TT 193: Busy but service-starved: Which train lines?

To what extent do Melbourne rail service levels reflect line usage? What is the geography of rail service versus usage? Who is well served and who gets short-changed? And what are the implications for service upgrade priorities, especially with the Metro Tunnel opening next year and a state election the year after?  

These are some of the questions I'll try to answer today. 

Station boarding data graphs posted by user AB014A on the Reddit r/MelbourneTrains group have made the job easier. The source Victorian government data is published here for those who want to do their own analysis. 

Boardings by line

The simplest graph shows passenger boardings by line. Numbers exclude central area stations served by multiple lines. But there has been some apportionment of numbers by suburban stations served by multiple lines. The original graph and discussion appear on this Reddit thread. 

Very roughly the longer the line the more the stations and the more the boardings. 

Be aware of branched lines, especially where the split is so far out that most stations are on two lines (and at most times of day get double the service frequency). The two 'giants' in this regard are Pakenham/Cranbourne (about 20 million boardings) and Belgrave/Lilydale (17 million boardings including the minor Alamein branch).

Mernda/Hurstbridge are different in that most of their stations are beyond the Clifton Hill 'fork'. At around 16 million their combined usage is similar to Belgrave/Lilydale. 

Service frequency can matter too, with lines like Sandringham and Glen Waverley carrying substantially more than comparably long Upfield. In short, the better you make service the more people use it. But what's striking is how well some lines do despite having frequency handicaps. For instance Werribee, Craigieburn, Mernda and Sunbury are about 88% Frankston line's usage despite having twice the waits off-peak. Even assuming a conservatively low service-patronage elasticity, you can reasonably predict that boosting each from 20 to 10 minutes off-peak will increase usage enough for all four to overtake the Frankston line (ie pushing that down from 2nd to 6th in ranking).       

Wondered about the colours? These correspond to the network's five main line groups. Eg light blue is Caulfield group, green is cross-city, orange is northern, red is Clifton Hill, blue is Burnley and purple is V/Line. Sandringham, on its own, is pink. Some will change when the Metro Tunnel opens next year.   

The coarseness of this data limits what conclusions you can draw from it. And some may be incorrect if you haven't considered factors like shared line sections, service levels and the number of stations. For instance Wyndham Vale's V/Line service doesn't look much but the few stations it has punch above their weight, especially after its generally lower frequency is considered. Also most lines serve inner, middle and outer Melbourne, with greatly varying demographics along their segments.   

Boardings by line segment

User AB014A went on to split the above data into line segments, with the graph and discussion in another Reddit thread. With this you can see which segments had the most entries at their stations, and thus identify busier and quieter portions of each line. 

Some commenters didn't like the way the data was segmented. However I like it because each segment has pretty much the same service levels at all stations in it. That allowed me to annotate the graph with off-peak service levels above each column, as below (click for clearer view). 

The numbers are maximum waits between trains in minutes for various times of the week. These are explained in the highlighted frequency key. I've used Saturday evening frequencies but on most lines  this applies for other nights as well.   

Colour coding is used for several purposes. Line group is identified just as it was in the first graph, ie you can quickly identify all northern group line segments by looking for the orange. My additions shade particularly high or low frequencies. Look for green and yellow for 10 - 15 minute frequencies and grey for 40-60 minute gaps. That way you can see at a glance which segments get particularly high or low service. 

Observations

1. The busy and well-served inner to middle east. The first five columns show segments that combine higher usage with higher service. These segments include all stations from the City to Dandenong and most to Ringwood. In these better served segments you can expect trains every 10-15 minutes during the day all week. At most stations peak waits are much shorter while evening and Sunday morning waits are longer. 

2. The busy but underserved north and west. If you're just scanning colours the first thing that jumps out is that patch of four adjacent orange columns. And if you follow to the frequencies you'll see they all have gaps of up to 40 minutes. 

