We were expecting public transport in March to be mad and throughout the month we certainly saw it living up to that expectation with daily reports of full services. Some people watched up to 12 full buses go past their stop before one with enough space arrived for them to squeeze on. On the parts of the rail network not yet served by electric trains services were also overflowing – and that was when they weren’t being cancelled or severely delayed.
Auckland Transport have today released the patronage results showing just how busy the month was and the results are astonishing. Across all modes there were an extra 1.1 million trip taken compared to March last year which at 15% is a huge increase. The annual result increased by 10% in comparison to the year to March 14. The results were helped by there being one extra business day plus events such as the Cricket World Cup, Volvo Ocean race and the Auckland Arts Festival.
Once again the star performer was the rail network which increased by a massive 33%. At 1.56 million trips in the month we finally surpassed the one month record of October 2011 which was from during the Rugby World Cup (although we got very close in February). Patronage for the last year is now at 13.4 million (up 21%) and at this rate we could see it top 14 million by the end of the financial year in June.
Of course with rail patronage growth accelerating it continues to reinforce our view that we’ll likely hit the CRL patronage targets well in advance of the 2020 date set by the government. At this stage it’s still looking like it could be in 2017 that we cross the 20 million mark. I wonder what the Ministry of Transport will say about it in their next report due August which will use those June numbers.
The other modes aren’t standing still either, bus patronage is also growing strongly. Patronage on the Northern Express is up over 14% and on other buses it is up over 11% compared to March last year. The 12 month figures are up 16.8% and 8.4% respectively. On ferries there was strong growth however the 12 month figure is still below its peak of mid-2012.
Lastly Auckland has now passed the milestone of 50 trips per capita per year (this accounts for population growth each month). That’s a good improvement from where we were a decade ago but well short of other cities. As a comparison Wellington has around 74 trips per capita while Perth has 80-90 per capita and Sydney about 130 per capita. Where do you think we’ll be in 10 years’ time? If the current growth can be continued – and with all the improvements planned then it should be possible – then around 80 trips per capita is not beyond the realms of possibility.
Here’s AT’s press release.
There’s been another big jump in the numbers using public transport in Auckland.
Annual patronage now exceeds 78 million boardings, an increase of 10%. In March there were 8.4 million boardings, a jump of more than 1 million on March 2014.
Auckland Transport chairman, Dr Lester Levy says it’s been a big year with increased services across rail and bus and the gradual replacement of the diesel trains with new electric models.
The big performer was rail which reached 13.4 million passenger trips for the year, an annual increase of 21%. March saw a monthly record high of 1.56 million train trips, an increase of 29% on March last year.
The growth is put down to the enhanced travel experience and additional capacity provided by the new electric trains and greater service frequency introduced over recent years.
Dr Levy says, “We’re moving to speed up the roll-out of the electric trains because we know Aucklanders want the extra capacity and the improved service that they provide.”
Auckland Transport is aiming to have a full electric network by the end of July except for the link between Papakura and Pukekohe which will continue to use diesel trains. These will be refurbished over time to provide an enhanced experience. The electric trains will provide improved travel experience and more capacity on the Southern and Western Lines.
Auckland Mayor Len Brown says the figures are good news for the City Rail Link.
“At this rate, Auckland will meet the Government’s threshold for financial support for the CRL three years early in 2017, three years earlier than predicted. Growth has been accelerating since late 2013.”
March was also a record breaking month on the Northern Express with patronage up almost 17% on the same month last year, the 12 month total reached 2.8 million.
It was also a record for other bus services as patronage rose 8% to 56.6 million. Ferry numbers for the year totalled 5.4 million trips, up 5% on an annual basis.
General Manager AT Metro, Mark Lambert, says growth on bus services is attributed to increased services and frequency, improving travel times from new bus priority lanes and a significant improvement in service punctuality being achieved by bus operators through new timetables. Further service level increases and punctuality improvements are planned for later this year along with the introduction of double decker buses on a number of routes. New network designs will also be introduced from later this year.
Meanwhile, Auckland Transport apologises for recent disruptions on the rail network including track and signal failures (operated by KiwiRail), mechanical breakdowns with the old diesel trains and staffing issues.
