What do you think about presenting the presentation on Friday?
Do you guys have any ideas?
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Confused
I am reserching the public transport issues. Do you think I need to write down all the main points of the articles we were given?
Our Progress
Today, me Mathew and Daniel at Period 2 started to work on the Audio for our presentation. We started to think about ideas on where the music should be placed in the presentation. The problem with Window Movie Maker was that it does not accept long music that we were planned to put at the start on our presentation, which i felt really frustrated about it. Our work is going fine, we've got enough amount of music to be putted on, yet we still need some more information and time to finish the work off. As always, our frequent problem was, the computer froze during our work, which made us have to log off the computer and log back in, and that wasted a bit of time of ours. I hope that everything will be going according to plan, and hopefully we'll provide an excellent presentation to the class.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Progress
I came to the group a bit late, so i missed some of the stuff they had done. Although i came late, i still had many things to do. I am having fun working with Andy and Daniel. We are working on our presentation, which is on the Windows Movie Maker. We had a few discussions and they all worked fine.
Hope you are having fun reading our blog.
Hope you are having fun reading our blog.
Window Movie Maker
On Monday, I attended a toolbox session which was very essential for our project, its called Window Movie maker. It was a very fun program and me Daniel and Mathew made the Title and the Sequence for our presentation which is about Public Transport Issues. We came up with variety of ideas, such as the video effects and video transitions, importing pictures and put them into the storyboard and etc. I also learnt a new skill on how to use the Window Movie Maker. Further details are shown below.
Outrage of the Government
Buses emits about 80 grams of of carbon dioxide per passenger per kilometre
Older trains emits about 60 grams of carbon dioxide, while the newer trains emits less than the trams per passenger per kilometre
The trams emits about 12 grams of carbon dioxide per passenger per kilometre
The cars emits about 200 grams of carbon dioxide per passenger per kilometre
AND THE GOVERNMENT CLAIMS TO BE CONCERNED BY THE GREENHOUSE GAS EFFECTS
Older trains emits about 60 grams of carbon dioxide, while the newer trains emits less than the trams per passenger per kilometre
The trams emits about 12 grams of carbon dioxide per passenger per kilometre
The cars emits about 200 grams of carbon dioxide per passenger per kilometre
This shows public transports are still better than private vehicles
According to the newspaper article, the government is paying more to the most gas emitting public transport than the lesser gas emitting public transport.
Bus operator gets payed $4.19 per passenger per kilometre
Train operator gets payed $2.57 per passenger per kilometre
While Tram gets payed only 98c per passenger per kilometre
AND THE GOVERNMENT CLAIMS TO BE CONCERNED BY THE GREENHOUSE GAS EFFECTS
Blog II - 21/2
Apologies for not getting another blog in sooner. You must understand that the internet has been shocking for us.
Today, our progress was compensated by one of our group members participating in the artist-in-residence program. Fortunately however, we did manage to finish the titles sequence for our presentation by applying amateur video effects and so on (we're new to MovieMaker).
We also recieved some new transport figures regarding greenhouse gases, charges, fees etc. Look out for an article on that subject tomorrow.
Otherwise, we'll pull the plug on this short blog.
Thanks for your time,
Rilcon
Today, our progress was compensated by one of our group members participating in the artist-in-residence program. Fortunately however, we did manage to finish the titles sequence for our presentation by applying amateur video effects and so on (we're new to MovieMaker).
We also recieved some new transport figures regarding greenhouse gases, charges, fees etc. Look out for an article on that subject tomorrow.
Otherwise, we'll pull the plug on this short blog.
Thanks for your time,
Rilcon
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Public Transport Analysis
Melbourne was until recently the most liveable city in the world. However, in 2005 Melbourne lost the title to Vancouver on the account of one thing: public transport. These days, with the exception of the tram network, the system has fallen into disarray and in particular, the train network.
This can largely be credited to the whole public transport network being privatised by the Kennett government in 1999 during its final months. ‘It introduced complexity, confusion and unnecessary expense to the system,’ quoted The Age (February 2, 2007). What happened was that the tram, train and bus networks became managed separately by private consortiums contracted by the State Government.
