Not really, the project scope is to run SD automatic trains in those tunnels with up to a 90sec frequency. Hence no DD could use the tunnels for next 40 years. At 90 sec capacity will be equal or greater than DD so no issue.Hmmm... probably true that SD 90sec headway capacity can exceed DD 3" headways, just shame gumment expects the passengers to stand while doing so. No technical reason DD can't run on 90sec headways.
Hmmm... probably true that SD 90sec headway capacity can exceed DD 3" headways, just shame gumment expects the passengers to stand while doing so. No technical reason DD can't run on 90sec headways.The only reason preventing 90 sec headway is the boarding times (probably (by my rough estimates)). The sheep herding at Townhall will need to be at every station for that to happen and I doubt the govt will want to pay them all.
Hmmm... probably true that SD 90sec headway capacity can exceed DD 3" headways, just shame gumment expects the passengers to stand while doing so. No technical reason DD can't run on 90sec headways.If you built extra platforms at Town Hall and probably Wynyard and a few others you might get 2min.
If you built extra platforms at Town Hall and probably Wynyard and a few others you might get 2min.
DD has 2 doors and higher capacity
SD will have 3 doors and lower capacity per car
In theory you will then always discharge the cattle faster on a SD.
@RTT_RulesOn Greenfield automated lines designed to a suitable standard from the start. 90sec is doable with a 3 door car about 20m long. You cannot do this with Sydney DD stock. Paris RER DD is 3 doors per car and the seated capacity is similar to Sydney as they make the car longer so their seated density is lower than Sydney.
in theory yes
as i probably said before DD > SD in every possible way for Sydney. Paris RER A is a great example of DD Stock running at high frequency. We can probably achieve this with a form of ATP digital signalling to get 2 min headways even with 1 min boarding times
On Greenfield automated lines designed to a suitable standard from the start. 90sec is doable with a 3 door car about 20m long. You cannot do this with Sydney DD stock. Paris RER DD is 3 doors per car and the seated capacity is similar to Sydney as they make the car longer so their seated density is lower than Sydney.
The boarding rate of a 3 door SD car is almost identical to a Sydney DD. The DD doors have 3 channels: vestibule, Up & down. The SD's have two: left & right. The S sets and even T sets only have doors wide enough for 2 channels, but the newer sets have wider doors and largely address this issue.
For the same signalling headway and same boarding rate, line capacity is actually lower with SDs.
In the case of Paris,the boarding rate is faster: more doors and more channels, but at the expense of train capacity. Line capacity is still higher than Sydney, but no by much (~5% after equalling out platform length).
The big advantage of a "new" system is the new signalling, not the "new" train shape.
The one format that does offer greater line capacity is a 4 door metro: where the boarding rate is much higher, and high enough to compensate for lower train capacity.
But in the end it all boils down to what you are trying to optimise for. If it's minimal unionised staff, the automated metro is the way to go.
Gee, that much! No seat is a high price to pay for that 3"Do the sums, adds up to alot of time per annum. My hourly rate its over $1000.
No one has cared about the remaining 35% or so of cityrail travellers who stand on way to workYes, that's right, no one has cared.
Well they seem to have done a great job until now and as this is will provide extra capacity overall I believe there will be no problem except that of having to change trains to catch the DD express to Parramatta.For the Express links to Parramatta and to resolve other issues long term there is a bit to do (read cost) on the Western main.
Maybe they will convert a heavy rail line or perhaps make a subway branch to Parramatta from Central.
They do say here it is not needed http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-01/high-speed-rail-not-necessary-for-second-sydney-airport/6438998 but I do believe a non stop metro would be the shot because.
· People do not want to change from the Metro to a fast rail.
· A fast train fare would be twice that of a non stop metro because the tunnel would cost $4b due to cutting three times the material.
· A non stop metro would cost under $2b and be half an hour compared to one with four intermediate stops that would cost $4b and take half an hour longer.
· It could use the same metro rolling stock branching off at Central or Sydenham.
· I suggest buying 4 TBM (50m each) now, exactly the same as we have, and put one pair west and the other east from a launch site at the Olympic park brickpit so the tunnel to Parramatta is finished at the same time as the CBD metro.
RTT-RulesMate it may be that I am too old to wait to see greater Sydney become well connected or just that I think we have a lot of catching up but.In my opinion it is preferable for express trains to have their own line so it would be possible to have two parallel metro tunnels with one an all stops and the other non stop particularly as tunnels are getting relatively cheaper as time goes by for example 15km NWRL for $1.1b so if CBD/Parramatta is only 22km I cannot see how it would cost more than $2b for a non stop and same again plus $500m for every station on the all stops.I know you are concerned about cost but here http://www.smh.com.au/business/aviation/second-sydney-airport-at-badgerys-creek-could-require-1b-in-subsidies-deutsche-20150708-gi7d7g.html it says it would need to be connected to Sydney to work and needs an extra $1b.I believe just like the Manly ferries people would be prepared to pay a lot more to use a 15 minute CBD/Parramatta express and as it would not have intermediate stations it would definitely be an economic success.It would only take 6 months to build another 4 TBM exactly the same as what we now have and they could even be used driving the CBD metro while our existing ones are getting a coat of white paint and some new cutting discs for the Parramatta express line.
Do not forget that the NWRL has 8 stations and that is 6 more than I suggest on a non stop CBD/Parramatta metro subway so yes it could be an economically viable thing with the low cost and premium fares.
Anyway NSW is in catch up mood and has plenty of money http://tunneltalk.com/Australia-08July2015-Sydney-moves-to-NorthConnex-construction.php
For the Express links to Parramatta and to resolve other issues long term there is a bit to do (read cost) on the Western main.
For my thinking (post City Metro and Bankstwon line conversion).
- Inner West southern pair of tracks are used inefficiently with 12t/hr due to mixing all stoppers and semi express from the SW.
- There is a bottle neck between HomeBush and Lidcombe
- The solution on how the outer two branches of the Bankstown line will operate I haven't seen.
- Growth in the outer west beyond Paramatta and Richmond lines will be limited due to inner city bottle neck capacity
- Inner West Metro, underground to Straithfield. Could be done in two phases, 1st to Ashfield
- Remove the inner west stations apart from Ashfield and Burwood to straighten the lines and help get faster trains.
- Build addition pair of tracks to Lidcombe, from Homebush may need to be a tunnel for 1-2km. New tracks will be for western express and interurban, no need for Platform at Flemington.
I did some googling on compartive costs around the world and while station costs are rarely individualized, stations are typically listed around $150 to $450m and construction costs are $300 to 400m per km including stations. The Melbourne Metro project lists all the stations at $1B.I believe all passenger rail in Sydney in the distant future will be single deck metro due to the value of surface land, NIMBYS, automated tunnelling and the extra cost of making and using a DD tunnel.People would not bother getting off a metro to get on any high speed train to Parramatta to save 10 minutes but would rather stay on a non stop metro.It has been agreed on here that express trains should not share lines with turn up and go all stoppers.Most people believe an underground station would cost about $500mThe NWRL only cost $1.15b for 15km of tunnels http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/media-releases/tunnelling-contract-north-west-rail-link so I cannot see how Parramatta to Central would cost more than $2b particularly as it could just branch off the metro line at Central so only needing one station at Parramatta.