Mr Lambert says, “The new timetable from December 2014 introduced a 20% plus increase in services across the constrained Auckland rail network making it difficult to recover when there is an issue. We are working with the rail operator Transdev to speed-up the recovery time when unfortunately inevitable failures occur.”
Processing...
> At 1.56 million trips in the month we finally surpassed the one month record of October 2011 which was from during the Rugby World Cup
Wow, that’s not just beaten the record, but absolutely smashed it. Almost a third of a million trips more than the record.
Yes, I agree. Not just beaten, but obliterated the previous record. Over 300k more trips.
funny how rail patronage is on track to hit the original 16 million by 2016 target that was used in the Project DART business case despite the fact many of these projects have been delayed by several years compared to what was assumed.
Does this suggest at latent demand arising from a lack of transport choice in Auckland?!?
Congratulations to all those involved in achieving this, even with frequent disruptions affecting performance.
I have a feeling that capacity constraints will continue to be something we complain about even as patronage grows.
Do you mean congrats to the suffering pt service users for tolerating new levels of poor service delivery? AT have outdone themselves in terms if broad based incompetence yet again.
Read Greg N’s comment about the “double bathtub curve” that our old diesel trains and new electric trains are currently facing in this earlier blog. I don’t think AT is to blame for that, though communication could be a lot better at times.
http://greaterakl.wpengine.com/2015/04/06/emu-faults-and-crl-properties/
Yes I replied to that. In Auckland there was never a period of ‘flat’ I.e. the bottom if the bathtub has never actually been reached/sustained for any reasonable amount of time.
And as I said at the time simon “flat” for a bathtub curve doesn’t mean zero issues/faults as you infer it to mean, it simply means a steady rate of faults.
The old diesels hit the bottom of their bathtub curve many moons ago, but then patronage was so low no one noticed it so much. And the up curve on the diesels has also come into play many moons ago as the faults started to accumulate. The curve has definitely accelerated upwards in recent times though due to a combination of things, but lack of regular maintenance no doubt one of them.
In a year or so at most the electrics will have hit the bottom of their curve too, and right now we’ve got both old and new bathtub curves in play, hence the double whammy effect.
Right now AT and KR have split forces dealing with two separate rail related “fires”, and they’re only actually equipped to fight one of those at a time.
Best way forward is get the old diesels out as quick as possible and get the electrics in that way you’re only dealing with one set of issues [electrics] and can put all your focus on fixing the issues that come up.
Greg: For some reason I can’t reply to your post directly. It seems like what you are saying is that we could be in the bathtub right now, as it is not about reliability, but consistency of reliability (meaning consistently unreliable too). And since both the electrics and diesels have been consistently unreliable for some time, we could be in the new norm right now. This sounds like serious apologist double speak to me.
My week thus far: Tues AM, 20 mins late to work (trains cancelled), Tues PM, 60 mins late home from work (electric line falling on tracks), Wed AM, 60 mins late to work (trains cancelled), Wed PM, trains delayed (10 mins). Thurs AM- drove in to work.
I think that the stats are good, but they are in spite of AT, not because of. I think that if it wasn’t for the NZ culture of acceptance and resolute apathy, the trains stats would be declining (as they actually should be).
I think that this blog should be demanding more from AT, instead of acting like a collection of sycophants.
I also have another question. Does the train timetable, in conjunction with the purchase of a HOP card act as a legal contract. In my view, AT should start offering full refunds for a services that are not delivered within 10 mins of scheduled times. That might get them moving.
“I think that this blog should be demanding more from AT, instead of acting like a collection of sycophants”
Really? You haven’t read much on this blog have you?
Simon, not apologising for AT or KR, they have bigger balls than anyone so they can take it I’m sure.
The bathtub curve relates to each technology, EMUs are “phasing in” – that is the the faults are still happening, but dropping, once they stabilise for a period of time, then thats the “new normal” – that will be the bottom of the bathtub.
