michaelwyres.com.au | musings of a geek

A Stupid Train Of Thought

The new version of Melbourne’s Metro Rail Tunnel, as announced yesterday as part of the 2014 State Budget is a massive slap in the face for commuters. It is Premier Napthine’s great big nasty pre-election surprise.

The original plan – (put forward by the previous Bracks/Brumby government) – was for the tunnel to run from South Kensington in Melbourne’s inner-west through to Caulfield in the middle-south-eastern suburbs.

Upon coming to power in 2010, the Baillieu/Napthine government quickly scaled it back to run only from South Kensington to South Yarra in the inner-south.

With five new stations – (under either plan) – at Arden, Parkville, CBD North, CBD South, and Domain, the tunnel promised to start the massive task of untangling Melbourne’s interconnected rail network, where problems on any one single line could bring the entire network to a screeching halt.

Not very useful.

By creating a truly ‘metro-style’ network, all lines would eventually become completely independent of each other, and therefore delays on one would have no effect on others.

Infinitely more useful.

The other big advantage of building the tunnel with these five stations was that there would finally be more capacity for getting passengers into the CBD, increasing the number of stations from five – (Flinders Street, Southern Cross, Flagstaff, Melbourne Central, and Parliament) – to seven, with the addition of CBD North and CBD South – a 40% increase in CBD capacity.

Most importantly, given that the new tunnel would be used to create a single line from Sunbury in the north-west, and the Dandenong/Pakenham/Cranbourne corridor in the south-east – (without crossing any other lines) – this new CBD capacity could be used to allow more trains into the CBD at any given point in time, and take trains from this new conjoined single line away from the existing City Loop tunnels.

In turn, this would allow more trains from other areas into the existing City Loop tunnels, boosting capacity on those lines too. Eventually, the network would have been expanded to the airport and Melton.

Sounds great – but we can forget about all that now.

The announcement yesterday that the tunnel would be completely changed, and only run from Southern Cross, to Fishermans Bend, and then to Domain and South Yarra completely messes up all the good things the previous plan would have provided.

The new tunnel will link to a hastened airport link, using the yet to be completed Regional Rail Link lines through the western suburbs, with no stops for passengers along the existing Sunbury line, and to the Dandenong group, via South Yarra.

This provides no relief for the Sunbury line in any way. People living out there lose their promised improvements. People in the inner-north who would have been serviced by Arden and Parkville stations, will now need to continue to rely on overcrowded bus and tram services.

All of these people would be more than justified in feeling pretty screwed by yesterday’s announcement.

Equally, regional commuters on the Geelong, Ballarat and Bendigo lines – who have been waiting for years for the Regional Rail Link – can feel rightly screwed also. They were promised their own dedicated tracks, free from entanglement with the metropolitan rail network.

Here now, they will be joined by metropolitan trains from an impending ‘super line’ between Dandenong and the airport.

So much for exclusive access to dedicated lines.

And that extra CBD capacity? Sorry, all gone.

Why is the government making these seemingly ludicrous changes to what seemed like a decent plan?

Well, the Napthine Government knows they are in trouble in the polls, and are at a real risk of losing the 2014 state election. A rail line to the airport is a very attractive proposition politically.

It is an idea that has significant traction with the public – but a rail line to the airport has to go somewhere, and if it is going to be done for political points with respect of the 2014 state election, it has to be done quickly.

So, lets use the brand new Regional Rail Link tracks – and lets use the money that would have been used for the ‘proper’ Metro Rail Tunnel to route through another political cause – (the Fishermans Bend Redevelopment) – and try and make it look like a good idea.

Because the airport link has to go somewhere.

On the surface, the new proposal is not completely without merit.

The problem is, it buggers up all the rest of the plans – and all to look good before a state election. Getting the airport link in earlier than previously planned – (it was meant to happen after the Metro Rail Tunnel opened up the centre of the network) – is nothing but a political ploy.

