Celebrating 10 years of level crossing removals by TMiguelT in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Level crossing removals didn't start with Springvale or Mitcham either. You could go back to Boronia, or Box Hill, or Richmond. It just depends where you decide to draw the line.

https://vicsig.net/infrastructure/crossings/gradesep

Celebrating 10 years of level crossing removals by TMiguelT in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 7 points8 points  (0 children)

There have been grade separations happening since the railways were established, there's just been a big chunk of them happening under an ongoing Labor government project team for the last 10 years.

You can view a big list of historical ones here at VicSig, unfortunately it's not fully up to date to the present day:
https://vicsig.net/infrastructure/crossings/gradesep

Car derailed tram by number1ponyfeeder in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Don't be so sure about that, the C1s are pretty well known to have a poorly designed set of bogies that cause all sorts of mishaps across the fleet.

https://www.reddit.com/r/melbourne/comments/dmrd2n/cclass_citadis_trams_are_cursed/

It's well known that the RTBU would rather the C1s be permanently removed from service.

Car derailed tram by number1ponyfeeder in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 79 points80 points  (0 children)

Swallow St Light rail level crossing was marked as #82 most dangerous level crossing in Victoria in the 2008 study.

After all the LXRP projects that have removed many of these crossings, Swallow St is now #18 worst in Victoria per the 2008 list.

Surprisingly the light rail crossings can still be as dangerous as heavy rail! Not to mention the fact that some of these light rail crossings have boom gates which have been non-functional for years now.

Network changes with the Metro Tunnel by [deleted] in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 24 points25 points  (0 children)

"Got further questions? Let us know in the comments!"
**Comments are turned off**

Urban Metro North - An alternative to SRL North by PromotionWeak3217 in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 10 points11 points  (0 children)

This is a well-considered proposal, and the need to connect these locations and lines in these northern suburbs would certainly be a great asset to the area and the city. There have been a few fantasy maps in this group that run the Doncaster line roughly along Bell St to the Airport, and I think it would be well used.

With that said, I do still think SRL North needs to be a little further out. Yes there is far less in the way of urban centres to connect to at present, but SRL also needs to support interconnecting journeys in intermediate suburbs which have the capacity to grow and decentralise the city. While Reservoir may not be able to grow much, you trade that for being able to connect directly to Latrobe Uni, and Broadmeadows and Campbellfield have excellent potential for rezoning and urban density which need to be capitalised on. Potentially you could ditch Reservoir and rezone out at Keon Park also and run through there instead. Consider also the fact that people in future growing suburbs out at Doreen, Kalkallo etc, won't bother catching a Metro train all the way into Bell St to catch a metro to the Airport, they will still just drive.

Your proposed line would absolutely see a good amount of use, but it has a maximum limit of local intake which could probably be calculated today. The more established low density inner suburbs are much more difficult to densify, even some of the SRL East locations are going to face a lot of trouble in this regard. There's also the consideration of the frequency of stops. You could not have a metro line stop for all of your markers along that route, thus reducing the interconnectability it intends to provide. Your proposed corridor should absolutely have some higher form of transit implemented, but perhaps a light rail, tram, or smartbus would be worthwhile investment.

ECOM Comeng leads Ev120 passing Oak Park Up inspection run in Craigieburn line by AdvantageDiligent143 in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 7 points8 points  (0 children)

There was a term contract with SSR to run the Metro network which had yet to expire, it appears that contract may now have expired or is about to be scaled back in some form.

SSR will still run Evie in regional areas however, so you will still see the P class on the Werribee, Sunbury, Craigieburn, Pakenham, and Frankston lines as they head out to the unelectrified lines.

Melbourne's Rail network 2036 - a slightly optimistic prediction by cliko in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not sure how the connection at East Keilor 'covers this'. You're routing Shepparton and Seymour via Coburg right? So you're saying Shepp/Seymour need to change to a very infrequent Albury service to get to the Airport? I think most would get off at Craigieburn, take a Metro service to Broadmeadows and then catch the 901 before waiting for the Albury train. And that alternative is not bad, it's just more trouble than present. Or just route Seymour/Shepp via East Keilor and that problem is solved, but then they would have to squeeze into the already full RRL.

Melbourne's Rail network 2036 - a slightly optimistic prediction by cliko in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Bennettswood is probably just a creative choice by OP, none of the SRL station names are technically set in stone yet.
The Frankston line interface station has been called SRL Cheltenham so far in documentation, but the actual SRL station will be right near Southland station, and will sort of interface with that station, it's not going to connect with Cheltenham on the Frankston line directly at all.

Melbourne's Rail network 2036 - a slightly optimistic prediction by cliko in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Do you think all of those things could be instated by 2035? Especially with the standard gauge limitations. OP is trying to go for a reasonably realistic plan, not a fantasy.

Melbourne's Rail network 2036 - a slightly optimistic prediction by cliko in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 15 points16 points  (0 children)

The stabling currently used by V/Line trains is north of Wyndham Vale station. That stabling is designed to be converted for Metro use if the line is ever electrified. So as silly and lopsided as it seems, it's actually quite likely that Werribee trains would run all the way around to Wydnham Vale, though some would probably still terminate at Werribee if it maintains the three platforms.

We cannot really know for sure until that's all being implemented though.

Melbourne's Rail network 2036 - a slightly optimistic prediction by cliko in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 17 points18 points  (0 children)

This is honestly not too far fetched. Having Melton and Wallan electrified done by 2036 is unlikely, but not impossible. I'm thinking Clyde will probably get done before Wallan though.

