Today, 18 February, is a historic day in the history of Melbourne's train services. Old timetables were cast aside in favour of more frequent interpeak service across south-east Melbourne.
More specifically, on this day in 1996:
* Frankston and Dandenong weekday trains improved from every 20 to 15 min (matching Ringwood and Glen Waverley), delivering what more would treat as a turn-up-and-go service.
* Pakenham and Cranbourne line trains beyond Dandenong increased from every 40 to 30 min interpeak and from every 80 to every 40 min on Sundays.
* Daytime Sunday services to Alamein, Belgrave, Lilydale, Dandenong and Frankston increased from every 40 to every 30 min.
* Alamein line trains increased from every 60 to every 30 min Monday - Saturday night
This upgrade package constituted the most decisive increase in metropolitan train services for many years, if not decades. They certainly trump the early 1990s Sandringham line boost (also every 20 to every 15 min off-peak) and the peak gains the Frankston line got when its third track was built.
It happened just before the March 1996 state election (at which the Kennett government was returned). A 15 minute frequency also raised more of the Melbourne's rail network to the service levels seen on Perth's newly electrified system which adopted 15 minutes as a base frequency (initially weekday, eventually 7 days).
Rail frequencies set a sort of base service level for buses, especially in the middle suburbs. Before the rail frequencies were improved, the main bus routes ran every 20 minutes. The upgrade to trains every 15 minutes did not result in immediate gains for buses. However later some of the major routes in the south-east became SmartBuses (eg 703, 888/889, 700 and then later 900, 901, 902 and 903) which featured 15 minute weekday interpeak frequencies to retain a degree of headway harmonisation with trains. And even where buses were not upgraded, the boost in train services to every 15 minutes reduced average waits for those changing from buses.
What about the West and North? They do not celebrate today. The Kennett government, especially in its first term, was south and east centric, reflecting its voter base. While the latter gained from the abovementioned service upgrades, they started a geographic inequality in train frequencies that has only widened since.
Leaving aside the politics (with the north and west rusted on Labor) it may have been possible to justify the priority treatment for the east and south-east on patronage grounds. This is because Melbourne was more lopsided then with the eastern lines being busier. That's since changed with any previously valid usage excuses for the north and west not to get more train service evaporating.
There ought to have been a subsequent service catch-up to give the west equality with the east (like implementation of 2012's Network Development Plan - Metropolitan Rail would have done). However there hasn't been with the Frankston line 'haves' now enjoying half the waits of the Craigieburn and Mernda line 'have nots' at most times. Hence the distribution of rail frequency today increasingly reflects 'safe seat' politics more than objective measures like patronage or social needs.
Returning to the 1990s, the other major Kennett era service boost happened before the 1999 state election in which metropolitan train and tram lines had Sunday services boosted between about 10am and 7pm to match their more frequent Saturday timetables. This was a major gain with benefits spread across Melbourne (unlike the 1996 upgrades).
Sunday evening services remained at every 40 minutes until a couple of years later when the Bayside portion got improved to every 30 min with the Hillside portion (under Connex) following suit a little later. Pre-10am Sunday morning services levels remain unchanged to this day except for the addition of earlier trips under Night Network and Werribee, Williamstown and Frankston upgrades in early 2021.
These 1996 and 1999 train service increases are historically important as they represent a decisive turnaround from the cuts during the 1950s, 60s and 70s. Sure these might have cut costs but they also reduced patronage and contributed to increased car traffic (which carries its own cost in road construction and maintenance). Hence cutting service is counterproductive and doesn't necessarily save much money.
Better frequency on the other hand is beneficial as it reduces waits, making train travel more useful for diverse trips throughout the day, not just during the commuter peaks. And of the times where you could boost service, off-peak frequency is most cost-effective as the marginal cost of increasing it is low and it optimises fleet usage. Interestingly this was more realised and acted on in the late 1990s than in the 2020s (so far).
The future
There ought to have been a subsequent service catch-up to give the west equality with the east (like implementation of 2012's Network Development Plan - Metropolitan Rail would have done). However there hasn't been with the Frankston line 'haves' now enjoying half the waits of the Craigieburn and Mernda line 'have nots' at most times. Hence the distribution of rail frequency today increasingly reflects 'safe seat' politics more than objective measures like patronage or social needs.
Returning to the 1990s, the other major Kennett era service boost happened before the 1999 state election in which metropolitan train and tram lines had Sunday services boosted between about 10am and 7pm to match their more frequent Saturday timetables. This was a major gain with benefits spread across Melbourne (unlike the 1996 upgrades).
Sunday evening services remained at every 40 minutes until a couple of years later when the Bayside portion got improved to every 30 min with the Hillside portion (under Connex) following suit a little later. Pre-10am Sunday morning services levels remain unchanged to this day except for the addition of earlier trips under Night Network and Werribee, Williamstown and Frankston upgrades in early 2021.
These 1996 and 1999 train service increases are historically important as they represent a decisive turnaround from the cuts during the 1950s, 60s and 70s. Sure these might have cut costs but they also reduced patronage and contributed to increased car traffic (which carries its own cost in road construction and maintenance). Hence cutting service is counterproductive and doesn't necessarily save much money.