It is also just shafting long suffering commuters and the taxpayer with a sub-standard plan that doesn’t add up for the future. Building the previous version of the tunnel would still connect the airport with the Dandenong corridor – (in itself, in line for a massive upgrade) – but keeps the increased capacity through the city, provides extra capacity for the Sunbury corridor, and doesn’t shaft Regional Rail Link commuters.

For the money, I think we all deserve better than this half-assed new plan – one that appears to be little more than a vote catching exercise.

UPDATE 07/05/2014 19:43: Thanks to Daniel Bowen for pointing out that the new tunnel plans don’t actually connect to the airport link after all. I managed to miss that point…oops! Importantly, I believe this makes the new solution even less sensible again – this increases the passenger load on Southern Cross station, with even less benefit.

Timely Google Security Reminder

With more and more people adopting tablet and smartphone devices running the Apple iOS and Google Android operating systems, I thought it timely to remember an important security issue if you choose to run the Google Chrome web browser on your device.

I must admit, I had completely forgotten about this issue until yesterday when testing on my iPad, an early prototype for a web application I’m currently building for myself. This web application displays to the user – (well, me in this instance) – the IP address and corresponding hostname from which they are logging into the application.

I noticed the following statement of those details (outlined in red, click for a larger view):

Why is it coming up that I am logging in from a Google IP address/hostname? I was testing this during my lunch break at the office, so this wasn’t what I was expecting.

After a few seconds of puzzling, I remembered why this was so.

Google Chrome on iOS and Android has a “Reduce Data Usage” option, which seeks to compress data coming across the internet into your device, thereby reducing the overall amount of data you download.

Possibly a good thing – but the fact that a Google IP address comes up when browsing to my web application reminds me that all traffic using this feature in Google Chrome for iOS or Android is routed through a Google server before it comes back to my device.

Be conscious of what that means – Google can not only see where you are browsing, but what the content of the sites you are browsing actually is. If you are browsing a corporate website that is normally password protected – (and therefore is normally unable to be indexed by Google) – it is now passing through their servers, thanks to the password you entered to access the page.

Fortunately, if the page you are browsing to is SSL encrypted – (or is inside an ‘incognito’ tab) – it does not pass through the Google proxy servers. The SSL would not work if such pages tried to use this connection method.

Hopefully, if your systems administrators are on the ball, even sites that are only accessible inside your corporate network are SSL encrpyted as a matter of course. Certainly, all of my live web applications are SSL encrypted, which is why I don’t usually see this behaviour, and why it had slipped my mind a little bit yesterday.

I’ve been working on this application without SSL, because I don’t have a spare IP address at the moment to do SSL on this app – something that I will able to fix when the application this new one is replacing is switched off – I’ll re-use that IP address.

You will notice straight away when I switched the “Reduce Data Usage” option off, it was clear that the traffic was no longer being routed via Google, as the address I was logged in from was now as expected, with an IP address/hostname that comes from the corporate network in the office:

So, if you are nervous about what Google might be seeing or not seeing when you are using Google Chrome on iOS or Android, consider turning this feature off in “Settings”, as shown:

Of course, I don’t know for certain if Google are capturing the traffic for other purposes as it passes through their proxy servers, but with my ‘security hat’ on, I do see this behaviour as – (at the very least) – an issue to be aware of.

Looking for the best IT security functionality possible is basically second nature to me – it’s part of what I do every day – so if something like this can slip my mind even just a little bit, it can easily slip yours a lot.

If you even knew about it in the first place.

As this option is switched on by default, I’m betting you didn’t even know about it – so have a think, and have a look.

Safety first.

Basic Computer Science Made Very Simple

Last night – (in the midst of one of my regular late-evening meanderings through interesting topics) – I stumbled upon this fabulously simple explanation of basic computing, produced by IBM in the United Kingdom in 1965.

The ease in which it explains the most basic operation of a computer is simply awesome.

Watch, and enjoy – and keep an eye out for the octopus!

Ron Dennis: The Rare Moment Of Senna Weakness

While I was never particularly a fan of Ayrton Senna, there is no doubt that he ranks with the very best of all time when it comes to racing drivers. He could make a car do things that nobody could, and that made him special.