Note: while the bathtub graph shows a gentle slope onto the bathtub floor, in fact that bottom part of the curve may in fact be stepped “downwards” rather than curved at the sides, so you may get “flat period” at fault level A, then changes/fixes are made, and fault level drops to Fault level B (which is lower than A) then stabilises and over time B steps down to C and may in fact bounce along the bottom before it settles down.
And then until you get to a point where fault level is flat/consistent for a long time – you can’t tell if you’re on the curve still, or still on Step A, B or C, only time can tell you that (as its a hindsight thing).
The Diesels have the same in mirror image – but they have been “stepping up” from the bottom for some time, and have now definitely hit the righthand curve upwards.
But again you can’t tell how far up that curve you are or how far you will go, until time has passed.
But having both diesels phasing out rapidly and EMUs phasing in like this brings two completely independent sets of overlapping curves into play, not good and leads to the situation you have now.
The best option is to eliminate one set of curves ASAP, seems to me that the diesels is the known situation/technology that you can **absolutely guarantee** will get worse so that should be the one to go first.
As far your faults, you can’t blame the electrics for faulty overhead wiring falling on the tracks (unless a faulty pantograph on an EMU that caused it to break/fall).
And by the same token a truck could have broken down and got stuck on any one of a dozen level crossings – can’t blame AT for either, (could maybe blame KR (or its subbies) for the wire falling down – as its their overhead electrification project not ATs).
Communication over any all delays is absolutely shit but thats because you have way, way too many layers between the operator of the service(s) and the folks running the infrastrucutre they use, need to cut that right down to a few levels, ideally, 1 level only, and then you have no delays or excuses why everyone doesn’t know whats happening.
Liz: I read this almost everyday. I guess that experience is subjective huh…
Thanks for your measured reply Greg. I guess the issue I have is that yes, the ‘bathtub’ phenomena could be at play, but just because the bathtub phenomenon exists, it does not mean that other factors are not contributing. e.g. the extreme incompetence of AT etc.
I guess that as a PT user I am experiencing whats known as ‘confirmation bias’ because PT providers in AK have such an appalling history of service delivery and my mind tends to connect their history of absolute uselessness to this continuing train debacle. e.g. Snapper card fiasco, hop card fiasco, integrating ticketing issues, GPS timetabling, delayed electrification, delayed roll out of electric, problems with electrics, instability of service, ticketing machines not working in sunlight and so on.
Yes
Its interesting the bias in the commentary. Bus trips increased by over 3 times that of rail but rail was the “big performer”, as a result of what AT has done.
Bias? Emphasis maybe. And rail has increased more in terms of percentage, hasn’t it? And it’s more relevant to many here, ’cause CRL targets.
Compared to March last year, patronage on:-
“. . .the rail network which increased by a massive 33%. .”
“. . .the Northern Express is up over 14% and on other buses it is up over 11%. .”
Or are you simply comparing absolute numbers of journeys (56.6 million for bus vs 13.4 million for rail), which many people know is not a valid comparison for two reasons:
i) journeys by bus are typically much shorter than those by train (7km as against 25Km average in Wellington; not sure about Auckland)
ii) in Auckland, history has resulted in the rail network having far more limited coverage of the city than the bus network, so city-wide patronage numbers cannot be compared. However comparing bus and rail patronage within a corridor served by rail would be more meaningful.
An interesting statistic which shows what rail can do when given a chance, is mode-share over the northern corridor into Wellington (the connection with the rest of the region). Here, rail dominates to the extent that it carries 45% of ALL journey-to-work travel, private-car included! (Source: http://www.gw.govt.nz/assets/Transport/Regional-transport/RLTP-2015/RLTP-2014-Accessible-2.pdf – page 21)
Well they haven’t provided data indicating the marginal bus trips are less distant than the marginal rail trips. As for coverage, it is irrelevant is to what has had a bigger impact. Given the cash ploughed into rail, this is about self justification.
