It seems Auckland Transport is slowing getting better with simple advertising. First we saw the nice, simple and effective Bus Lane poster. Now it’s the rail network and City Rail Link’s turn. On AT’s Facebook Page for the CRL this image has appeared highlighting the capacity of our new trains.
I think AT are on the right track with this by highlighting the capacity however a couple of quick thoughts it would be good for them to consider.
- Why not just talk about 375 people per EMU being moved free of congestion.
- Using the car comparison a car occupancy rate of 1.3 seems a little high, a rate of 1.2 is probably more realistic and would mean ~312 cars off the road.
- There’s no mention that at peak times many (not all) trains will consist of two EMUs. Based on ATs figures that means 576 cars off the road.
- Why not highlight what that means at peak times. We know that if AT run the network to the full capacity they plan which is a train every 10 minutes on the Eastern, Southern and Western line plus half hourly on the Onehunga line that would equate to 20 trains per hour at Britomart. Most of those at the height of the peak will be 6-car trains. Based on ATs figures that works out to around 10k-15k vehicles of the roads over the 2-hour morning peak.
- Taking the line of thinking above further, the CRL is said to allow for up to 24 trains per hour per direction or a total of 48 trains an hour. Assuming by then all trains would be 6-cars in length that’s a total capacity of almost 28,000 people who could be moved free of congestion and with much better frequency than we have today.
Overall a good effort from AT though it also opens up a lot of opportunity for expansion.
Processing...
Yeah, good idea to translate that into meters of motorway at peak time
How many cars are actually on the road at that time?
And to be honest, I prefer the Vancouver ad. Simpler and more meaningful.
15 thousand cars over two hours is a bit more than the capacity of the harbour bridge in the peak direction.
But Matt, I think you’re figures are a bit light. If the CRL can move 48 trains an hour, and each one can hold 750 people (in relative comfort), then you get 36,000 people an hour (to any one point), or 72,000 people across the two hour peak.
So the rail network with the CRL could move the equivalent of 18 motorway lanes. Given the Northern Motorway has up to 5 lanes inbound, the Northwestern 4 and the Southern 4 (at the peak pinch points) then the CRL could easily move more people than the three radial motorways put together.
Of course that assumes more trains, better signalling and the means to get enough people to train stations so you can fill those trains up, but the potential of the infrastructure is there.
The figure I used was the number of cars according to AT’s figures
The statement on the poster is factually incorrect.
Do you have some kind of word limit or something? If you have something to say why not actually say it? What is your perfect math then? Are all rail fans so obtuse?
If a full train had taken out 288 cars it would have been on the news!
If you are talking to me Patrick I respect politeness not nastiness. There is a possibility that not one passenger on a current electric train is a refugee from a car.
If I were on board my car is still in the garage since I don’t drive to work.
I would have thought that someone of your intelligence would have the the glaring error.
Isn’t that the whole message, your car is at home and you’re in the train…..
That is not an error. The figure is clearly a potential number. And given in Auckland we have rapidly rising numbers of train riders as well as lifts in bus and bike use this type of communication is arguably more likely to be true in practise here than the many other cities that also use these comparisons. Everyone on a train is potentially a user of another mode, and visa versa.
Look up the difference between accuracy and precision. The poster has a precise number; clearly this can’t be literally accurate. It is a symbolic description of the value of improvement in the rail network to road users.
And your comment was still so clipped as to be meaningless.
I don’t think that’s quite fair. Imagine if motorway capacity was expressed assuming all cars had all seats filled — this blog would (quite rightly) call it as nonsense. Similarly, assuming all train passengers would drive (especially since many people who can’t drive use PT) isn’t a fair comparison either….
However, I take the point that many would — and thus it still represents many cars off the road, benefiting everyone.
Alan – I’m only talking about AT’s figures. As for whether all capacity will be used, who knows but certainly at peak times recently before the electrics started we’ve seen many trains at or over the expected capacity so it’s certainly possible.
