Tag: metro rail

10-26% Rail Utilisation?

·

Ummm – Bit Short Are We Not

 

After returning from the Papakura Unitary Plan feedback session this morning which was highly informative as I went one on two with Council Officers. I even learnt that Browns Bay on the North Shore who think they are in for 6-8 storey buildings are only in for four storey buildings looking at The Clunker in-depth. However, more on The Clunker later.

 

After my dialogue on The Unitary plan I had a discussion with Angela Dalton of Manurewa Local Board and two Papakura Local Board members (who I will look up their names shortly). The discussion came to the Glenora Road Rail Station at Addison, Takanini; 5-minutes from where I live. I was told that Auckland Transport are not doing Glenora Road Station AT ALL because of the $35 million cost for the station. $6 million for platforms, shelters, park and ride, kiss and ride and bus interchange (so a fully fledged station minus people manning it); $29 million for the grade-separation at Walters Road 50 metres south. AT forecasts the patronage figures at 952 daily using Glenora Road which I called Bollocks on straight away as a justification in not building the station.

I will also write a separate post on the Glenora Road situation and call AT on this as I know that station will attract at minimum five times that amount (952) as a conservative figure as the area grows (regardless of Takanini closing down or not).

 

But the 952 gives light to a mega-embarrassing situation that has not been aired yet on the Auckland laundry line. That is our honestly shameful rail utilisation figures which on average over 363 days a year (there are no passenger trains on Good Friday and Christmas Day) stands at 27,000 a day or 20.5% of potential patronage if we ran every train on average 67% full day in day out (see explanation at bottom of post). 

Let me run the numbers with you:

 

The Numbers using 325 services a day (average) per Auckland Transport

 

On existing services (there are 325 a day average according to the Fare Evasion Modelling) AT expects around 30,000 passengers a day. That means 92 passengers a service and our current diesel fleet holds anywhere between 350 to 750 depending on the train class (safe loading – not crush loadings). So 92 passengers means the train is anywhere between 12% full to 26% full AS AN AVERAGE as I know some trains are packed out.

Using 10 million as the rolling annual target we are at 27,000 passengers a day which gives an actual utilisation AVERAGE (weekends are in here) of 10-23% and we need around 40,000,000 rail passenger trips annually using the existing diesel fleet if the utilisation was at 67% (rather than 100% – see explanation below)

 

If we take the averages across the fleet (which with out diesels it does not make this easy as we have a heterogeneous fleet currently) then followed by the new EMU fleet all running at the maximum 6-car – top and tail config (two EMU-3s put together) this happens:

If the average diesel train holds 507 passengers average and 67% puts it at 339 passengers required, multiply that out by 325 services means you need Monday to Thursday 110,099 passengers a day to get ANY WHERE near turn over rates mentioned above. And yes I know the ADL-2 and ADK-4 can not hold 507 passengers – but this is averages here made out from the SA/SD 6 car sets holding 750 passengers. 

 

Let me try this for the EMU as EMU-6 car sets which hold 750 passengers

67% means 502 passengers and across the existing 325 services means you need: 163,150 passengers DAILY to make this viable, while AT is playing around with 30,000 a day or 92 passengers per train service. This means for an EMU-6-car running at an average of 12% full.

10-26% utilisation rate?

As a grand total figure we need with the EMU’s all running on just the existing provisions moving about 60 million rail passenger trips a year (this is at the 67% average utilisation rate) (so 6 time more than now) and we have not even stepped up the services yet to well over 400/day Monday to Friday at the minimum as planned.

 
This is mega embarrassing folks to have our existing rail utilisation at any where between 10-26% (92 passengers average for every single service – and depending on train type) per service which means Auckland is at no more than 18% of rail utilisation compared to its minimum viable capacity which stands at 67% of total maximum capacity – if we were carrying the 30,000 AT is modelling for at the moment. However remember as I mentioned above only 27,000 approximate people on average use the trains a day (10 million divided by 363 days)  which means knock another 2% off the utilisation rates.

 

I did say mega embarrassing now didn’t I? To be honest as an Aucklander I would be deeply embarrassed at the situation before us right now with our heavy rail. We have seen growth to above 10 million only for it to slip back below that milestone in February this year. But we seem to be stuck in a rut in getting the figures where it should be. AT forecasted the annual rail passenger trips near the 12,500,000 mark which means around 34,500 a day or a utilisation rate of around 23%, but that has slipped to 10.5 million so the figures fall back to around 30,000 a day.

We have a long way to go folks to get near 60 million annual rail passenger trips (might as well use EMU figures now with them coming on-stream soon) (60 million at 67% average utilisation across ALL 325 existing services) – which means the theoretical capacity stands at 90 million.

 

Still 9,996,066 annual rail passenger tips for the existing diesels and we need 40,000,000 for it to be viable, 60,000,000 when the EMU’s are all on stream. Remember this total average utilisation figure rises if you run more services. For example say the CRL is complete and all EMUs are running as 6-car sets holding a maximum capacity of 750 passengers and we go to 410 services average a day, 363 days a year. That means at 67% utilisation across  the services one would need 74,500,000 annual trips approximate for the entire operation to be viable. The Auckland Plan calls for by 2041, 140 million trips to be made a year by public transport – all modes…

 

Note: my figures are expressed as a percentage of 67% average utilisation or carrying numbers (which is 67% of the total maximum capacity) – not the actual total maximum capacity numbers (which would be 100% utilisation or carrying numbers). 67% was derived from the theoretical minimum all services would have to carry as an average for the Auckland Metro Rail system to be viable, and takes into account the system will be: 

  1. never at 100% utilisation across all services

  2. balances out across the services where are individual services are at 95-105% utilisation and others are around the 10% currently and also projected. It basically allows for a generous spread and average from varying patronage numbers per individual service.

