Do Australian Cities Need Rapid Transit?

[Manila_Playa87]

Well footy seasons over and i need something else to vent my anger at besides losing bets. During my spare time, it can be said that i am a bit of a train spotter LoL. I have been getting increasingly frustrated with our piss poor public transport system which brings me to the question of whether we need a rapid transit system in our cities. No not the shitty suburban commuter service from the suburbs to the city does not count as rapid transit and you'll all see why it doesn't.

A rapid transit, underground, subway, elevated railway, metro or metropolitan railway system is a passenger transport system in an urban area with a high capacity and frequency, and grade separation from other traffic. Rapid transit systems are typically located either in underground tunnels or on elevated viaducts above street level. Outside urban centers, rapid transit lines may run on grade separated ground level tracks.

It has come as a shock to see that many Pov countries such as the Philippines, Thailand, Brazil and even Uzbekistan have mass rapid transits along with the big boys like the US, UK, France, China, Japan etc. So WTF is wrong with Australia. We can't seem to get a simple grade separation done let alone a rapid transit system. With both our major cities surpassing 4 million persons and the likelihood of new urban renewal projects such as Barangaroo in Sydney and Fisho in Melbourne with the prospect of cramming in thoausands of apartments, there is a big case for implementing a plan to build a rapid transit system in our cities rather than just pissy little tram extensions. A rapid transit system with a 6 car train has the potential to carry 1000 passengers 24 times per hour on its own dedicated line compared to a tram that can barely carry 100 per trip. So to a rapid transit system, I say yes. Thoughts?

 

[Tiff]

Waste of money for us. Perth will find a way to make it slow.

 

[Hap Hapablap]

The problem is money and our heavy reliance on cars.

Sydney was going to have a system but they scrapped it because the the government is borderline broke .

The thing is you need to change the culture of car reliance to public transport problem is that isnt gonna happen with a system that is inadequate or doesn't exist.

Perth for example doubled its rail system back in 2007 and its done wonders however the line is too north south focused more rail whether light or heavy needs to be in foresight to make an entire new generation to get on board. But when you have a govt that wants to implement the system by 2031 and even then it doesn't cover the entire city then questions need to be raised.

Governments need to build rail all over and then connect these systems to rapid transit whether that'd be buses or trains. A lot of inner Perth is inadequately serviced simply cos of this north south focus. The reality is the inner suburbs and areas still not developed need attention. Sure it's not attractive to say living near the coast but as the saying goes build it and they will come.

Totally agree though Melbourne's and sydneys transit system really do need a metro connection not to mention to sort out the road blocks on Parramatta rd. I still dont know how the largest state in Australia allows two huge routes to meet up On one run down road for kilometres and not fixing it for years. The worst stretch of road in australia imho.

 

[Manila_Playa87]

WTF? I didn't even know it went through the first time. Piece of shit laptop

 

[radiojake]

It's time for our culture of car obsession to come to an end -

Also rapid trains between the major cities, especially the east coast, is a must -

 

[Manila_Playa87]

NW rail link is apparently "rapid transit" so they say. I don't live in Sydney but i'm pretty sure there are no level crossings and it's a combination of tunnels and elevated viaducts. The one that the previous premier cancelled was the west metro that would have run through Parra, strathfield, olympic park, liechardt, camperdown, Sydney Uni on the way to central. I would have like for it to continue on as the "second harbour crossing" to chatswood, Epping then back to parra possibly running as a loop metro.

High speed train between cities is one for another thread and sad to say well beyond the scope of Australians. I don't think we have the population at this point in time to justify high speed rail anyway for what it's worth but having been to Japan, they are a very handy substitute for air travel. Take California for example, they have in excess of 50 million people and only now have started the first stage of HSR after a huge struggle. Australia's densest corridor between Melbourne and Brisbane would be 15 million so the cost per trip would have to be exorbitant in order to make a profitable return.