As the 20th anniversary of his death at Imola in 1994 approaches, I read with great interest thoughts from McLaren boss Ron Dennis about his time working with Senna between 1988 and 1993.

I found his comments on the famous incident between Senna and Alain Prost at the 1990 Japanese Grand Prix most interesting:

“I looked at the traces (from Senna’s car), the brake and the throttle pedals, and you didn’t need to be Einstein to work out what had happened.”

“He came back to the pits, and I said, ‘I’m disappointed in you.’ He got it. I didn’t have to say any more. It was one of his rare moments of weakness. I don’t think it was anything that he was particularly proud of, but it was the finishing touch when pole position was on the wrong side of the road.”

“He said, ‘there’s no way I’m able to get to that first corner first. If I get to that first corner and I’m not able to get through, I won’t be exiting it.’ It wasn’t a great moment, but he had very few lapses in his life and he was an incredibly principled person – a great human being.”

This is a fairly clear statement that Dennis knows that Senna deliberately caused this accident. Most people probably felt so – (I know I did at the time) – but to hear this from someone like Ron Dennis is a stark admission.

Senna – a genius, but like so many geniuses, flawed.

May he continue to rest in peace.

The EastWest Non-Link?

The proposed EastWest Link, a partially underground toll road through the inner north and inner west of Melbourne has been controversial to say the very least.

Countless protests against the proposal have ended in scuffles with police, and even attempts by the Victorian government to subvert otherwise legal protest activities.

I – (like many other people) – believe that the proposed Melbourne Metro Rail Tunnel is a far more pressing need to improve transport infrastructure in Melbourne.

I don’t think that EastWest Link is ultimately a “bad thing”, but the lack of transparency and public consultation around the project has raised the ire of many, but the rail project should surely happen first.

Even the long-term Network Development Plan prepared by the government demonstrates the benefits of getting the rail network changes into place.

You don’t relieve road congestion by giving more vehicles more places to drive.

You relieve road congestion by getting people to leave their cars at home and travel in more sustainable ways. Like by rail, but I digress.

I noted yesterday that transport minister Terry Mulder has been in the media speaking of the second stage of the link.

The first – (controversial) – stage runs from the end of the existing Eastern Freeway in Clifton Hill, through to Footscray Road in port area of Melbourne. The second stage would then run initially through another tunnel underneath the inner western suburbs, eventually to meet up with the Western Ring Road in the West Sunshine area.

The thing that I find curious here is that in between the two stages, what will ultimately be two separate freeways/tollways there really isn’t a significant link at all.

The EastWest Link, doesn’t actually link, together.

Here is the current plan as displayed on the Linking Melbourne Authority website (click image for a larger view):

Note that the stage one road – (indicated in pink) – and the stage two road – (indicated in purple) – don’t actually meet up? To get from one stage to the other, you have to rely on Footscray Road.

Having lived in Melbourne’s inner west, I know full well that Footscray Road – (and for that matter, Dynon Road a little to the north, and which are both significantly linked to the stage two works) – is a major arterial that is heavily trafficked, particularly in the morning and evening peaks.

Commuters travelling by car from the inner western suburbs to the west of the Maribyrnong River to the CBD, already using clogged Footscray and Dynon Roads – (and Footscray Road in particular) – will then have to compete with traffic interchanging between the two stages of the EastWest Link as well.

As a road touted as “relieving road congestion”, this seems completely non-sensical. It does appear that traffic flows in the mid-section of Footscray Road will favour the EastWest Link traffic – (given the indicated ramps and off ramps) – but that’s only going to further slow down existing through traffic which has no intention of using either part of the link.

Crazy right?

How about if we are going to spend billions of dollars building this thing, we do something a little more sensible?

What if we did something like this? The green roads have been added in myself (click for a larger version):

Instead of continuing the EastWest Link down from the Tullamarine Freeway interchange to the north, and onto Footscray Road, lets delete that section, and route the road over the green marked road I have added.