Umm I think it might be advertising rather than a factual statement. Kind of like “finger lickin good” when they really mean “how do I get this greasy muck off my fingers”
Obviously all of the people on the train would have just stayed home if the train stop running. /sarc
Exactly… the figures are actually more than lenient, don’t think they are counting standees and the fact that most peak trains will be 6-car. If the trains were not there most would be driving, or potentially getting dropped off by someone who wouldn’t otherwise be on the road at that time, or even taking a bus which would require a ton more buses across the network due to capacity constraints which would potentially cause chaos in the cbd at peak.
I think you’re actually not too far off. They wouldn’t stay at home, but without that train, probably about 300 people would have to find a job somewhere else than in the CBD.
And drive to it.
I agree. This is the type of advertising they need to start doing. I was living in Perth when the northern suburbs line was opened and all the lines were electrified (1991-1992). The northern suburbs line ran right up the middle of the freeway. I remember a tv commercial they ran which had this guy laughing and pointing at all the cars he was passing on the train. All the cars were stuck in the morning peak.
It brought home to people like me that the train was so much faster than the cars.
A similar tv commercial here in Auckland once the full electrification of the lines is completed would drive home the message that the train is indeed mightier than the car (at least in the peak hour). The southern line runs right along the southern motorway. Time to really slam home the point.
“the train was so much faster than the cars” – True when in motion, but the real test is point-to-point journey times.
Walk/cycle/bus/drive to the train station, wait, use train (hope it’s on time), walk/bus at destination end… you know the drill.
Convenience, comfort and cost. The trifecta is needed.
Quite true. The other convenience of the train is that you don’t need to pay $20 or whatever to park it in a city carpark during the day. It is also less stressful than having to deal with idiot Auckland drivers in the morning peak. Much better reading the newspaper or facebooking or whatever on the phone.
Yeah I noticed AT’s plans in the RRTP for frequencies of 10 minutes throughout the day and 15 minutes in the evening Mon-Fri for West/East/South. But no mention of operating hours? Will these be similar to the NEX with services to 12am Sun-Thurs and to 3am Fri-Sat?
Theres also some errors in the RRTP… Post-CRL why is Western frequency strictly 15 on Saturday and then 10/15 on Sunday, other lines have 10/15 both Weekend-days and isn’t Saturday a bit busier?. Also how is 5 min frequency at peak post-CRL on the Onehunga line possible? are they going to double track it somehow? Seems to be an error since its all 30 min the rest of the day.
We’ve mentioned the issue with the Onehunga figure to AT separately. Seems like it should be 15 not 5
Is there any possibility to use the siding west of Te Papapa as a passing loop to increase Onehunga capacity?
That’s what I’ve always wondered, why is double tracking always a requirement where sidings can be used as substitutes in same cases. Especially Onehunga where double tracking isn’t that easy.
No reason at all why it can’t be done. Just the will to do it.
It would of course be better if the crossing was at Te Papapa station itself, but this is not a show-stopper.
Mention is often made about the risk to reliability of scheduled loop-crossings, but Wellington’s Johnsonville Line which has 3 of them shows that it can be done and generally works well. And arguably the Onehunga Line as it currently is (i.e. without a functioning crossing-loop), is a greater risk to reliability than if it had one, although provision of such a loop would enable greater frequency of service and this might then have implications on reliability. But hey – the trade-off would be a better service.
For the cost of something similar to the Grafton station rebuild a new two track grade separate Te Papapa station could be built at the intersection with Capt. Springs Rd and Church to similar design. Taking out two of the busiest level crossings in Ak, massively improving capacity by providing a passing loop station, and moving Te Papapa to the boundary of the industrial and residential areas (better catchment). Timed for Post CRL as Britomart still the limiting factor anyway.
Bit of cost in approaches of course but note track on embankment to the south, chance to link up severed park there too by lowering track, cutting required back to Penrose. Site not nearly as constrained as Grafton, however
I like it, Patrick. Would solve several issues in one project. The cost of a few metres of motorway!
I understand what you’re saying about the car occupancy rates — maybe if train passengers don’t catch PT, they’re more likely to catch a ride with someone else/not go at all than to drive themselves? This would explain the fewer cars off the road, and would make sense as many people who don’t have access to a car rely on PT.