 

So with this very embarrassing situation that makes me deeply embarrassed as an Aucklander to be confronted by this

 

The situation also reinforces my released Statement on Auckland’s Transport this morning which you can read below in the Scribd embed

 

I await Auckland Transport’s reply

 

The Issue with Auckland Rail

· 1 Comment ·

Advancing a Good System to a First Class System

 

Note: It has been brought to my attention that BR:AKL focuses heavy on rail in public transport commentary. That would be true having worked in the industry (passenger metro rail). However the lines are “open” for a bus “person” to contribute to the blog, contact me at view.of.auckland@gmail.com

 

After watching some proverbial spankings being handed out (mainly one way) after WO’s Rail Patronage post, I sifted through the comments and plucked out a common trend that came from the comments. Now I conveyed these comments to an academic and he told me we do (which I know) have an anomaly in our public transport system that gives rise to the common trend. Now how this ties in with Good System and First Class System is a good question. The answer is it “does” because while we have a “good” basic passenger metro rail system in position, this anomaly which is caused by ideology (and nothing else) causes people to lose confidence in the rail system – thus further investment into turning a good system into a first class system.

Now with Auckland Council and Auckland Transport releasing the notification for the City Rail Link; this is where confidence building in the existing good system needs to happen if we wish to advance to a first class system.

 

So where is this confidence loss happening with our Good System (and also the reason why someone got a proverbial spanking that night). Well I summed up that loss with the current situation:

In short thanks to a recent ticketing change this is the situation if you want to take your family to say Santa Parade

2 Adults, 3 kids from Papakura to Britomart and back again

Cost by rail (if you did not get the inaccessible Family Pass before you travel): $53.30

Cost by car (including gas, parking and everything else) around $25 (parking sucked up most of that cost)

https://voakl.net/2012/11/23/ge…

So those here arguing on cost grounds – yep can understand your reasoning.

And for an example I have a meeting in Henderson today. So from Papakura to Henderson these are my costs:

Rail: Time to Henderson (and taking into account a transfer at Newmarket): Departs Papakura at 11:25am, arrives at Henderson (after transfer at Newmarket) at 1:07pm (I have to wait at Newmarket for the transfer is 23 mins) – so total travel time is 1:44 hours. Cost one way is $12.40 + $1 in gas as I would drive the Papakura Station park and ride.

To do this back to Papakura: Cost is the same so $12.40 + $1. As for travel time: Leaves Henderson at 3:45pm and will arrive in Papakura at 5:14pm (this includes a 9 minute wait at Newmarket while transferring trains) – so total travel time of 1:31 hours

Total cost for rail is $26.80. Travel time total: Varies each way but total time is 3:15hours

Car: Using State Highway 20 – 80km there and back. Parking: Free. Fuel at 14km/l =5.71l. 5.71/l at $1.959/l for 91 = $13 (take into account some low-speed and idling). Travel Time: 42 minutes each way. Maintenance and other car costs (WoF, Rego) $2.

Total for car is $15 (for all travel) at a travel time of 42mins one way (1:26 total)

So on crude terms it costs and takes me double to go by train to where I need get to (and out of luck I live near a station and my place of meeting is AT HQ right on Henderson station) compared to by car. So yeah I can see major issues here folks

 

Double time by train, around 1.75x the cost; and this I have not even included the time to drive to and from the Papakura Station Park and Ride and waiting time I might face at both Papakura and Henderson stations for the train.

And this was the trend that kept coming up and up again constantly (there were others but one step at a time) when the mention of rail patronage slippage happened. Usually it would be the other way around with a well-greased mass-transit system in time and cost however, ideology which has set the current policy leading to the current situation we have here in Auckland is currently in the way and not doing confidence building any favours right now.

 

Now in fairness to the rail system as a stand-alone (the infrastructure and operations currently in place (not I did not say fares or customer service) is basic but good. It has for the most part since 2003 when Britomart opened and with the current Project DART work happening carried out its basic purpose and function despite all sorts of problems. This is apparent with the back to back patronage growth month upon month, year upon year until the July 2012 peak to which afterwards we have now started seeing this prolonged slip. The current system is good because it has the three basic foundation backbones (The Southern, Eastern and Western Lines) with two spur lines (Onehunga and Manukau Lines) that allow for straight forward investment and expansion of the network into new areas of Auckland (The City Rail Link, The Airport Line, The North Shore Line, The Botany Line and The South West Line) without much difficulty (as you would get starting an entirely new system from scratch).

 

So we have a good system, and it can and will be a first class system. That will require investment as we know and are seeing coming through the pipeline and as I have noted which on the infrastructure side will bring our good basic system into a First Class Comprehensive System.

However “The Issue With Rail” still is apparent and is knocking confidence around with the current good system and getting investment for the First Class System.

 

Now that issue I mentioned above can basically be only dealt with by Central Government changing its mindset and ideological hell-bent. Once that bent is removed then confidence (through P/T being actually cheaper and relatively more easy to move around than the car) can be restored along with enabling our good system to become First Class System

 

For more on BR:AKL and the push for a fully integrated and comprehensive transport system that includes private and public transport – search this blog or ask me a question in the comments below.