While Yarra Trams has done a commendable job with the tram network, bringing in new disabled-friendly C-Class Trams, restoring the historic W-Class trams and extending lines (most notably, the Box Hill and Vermont South extensions), Connex and Met Trains made the train network impractical for themselves thanks largely to the introduction of the city loop in 1964.
The loop was originally built on the advice of the Metropolitan Town Planning Commission with its Melbourne Transportation Plan of 1969. They predicted that rail journeys would hit 370 million per year in 1964 and that train numbers would increase to 181 an hour and that a city loop would need to be builded to cope with the extra numbers.
However, the effect of the car changed all that. Because of the growth of car usage, the State Government spent more money building roads to cope with the traffic and less on public transport to discourage car usage and make public transport a more viable and efficient transport method.
The impact of the car resulted in decreasing patronage figures for the rail network. In 1950, patronage figures peaked at 201 million rail journeys per year. By 1964, the total was 170 million and rail journeys fell from 116 an hour to 108 an hour. Since then, even at peak hour, only 90 trains per hour pass through Flinders Street Station.
But how did the construction of the city loop affect all this?
Put it this way, the city loop was built, but it wasn’t needed. The most efficient method before the loop was opened was using Flinders Street Station as a through station because trains wouldn’t need to be reversed. The loop was originally meant to add to capacity, but that’s not what it was used for when Met Trains and Connex took over the rail network. It had the opposite effect: it reduced capacity.
The Kennett government split the network between two companies, each with its own designated section of rails to run. There are no through-routed trains at Flinders Street these days because trains when the reach the city loop, they find themselves at the edge of their ‘territory’. Trains only use the city loop to make a circle round the city and head back in the direction they came. This adds time to the return journey because of the extra time spent in the loop.
Confused? Well that’s the point because that’s what happened. Even when Connex took over the whole network, nothing changed and the city loop is still used for the exact opposite purpose that it was designed for.
The other major factor in decreasing rail patronage figures is because the State Government overlooked Connex’s previous history. What history says is that Connex lost their contract to run trains in Southern England ages ago.
It’s pretty obvious why they lost their contract and the answer can be found in the newspapers. Currently, they use a train control system that is so out of date compared to its interstate counterparts that they have to find spare parts at swap meetings. Also, they have braking problems with their ‘brand new’ Siemens train fleet, and they use a rail network which has been largely unchanged for 150 years which is so dangerous that drivers not only ignore the ‘safe’ speed limits, but also the recommended speed limits on their daily bulletins and go even slower.
But what has the Bracks government done about our rail network?
The answer is nothing. Instead of putting money where it matters on the rail, they have been busy supposedly improving our bus networks. However, how can they be improving our bus network when buses are regularly running up to 20 minutes late and how can they be improving our network when there aren’t enough regular services especially after dark?
The Bracks government doesn’t care about our public transport. Why else would they have chosen Connex as one of the companies to run the rail network when they have a proven poor track record?
Another problem with the public transport system is that it isn’t extensive enough. 30 years ago this wouldn’t have been a problem but since then, urban development has expanded so far out of Melbourne that towns formally considered to be not part of Melbourne are now part of Greater Melbourne. These include for instance Frankston and Healesville. Tullamarine Airport is another classic example. When the airport opened, there were no houses around it for miles and nowadays, hundreds of houses surround the place.
The impact on that is that public transport can’t cover the expanded area. Even before then, certain areas of Melbourne weren’t served and still aren’t served by train or tram.
Although the train network runs out into the western suburbs, they don’t serve it as extensively as the eastern suburbs. There should be a train line out to Melbourne Airport, yet there isn’t and for years, people have insisted that there should be a line out to at least East Doncaster, yet the Bracks government is too conservative and too afraid to do anything about it. They would rather rebuild stations rather than lines (eg. Southern Cross Station) and focus on improving our road network with such projects as the Scoresby Freeway (and cash in on it by charging tolls). Recently, a cross-city rail tunnel proposal was drawn up by the State Government but, chances are that the tunnel won’t make it past the drawing board because the government is so conservative: our local area isn’t served well by public transport.
