The 260s and 160s do. The 200s and 100s though despite the recent life extension will be in their early to mid 40s by the mid to late 2030s and the 220s and 120s not too far behind. I wonder if after the Olympics more QTMP might be ordered to replace them, or some other kind of new rollingstock. Guess we will have to wait and see.
10 posts were split to a new topic: Ferny Grove Line
Something like that could work temporarily for rosewood line. But if that area grows it canāt be a long term solution. Eventually proper accessibility upgrades to the stations would need to be done. But I think extending platforms on the Rosewood line is at the bottom of the priority list right now. Extending light rail to the Gold Coast Airport, direct rail to the Sunshine Coast, a Cleveland line upgrade, Ripley extension and even potentially trains to Beaudesert would be of more importance. The only thing that might give some backing behind upgrading the stations along the Rosewood corridor would be fast rail to Toowoomba, which unfortunately I have doubts of ever happening for another half century at least with the way we are tracking.
Please show me an example of a service on the QR Citytrain network that has ever been named āExhibitionā for any purpose other than to denote a train servicing Exhibition Station.
The use of āExhibitionā to solely denote an event service that isnāt servicing Exhibition Station isnāt something that exists within the QR network for the simple reason that we have had a station called Exhibition in operation since 1881. When special or event services are used, the general designation QR uses, as far as Iām aware, is simply āSpecialā, which works fine seeing as we donāt have a āSpecial Stationā on the network.
That aside, I donāt know whether services terminating at Exhibition will be labelled as an āExhibition Serviceā anyway. I wouldnāt be at all surprised if services going through Cross River Rail will be labelled as being a Cross River Rail Service. specifically to set them apart from aboveground services, with a voiceover along the lines of:
āThis is a Cross River Rail Train, stopping at Boggo Road, Woolloongabba, Albert Street, Roma Street & Exhibition. The next station is Exhibition. This train terminates at Exhibition.ā
3 Likes
Can an admin split the FG line discussion to a new post?
Iām putting this on this thread because I think itās probably the best related topic to do so as it is to do with operations post CRR.
I was thinking about Boggo Road station which to me is quite a poor setup - particularly with the current rail platforms. Once CRR is online the Cleveland-Ferny Group sector will have those tracks all to themselves, but I also think itās good to safeguard for any future potential operations.
I think a good option for the surface Boggo Road stations would be to change the setup so that the platforms are moved slightly towards the South Bank end to eliminate as much of the curves on the platforms as possible. Also, I think a three platform setup would be a good option with the two side platforms taking through services from Cleveland to Ferny Grove, and the middle platform used for terminating services that may do short runs with the relevant crossovers to minimise conflicts.
Iāve attached a pic which hopefully explains what Iām thinking. I do think itās good to keep the Beenleigh/GC line connections for any future lines (e.g. Beaudesert/short runs on the inner Beenleigh line) as well as if services need to be rerouted for operational reasons.
The purple lines are the approximate location of the platforms and the blue line is where the inbound Cleveland track could be shifted to.
My 2c, if I had more money and less problems.
Three platform faces for Cleveland group, and two faces for the Beenleigh line terminating platform.
In the sketch you would need to rebuild part of the freight overpass though to widen the Cleveland tracks, but Iām reasonably confident this would actually fit on the ground
3 Likes
I donāt think they will have the line fully to themselves. Iām expecting to see additional services running between the CBD and Boggo Road for the sole purpose to provide additional, frequent connections to South Bank.
1 Like
I think what was meant was that it will be Sector 3 only. Bowen Hills to Boggo Road shortworkings would still be Sector 3.
3 Likes
With Blue Team Around, it still very well may be an Elizabeth Line Train..
I think the timeframe for naming things in honour of QEII has passed, even for staunch monarchists. Weāre coming up to the 4th anniversary of her death this year, and 2029 would be 7 years after her death.
That being said, maybe we might see it changed to the Olympics Line?
5 Likes
Yes, but that is on the same sector, and so the additional platform is an attempt to allow provision for services to terminate at Boggo Road.
I donāt think itās in any plans but i would love to see a central terminating shunt road just north of the bowen hills flyover and just south of boggo road (towards dutton park) between the two running lines. Thereās space to do it at both, and I think operationally it would be fantastic because it has very few conflicts to through services. But I think QR would fight aggressively to never have any terminating shunt roads like beenleigh ever again. Platforms or nothing. They are common in perth with a few in sydney.
Do you know why this would be the case? I think theyāre an efficient way to turn back services, limiting conflicts and also keeping services on consistent platforms.
Usually they have to babysit the train so itās not true rest/break. Just due to the location of these things means they canāt easily use a rest facility, either on a platform or a dedicated train crew facility. Platforms do mean you can leave it there with the passenger doors open.
At least at beenleigh they physically can get to the traincrew facility, even if it does mean walking in an active rail corridor.
QR will fight anything that might make a drivers life slightly more difficult, even on a very rare occasion.
Interesting. I think I did read once that the amount of time in a typical shift actually driving a train is pretty low. I realise they would need breaks because drivers need to concentrate, but I remember being pretty surprised at the number. I canāt remember the exact figure though - Iāll have to try and find it. Or thereās probably someone way more knowledgeable than me that could comment on here.
Arenāt south bank etc already well served by other public transport like the metro. Dont see much point running additional trains to Park Road (sorry itās Boggo Road now) outside of peak hour turnarounds
In the long-run future weāll eventually want to have Merivale sector services running through Dutton Park again.
Until then I think the current layout will suffice. Cleveland line will keep doing what itās always done and any short workings can get over to the western side of the line, albeit clumsily.
So I think it might be handy to have a track for the inbound Cleveland line train to platform 3 (soon to be platform 6) and that way short-terminating trains need only get to platform 2 (soon to be 7).
n.b. if you havenāt heard, the numbering scheme at Boggo Rd is soon to be as follows: CRR takes P1 and P2, busway takes P3 & P4, surface takes P5-P8 (such that what was P1 is now P8 - increasing west to east instead of east to west).
More foamily, itād be neat if platform 5 (was 4) got rebuilt on the other side of its track. This allows for cross platform interchange with the busway, but it would also then allow for platform 6 (was 3) to be rebuilt further northwest (straighter and less sticky-outy) and that also improves the track geometry from the Cleveland line.
2 Likes
That canāt be done unless they redo the dual-gauge track that serves the (current) P4. The reason that platform was built that way was so that narrow-gauge trains using that track can stop at the platform without a big gap. Granted thereās still a sizeable gap because of the curve, but itād be a bigger gap if the platform was on the other side.
2 Likes