 

[JHF1870]

Well footy seasons over and i need something else to vent my anger at besides losing bets. During my spare time, it can be said that i am a bit of a train spotter LoL. I have been getting increasingly frustrated with our piss poor public transport system which brings me to the question of whether we need a rapid transit system in our cities. No not the shitty suburban commuter service from the suburbs to the city does not count as rapid transit and you'll all see why it doesn't.

A rapid transit, underground, subway, elevated railway, metro or metropolitan railway system is a passenger transport system in an urban area with a high capacity and frequency, and grade separation from other traffic. Rapid transit systems are typically located either in underground tunnels or on elevated viaducts above street level. Outside urban centers, rapid transit lines may run on grade separated ground level tracks.

It has come as a shock to see that many Pov countries such as the Philippines, Thailand, Brazil and even Uzbekistan have mass rapid transits along with the big boys like the US, UK, France, China, Japan etc. So WTF is wrong with Australia. We can't seem to get a simple grade separation done let alone a rapid transit system. With both our major cities surpassing 4 million persons and the likelihood of new urban renewal projects such as Barangaroo in Sydney and Fisho in Melbourne with the prospect of cramming in thoausands of apartments, there is a big case for implementing a plan to build a rapid transit system in our cities rather than just pissy little tram extensions. A rapid transit system with a 6 car train has the potential to carry 1000 passengers 24 times per hour on its own dedicated line compared to a tram that can barely carry 100 per trip. So to a rapid transit system, I say yes. Thoughts?

I recently wrote a report on a design I'd like to implement, and that is to have an on demand tranist service.
You think about how much money it costs to own a car. What if you could get to the train station, and immediately jump into a smaller cab, instead of a traditional train. The lines would take up less space, they would be multi-dimensional, and if you were willing to pay more you could own your own rights to a cab, direct to your destination. If not you would have to stop at multiple stops. The system is already being trialed (I think) in Japan.

Driving is dead time. You can't do anything constructive with it. If a system could be implemented like this. It wouldn't hurt someone to have to travel for up to 4 hours a day, because work could be done during transit, allowing people to live away from cities. But also by having a private cab it would allow people more privacy.

I thought it was also worht mentioning that with the billions of dollars Victoria has invested in roads, there has been a minor improvement in traffic speed and congestion. Don't have the reference, but I assure you its out there, I remember writing about it. It was like 37Km/hr to 39Km/hr.

Surely there is a better way to invest money in transport than barely managing to keep up with the increased traffic levels each year.

 

[NarklesHelmet]

You wouldn't believe how great it is living in a place like I do now (Sweden) that has such great public transport. Have been here for five years and never felt the need to own a car. It really changes your life for the better and whenever I come home to Australia for a visit, I realise how bad life is when you have to drive everywhere. The main factors I see at play in Australia keeping this from happening are:

• Politicians are too gutless to spend a bit of money on it (or #gasp# even raise taxes a bit to cover the expense. People here are happy to pay a bit more tax on a reliable, clean safe public transport system as you save a heap not having a car. I know I have saved a lot not needing a car even though I pay a little more tax here).
• The car culture is pretty entrenched in Australia and it will take a while to change peoples attitudes about public transport: particularly when it is the way it is at the moment (poor).
• Many people and the media seem obsessed with governments running "surpluses" instead of spending the money on something useful. Therefore governments are scared to not be in surplus.

It will take a visionary politician to actually go ahead and spend some proper coin on a proper public transport system in Australia but where are the visionary politicians? The only ones who seem to care about the issue are the Greens but they are labelled as "radicals" in Australia so there isn't much hope that public transport is backed by the mainstream parties when such a logical thing as public transport that is reliable, safe and clean is seen as such a radical idea.

 

[checkraiseulite]

It has come as a shock to see that many Pov countries such as the Philippines, Thailand, Brazil and even Uzbekistan have mass rapid transits along with the big boys like the US, UK, France, China, Japan etc.

Would be interested if any developed country has implemented one of these in a city with a pop >3m in the last decade (UK, France, Germany, US, Canada etc).

Cost is just way too high. It'd also take years to organise given the need for reclamation of land, planning issues etc.

It would've been good to have one, but it should've been built decades ago when it was cost effective.