Edit: Initially the comments above didn’t appear for me, seems as though this issue has been covered. Never mind….
The trouble with this simple advertising is that it doesn’t actually promote the idea that YOU would be HAPPIER leaving YOUR car behind.
There’s no incentive in this ad, there’s no benefit in being one of the 1.3 people on the poster – in fact, this poster could also be viewed as an incentive to stay in your car: If you endure the horrific traffic long enough from the luxury of your private vehicle, the other idiots will eventually get off the road and into trains so you won’t be stuck in traffic anymore! Huzzah!
Because there’s no incentive, no reasonable, attractive alternative, it’s just a meaningless stat. It’s just another thing we ‘should’ do — it’s a tad patronizing, it relies on guilt, or worse, on inducing a sense infuriating, gloating, do-goodery (when observed). Human beings just aren’t wired that way. Nobody’s going to do it just to be one of the many.
What about a campaign that shows the train ride enjoyable, or shows you what you could be doing instead of breathing fumes and staring at bumpers for a couple of hours a day? What if AT focused on their user-experience until it was something that they could be proud of, shown as a realistic, comfortable and efficient alternative to being in your car?
Of course in SF, there’s a private company doing just this… that is, offering a true alternative that works for people… but I realise that’s not the answer to mass-transit. Still, there needs to be some middle ground…
Think of all the things you could be reading or researching or listening to on the train! A list of fantastic podcasts would be a good start, or movies (there are heaps of American web series that are only a few minutes long, precisely for commuters); an ad for a great coffee and a delicious treat to that you can get at the train station is probably better, or at least as good as, bare-bones stats spitting for actually getting people encouraged to change their behavior.
I think that AT and other providers need to start seeing what they do as deliverance from the mundane experiences of traffic, damaging health effects of sitting for an extra couple of hours. What would you use your train journey for?
Price, good service, faster, being green, socializing, enjoying some games or other activities on your smart-device, better health (lack of sitting on a smelly fumed-up motorway) vs car should be characteristics AT should be gunning to implement where missing and then advertising toward those.
It depends on who the advert is aimed at. If aimed at the individual car driver, I agree with you. It does nothing to influence a driver’s marginal choice of car vs PT for a particular journey.
However, at the society level it hits the spot. It makes the case for investment in railway infrastructure and PT generally. It implies ecological benefits. In general, it’s designed to help ratepayers see that their rates are being spent for the benefit of all of us, regardless of your personal choice of mode.
Good to see AT taking a more proactive stance to promoting PT. It really does show however how far Auckland has to go in terms of numbers of people using train compared to most cities. Out of a total population of 1.5m we could get 28,000 people (ok per hour) but that represents just 1.87%. So even if you multiplied that by 6 that number (3 hours morning, 3 hours evening) you get 11.2% (throw in another 2 percent for other services) and you are looking at 13.2%. I guess with a North Shore Line and an Airport Line that would provide a decent boost but you are still looking at less than 20% of trips made by train.
Just putting it out there as to how to potentially boost that in future?
I would imagine adding a 7th car to 6 car EMUs would provide approx a 20% boost to capacity (provided platforms worked for this). There would have to be a big improvement to things like dwell times and have services running closer together also.
The Avondale to Southdown Line would also provide network boost and allow for increased services by taking pressure off the central section of the network.
Sure buses and ferries have their place in the overall scheme of things (along with walking/cycling), but for a liveable city we need more trains and more people on them.
Hey Bruce, couple of things to consider:
The figure on train capacity is one way per hour to one point. You can double that to get a two hour peak period for a start. But of course people can also use it to travel in the counterpeak direction (say morning side to Henderson), or the can use it to get between intermediate points (say Papakura to Morningside).
The other thing is that not every man woman and child makes a long distance trip every peak time. I don’t know the figure but my guess is only 20% at best of the population travels at peak times beyond their local area.
As I mentioned above the rail network currently moves more people than the harbour bridge at peak, and with the CRL it could do the same as the northern, northwestern and southern put together.