especially as we just don't have time to build anything.Which is why I came up with the idea to fix the buses ASAP, to give some breathing space for rail infra development (at least in certain areas such as the Hills District, the Eastern Suburbs, the Inner West, the Northern Beaches...).
Absolutely. I'll reiterate my belief that the entire single-deck issue keeps coming back again and again because somebody is pushing their agenda/preference/bias/fetish. While there could be operational segregation - that's fine, we currently call it sectorisation - making it physically impossible to cross-run is nothing short of downright idiotic.
metros can be double deckers. something like the paris double decker train with 3 doors a side. that could work if we lengthen the carriages and shorten the train and use some kind of signaling system like ETCS to give us 30tph. the problem i see with this govt is that its cannabilising cityrail tracks for metro. i can see a point with bankstown tracks as the bankstown line will cease to run but illawarra tracks where their is a mix of normal services, intercity and freight would be a problem.
I paid the NWRL centre a visit today, and I got some interesting documents. Essentially, the bits to be eaten will be Rouse Hill via Macquarie Park and Victoria Cross, the new Harbour Tunnel, MetroPitt, the Illawarra to Hurstville and the Bankstown.
It will be a disaster. I've taken a nice look at what they have, those animated artist's impressions they have. Sure, it looks sleek and sexy - it's based off the Melbourne Siemens train, as far as I can tell - but the capacity is lacking. I realise none of this is final, but it's not looking good.
I've identified three main reasons why single-deckers are being trumpeted as Sydney's Saviour. Apparently, they will provide more doors and will have better acceleration, leading to faster journeys due to reduced dwell times and faster running. The reduced capacity will be dealt with by increased frequency. I do not believe that SD stock is the only way to do this - I believe this is perfectly achievable with DD stock.Under both circumstances following, the lines will have to be completely resignalled anyway, so I have taken the assumption that the lines will have been upgraded to take 24tph (DD) and/or 30tph (SD), and most likely have ATO/ATP.
With the SD stock impression, t
hey've gone for a 2+2 layout coupled with longitudinal near the two outer doors. I crunched an estimate, and I get around 600 seats, will provide just over 21,000 pphpd at 20tph
. That is a marginal increase over what we have currently, and that was based off a 175% loading (i.e. the standing load is assumed to be up to 75% of the seating load). The capacity is just shy of 32,000 pphpd at 30tph
(the assumed maximum SD tph value) - but with much of it being standing capacity. My exact numbers and fully worked solutions are available upon request.
I then crunched an alternative, my old 7RER
idea, which some of you may remember. It consists of 7-car DD trains, similar to the Paris RER ones (hence the name), each car of approximate V set dimensions. The length of the car allows a third, middle door. The car thus has two double-deck areas and two outer vestibules. The total seating capacity works out as 832 (a mere 62 less than a Waratah, but with 5 more doors), and the capacity at 150% loading is 1,248. This gives 24,960 pphpd at 20tph
, and provides 29,952 pphpd at 24tph
(the assumed maximum DD tph value).
Thus, in terms of capacity, the numbers just don't stack up to justify conversion.
Then there's the acceleration problem. I believe this to be due to the heavyweight nature of CityRail equipment - there's been a creeping biggerism in train weight, to the point where D and N cars on the Waratah weigh 51 tons - and the T cars aren't much lighter at 48 tons. I also believe the trains can be made lighter without having their structural integrity affected. This reduces the acceleration problem.
By having three doors per car across seven cars, the door count is now 21, over the present 16. Admittedly, this probably can't match the SD stock, but the 7RER obtains the greater door count without sacrificing the high seating capacity of the current stock.
Thus, with some creativity, DD stock can be crafted to reduce dwell time and increase speed. They can also be made to look sleek and sexy, and are most certainly not obsolete in Sydney. Double-deck stock can be adapted to achieve the main goals of single-deck stock identified without making the sacrifices and taking the risks of converting to single-deck.
The 7RER concept can first be applied just by rolling stock changes (the best opening being the withdrawal of the C sets, K sets and Tangaras) and then resignalling, both of which have been done before in parallel with revenue running, both here and abroad, without undue catastrophe. I do not believe conversion to metro is such a smooth process.I thus conclude the state government is incorrect in its decision to head down the single-deck route
, and that by deliberately limiting new infrastructure to single-deck stock, it is headed for a disaster.