We're talking about the Sunbury and Craigieburn lines here. Or more specifically Middle Footscray - Watergardens, Kensington - Essendon and Broadmeadows - Craigieburn. 

Passengers in these segments use trains a lot, but unlike their eastern suburbs counterparts, don't get the  same frequent service. This is most notable interpeak weekdays (20 versus 10-15 min), weekends (20 versus 10 minutes) and Sunday mornings (40 versus 30 min). 

The Sunbury line will become part of the Metro Tunnel. Moving their trains out of the northern group City Loop portal will (in theory) allow higher peak Craigieburn line frequency. However not even broad service specifications have yet been made available so it's just guesswork as to whether these lines get the frequent all day service they need in the post Metro Tunnel timetables.    

3. The Wyndham patronage powerhouse. Those prominent orange bars might have caused you to skip the two even busier segments around Werribee/Tarneit. 

The Deer Park - Wyndham Vale portion of the Geelong line is extremely productive. And, more than other lines, 40 minute gaps on it are common including at times when Metro lines enjoy 20 and sometimes even 10 minute frequencies. Labor promised an upgrade to 20 minute frequencies before the last election. This won't come a moment too soon given its high passenger numbers. Ultimately, given the area's massive growth, that also probably justifies a full two tier service including all week 10 minute frequencies to Wyndham Vale.  

Metro's Werribee line is also a strong performer west from Laverton. The very welcome 2021 train timetable cut maximum waits from 40 to 20 minutes, with particular gains at night and on Sunday mornings. Continued suburban growth justifies further improvements, starting with broadening shoulder peaks and moving to a 10 minute all week service, such as already enjoyed by its cross-city partner out to Frankston. 

4. Quiet but frequent. Let's ignore the line colours and just look at which segments get 10-15 minute service. The quieter segments that nevertheless have good frequencies are all in the east or south (but not south-east). 

Most notable is the Alamein line, which enjoys a 15 minute off-peak service. East Camberwell - Union and Heyington - Darling, areas home to some of Melbourne's choicest real estate, were in about the bottom third. However both segments were en-route to busier sections, such as Box Hill - Ringwood and East Malvern - Glen Waverley.    

The first graph had the Frankston line as having the second highest number of boardings. It's a long line with many closely-spaced stations. Its inner section is busy (aided by Dandenong train express patterns) but usage falls away from the CBD. The Mentone - Frankston portion is its quietest segment, though Frankston station itself is busy. Its high 7 day frequency should induce more patronage than it has. Possible reasons why it hasn't include (i) weak catchment (including the bay), (ii) poor reliability due to frequent bus replacements and (iii) a new competing parallel freeway that is more attractive than often limited feeder buses.   

5. Battle of the branches. Which of the branches beyond Dandenong and Ringwood do better? The answers might surprise.  

For Dandenong the Cranbourne branch got about 50% more passengers than Pakenham. Even though Pakenham has some significant destinations like Berwick and Fountain Gate near (but not on) its corridor. Both are urban growth areas where most development has been away from stations. Some areas like Clyde got extra or extended buses. But Officer and Pakenham generally have not. Cranbourne generally has better buses than Pakenham with some routes (eg 897) operating every 20 minutes 7 days. I don't want to read too much in to numbers here as factors like frequent bus replacements (as have occurred on the Pakenham line) can depress patronage.  

The branches east of Ringwood are about evenly matched with regards to both service frequency and patronage. Both also get more numbers than Alamein even though Alamein gets twice the weekday off-peak frequency. This matches what I saw in 2020 when I concluded that there was a 'greater good' gain of boosting weekday Belgrave and Lilydale frequencies to 20 minutes even if it meant that Alamein got a decrease from 15 to 20 minutes.  

6. Average performing lines with below average service. Here there's a mismatch between patronage and service but perhaps not quite as much as those in 2 or 3 above. I'd put most of the Mernda line in this category due to its low off-peak frequencies.