You know, actually joining the roads together and actually creating a link between the two?

We could even use the on and off-ramps already shown in purple – (with just a little tweaking) – to give access to the ports areas for traffic that wants and needs to use the local traffic area of Footscray Road, and eliminate the need for through traffic from stage one to stage two – (and of course, vice versa) – from having to slow down and negotiate traffic lights to get from one side to the other.

Anyone in Melbourne who remembers the first attempt to join the South Eastern Freeway to the Mulgrave Freeway – (to form what is now known as the Monash Freeway) – will know what it is like to have a freeway with traffic lights in the middle of it. Traffic lights existed at Toorak Road – (where the South Eastern Freeway initially finished), High Street, Burke Road, and Warrigal Road – (where the Mulgrave Freeway commenced).

It was an expensive and timing consuming mistake to fix.

It looks to me like the Linking Melbourne Authority are planning to make the same mistake all over again.

Please.

Don’t.

NBN Flux: Why Even?

The National Broadband Network (NBN) has been a torrid political beast for around five years, ever since it was first mooted by the then communications minister, Stephen Conroy, and the then Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd.

One of the first arguments by opponents of the scheme was along the lines of:

“We already have access to broadband internet nationally, why do we need a new national broadband network?”

Well, not quite – that is simplifying it far too much.

While the vast majority of Australia’s population is covered by broadband of some kind – (predominantly a flavour of DSL, or HFC cable) – the fact remains that many areas of Australia are either not served – (usually for a combination of geographic and financial reasons) – or vastly underserved.

Even from within my my own family circle, I know of significantly populated areas where the only available broadband is ADSL1 – (limited to 1.5Mbps download speed, and sometimes 8Mbps depending on the provider).

In the specific family-related case I am referring to, ADSL2/2+ is not available in the area because there is no space left in the local exchange for ADSL2/2+ equipment to be installed.

Similarly, the local HFC cable provider has not extended their network into this particular suburb, despite the rest of the city being covered.

So it is ADSL1 for them. Even mobile coverage in the area is patchy, so 3G/4G is not really an option – even before you consider the much higher cost per unit of download for wireless internet services.

At the last census, there were approximately 11,000 people living in the suburb, so it is not as if the area is some rural backwater.

Through my career in IT and telecommunications, I have seen DSL orders for sites in inner suburbs of major cities like Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane fail to be completed due to the lack of or the poor condition of existing infrastructure.

I have seen business premises that have been able to successfully receive 2Mbps/2Mbps SHDSL services, yet the building next door only manage to get ADSL2/2+ or even ADSL1 – and sometimes nothing at all, just 56Kbps dialup which is not broadband.

The highest DSL speeds in Australia of 20Mbps/20Mbps – (provided by SHDSL.biz) – is limited to major city CBDs, and CBD fringes due to the high implementation cost making it unviable in just about any other location.

Existing fibre services are sparse outside of CBDs, and vastly expensive if they exist at all. One fibre quote I received several years ago was for $80,000 just to do the build, and the distance to be covered was less than 500 metres.

Ask anyone living in a small rural community if they are able to get even ADSL1. If the answer is yes – (as some can) – be very surprised. For the most part these communities have modem dialup, and maybe wireless internet which we know is expensive per unit of download.

So anyone who says “we don’t need a national broadband network” simply does not understand the existing situation.

If you’ve ever had to tell someone who wants to get a broadband service provisioned that they can’t have it – (as I have had to do many times) – for no other reason than that their home or business premise simply exists where it exists, you just feel like a bastard about it.

Even though there is absolutely nothing you can do about it.

For years, successive governments have spoken of the need for Australia to become the “clever country”. I am sure that most Australians would agree with the notion too.

This is why we need a new national broadband solution – so that all Australians have an equal opportunity to participate in the global information economy, so that we can accelerate towards becoming that “clever country” we strive to be.

But which broadband solution do we need? FTTP? FTTN? Wireless? HFC? Something else?