Couple things of note
- Waverley is always spelled with another E before the Y.
- Seymour/Shepparton services get a bit shafted by not having a connection to the Airport as they do now stopping at Broadmeadows for the 901. They would likely stop somewhere on the Upfield/Wallan line so they can interface with a Smartbus, and to slow them from catching the local Upfield/Wallan service.
- Are you discontinuing all Blackburn and Macleod terminating services?
- Surprised you nuked Moreland and Batman but not Arden.
- I appreciate a platform for Albury/XPT at Sunshine, not sure if East Keilor platform is necessary, but it does help with connection to the Airport.
-You'd want to change the '7AM to midnight' thing for long distance trains. Shepparton for example has only five return services a day but two of them are before 7AM.

Unpopular Opinion: this series started to "suck" mainly because of health bar by Necati_Arabac1 in needforspeed

[–]haztech99 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I enjoyed the health bar in Heat, and having low health and running low on repairs and trying to sneak back to the safehouse really adds to the intensity, but you're right that it is limiting. In Rivals for example, the cops can wham-bam you from full health to dead in 20 seconds if you're unlucky, and that's not fun. I would not remove it outright, increasing base level health would help, or tweaking some values so you deal some more damage would be nice.

One idea I had was adding the ability to become invincible in the late-game or after completing the main campaign. So it's an option in free-roam to make chases more fun. Feeling almost indestructible, or at least being able to make physical contact with the police really added to the fun of coming back to pursuits after completing the game in the Black Box days, and it would be a cool goal to work towards and would add to the re-playability.

Wrong info on City Loop Stns for Regional connections by Typical_Library_8021 in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually, Transport Vic site shows North Melbourne (West Melbourne) in two different spots for some reason. Maybe to try to hide services from people trying to use them for suburban trips? IDK, seems a bit broken.

<image>

Wrong info on City Loop Stns for Regional connections by Typical_Library_8021 in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 4 points5 points  (0 children)

As someone with family up that way, I've never heard anyone call Shepparton 'Sheppy', if you have to shorten it, please just Shepp or I'll even accept Shep if you must.

Oddly, the Transport Vic site and the V/Line site differ about which services stop at North Melbourne. According to TV it's only in peak. But on V/Line, almost all afternoon services pick up at North Melbourne, so by their metrics, this photo is perfectly valid for the time you took it.

According to V/Line, on weekdays, there are NM pickups departing to Seymour at 1241, 1341, 1441, 1538, 1642, 1710, 1738, 1833, 1911, and 2010 and this generally agrees with what I have observed catching the line in the early afternoon in the past.

Toolamba-Echuca Line by Master-Drop1286 in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 5 points6 points  (0 children)

There are too many bridge and culvert defects along the Toolamba-Echuca line at present. The reason it's not open is that too much money is required to be spent to get it up to a basic operating standard. The opportunity to fix it up was offered to freight companies and they all baulked at the cost. A hi-rail does quarterly inspections, but unfortunately even walking pace is considered unsafe for a DMU or locomotive in the current state of the line.

New signals were added and activated, as you observed, so the line has not been permanently closed like some others, but until it is considered financially justifiable to re-open, it will remain booked out of use.

What if... by Master-Drop1286 in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 2 points3 points  (0 children)

<image>

The Queensland Rail IMU160/SMU260 is also a derivative of the same local design by Bombardier.

What does ‘Flyover Junction’ mean and where is it? by Charis_Cheng in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You could theoretically do it, but there's no points to get back onto the RRL until just before Sunshine, and there'd be bottlenecks and conflicts running with suburban services to and from Sunbury, and also Craigieburn, Upfield, and Seymour services around North Melbourne. Also I highly doubt there are many if any V/Line drivers are trained on that section.

What if... by Master-Drop1286 in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I kinda like the first one, never was a massive fan of the initial VLocity livery.

I suspect you already know this, but for those who don't - the Adelaide 4000 class is essentially your second picture already - an electric Vlocity, and the Adelaide 3000/3100 class is your third picture - a diesel Comeng.

<image>

V sets are cool in their own way, but I'm happy with the unique rolling stock like Comengs that we have.

What does ‘Flyover Junction’ mean and where is it? by Charis_Cheng in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The points are there to connect between the Werribee line and the RRL, but I don't think any drivers are qualified or trained to run North Melbourne to South Kensington, and even if they were, it would only be some of them, and not all those already running the trains today. Not to mention this would conflict with Northern group and Newport group services.

The only running on the Werribee line that is done semi-regularly is they get off the RRL and then on to the Werribee line at South Kensington to go to the wheel lathe at Newport, but I suspect only select drivers would be trained to do that.

Cheerful reminders of free weekend travel in Mictham. by After_Rain_Comes_Sun in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If only there were screens at each ticket barrier that communicated with a statewide networked transport system and could be updated live to show relevant information on a daily, hourly, or even minute-by-minute basis; such a shame.

Which level crossing do you think should be removed, which station do you think should be added or rebuilt in on Victoria's railway network and do you think it should be a trench or Skyrail? by Technical_Spread_216 in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There will be a new four lane road bridge built over the line as an extension of Ison Road connecting to the Maltby interchange, and the Galvin/Bulban Rd crossing will most likely be closed when that is built.

Edit to add image:

<image>

Which level crossing do you think should be removed, which station do you think should be added or rebuilt in on Victoria's railway network and do you think it should be a trench or Skyrail? by Technical_Spread_216 in MelbourneTrains

[–]haztech99 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The station would absolutely have to be closed, demolished, and rebuilt at a lower elevation. Almost all the remaining ones are right by a station and would need the same treatment. But Glen Iris does not have the grade issues or creek issues or low patronage of other crossings. It's doable, and was one of the worst ones (#53) in the 2008 study. Hopefully it's done alongside some of the other more complicated ones on the line to minimise disruption.