Also while the Sandringham line has above average service at most times, its 40 minute Sunday morning service lets it down. This is a case where adding just a few trains per week can half maximum waits and provide a more legible and dependable all week service (especially given its already good evening frequency). 

7. Poorly performing segments with high patronage potential. Some lines have a lot of stations in areas that have the density and demographics to support higher usage. These are often inner ring suburbs that also have trams.

In these parts public transport is abundant when looking at the map but each mode has problems that stop it from reaching maximum patronage potential as part of a connected network. For example trams are frequent but slow, trains are faster but infrequent while buses join the radial lines but have short operating hours. Boosting train frequencies would provide a frequent/fast option that would free up sometimes crowded trams for feeder and local trips. 

Examples of infrequent rail segments with patronage potential include Rushall - Bell on the Mernda line, Macaulay - Coburg on the Upfield line and, perhaps to a lesser extent, Westgarth - Eaglemont on the Hurstbridge line. Rushall - Bell would support usage of the Mernda line, which along with Werribee, has the highest claim to go to a 10 minute all week service after the busy Craigieburn line and the very cheap to upgrade Ringwood line. 

Interestingly the Kensington - Essendon portion of the Craigieburn line has equally low service but is already a good patronage performer. Essendon station's very high patronage (aided by some good tram and bus feeders) plus the high density around Moonee Ponds would explain all or most of this.  

Why are service levels as they are? 

The above has taught us that there are some busy lines that have high service while other busy lines have low service relative to usage. Other lines are better served relative to their patronage. And there can be significant variations across the week, with even the busiest lines not necessarily having the most frequent service at certain times. 

Here are four elements that I think have been decisive:  

1. The past. Go back about 50 or 60 years. Manufacturing was much bigger, especially in the west and north (including suburbs that would later gentrify). Such jobs were often local and suburban. Whereas middle class white collar workers favoured the east along lines to destinations like Ringwood and Glen Waverley. These have had more frequent service deeper into the suburbs than  other lines. And it was true that the Burnley group was the busiest of Melbourne's then four operational groups until about the mid-2000s when that got overtaken by the Caulfield group. So if you look at the 1975 Working Timetable it was only Burnley group lines that had a basic 15 minute off-peak weekday frequency (with 20 minutes being more common elsewhere). 

2. Advocacy/policy entrepreneurship. Despite the general doom and gloom there was a concerted campaign around 1991 to improve the frequency of the Sandringham line from every 20 to every 15 minutes. Advocates demonstrated that an upgrade was cheap and could even recoup what it cost in fares. This got implemented and was apparently successful. Except for Sunday mornings the Sandringham line continues to enjoy above average day and night frequency today.    

3. Who is in government. There are exceptions but the general pattern is that political parties will add service in areas most politically important to them. In a traditional two party system with many safe seats they will often neglect their 'base' voters or those they think will never vote for them. 

Despite its record of closing regional lines and sacking workers, the Kennett Coalition government also introduced some significant metropolitan rail frequency upgrades during its time. The 1996 off-peak boosts were confined to seats that were politically important to it in Melbourne's south and east. That saw Frankston and Dandenong trains improve from every 20 to every 15 minutes interpeak. 1999 saw a big upgrade in metropolitan Sunday train and tram services, but this time across the network.     

Subsequent Coalition governments boosted south and eastern metropolitan train frequencies further, including Ringwood, Dandenong and Frankston getting 10 minute weekend services. Around this time Dandenong and Frankston got 10 minute interpeak weekday services too. 

Labor governments have different priorities. They can point to significant records of extending rail electrification and (more recently) building the Metro Tunnel and removing level crossings. 

Labor has only won office when it has won major regional city seats so regional rail has been a major priority since the 1999 Bracks victory. Improvements here have included both infrastructure (including line reopenings) and service levels (especially weekday). 

