There are a few interesting implications that arise from last week’s announcement that Auckland’s electric trains fleet will be completely comprised of Electric-Multiple-Units (EMUs) rather than a mixture of EMUs and electric-locomotives. It seems to me that in the end it was a fairly logical decision to make – over the lifespan of the trains it was cheaper to get a fully EMU fleet, once you include operating costs. Furthermore, being able to have a single type of train right across the fleet has some big advantages too in terms of consistent running times – while of course now all the trains would be able to access the City Rail Link tunnel (something I will discuss further in a minute).
The first implication is that we now have a large number of rail carriages with a fairly uncertain future. Since around 2003 we have bolstered the ex-Perth ADL and ADK trains with the SA/SD carriages, which were completely refurbished (and largely rebuilt) carriages from Britain. Over the past eight years we’ve built up a fairly extensive fleet of these carriages – 23 sets from what I know. All these rebuilt and refurbished carriages represent a resource that still has a lot of value, and a lot of life left (even if the locomotives that generally haul them are really old). A lot of money has gone into them over the past eight years, so we really should be trying to get as much value out of them as possible. So that leaves an interesting conundrum – what to do with all these carriages once the rollout of the all the electric trains has occurred?
Some will be needed to operate the feeder trains from Pukekohe (and beyond?) to Papakura, while some will also be needed to operate feeder trains from Waitakere/Huapai (and perhaps beyond?) to Swanson. But one would imagine that would only be a fairly small proportion of these carriages. So what other options do we have?
- Refurbish them for inter-city travel to Hamilton, Tauranga, Rotorua & potentially beyond. While any service other than to Hamilton is unlikely to be viable in the short-term, with fuel prices going up and the potential long-term boost to New Zealand’s tourism from events like the Rugby World Cup, who knows – inter-city rail may have a resurgence in the longer term.
- Sell them to another city in New Zealand: either Wellington if they want to expand their fleet of trains hauled by electric locos (which I understand haul a couple of the services) or perhaps other cities that may wish to establish suburban rail operations.
- Sell them overseas – perhaps somewhere in one of the Australian states with the same track gauge as New Zealand.
- Put them into use for a service something along the lines of the “Long Hauler” that is discussed in some detail here. Between the full rollout of electric trains and the eventual completion of the City Rail Link project there is likely to be a stage when extra capacity is required, some of which could be provided by West to South (via Newmarket) or East to West (via the Strand & Newmarket) services – operating limited stop to ensure they didn’t hold up the EMUs.
The second implication is that with the extra EMU trains, we are probably pretty close to having a fleet which would work post-City Rail Link. The Business Case for the Rail Link looked at two different operating patterns: one which would require additional trains (above what was expected to be purchased at that time) and one that wouldn’t. The two options are shown below:
While the “minimal rolling stock” service pattern is pretty unacceptable in many respects, the base option probably provides quite a level of ‘over-supply’. 5 minute frequencies on the Western Line all the way out to Henderson just seems somewhat excessive – even in 2024, while all the options just look far too complicated in my opinion. I would much rather go with something like this:
Obviously over time you would boost service levels on the lines – probably on the Red Line first, at least until you extended the Blue Line to the Airport – forming a loop back to Manukau. Ultimately you could probably run 12 trains per hour each way on both of the lines, providing a train every five minutes, or every two and a half minutes on sections of track where the two lines overlap.
The implication of the additional EMU purchase is an interesting question of, post City Rail Link, how many additional trains would really be needed, over and above what we have with the 57 three car EMUs, to run the kind of service pattern shown above? While the business case review of costings did look at 57 EMUs (in fact that was the first clue I had that a full EMU fleet might be being looked at), it still seemed to be based on the overly complex service pattern in the first diagram above – which requires quite a few additional trains on the opening of the City Rail Link.
Overall, one would have to assume that if the additional EMUs are being purchased as part of the electrification project, then they won’t need to be purchased as part of the City Rail Link project. This pushes the cost of that project down, potentially by quite a bit, meaning that the quoted $2.4 billion figure may be overblown by quite a bit (from memory the core cost of the rail link was around $2 billion, the rest being upgrades to the rest of the network plus the cost of the trains).