The tram network isn’t as extensive either, despite recent extensions on lines to Box Hill and Vermont South, Melbourne isn’t served at all in the north-eastern and western suburbs. Again, the government has talked about extending Route 48 out to Doncaster Shopping Centre, but nothing serious has been done.
However, the tram network shouldn’t be expected to cover Melbourne so much as this can be done by the train network after all. It’s more an icon for tourists as it is a public transport service in the strict sense and trams do have their uses. The reason is simple: motorists always complain about how trams clog up the road and cause traffic jams, but that’s the point. It discourages people taking their cars to work and instead, what it does is encourage people to take the tram to work which is efficient and reliable.
And then there are W-Class trams. They are an icon in Melbourne and just marvellous and quite frankly, one of our main tourist attractions. But since then they have been superseded by younger models. Thankfully, since then, Yarra Trams have restored them to their former glory and they happily tackle the free city-circle route every day now.
The final problem with Melbourne’s public transport system is the fares charged. The thing is that Melbourne uses the unfair zone system in which people in Zone 2 would have to pay more for public transport than those in Zone 1. Until the 2006 election, Melbourne used a ridiculous 3-zone system, but since then, both parties during the election agreed to abolish zone 3 and adopt a 2-zone system. But that system is still unfair. Why should people in Zone 2 have to pay more for public transport than those in Zone 1?
In conclusion, tickets are just too expensive in Melbourne and complicated (a 2-hour Zone 1 fare costs $1.90). That is why too many people don’t use public transport. Tokyo and Paris for instance are cities in which people rely on public transport and the reason is because it’s cheap: you only pay about $1 for a daily pass that covers the whole network. What Melbourne should have is a no-zone public transport system in which you only pay $1 for access to the entire network for the day.
That is what Melbourne should do to have a reliable public transport network.
This can largely be credited to the whole public transport network being privatised by the Kennett government in 1999 during its final months. ‘It introduced complexity, confusion and unnecessary expense to the system,’ quoted The Age (February 2, 2007). What happened was that the tram, train and bus networks became managed separately by private consortiums contracted by the State Government.
While Yarra Trams has done a commendable job with the tram network, bringing in new disabled-friendly C-Class Trams, restoring the historic W-Class trams and extending lines (most notably, the Box Hill and Vermont South extensions), Connex and Met Trains made the train network impractical for themselves thanks largely to the introduction of the city loop in 1964.
The loop was originally built on the advice of the Metropolitan Town Planning Commission with its Melbourne Transportation Plan of 1969. They predicted that rail journeys would hit 370 million per year in 1964 and that train numbers would increase to 181 an hour and that a city loop would need to be builded to cope with the extra numbers.
However, the effect of the car changed all that. Because of the growth of car usage, the State Government spent more money building roads to cope with the traffic and less on public transport to discourage car usage and make public transport a more viable and efficient transport method.
The impact of the car resulted in decreasing patronage figures for the rail network. In 1950, patronage figures peaked at 201 million rail journeys per year. By 1964, the total was 170 million and rail journeys fell from 116 an hour to 108 an hour. Since then, even at peak hour, only 90 trains per hour pass through Flinders Street Station.
But how did the construction of the city loop affect all this?
Put it this way, the city loop was built, but it wasn’t needed. The most efficient method before the loop was opened was using Flinders Street Station as a through station because trains wouldn’t need to be reversed. The loop was originally meant to add to capacity, but that’s not what it was used for when Met Trains and Connex took over the rail network. It had the opposite effect: it reduced capacity.
The Kennett government split the network between two companies, each with its own designated section of rails to run. There are no through-routed trains at Flinders Street these days because trains when the reach the city loop, they find themselves at the edge of their ‘territory’. Trains only use the city loop to make a circle round the city and head back in the direction they came. This adds time to the return journey because of the extra time spent in the loop.
Confused? Well that’s the point because that’s what happened. Even when Connex took over the whole network, nothing changed and the city loop is still used for the exact opposite purpose that it was designed for.