 

[sabre_ac]

Can't see it happening in Perth anytime soon while people demand more home space than they can ever possibely use. Rapid transit is brilliant, but requires a decent amount of density.

I read somewhere that it's about 1 billion per subway station, not sure how accurate that is though.

I've been living in a city with a subway for almost two years and the personal benefits are significant and include:

1. Money saving (I was pumping at least 1k a month into my car (Car Loan/Petrol/Insurance/Maintenace)
2. Subway time isn't dead time like driving, you can read/work and you can do it intoxicated.
3. Most major public destinations take moments to get to and get out of using the subway.
4. It's safer (I can't back this up with any stat though).

 

[Bunk Moreland]

It’d never happen in Melbourne now. Retro-fitting large, proper transit systems (underground railways or the like) into cities and urban sprawls that are already developed is very, very difficult and prohibitively expensive. Also, our suburbs are a huge sprawl and getting bigger – we build out, not up – any system would have to cover a massive amount of area.

I know it sounds stupid because they have a bad reputation at the moment, but I reckon the only real answer for Melbourne’s woes now is a proper bus system. Not the crap we have now, which is unreliable, infrequent services that run along stupid random routes. A proper system – vehicles with good capacity, running both ways along all major roads (east – west and north – south), stopping at each main road that intersects to allow people to change, at proper intervals – 10 mins, or 5 mins during peak hour. We have a pretty good road system (it’s the traffic itself that is the problem), it’s what we have to take advantage of. If you could offer people a reliable system that ran frequently along simple, logical routes and allowed them to change regularly to get to where they need to, I think it’d be taken advantage of to some extent. It’s never going to be as good as a proper grid railway system etc, but might be the best we can do and could get some cars off the road. If you can get 50-100 people on a bus, generally that’s 50-100 cars off the road in peak hour.

The other thing that needs to happen is to get rid of the scourge that is level crossings. It’s staggering we still have so many in such high traffic areas. There’s simply no leadership from state government on this – all we hear about is how expensive it is to get rid of them. Well ****, find the worst one in Melbourne and fix it. Do something! Next year, maybe do one or two more. Who knows, in 10 or 20 years we might have got somewhere. Unfortunately politics at all levels at the moment lacks visionaries who want to get shit done.

 

[Copernicus]

It sounds great and all - but how are you going to pay for it? That's the big bugbear getting in the way of a comprehensive rapid transit system. I think you can forget about high speed rail with the exception of Sydney to Melbourne - the air route is extremely busy and high speed rail could work, but it would still be massively expensive given the distance involved. You just can't compare Australia to any other country, given the lack of population density.

I would be very interested to see a proper, detailed investigation into the possibility of implementing a rapid transit network in Melbourne, but it's hard to see how it could be realistically done.

 

[BILC]

I heard North Haverbrook have a fairly efficient one.

Maybe we should look into it.

 

[Hap Hapablap]

I heard North Haverbrook have a fairly efficient one.

Maybe we should look into it.

dont forget ogdenville

 

[fairdinkum]

I heard North Haverbrook have a fairly efficient one.

Maybe we should look into it.

It'd put us on the map.

 

[ozasismick]

Is there a chance the track could bend?

 

[Scotland]

Can't see it happening in Perth anytime soon while people demand more home space than they can ever possibely use. Rapid transit is brilliant, but requires a decent amount of density.

I read somewhere that it's about 1 billion per subway station, not sure how accurate that is though.

I've been living in a city with a subway for almost two years and the personal benefits are significant and include:

1. Money saving (I was pumping at least 1k a month into my car (Car Loan/Petrol/Insurance/Maintenace)
2. Subway time isn't dead time like driving, you can read/work and you can do it intoxicated.
3. Most major public destinations take moments to get to and get out of using the subway.
4. It's safer (I can't back this up with any stat though).

This.

I grew up a car person, then moved close to the city. I can walk to a train station in 5 minutes and am a 10 minute journey from the city. If I drove in right now it would take me around the same amount of time, then I'd have to find somewhere to park etc. which is generally not easy or cheap. If I decided to drive during peak hour it would take me an hour, easily. Eff that.