Processing...
So if buying 57 EMU’s now means no more are required for the CCRL then that not only pushes the cost down to 2 Billion, but also the govts own BCR up from 0.3 which SJ is always quoting in Parliament.
POint 2 – I like your network operating pattern simpler and easier to understand. With 10 minutes and 5 minute req across the network.
And your simpler operation can be complimented by a south-west diesel loco SA/SD service which would increase frequencies and route options without new capital expenditure. We know there is demand now for such trips and there clearly will be more with people attending the new MIT campus above the Manukau Station from west AK too soon.
So, no chance of a Manukau – South link in the next 50 years?
Post electrification the Pukekohe and Waitakere shuttles will be run by refurbished ADL’s not SA sets, one of the main reasons for this is that the size is more suited to the number of passengers and the ADL’s are apparently much cheaper to run as they are more fuel efficient.
Looking at the CRL issue, I created a calculator a while ago to work out how much faster the timetable might be with new trains, I have also plugged in the CRL distances to it and based on that it indicates 57 EMU’s is almost the number we need to be able to provide 10 minute frequencies on your suggested lines with each train consisting to two EMU’s.
Also the extra trains were only one part of the extra costs, the other costs consisted of things like double tracking the Onehunga Branch, grade separating most level crossings etc. By increasing the EMU order it has probably knocked about $150m off the cost of the extras so the whole thing is now more like $2.2b
Well grade separation is really a roading cost, it is to speed up traffic, no improvement to rail service, so you can take that cost out too.
I’ve said somewhere quite recently – If I were Dunedin, or Hastings/Napier or Tauranga or even Wanganui then I’d try to get my hand on a set or two and introduce suburban services. Mosgiel (or Dunedin Airport with a new short spur) to Port Chalmers, Hastings to Hawkes Bay Airport, Tauranga (or a station or two west) to the Mount, and Castlecliff to East Wanganui. Then I’d change the local buses to interchange with it, add small stations at 1km intervals with bike lockers and bike share, and get the whole best practice according to those darn-pesky left leaning transport and cycle blogs. Would it work in small cities? I dunno, it might.
Matt T, great idea. It might even herald a rail renaissance in New Zealand if you persuaded the middle sized towns that rail actually works as part of a modern integrated public transport system. It might also serve to demolish the anti-rail platform of provincial naysayers like Joyce, Ryall and the rest of them because it could be demonstrated that rail wasn’t just an Auckland indulgence. And it might also prompt the revival of inter-city passenger rail.
IIRC the cost of the tunnel is $1991m + extras at a 95% confidence level (the extras are mainly EMUs and double tracking Onehunga). This should not be confused with the most likely cost i.e. 50% confidence which would be around $1.7b (half way between $1.4b & $2b).
Cost of $1.4b is achievable but unlikely – possibly 5% chance. Remember all these costs are estimates based on very little detailed engineering input. As the council moves through consenting; property acquisition; then onto test drilling; preliminary engineering etc……etc…. then a lot of the allowance for uncertainty drops away.
If the council can get a competitive tender between multiple overseas companies then the cost will drop below $1.7b. If engineering solutions can be found to build a smaller station box than in the forecasts; and the Chinese can be brought in as financers; as well as contractors then they could bid low in the $1.4b range. Hence the 5% probability as it requires a lot of ands to line up.
Nah, sell them. You took the entire fleet of ADLs from Perth which was good for Perth as it forced them to make the electric model work. Don’t sit there with too many crutches preventing you from learning how to walk as an all electric city.
I’m still not convinced the Puke stuff has been thought through. Simplest option (Brisbane is my inspiration for this) is to can Swanson to Waitakere and direct the savings toward electrifying to Puke – which will also build momentum towards Hamilton. Waitakere is never going to need trains (lovely little station though it is) and the NIMT does need trains and will need them further and further south of Auckland.
