My observation when doing this video was that if they had’ve put a temporary track on one side or the other of the then existing double track (as they did with Clayton) the twin viaducts could have been placed closer together side by side leaving room for at least one overtaking track as is the case on some other Melbourne lines.
When I do the Driver’s View video between Dandenong and Caulfield it will be clearer as to where any overtaking track(s) could still be inserted but it does seem that the VLine long distance passengers are bottom of the barrel for getting faster suburban travel. In fact it has been suggested to me that their trains may be terminated at Dandenong or even Pakenham with passengers then being required to transfer to all stations electric trains.
Maybe I am just spoilt from Sydney having Express suburban runs on most lines for certain longer journeys (even if they are not as fast as they used to be).
On 14 May 2019, at 9:31 am, Daniel Bowen danielbowen@...> wrote:
> Surely they must have considered this issue before embarking on such a project?
They did. They concluded the reservation (particularly Caulfield to Oakleigh) wasn't wide enough to do 4 tracks without acquiring hundreds of properties.
They also decided they wanted to try and minimise disruption during construction (eg trains could keep running at ground level while most of the elevated structure was built), and maximise use of open space under the tracks when they had finished (hence the design which lets in light and rain).
And they're addressing capacity via longer trains and upgraded signalling.
All of which means express/stopper issues are not yet addressed, but what the line has ended up with ticks most of the other boxes.
> On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 07:20, Prescott lenkaprescott@...> wrote:
> Thank you for another excellent video Richard. I never realised until just recently that the skyrail sections are being built as separate viaducts on either side in a potential quadding reservation, with the central two tracks then to be abandoned. From a Sydney perspective this is appalling and it would never get a look-in here. It's something so fundamental to getting long-distance trains out past the stopping trains and thus reducing the time of distance journeys, not to mention the opportunity to expand the capacity of a line. Surely they must have considered this issue before embarking on such a project?
> Tony P