COMMUNITY BRIEFING NOTE 04
High speed is not the same as high frequency
PTA’s newly released ferry operations material points to roughly a 30-minute service at existing speed limits. But frequency does not necessarily require faster ferries. A simpler route could potentially deliver a more frequent service at much lower speed.
Damien Smith · 7 September 2026
One of the most important things in PTA’s newly released ferry operations material is the timetable.
At existing speed limits, the proposed service is now around 30 minutes. PTA’s preferred operating case gets closer to 25 minutes, but only by seeking speed exemptions.
Wearing my stakeholder hat, I have repeatedly heard DTMI representatives say that the ferries would operate within existing speed limits. The new operations material now shows what that means in practice: roughly a 30-minute service.
The timetable problem was already being raised during the ferry tender in 2025, before the vessels were ordered.
Tenderers were asking how PTA’s timetable dealt with acceleration, deceleration and vessel turnaround. I was one of them.
In Addendum 10 on Tenders WA, I asked PTA for the acceleration assumed in its timetable, the time allowed to turn the vessel, and access to the existing ferry Tricia so the turnaround could be measured. Similar timetable questions were also raised by other tenderers at briefings.
From where I sat watching the process, the preliminary operating work had simply not gone far enough to expose the timetable problem before the important vessel and system decisions were locked in.
The apparent assumption was that a faster boat would solve the problem, with speed exemptions available where necessary.
But maximum speed is only one part of a ferry timetable.
Distance, acceleration, slowing down, berthing, passenger exchange, charging and turnaround all matter.
High speed is not the same as high frequency
PTA clearly wanted a frequent service.
The problem was the assumption that achieving it required faster ferries.
There was another way to improve frequency: simplify the route.
A shorter direct service between JoJo’s and Canning Bridge, using a double-ended ferry with a speed of only about 9.5 knots and operating within existing speed limits, gives a nominal round trip of about 37.6 minutes.
That 37.6 minutes is the vessel’s full return cycle, not the passenger journey time.
The one-way trip between Canning Bridge and JoJo’s is about 15.3 minutes.
Despite using a much slower ferry, the simpler service is actually quicker.
The cycle includes five minutes berthed at JoJo’s and two minutes at Canning Bridge. With a double-ended ferry, there is no need to spend time turning the vessel around at either end.
On that basis:
Three ferries could provide a 15-minute peak service.
A 15-minute timetable gives 45 minutes of fleet time per cycle, leaving about 7½ minutes of margin above the nominal round trip for operating variation.
At quieter times:
Two ferries could provide approximately a 20-minute service.
Compare that with the Government’s current five-vessel network, now being discussed in terms of roughly 30-minute frequency at existing speed limits.
Why frequency matters
A 15-minute service gets close to “turn up and go.”
Passengers do not have to organise their day around a timetable, and missing a connection is not a major problem.
At 30-minute intervals, it is.
Frequency also determines capacity — and therefore matters to the business case.
There are practical limits on how large ferries can sensibly be on the Swan River. If vessel size is constrained, one of the main ways to move more passengers is to run more frequent services.
A ferry arriving every 15 minutes provides roughly twice the potential carrying capacity of the same-sized ferry arriving every 30 minutes.
That becomes particularly important when the business case is forecasting millions of additional public-transport trips.
Questions for PTA
Was a simple direct JoJo’s–Canning Bridge service ever properly modelled before the vessel and terminal decisions were locked in?
Now that PTA’s own operations material points to about 25 minutes with speed exemptions and around 30 minutes at existing limits, what does that do to the patronage, capacity and business case that were built around a 20-minute service?
These are not hindsight questions.
The timetable problem was being raised before the ferries were ordered.
Source documents
PTA250023 Addendum 10 — Design and Construction of Transperth New Electric Passenger Vessels
Includes the tender questions and PTA responses concerning acceleration, vessel turning time and access to Tricia.
[Download PTA250023 Addendum 10 — PDF]
Ferry Operations Development Application — timetable and operational material
Includes the operating scenarios showing service frequency under existing speed limits and proposed speed exemptions.