Buses generally have higher operating costs per passenger-km than rail. Each bus-load of about 40 passengers needs its own driver, whereas a train can carry 700+ with a one-person crew *. When Perth was comparing a busway with rail for its northern corridor, the lower operating costs of rail were expected to offset the higher capital cost of rail within 15 years. The link below provides an inside story on the politics behind Perth’s rail revival. Now that the investment in rail has been made in Auckland, rail is well placed to take on this role on high-demand trunk routes.
http://www.curtin.edu.au/research/cusp/local/docs/the_perth-rail-transformation.pdf
* Melbourne and Perth both have had one-person operation of trains up to 6 cars in length for at least the last 20 years. Adelaide has one-person operation of trains up to 3 cars during the daytime, but above this requires a second crew member to cope with curved platforms. At night there is a second crew member for safety perceptions. Auckland requires a 2-person crew but I haven’t seen any justification for it. This is a pity, because it increases operating costs.
We don’t know what marginal trips are doing but across all bus trips the average distance is about 9km while for trains the average distance is 14.5km
Ok thanks, so IF the marginal trips are similar to the trips match the rest of the trips then passenger kms on bus have increased more than rail over the last year.
The NEX intrigues me it is very successful. So why aren’t we rolling these out down Pakuranga Highway, Dominion Rd, and Other like arterial.
Cause a big part of the success of services like NEX is the (at least for a good part) dedicated right of way (Northern Busway). Not that easy to get everywhere – but we’re trying.
Theyre being rolled out as fast as right-wing politicians allow.
So auckland leaves adelaide in its dust while gaining rapidly on the south east queensland urban frankenstein in terms of pt trips per capita. Interesting times we live in.
do you have any stats on that (leaving Adelaide for dust)?
perhaps you’ve heard of this new thing called Google: https://www.sa.gov.au/topics/transport-travel-and-motoring/transport-facts-and-figures/public-transport-journeys
Um that’s very old stats and was during having lines shutdown for 6 months at a time, I was assuming that there some recent data that was compared to
So you did further looking? You will see that Adelaide is not at all like Auckland, and ridership has not grown since then in fact it’s been falling and flat-lining, basically bouncing around, not growing consistently. Auckland too has been rebuilding it’s entire rail network, Adelaide only one line. I think it’s fair to say we’re doing it better in AKL than ADL, or more accurately AKl is growing strongly and is densifying, ADL is struggling [subsidised car manufacturing closing] but also it doesn’t enjoy the geographical constraints Auckland does [Harbours, Ranges, etc].
Adelaide is firmly in the rearview mirror; Auckland is the fifth largest Australasian City, and #5 for Transit use per capita per annum [just over 50]. But this metric rising fast, as Transit use is sooooo far ahead of population growth, at about 0.6 rides per month!
If you find a good chart of recent ADL pax numbers I’m sure we’ed love to see it. Good context for AKL’s recent growth.
Bit tricky to find. But here is a chart from the excellent http://chartingtransport.com/2010/11/13/public-transport-patronage-trends/ site.
A bit annoying being in percentages but it does show AKL’s strong growth, and the fact that CHCH’s bus use was growing even stronger before the tragedy of the quakes, and the weird-lands of SEQ are clearly urbanising too. Adelaide, meh [Also has the cheapest parking of all the Australian metros]:
Auckland must be just about to go off that chart by now at nearly 200% growth since 2001?
wow, my point is that there have been no stats on public transport released in Adelaide since our southern line was electrified and extended, and since the 2 busiest lines went to 15 min daily frequencies and half hourly on weekends and public hols, yet out old stats are being compared to your last month stats. This stat of doing trips per capita is pretty useless if we can not comparing apples with apples. Official Aust Bureau of stats shows that Perth only has slightly higher proportion of people using public transport, yet this PT per capita has Perth way above us, so something is not quite right. The only recent data I have found is from Sept 2014 from ABC news that Adelaide’s rail system carrries about 1 million per month, but no one knows if this is just initial boardings or total boardings because at present you have more chance of getting stats from the North Korean govt compared to the South Australian govt
From what I can find.
Patronage for 2013/14
Bus – 39.957
Tram – 2.288
Train – 8.230
http://www.dpti.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/154270/DPTI_Annual_report_2013-2014_060115.pdf
As you say that doesn’t include patronage since electrification.
Those are initial boardings, not total boardings
AK trips per capita ahead of WN by 2020.. 2019..?