The problem is with the low population density I am in about a 1% minority of the population. The way forward needs to be increasing density around the infrastructure we have, and expanding and improving said infrastructure. The idea that the govt is going to keep building rail lines to everyone has a station on their doorstep while living on 500sqm is ridiculous.

 

[Lensen]

what about admiral afterfood?

 

[Scotland]

what about admiral afterfood?

What about him?

 

[evo]

You wouldn't believe how great it is living in a place like I do now (Sweden) that has such great public transport. Have been here for five years and never felt the need to own a car. It really changes your life for the better and whenever I come home to Australia for a visit, I realise how bad life is when you have to drive everywhere. The main factors I see at play in Australia keeping this from happening are:

• Politicians are too gutless to spend a bit of money on it (or #gasp# even raise taxes a bit to cover the expense. People here are happy to pay a bit more tax on a reliable, clean safe public transport system as you save a heap not having a car. I know I have saved a lot not needing a car even though I pay a little more tax here).
• The car culture is pretty entrenched in Australia and it will take a while to change peoples attitudes about public transport: particularly when it is the way it is at the moment (poor).
• Many people and the media seem obsessed with governments running "surpluses" instead of spending the money on something useful. Therefore governments are scared to not be in surplus.

It will take a visionary politician to actually go ahead and spend some proper coin on a proper public transport system in Australia but where are the visionary politicians? The only ones who seem to care about the issue are the Greens but they are labelled as "radicals" in Australia so there isn't much hope that public transport is backed by the mainstream parties when such a logical thing as public transport that is reliable, safe and clean is seen as such a radical idea.

I think as Melbourne and Sydney become denser better quality public transport is inevitable. Furthermore, our 'car culture' will hopefully evolve. Peak Oil and carbon credit systems will slowly modify behaviour.

As an aside my brother-in-law lives in Singapore, he pays something like 60K for the priveledge of registering his Lexus. The average person just can't afford to own a car there. I can see similar happening in Australia in the coming decades.

 

[Lensen]

What about him?

i was going for "he'll be given cushy jobs"

 

[fairdinkum]

As an aside my brother-in-law lives in Singapore, he pays something like 60K for the priveledge of registering his Lexus. The average person just can't afford to own a car there. I can see similar happening in Australia in the coming decades.

Yes and the public transport is so efficient there that cars are effectively a luxury item.

I should know: I mate from uni put me up in Singapore for a few nights and his old man had no less than five Mercs.

Still shake my head.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I think as Melbourne and Sydney become denser better quality public transport is inevitable. Furthermore, our 'car culture' will hopefully evolve. Peak Oil and carbon credit systems will slowly modify behaviour.

As an aside my brother-in-law lives in Singapore, he pays something like 60K for the priveledge of registering his Lexus. The average person just can't afford to own a car there. I can see similar happening in Australia in the coming decades.

Won’t happen in a country our size. There’s too much space, so people live in it. Our urban sprawls are huge and aren’t going to get any smaller. The car is the most reliable and economical mode of transport for most people in the middle to outer suburbs, and that’s not going to change to the point where it’ll be politically viable to effectively make cars unaffordable.

Petrol will obviously become a thing of the past at some point, but cars will always exist and be popular in places like Australia and USA.

 

[evo]

Won’t happen in a country our size..

It is worth browsing "Melbourne @ 5million".

Government are more committed to higher density living than a lot of people are aware.

http://www.dpcd.vic.gov.au/planning...rmelbourne/planninghistory/melbourne@5million

 

[Scotland]

People aren't going to stop using their cars unless they have to.

There are places I can drive to in 15 minutes from my house that would take well over an hour to connect to by PT. Bugger spending an hour plus each way getting PT to do the grocery shopping when I can be there and back within an hour.

The govt (over here anyway) needs to strike a balance between carrot and stick. If you make getting trains & buses easy and affordable people are more inclined to take it up. You can't please everyone but the goal should be to get the thousands of people all going the same way each morning/afternoon onto PT. The more the actual city itself becomes pedestrianised the better.