor
Post date 20/04/2022
No Comments on The compelling need to operate our country passenger services more efficiently

The focus in our last blog was on the buffet service provided for regional rail trips. This blog provides a better understanding of the operating practices and the opportunity for capital, operating and maintenance cost savings and reduced environmental impacts.

An efficient professionally run railway must tailor regional train sizes to fit the return train patronage out and back from the outstation. Qantas would not run its 2200 flight to Sydney with a 787 when a 717 would do the job and the same rationale must apply for the operation of Victoria’s country passenger rail service.

History also teaches us the need to re-configure the fleet to suit the changing traffic task. But instead of using a mix of 3&4 car sets which allows trains to be run with 3,4, 6, 7, 8 or 9 cars with a range of car types, current VLine operating practices limit the options to multiples of a standard 3 car consist, with train sizes of 3, 6 and 9 cars for regional services.

The Inter City VL service can standardize on 4 car sets seating 230, and attach commuter type cars within Geelong, Bendigo or Traralgon unbooked as required. Buying powered trailers, or even non powering trailers saves a lot on fuel, and fleet maintenance which is distance based per car. Under existing policies, buying more 3 car sets with driving stations makes no sense. This costs more per seat in capex, and $ tens of millions p.a. in wasted opex, fuel and maintenance costs in running 6 car sets around when 4 would be enough. VLine has more than enough trains with 106 VL sets. What we need now is longer VL train sets.

In the case of the Inter City V/Locity for the Albury service the majority of trips require more than 152 seats. Under the current arrangement, with three car set modules this requires 6 cars. By inserting a trailer car with 80 seats in the 3 car Inter City consist, train capacity increases to 230 all serviced by one buffet. Instead of 6 cars powering we have 4 cars powering consuming 2/3 fuel of a 6-car set.

N sets built for the Inter City service with buffets were originally 3 cars seating 206. As patronage increased we moved to a mix of 4 and 5 car N sets seating 236 and 292. The 5 car sets were used on the am Inter City Ups and Evenings Downs. Ordering multiples of 3 car Inter City sets each seating 150 makes no sense based on past history of longer distance patronage.

All of the above reflects a short-term efficiency issue that should be addressed immediately. The Commonwealth games scheduled for 2026 should provide additional incentive to fix it but the environmental imperative remains compelling. This includes the need to replace the existing fleet with green energy powered vehicles which will be the subject of a later blog.

Tags country rail service

advocacy public policy sustainability governance best practice public transport train

Fundamental need to understand the business

Post author By Roger Taylor
Post date 18/04/2022
No Comments on Fundamental need to understand the business

Good transport policy must be based on a sound understanding of the transport service, particularly by the public service whose responsibility is to provide frank and fearless advice and a willingness of the Minister to listen. Whilst this may sound obvious, too often this is not the situation and is highlighted recently in a policy decision by the Minister in relation to catering services on Albury V/Locity service, with a critical response quoted below.

From Ben Carroll .. (in a written response to a CUSTOMER who had the temerity to enquire re Albury V/Locity and the elusive catering services)

“With regards to the configuration of the new standard gauge VLocity trains, the three-car modular configuration enables the greatest flexibility to scale up services with peak demand. This is better for the environment and provides a greater cost benefit to the taxpayer. When the Albury services consist of six cars, they will not operate with two buffets open simultaneously. One buffet will be open for part of the journey, with the second buffet to open for the second part of the journey, using the same Conductor.”

Quoting from a critical observer “Interesting, but lacks an understanding of how the buffet car is operated and its value to travellers. Implementation means one person will have to do multiple stocktakes counting “teaspoons” in both buffets (which typically takes 15’ to open up and another 15’ to take stock and close). So on the Up journey, the buffet will actually be open from Chiltern to Violet Town, then in the second set from Avenel to Donnybrook if you are lucky”. Our cynical observer continues:

“I can see the VLP blurb now ” The 0630 Albury – Melbourne service will have on-board catering arrangements which V/line has especially arranged for your travelling inconvenience.
1. Customers boarding at stations between Albury and Euroa in the trailing 3 carriages are requested to defer their hunger until Chiltern and be sure to have made all purchases by Violet Town. Those in the leading 3 cars – see below re BYO arrangements.
2. Customers boarding at stations between Euroa and Seymour in the leading 3 cars are asked to defer their hunger and purchase their refreshments only between Avenel and Donnybrook. Those in the trailing 3 cars – see below re BYO arrangements.
3. All customers joining at any station in either section of the train are offered the added convenience of bringing your own refreshments which may be consumed at any time. V/Line do hope you enjoy the flexibility these unique on-train catering arrangements offer !!!”. And further…..

“All totally avoidable if we had 6 sets as 4 car consists (seating 230) with one buffet car which would have been cheaper both capex wise; and opex wise than a mix of 3 & 6 car sets”.

With respect to environmental benefits, these could be increased by improving the quality of service to encourage more people to travel be train instead of car or coach supported by a marketing plan that encourages more people to travel off-peak. It would also improve VLine’s financial bottom line. The more important question is how will this service operate in a zero-emission world? How will the locomotives and other operations be powered? By electric power, or hydrogen? How will this be achieved in an environment in which energy, materials of all kinds and finance will become increasingly constrained? None of this will happen overnight – it needs a plan but time is running out. The carbon budget to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees will, at current trends be exhausted within six years and ten years to limit it to 2 degrees.