The other major factor in decreasing rail patronage figures is because the State Government overlooked Connex’s previous history. What history says is that Connex lost their contract to run trains in Southern England ages ago.
It’s pretty obvious why they lost their contract and the answer can be found in the newspapers. Currently, they use a train control system that is so out of date compared to its interstate counterparts that they have to find spare parts at swap meetings. Also, they have braking problems with their ‘brand new’ Siemens train fleet, and they use a rail network which has been largely unchanged for 150 years which is so dangerous that drivers not only ignore the ‘safe’ speed limits, but also the recommended speed limits on their daily bulletins and go even slower.
But what has the Bracks government done about our rail network?
The answer is nothing. Instead of putting money where it matters on the rail, they have been busy supposedly improving our bus networks. However, how can they be improving our bus network when buses are regularly running up to 20 minutes late and how can they be improving our network when there aren’t enough regular services especially after dark?
The Bracks government doesn’t care about our public transport. Why else would they have chosen Connex as one of the companies to run the rail network when they have a proven poor track record?
Another problem with the public transport system is that it isn’t extensive enough. 30 years ago this wouldn’t have been a problem but since then, urban development has expanded so far out of Melbourne that towns formally considered to be not part of Melbourne are now part of Greater Melbourne. These include for instance Frankston and Healesville. Tullamarine Airport is another classic example. When the airport opened, there were no houses around it for miles and nowadays, hundreds of houses surround the place.
The impact on that is that public transport can’t cover the expanded area. Even before then, certain areas of Melbourne weren’t served and still aren’t served by train or tram.
Although the train network runs out into the western suburbs, they don’t serve it as extensively as the eastern suburbs. There should be a train line out to Melbourne Airport, yet there isn’t and for years, people have insisted that there should be a line out to at least East Doncaster, yet the Bracks government is too conservative and too afraid to do anything about it. They would rather rebuild stations rather than lines (eg. Southern Cross Station) and focus on improving our road network with such projects as the Scoresby Freeway (and cash in on it by charging tolls). Recently, a cross-city rail tunnel proposal was drawn up by the State Government but, chances are that the tunnel won’t make it past the drawing board because the government is so conservative: our local area isn’t served well by public transport.
The tram network isn’t as extensive either, despite recent extensions on lines to Box Hill and Vermont South, Melbourne isn’t served at all in the north-eastern and western suburbs. Again, the government has talked about extending Route 48 out to Doncaster Shopping Centre, but nothing serious has been done.
However, the tram network shouldn’t be expected to cover Melbourne so much as this can be done by the train network after all. It’s more an icon for tourists as it is a public transport service in the strict sense and trams do have their uses. The reason is simple: motorists always complain about how trams clog up the road and cause traffic jams, but that’s the point. It discourages people taking their cars to work and instead, what it does is encourage people to take the tram to work which is efficient and reliable.
And then there are W-Class trams. They are an icon in Melbourne and just marvellous and quite frankly, one of our main tourist attractions. But since then they have been superseded by younger models. Thankfully, since then, Yarra Trams have restored them to their former glory and they happily tackle the free city-circle route every day now.
The final problem with Melbourne’s public transport system is the fares charged. The thing is that Melbourne uses the unfair zone system in which people in Zone 2 would have to pay more for public transport than those in Zone 1. Until the 2006 election, Melbourne used a ridiculous 3-zone system, but since then, both parties during the election agreed to abolish zone 3 and adopt a 2-zone system. But that system is still unfair. Why should people in Zone 2 have to pay more for public transport than those in Zone 1?
In conclusion, tickets are just too expensive in Melbourne and complicated (a 2-hour Zone 1 fare costs $1.90). That is why too many people don’t use public transport. Tokyo and Paris for instance are cities in which people rely on public transport and the reason is because it’s cheap: you only pay about $1 for a daily pass that covers the whole network. What Melbourne should have is a no-zone public transport system in which you only pay $1 for access to the entire network for the day.
That is what Melbourne should do to have a reliable public transport network.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)