That’s another difficult topic – one which I will discuss in the next article in this series.

NBN Flux: Inflexion Point

I have worked in the IT industry in Australia – (in one form or another) – for almost 20 years. My history of tinkering and mucking around with computers goes back more than 30 years.

So it is fair to say that I have seen quite a bit of weird, wonderful and outright “batshit annoying” occurrences over the journey.

A large chunk of my IT history has been directly in the telecommunications space, and most of the “batshit annoying” stuff I have seen over the years falls neatly into this space.

Broadband in Australia is currently at a critical inflexion point, as the “final” form of the National Broadband Network (NBN) falls into place.

Now is the time for the right decisions to be made, and I fear – (like many other people) – that many of the decisions currently being made, are being made for political purposes, rather than for the future and common good of this country.

Today I am beginning a series of articles on the NBN – where it has come from, what it is, what it is becoming, and where it should be going.

Some will accuse me of having “left” leanings, as I will continue to support the full FTTP model developed by the previous Labor government, but I am anything but what is usually termed a “leftie”.

That said, I am not a “righty” either. My political beliefs are quite “centre”. I certainly believe that it is possible for good policies to come from either side of that centre line.

I am not naive or short-sighted enough to believe that only one side of the political divide can come up with good ideas, like many people seem to believe.

It just isn’t so.

I will be writing these articles from the perspective of my experience in the industry – what I have seen, what I know doesn’t work, what I know does work, and what I want for the future.

What I want my children to be able to do.

I don’t want to see that stifled by a political point-scoring exercise, as is happening at the moment.

First up, I will begin with a discussion on why we even need an NBN.

ARTICLES IN THE SERIES:

NBN Flux: Why Even?

Napthine Turning Technology Upside Down

With 2014 being a Victorian state election year, both the Premier and the Opposition Leader are running around the state, making promises to butter up the voters ahead of the November poll date.

Opposition Leader Daniel Andrews was in Ballarat today, touting an upgrade to Eureka Stadium, in an effort to encourage AFL games to be played in the city.

Premier Denis Napthine was in Geelong, making a promise that has been promised over and over again over a number of years, to install free wifi in V/Line trains.

Of course, promises made by politicians often come to nought when they come to power – so each of these promises are currently vaporware.

Politicians being politicians, they are always looking for a good photo opportunity – such as the photo above of Napthine trying to look technology savvy while making the free wifi announcement.

They have their minders and image consultants to make sure they look their very best, and present the right image to the target audience.

But hang on, something looks a bit unusual with the iPad Napthine is holding in the cheesy staged photo – (click image for larger view) – right?

Is he holding the iPad upside down? That sure looks like the home button at the top there, doesn’t it?

Certainly, the cover in which this iPad is installed appears to open on the right hand side, further suggesting Denis should be standing on his head to be oriented correctly.

I first noticed the “error” while watching the evening news, where footage was shot from left of frame from where this still image was taken – and I thought it odd that the dock connector was at the top.

Sure – the auto-orientation feature might have turned the screen the right way up – (if it was turned on) – but one gets the feeling the good doctor doesn’t play with such technology very often.

You might say it is a bit finicky to criticise such a basic mistake – but really – that’s just funny, especially when you are trying to appeal to the technologically savvy audience an announcement like this is aimed at.

Oopsies.

What The MH370 Black Boxes Might Not Reveal

As the search for Malaysia Airlines 370 continues, the distinct possibility that it will never be found remains in play.

The similarities to the initial phases of the disappearance of Air France 447 in 2009 are striking.

Though search and rescue personnel had some idea where AF447 went down, it took five days before any debris was found, and before that time people feared it would never be found.

As we approach the two-week mark since the disappearance of MH370, still no sign of it has been found, and as with AF447, people fear we will never find the wreckage of MH370.

The difference between the two events is that there is so much scope as to where MH370 might be. AF447 searchers had a relatively confined area to search, a luxury not afforded with respect to MH370.