Sadly, none of the concerns raised about the buffet operations are rocket science, just plain common sense which is often lacking and reflected in poor or misguided policy. Sadly this situation is not confined to transport and occurs in all tiers of government. Much of this is a reflection of a civil service that has been run down over a long period of time, increasingly fragmented and lost much of its expertise and corporate memory as a result of contracting out to businesses or consultancies in the private sector. It is further weakened by restructuring, increasing politicisation and substitution of permanent employment with contract arrangements which can encourage advice the minister would like to hear, instead of frank and fearless advice which the minister may sometimes not like to hear and risk compromising the renewal of the employment contract.

There is no suggestion that parties involved in the situation outlined above did not set out to provide the best possible outcome. It is most likely another example of system failure which made this difficult. This has occurred with only minor consequences and can be easily rectified but there are many situations in which the community pays a huge price for poor policy decisions. There are no simple single fix solutions unfortunately. Addressing this requires fundamental system change and reform which is becoming increasingly urgent, particularly in response to the bigger environmental challenges confronting us now.

Tags buffet car, dining car, VLocity trains

public transport train tram

Rapid Public Transport Improvements at Minimal Cost

Post author By Roger Taylor
Post date 28/06/2021
No Comments on Rapid Public Transport Improvements at Minimal Cost

Yellow bus traffic sign painted on asphalt road.

Buses are the only form of public transport available for about two thirds of Melbourne and should be the ‘glue’ that ties the entire public transport system together. So it is critical Melbourne gets them working properly and this should be the starting point for an integrated public transport plan.

Transport for Melbourne ran forums in 2018 and 2018 aimed at improving Melbourne’s transport quickly and relatively cheaply by focussing on the things that really matter ie customer service. For transport this invariably means network coverage, convenience, comfort and safety. More specifically this is determined by route/network design, service frequency, journey times, timeliness of arrivals and departures, reliability of journey times and ability to make connections, and span of service over the day.

In the case of buses many of these service issues can be improved simply by modifying routes to make them more relevant as part of an integrated public transport network, providing priority on the roads to buses (and trams), improved maintenance, improving timetables, better customer information including signage, maps, modifications to the local environment such as improved lighting, urban design to improve accessibility, convenience and safety. Most of these measures are not costly and most require minimal investment in physical infrastructure. In fact the aim should be to maximise use of existing infrastructure and make it work more efficiently and more effectively. This logic should apply to all public transport modes. Smart cities address all of this as a matter of course – but not here in Melbourne.

There are signs the Minister for Public Transport is listening at last and the State government is beginning to focus more on buses and service issues more generally. These are issues that must be addressed if government is to provide the kind of public transport service Melbourne needs and make it comparable to world best practice. There is also an environmental imperative to do so. This must be reflected in budget allocations but they remain substantially inadequate and require a fundamental change in investment priorities ie instead of a focus on big build infrastructure to the things that really matter: customer service, but in a way that is designed to achieve zero emissions by 2030.

Tags value for money

public transport service train value for money

The Sunshine Rail ‘Super Hub’ Debacle

Post author By Roger Taylor
Post date 19/04/2021
No Comments on The Sunshine Rail ‘Super Hub’ Debacle

As reported by Timna Jacks in The Age 11^th April, after much hype by the State government to redevelop Sunshine Station as a “super hub” that would in the words of the Premier “include retail, housing, all sorts of different options .. that can create one of those brand new spaces — a real boom for this area from economic activity” –that would fuel an economic boom in the working-class suburb, state and federal governments have now removed references to Sunshine station being a “super hub” and councillors have been advised that Sunshine and Albion stations would be “relegated to secondary priority”.

Council is most unhappy ofcourse as are developers who have called for more transparency on plans along the rail corridor, where nine major developments are being proposed, including nearly 2500 residential units, two hotels and $230 million in construction activity.

So perhaps all the fantasy and hype was simply another dream without foundation based on business as usual projections, creating the illusion that government was getting on with the job. it is time to take a reality check and look at some of the lessons that should be learnt from all of this.

There is little doubt the impact of Covid has been profound and will have lasting impact although the extent remains unclear and it has yet to run its course. In the short term we might expect some recovery but what are the prospects for the longer term? Despite government declarations that covid has been a one in a hundred year event, we must expect more events like this in an increasingly uncertain world, and that these will be driven increasingly by environmental change and the social and economic impacts that follow.

It is critical that government planning reflect this otherwise we will see more and more examples like this in which local communities are deceived by grand plans that at best will be short lived, a waste of money and do little to enable communities to adapt to the changing world around us.

Fortunately the Sunshine Hub is a relatively small project and is dwarfed by mega infrastructure projects in the government’s Big Build program, all of which assume business as usual to continue within current planning horizons. Few have a soundly based business case. A business case for airport rail has been under way since 2018 and was supposed to be released last year, but is not yet complete. The largest, the Suburban Rail Loop has yet to be accurately costed and no business case has been carried out for it, but this has not stopped this government committing to it and already committing hundreds of $millions to it. The financial risk associated with all these monumental projects is huge. It is time the business case for all projects in the Big Build program are properly evaluated at the outset before any commitment is made for them to proceed. Once approved, all projects must be subject to proper planning and development processes before undertaking any works. It seems proper process has been abandoned on these projects.

Tags debacle, disaster