So get rid of the loco hauled sets – convert them for long distance if required, or GWC for Masterton capacity (it may be electrified one day too).
Other cities, if they dabble in rail, will want railcars, maybe the ADLs when they’ve done their day in Auckland. Not loco hauled sets.
In the report “Time for Change” presented by then Railways Department General Manager Trevor Hayward, it was noted that for a diesel train to rival coaches for fuel efficiency, it needed to carry more than 3 full coach loads on average. Given the patronage of the defunct Silverfern services to Rotorua and Tauranga averaged at around 30 a day each way, it’s not likely. The speeds on intercity rail in New Zealand are far from competitive with roads, and anyone not travelling alone will always find it cheaper, faster and more convenient to take a car.
Wellington will have a surplus of rolling stock when all of the Matangi units are operational and the Ganz Mavags are refurbished, so no need there.
They are probably best left as charter equipment, although the ADKs are at the end of their lives and the ADLs probably don’t have much more to go either.
There is virtually no market for secondhand narrow gauge rolling stock, if they can’t generate net revenue, they will either be good for enthusiasts or for scrap.
I think the shuttles are worthwhile. They could be used for semi-fast South-West services, once or twice an hour, or indeed with a new curve, Manukau – Pukekohe shuttles. These would cover off Pukekohe, and also Papakura-Manukau demand so might be quite handy.
Or some Hamilton – Manukau trains in off-peak to cover shopping and school journeys, and build rail as a part of communities and the wider consciousness – rather than just for commuting.
The loco-hauled stock could wait for when Silver Ferns hopefully aren’t enough for the Auckland – Hamilton services! 🙂
In recent times I have had to travel by bus and train to get to work and back due to absence of a car. I have acquired a new understanding of Aucklands PT as a result.
Concerning the trains, I appreciate and applaud the work that has been done to upgrade the infrastructure. To see that it has been done on time and on budget or better is a testament to the improved attitude and abilities of New Zealand construction companies. Much of the work done has included imaginative and skillful designs and construction. My only quibble would be with the quality of the track laying. In many places it is just crap and needs a jolly good improvement to allow faster transit by the new EMUs.
However, equipment and infrastructure are not the only important elements of a good, reliable PT system. There are two other things it needs, a great attitude in the people running the services and a great plan.
The attitude is generally poor. Most train attendants and bus drivers I have met have been civil, but show little interest other than in collecting fares. For example, when I asked why my 6:15am train was late the attendant had no idea why and seemed uninterested in finding out. The question of how he could find out is superfluous. Contrast that with one bus driver who apologised for being 90 seconds late. That’s less than the error in most peoples watches but it shows that he was genuinely concerned not ot inconvenience his passengers. It has always been evident to me that a true understanding of “service” is often absent in this country. My recent experience has cemented that view in place. A poor attitude is not just restricted to the bus drivers and train attendents. Veolia need a shake up as well. On every occasion I have e-mailed them to complain about this or that, I have received a formulaic and vague response. MAXX also needs to wake up! I see posters on the walls of trains proudly announcing 81.6 % punctuality and about 90% servicability on the Eastern line. Those figure might well represent an improvement but it is nothing to be proud of. In my business, those figures would mean I was out of business. Customers would have long gone somwhere else.
The second essential is a great plan. That is to say, how does it all connect together and get people from where they are to where they are going, in a speedy and reliable manner? We have no great plan as evidenced by the many very meandering, circuitous and slow bus routes and the lack of logical connections from one service to another. There are much better ways of organising routes and services, ones that feed from small local services, like on-call buses, to main fast bus routes and trains. On one occasion I took the Onehunga train right into Onehunga. There were about 80 passengers disembarking there. Was there any other transport to carry people further? None!
Cheers
On the issue of infrastructure, in particular the track conditions, my understanding is that after all of the work that is happening with electrification is finished (bridge reconstructions, mast installation, signalling etc) that Kiwirail will give the track a bit more attention so it is in better condition before the EMU’s arrive