Even with the initial AF447 debris found after five days, it still took another two years to locate the main wreck site, four kilometres down in the mid-Atlantic Ocean.

The discovery of that wreck site, and the subsequent discovery and recovery of the two black boxes, allowed investigators to determine beyond most doubt, what happened on that stormy night in 2009.

Let’s step into the future for a moment.

Say some floating debris from MH370 is found in the Indian Ocean a few days from now, and say, using the location of that debris as a starting point, eventually the wreck of the plane is located on the ocean floor.

Say the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) and the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) are also located at the wreck site, and retrieved, as happened with AF447, and that the data they contain is able to be read. There have been cases of black boxes being recovered from the very deep Indian Ocean, such as South African 295 in the 1980’s.

But if they do, what then?

The problem with the MH370 incident, is that they will probably actually show very little at all.

If a major problem occurred on that flight – (mechanical, electrical, fire, bomb, hijack) – at the point the flight became missing, about an hour after take off over the South China Sea, the black boxes would have captured something.

It might not be enough to completely solve the mystery, but it would most likely give the investigators at least something to work with.

While the black boxes almost always provide the hard evidence in crash investigations, in the case of MH370, the black boxes themselves may actually be a problem.

In commercial passenger aircraft, black boxes generally record on a 30-minute loop. The last 30 minutes of data is available inside of them, but after that 30 minutes, the data gets overwritten with the next 30 minutes.

Given it now appears likely that MH370 continued on for a number of hours – (up to 7 hours in some reports) – the 30 minutes of data that existed at the moment the initial problem occurred is long gone.

It has been overwritten.

The infamous Qantas 32 incident in 2010 also saw this happen. Even though the plane eventually landed safely, because the plane was in the air for around 2 hours after the initial engine explosion, the 30 minutes of black box data from the time of the initial explosion was long gone.

The crew asked to hear the CVR during the investigation – but the initial data was gone. There is no electronic record of nature of the incident, or the work that crew did to save 469 lives that day.

Even if the MH370 black boxes are found one day, there will be no hard evidence of what happened in the cockpit or with the aircraft’s systems at the moment the incident started.

Maybe if something sinister has happened, that was the plan – to leave as little evidence behind as possible.

If they are found, they will be able to tell us what happened in the 30 minutes up until the true end of the flight.

If the crew were incapacitated, we won’t hear them saying anything – we might only hear engine noise, and audible cockpit warnings on the CVR. We might only see the plane running out of fuel and gliding gracefully into the ocean on the FDR.

But as for exactly what happened an hour out of Kuala Lumpur that night, they won’t be able to tell anyone anything at all.

Let us hope that for the sake of the families involved, that someone does find something, but right now there is a very high chance that even if the plane is found one day, along with the black boxes, we won’t ever find out what really happened.

Abbott Repeats Turnbull Tasmanian NBN Lie

Prime Minister Tony Abbott has repeated an unsubstantiated claim made by Malcolm Turnbull in October, in regards to the construction of the NBN in Tasmania.

“In general, Abbott did not directly address the issues being raised. For example, on the issue of how politically damaging the FTTP issue could be in Tasmania, Abbott claimed that the rollout of Labor’s National Broadband Network project in Tasmania “stopped in July” and “was not going to start again” because of the “utter incompetence and ineptitude” of Labor and the Greens.”

The fact of the matter is that the fibre rollout in Tasmania had not “stopped in July” – (and it remains to be seen if it has stopped even now) – and was indeed still well underway in October, despite claims from Turnbull that it had stopped:

This shows – at the very least – that Turnbull is quite happy to speak out in the media about what he believes is the case, without truly confirming the veracity of his claims. It could even be just out-and-out deception.

Given Turnbull has just agreed to continue with FTTP trials in Tasmania, even the “not going to start again” statement is flat out incorrect.

The Coalition certainly have form on false NBN claims, and this is just another example.

Given this piece of infrastructure – (whatever form it finally takes) – is so important for the future of this nation, it is time that Abbott and Turnbull stop making things up to suit their political discourse and motivations.