Begs the question, where now might Auckland be if “Robbie’s Rail” had been allowed to proceed in the 1970’s?
Or for that matter, where might Wellington be if the De Leuw Cather recommendations for the southern rail extension had happened at this time?
Both these projects were knocked on the head by politicians who believed (or wanted to contrive) that well-funded public transport was no longer appropriate for New Zealand as the populace had an immutable preference for using only cars. At last they are being proved wrong, although as we know all too well, this erroneous message is still peddled by its adherents and completely pervades the current government.
Retrospectively musing on “What if. . . ” may not always be helpful, but its value can be to learn from the mistakes and the wasted opportunities of the past, in order to avoid making them again in the present and the future. Unfortunately certain people, politicians and vested interests are either very slow to learn, or are actively trying to avoid learing.
Happily it seems that an irresistable tide of pent-up demand for the type of public transport that should have been there all along, will simply sweep away the obstructionists and their conniving schemes.
“Begs the question, where now might Auckland be if “Robbie’s Rail” had been allowed to proceed in the 1970’s?” My guess is recovering from bankruptcy with no paintings left at the art gallery and very few parks. Rail in the 1970’s was a losing proposition with patronage bottoming out in the 1990’s. At one point it probably would have been cheaper to not run the trains and pay anyone on the platform to not travel! Imagine if we had more rail to pay for throughout that period.
I’d expect that if there had been more quality infrastructure that the rail network wouldn’t have been so run down and we’d be 10-15 years ahead of where we are now. Maybe even without the pain of trying to change over the whole fleet at the end of a major upgrade to the infrastructure.
“At this rate, Auckland will meet the Government’s threshold for financial support for the CRL three years early in 2017, three years earlier than predicted. Growth has been accelerating since late 2013.”
a) This is only one of the two criteria so Len is being very misleading.
b) There is still the business case to be undertaken.
Yeah, its a shame having to do things like business cases, when motorway builders don’t need any. #evenhandedplayingfield
Wasn’t the business case done a couple of years back? God how many do they need to do. Pretty sure motorways don’t get this much scrutiny
The only MoT ones carried out gave poor results. The one to come will be joint AT/ dental government.
The MoT don’t do business cases for any project. They did review the original CRL business case though and while they found some errors in it, it was completely biased e.g. they said they shouldn’t be using agglomeration benefits when the same things were being used by the NZTA for the RoNS. Back then of course the EEM was also much more weighted to disadvantage PT projects.
Following that the Council/AT and the MoT worked on the CCFAS which came to the conclusion the CRL was the best option and had a preliminary business case which missed many elements. From that however the MoT have also said they believe the modelling is likely underestimating rail patronage. A change in the modelling could have big impacts on the project. This also ignores that historically PT modelling hasn’t been good and usually way underestimates change – just like what happened with Britomart.
Yes I was referring to the MoT review. The merits of the review are irrelevant though, the point is a business case is required prior to government funding of the CRL, and it hasn’t been completed yet.
A business case has been completed but the government choose to ignore it via a bogus review. Note: I’ve had senior people in the ministry tell me they get told off by ministers for even suggesting the CRL might make sense.
A lack of a business case hasn’t stopped the government on any other project. Many of the RoNS didn’t have them and it seems Puhoi to Warkworth still doesn’t. In the most recent example the government pruinose to upgrade bridges in northland and none of them have had a business case (although two have had a combined one page indicative review). The minister himself has told us he doesn’t think BCRs should be the only criteria for a project
The only political party in Government demanding a(nother) “business case”, and that two other hurdles be crossed before they’ll fund their agreed 50% of the CRL is the Key National Government.
The CBD employment target can’t be reached as there is not enough office space planned/able to be built in time soon enough to meet that target nor was there ever a chance of it being met when it was first set.
All other parties able to be in Government except maybe ACT (and who knows what principles they will stand firm on from day to day, or whether they’ll be in parliament next time round), support CRL without the need for any of these “make work” hurdles.
Those hurdles/requirements will suddenly disappear by 2017 as National vies to keep in power in 2017 – wait and see.
And by then patronage will be at 20m, so the Government can’t then argue there isn’t the patronage “demand” – which was their stated position for 5 years – until recent times (about this time last year in fact).