However Labor has rarely added service on the metropolitan rail network, especially in established areas historically regarded as safe such as Broadmeadows, Coburg and Preston. Because the Liberals improved service in 'their' areas when in office but Labor didn't do likewise (and has governed for so long) the long term trend is towards an inequality in which some lines (like Frankston) have double the all-week frequency of others (like Craigieburn) despite similar patronage levels. It remains to be seen whether the timetables associated with the Metro Tunnel will buck this trend or not.

4. Crowding. If crowding gets extreme (to the point of trains being crush-loaded) or reliability suffers then that can force reformed timetables, operating patterns and service levels, particularly during peak times. 

However the Melbourne record is that the lag time can be as long as 8 years. As an example, metropolitan rail reliability was good in the first three years of franchising then fell off a cliff in 2004 in line with rising patronage. This should have forced some action but the prevailing ideology was to blame the franchisee (in this case Connex) with the hope that the public would too. Performance continued to decline with train disruptions frequently making headlines from 2007. After overcoming a driver shortage the government slotted in a few extra peak trips in twice-yearly changes but the slide continued. They dumped Connex for Metro and it still continued. The service changes became more radical, including new simpler 'greenfield' timetables with more consistent service and more separated operations. Reliability rebounded markedly after about 2012 and the service improvements on some lines, notably in the south-east, extended to off-peak times.     

To summarise, the timetables we have now most reflect (a) past travel patterns, (b) inertia as the default state and (c) politics. Other criteria, such as patronage or social needs, are less important but can force upgrades when crowding affects swinging voter commuters or unreliability makes the headlines. 

Concepts influential in other cities, such as a network-wide service standard or a culture of incremental service improvement (such as we saw a little of in January 2021), are weak on Melbourne's metropolitan rail network. As an example all other Australian capital cities (with some minor exceptions) have a 15/30 min 'pulse' on their train network, whereas Melbourne can have frequencies of 10, 15, 20, 30, 40 and 60 minutes at various times, making connections between lines haphazard. 

Whether it's the stable branding, advertising or information, in a city like Perth you get the sense that there is a strong, competent and multimodal 'network owner' able to pursue at least steady service improvements, we don't get quite the same vibes that our anonymously-led and continuously re or debranding DTP/PTV are moving the network forward at the same rate.   

Priorities for improvements

There's no one correct answer or order for improvement. But benefiting the most number of passengers for the lowest cost would be a major factor. 

If one wants a simple network without nasty surprises (like 40 or 60 minute gaps in broad daylight) then you start by cutting the longest waits on the busiest lines. These include Sunday mornings on the Metro network and weekend services on regional lines at least to Melton and Wyndham Vale. 

Such an incremental approach might also see the widespread 30 minute evening headways cut to 20 minutes until say 9 or 10 pm with further pushing back in later years. This staged approach involves only a small percentage rise in service kilometres each year so is easier to manage with regards to driver recruitment and training etc. 

Getting to all week 10 minute frequencies on all lines needs more service investment. This would probably need to be in phases over say 2 to 3 years. A start could be made by broadening the shoulders on high patronage potential lines like Craigieburn, Werribee and Mernda. 

Sections of some lines aren't as strong patronage performers as those listed. But if an upgrade is cheap and benefits a lot of stations (eg Ringwood 10 min interpeak, Sandringham Sunday mornings) then it would be a high priority. 

When patronage was growing rapidly about 15 years ago there were typically two timetable changes a year. That's a good approach as you can't do big upgrades overnight. It's good to do what you can when you can to bring the benefits of service forward. As opposed to doing nothing for many years and trying to tie service improvements to big infrastructure projects (that, contrary to some impressions conveyed) are not a pre-requisite for all-week service improvements.

Such a program could be linked to supporting bus coordination, as PTV commenced doing in its early years. A routine like this would make service upgrades more similar to (say) level crossing removals in that there are established processes rather than something so rare that it requires the 'wheel to be reinvented' each time or inefficient peaks and troughs in work-flow. 

See other Timetable Tuesday items here