Better frequency on the other hand is beneficial as it reduces waits, making train travel more useful for diverse trips throughout the day, not just during the commuter peaks. And of the times where you could boost service, off-peak frequency is most cost-effective as the marginal cost of increasing it is low and it optimises fleet usage. Interestingly this was more realised and acted on in the late 1990s than in the 2020s (so far).
The future
The current state government has found it easier to borrow tens of billions for new infrastructure than to find more modest (but recurring) amounts to make service more frequent and thus useful. Over the last decade or so this has been notable for all modes of transport except V/Line trains (which have enjoyed both large infrastructure and service gains).
Hence it's a common sight in the suburbs for there to be shiny new stations served by trains as far apart as 30 or even 40 minutes at important times people travel. Melbourne's 'infrastructure first' approach is quite different to 'service first' planning practice elsewhere, such as Sydney, that have done much to reduce maximum waits to much lower amounts (like 15 or even 10 minutes) over a much wider span of the day (while simultaneously pursuing a large infrastructure program).
Will Melbourne's approach change any time soon? Will service finally get its day in the sun? Large Metro Tunnel banners raise hopes though without specifics it remains to be seen how widely spread the benefits will be.
Hence it's a common sight in the suburbs for there to be shiny new stations served by trains as far apart as 30 or even 40 minutes at important times people travel. Melbourne's 'infrastructure first' approach is quite different to 'service first' planning practice elsewhere, such as Sydney, that have done much to reduce maximum waits to much lower amounts (like 15 or even 10 minutes) over a much wider span of the day (while simultaneously pursuing a large infrastructure program).
Will Melbourne's approach change any time soon? Will service finally get its day in the sun? Large Metro Tunnel banners raise hopes though without specifics it remains to be seen how widely spread the benefits will be.
https://melbourneontransit.blogspot.com/2011/05/melbourne-interpeak-train-service.html
https://melbourneontransit.blogspot.com/2011/05/melbourne-evening-train-service-levels.html
https://www.ptua.org.au/files/2008/2023/12/PTUA-News-Volume-23-No.-2-June-1999.pdf
4 comments:
Notably 2 of the 4 seats the Kennett Government lost in the Legislative Assembly at the 1996 election were on lines not upgraded (Ivanhoe and Essendon on the Hurstbridge and the then Broadmeadows lines respectively, seat the Liberals have never regained) and the seat they won (Carrum) was on an upgraded line (Frankston).
It's disappointing that the frequency improvements on the Frankston line haven't led to as much patronage increase as we would have liked, but have instead halved over the last 14 years. Boardings on the Glenhuntly-Frankston sector were
2005/06 10.6m
2006/07 11.3m
2007/08 13.0m
2008/09 14.7m (Eastlink opened 29 June 2008)
2009/10 14.3m
2010/11 14.4m
2011/12 13.4m
2012/13 N/A
2013/14 11.3m
2014/15 11.1m
2015/16 10.6m
2016/17 10.6m (bus replacement Jun-Aug 2016 for Ormond-Bentleigh grade separation)
2017/18 11.5m
2018/19 11.6m
... (COVID, Cheltenham grade separation)
2022/23 7.0m (bus replacement Mar-Jul 2023 for Glenhuntly grade separation)
Hopefully patronage builds up again now that most of the grade separations are behind us, and return to office numbers stabilise. Posters on Reddit mention unreliability of the train network as a factor discouraging use of the train system, particularly during the grade separations.
Thanks Malcolm. Yes the Frankston line has been beset by various issues, some temporary, some permanent. Certainly agree that it's been buses for prolonged periods and is still buses at various random times. Many will have given up on trains.
Peak timetables and frequencies have improved but travel times are still slow with Frankston trains now a long all stations trip rather than the expresses we used to have (swapped with Dandenong trains). I'd also point to the Mordialloc Freeway which will have taken passengers away.
I'm guessing Metro Tunnel might help a bit as Frankston line passengers will have their Loop service restored. Cross-city has in theory been good but sometimes unreliable. Also while Caulfield isn't the greatest interchange it should be an overall timesaver for Frankston passengers changing there for some trips. There are however some level crossing removals pending eg Mordialloc's so we might not be out of the woods re shutdowns yet.
Would an all day semi express service help increase patronage? This could save 18 minutes on what is currently a 59 minute trip on an all-stopper from Flinders St, bringing it down to 41 minutes. The 3-track section allows overtaking but when operated alternately in each direction could probably only do so reliably with a service frequency of 30-60 minutes. It would then be similar to the service frequency that Geelong has had (until recently). There is a huge population south of Frankston. Mornington Shire has a population of 170,000 compared with 250,000 in Geelong. Buses from south of Frankston and Stony Point services would need to be timed to fit these semi-express services. Once when travelling on the Frankston line mid morning I was surprised how many passengers were travelling all the way from Frankston to Flinders St.. An all-stopper service every 10 minutes serves those along the middle part of the line very well, but at the expense of those beyond the last station. Perhaps this market has switched to Eastlink and working from home during all the disruptions with level crossing removals. But Geelong proves there is a potential market for such a service.
Post a Comment