“A business case has been completed but the government choose to ignore it via a bogus review.” The original business case was virtually cheerleading the project and was heavily criticized.
Look, it is Len bringing up the 2013 government announcement specifics and that includes a business case.
Matthew W.. Show me the “business case” for doing anything other than the CRL, including doing nothing. This is in the CCFAS. Meanwhile, patronage is flying up and the Britomart cul-de-sac will soon hit its limits. The CRL is both absolutely necessary, and at the same time there can be no serious doubt about its likely overwhelming success.
Big wheel, actually that is a major flaw of the CCFAS, it doesn’t consider do nothing. All of the options considered had BCRs less than 1 (yes I know they called them CBCRs, a somewhat strange concept in and of itself). Do nothing’s BCR, or CBCR if you prefer, is by definition 1, so it should have been ranked highest by the study.
Remember, all transport is unpriced or heavily subsidised. To say the CRL is necessary is like saying it is necessary for a baker to increase production because the bread he sells at 10% of cost keeps selling out. There is an alternative!
Yes there is an alternative: An underperforming, uncompetitive, dull and vapid city, clogged with cars and buses, unable to grow, and losing talent to its better connected and more dynamic competitors in the region.
All because some fail to understand the value of investing in long term high value capital works.
Get digging.
No the alternative is congestion free, self funding transportation giving us a step change in land transport efficiency. This would give us a massive advantage against other metropolises in the region.
Do unveil this fantasy. But remember not everyone shares your idea that the worst thing in the world is society getting together to build things, like roads, drains, bridges, and tunnels. It is a system that works very well, though of course not perfectly.
Road pricing, and market pricing of transport in general, is hardly a fantasy. Its been talked about since Adam Smith, has been implemented with success in many areas, and we now have the technology to go the full monty with it. Far from being a fantasy it is fairly well unambiguously supported by the economics profession.
If you use your imagination, you will see what I am talking about is a vastly better system. Implementing or not implementing the CRL would be a complete sideshow in comparison.
I’m all for road pricing. And using the money to build the alternatives for driving. The CRL. I believe this is exactly the Council’s plan.
You want road pricing but no alternative infrastructure, in particular spatially efficient high capacity systems. So all those you price off the road can do what? Rot in a gutter?
ACs motorway charge is fairly useless as it is not set at a rate which will decongest the roads. It is primarily for revenue collection. It also only applies to Motorways.
It is not that you dont build more infrastructure, it is that you can assess projects based on observed demand in terms of market rates and volume on existing infrastructure.
For rail this means waiting until fares start approaching that which would make the CRL (for example) self funding.
Regarding people being priced off the roads and left in the gutter, this would not be the case:
– The capacity of the roads does not decrease with uncongested roads vs congested roads. So you are not actually removing road capacity.
– The road network is currently very inefficiently used I am sure you would agree – lots of relatively low value single occupant vehicles taking up the lions share of the road space. You start replacing single occupant cars with full buses and you can get a huge amount of additional capacity out of the road network. So far from being left in the gutter, there will be a massive increase in transportation capacity. And given the virtuous circle of higher capacity networks, the buses will be a heck of a lot more useful to a heck of a lot more people because of frequency and trip time improvements.
NEX continuing to increase at 14% year on year is amazing for a facility completed in 2009. What is driving the growth of a “mature” transport product ? Normally PT growth peaks after about 6 months of new service being offered, after which further growth is through new urban development and demographic change.
MoT are suggesting a slow-down in growth of rail once patronage adjusts to a full EMU fleet. Are they expecting the “slowed down” rate is 14% as for NEX ?
Services frequencies have increased a lot since 2009 of course, which itself drives growth because of convenient it is – turn up and go.
Only in the peak. Of peak is still over crowded as can be.
Seriously how hard is it to get eight buses an hour all day?!
I don’t think you can call any PT service in Auckland mature. Still a lot of latent demand available and people are increasingly becoming aware of how good the service is (generally). Your question could also be leveled at the likes of the western line which saw a 29% increase despite no changes to peak frequency since about 2008 and which still has half hourly services off peak. Also other buses which haven’t seen changes are up 11%.
