Thursday, May 11, 2006

Brisbane Underground

Seeking distraction from the drudgery of work, today I googled some webpages detailing Brisbane's new transport infrastructure plans. It sounds fantastic, with the North South Bypass Tunnel, the Hale Street bridge, the Airport Link highway, the Gateway parallel bridge, and the possibility of more tunnels and bridges as part of the TransApex project.

My curiosity also led me to google plans for an underground railway in Brisbane. I learnt one independent group has already prepared a proposal document. The proposed route map is here. The proposal document cites London's Central Line and Dockland Light Railways (DLR) among examples of several options for the different system to be considered. The less said about the DLR, the better. Basically, it's an ugly light railway system augmented with some new tunnels and viaducts. But like all light railways it reeks of compromise. The Central Line, a deep-level tube line more than 100 years old, is fantastic, and perhaps my favourite on the Underground. Its east-west axis cuts across London in next to no time, and its 1992 rollingstock is fresh and modern.

The proposal makes mention of the Central Line's large windows, and their appropriateness for a Brisbane system, begging the question of why you would need windows on an underground railway? I learned the answer at London's Transport Museum last year. When the London Underground first opened, the carriages only had tiny windows at the top of the carriages, making for a very claustrophic experience. It wasn't long before new carriages had windows, and the feeling of claustropbia was greatly reduced. And nowadays (as might happen in Brisbane according to one scenario), the tube carriage windows are used for their traditional purpose, as only about 40% of the Underground is actually under ground!

Whatever subway is chosen in Brisbane, we can be sure that it won't be as susceptible to failure as the UK's rail network. I don't know whether the infrastructure is just old, or the rail companies staffed with whingers, but it's a well-known fact that trains stop running in London for the most absurd reasons. In autumn, it's "leaves on the tracks" (apparently tree leaves get wet, and turn into a slippery mush). In winter, it's "snow on the tracks". And in spring and summer, the tracks warm up, and bend, and the trains can't run, causing the mass panic we saw last week when the system shut down. And yet, everyone knows that in other countries there are leaves, and snow, and hot weather, but this problem remains peculiar to England...

2 comments:

David Nixon said...

I too think an underground for Brisbane (as opposed to light rail) seems a good idea, but I am more excited about how an underground could change Brisbane as a city. Here is my 2 cents worth:
http://www.nixon.com.au/aussietruth/brismetro.htm

By the way, I think the triangle of lines in this proposal is a bit over the top.

Nix said...

Thanks for the comment and the link to your proposal.

Actually, I like your proposal a lot. It would be cheaper than the multi-line solution proposed by UDAL, and thus more likely to see the light of day. The other thing I like is that it provides many river crossings. The limited number of bridges (rail/road/bus) is what severely limits travel within Brisbane, I think.

For example, it shouldn't take as long as it does to get from the centre of New Farm to Oxford Street, Bulimba. Your metro route offers - among other things - a good alternative on this route to the roads and ferries.