Growth seems to be from a couple of small tweaks such as hop. Going to go nuts once new network comes in
PT increases are the only ones able to keep up with Akl’s house prices. House prices are going to crash or flatten, can PT crash or flatten as well?
What’s your logic there? People will still need to go to work, shops etc regardless of what their house is worth.
with an economy based on soaring house prices, if it crashes it’s not going to affect only home owners. The cafe downstairs won’t sell many lattes if the real estate agents lose their jobs. the waiter loses his job. the cafe gets in trouble with bank who is now very cautious with lending (if it’s still operating). the coffee beans supplier doesn’t get paid, the mustachioed coffee bean supplier CEO can’t pay his mortgage in Grey Lynn… no need for CRL mate we are all doomed to stay home jobless drinking awful plunger coffee.
As reflected in the dip in transit use between 2008 and 2012?
there was no crash at the time. I’m talking real full on crash. Also don’t take it too seriously, chinese property investors will need to use PT once the price of their rotten shacks in avondale come down.
Gonna need to order more EMU’s so that they are ready in time for the extra demand and for CRL.
I’m beginning to think that drivers will continue to be more of a constraint than the actual EMU.
I’m sure that more rolling stock would always be helpful, but to truly reach the frequency a lot of people want drivers is probably the risk.
There is a driver shortage due to the driver pool being split between EMUs and diesels. Once the diesels go they will almost all be moved across to EMUs. The other reason for the shortage is that there are a lot of 3 car EMUs being run. A 6 car EMU requires the same crew as a 3 car.
My understanding is that the pool of diesel drivers is now so short of “spares” that they can’t release many of them to become EMU certified hence the slow down in EMU rollout.
But maybe AT need to run 6 car EMUS on all Manukau and Southern Lines using EMUs now to maximise the passengers carried per driver.
That means less EMU drivers may be needed from the EMU driver pool.
The spare EMU drivers can then either drive diesels for a bit to allow Diesel drivers to upskill to EMUs and/or they run 6 car EMUs on the Western Line mixed with diesels.
Seems like CAF can make EMUs quicker than we can (cross train) folks to drive them!
The scheduling nightmare that is drivers, especially during such a large transition mus be horrendous, without even contemplating sick leave associated with winter conditions.
I’m looking forward to reaching the tipping point and some spare capacity being available to progress the rollout of EMU.
Looks like the western could straight to 6-car on the current timetable at least if there aren’t the drivers for 10 min frequencies….?
More units have always been a part of the plan, but they were shifted back during the budget cut that claimed Newton Station.
There are lots of shiny new EMUs sitting in there stabling yard at wiri. Yet most of the services I travel on are old diesels. How likely in Len comment that we will be all electric by July?
How many EMUs are running on the southern line now? It seems like only 1 or 2.
The new ones have to be tested and commissioned which takes a bit of time. They’re comin’ on.
Correct me if I’m wrong here, but I bought a house in Glen Eden, in late 2011 with the belief that electrics would be on line shortly thereafter (perhaps late 2012).
Still, I love your sense of allegiance to the roll out. I’m sure we will get there eventually (I’m guessing 2017 for full operational roll out).
As an aside, it would be interesting to see an analysis of the delays to the electrification of the Auckland network, and correlate that to level of complexity of the task etc. to create a rough estimate of when we can expect the CRL to be 100% functional and completed. Given the relative simplicity of the electric work, I would roughly estimate late early 2030’s….
I’ll take your bet. I reckon we will be all electric this year (save Puke), but still with teething issues being sorted. And the CRL not long after 2020. Running sweetly. No Party will go into next election without a real CRL pledge, except the loony tunes of ACT.
Pint at Galbriaths?
Sure [but I don’t drink beer]
I’m not sure you could call electrification relatively simple. It’s a pretty big task both physically (as there are work sites spread across 90km of network) and from a design/engineering view. I would expect the CRL’s challenges will be more around the civil works than integration into the network.
With the mining boom in Aus falling apart surely we could try and entice some kiwi LE’s to come home and drive.