Improving the cost efficiency of Sydney Trains operations

 
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

My program of capital works is (in no particular order) i
This may surprise you, but on connecting the NWRL Metro to the Western Metro, I actually agree with you. Good idea and yes its not too late.
RTT_Rules

You are absolutely right.  I am surprised Smile

I have no idea how they plan on terminating the Western Metro, or which DD line will be converted in that process.  Inner West perhaps? Smile



Main reason is that the Bankstown Metro has now been truncated from connecting to Liverpool and hence leaving a messing interaction with the existing network that has messy shuttles over short lengths of track which do nothing for cost or practicality.


I don't think that will be such a big deal to extend the metro.  Fortunately, they are not building the new stations across the ROW (which is more tyhan can be said for the Leppington Car sheds).  


Agree with the Sexup from Sydenham to Erskinville, corridor is mostly there and partly built.
Question, could these two extra tracks then connect up to the unfinished Redfern and Central platforms?


Personally, I would, as there is 4km of surface route already in existance here.  I wouldn't be using the unfinished platforms, I'd be using the *finished* ones.


I wouldn't run it via Museam (not that popular and most people walk towards Pitt Street from what I noticed, rather via new Pitt Street station and termination at St James, where most of the station is ready and waiting and doesn't need a huge amount of work and 250m from popular Martin Place.


The Pitt St corridor will be taken by Metro.  The St James centre platform tunnels (AFAIK) are completed, with flyover, almost as far as College St


Adding extra platforms at Wynyard would be huge cost.

It would be.  But fortunately Bradfield had them built in the 1930s.  (BTW, appreciate an update on platform 1&2, since the carpark closed)


I did the numbers before on Quad to Chatsood, not needed any time soon and likely for a few decades if not more. The NWRL Metro will solve most of this issue and adding express tunnel between Nth Sydney and St Leonards solves the slow running for upper shore users.


Basically, Metro is not needed (at least in terms of capacity) for the same reason.  It's about solving the operational problems of adding *another* new line to the network.

My last post on the subject was something of a brain fart (at least more than usual) considering the implications of the Western Express, which I think will be inevitable now.

Metro will eliminate the need for extra capacity on the North Shore, but the wex creates numerous operational problems, not least being Northern interurbans.  Personally, I think the right solution to that is Via Chatswood, allowing the main north to be single track in part to create a fully isolated NSFL.  Amplification of Chatswood-Hornsby would be one of the cheapest in the city because the route is fairly short, and much of the pre-work (including many of the bridges) has already been done.  The problem will be Chatswood Station, being both a hub, and permanently restricted to 2 platforms thanks to Metro *and* the sale of the air space above/near it.

Sponsored advertisement

  djf01 Chief Commissioner

However, it will probably be too late to cancel the Bankstown Line conversion after the State Election (assuming Labor wins), as the major contracts will most likely be in place and it would be an expensive exercise to abandon the project.  I think we have to accept that it will be a fait accompli.  The only thing that could possibly derail it before the election, is if, and it's a big if, the current government has second thoughts if there is widespread disruption and public criticism following the shutdown of the Epping to Chatswood Rail Link.  The chaos with the shutdown of the Bankstown Line for conversion will be much worse.  If the anticipated chaos does occur, then I'd suggest that future conversions of existing lines to metro will be off the agenda and the focus will be on building completely segregated metro lines where warranted, as it should have been in the first place.
Transtopic


I understand that this is Labor policy, and I'll be very very surprised if this project could not be "modified".  The question is when are they scheduled to start drilling the Sydenham-Central tunnels.  TBH, I didn't eventhink they'd finalised the route yet.

But even if I'm right, the window is pretty small.  I wouldn't under-estimate the fear of political backlash in the Lib party given what's happened with LR project.


Assuming the Bankstown Line metro conversion proceeds, then the sextup from Sydenham to Erskineville is less likely to be  needed,

Agreed.  And it's not really needed from a capacity point of view, only to isolate the eastern and western arms of the City Circle.  And capacity allocation prevents this from happening anyway.


I also agree that completion of sextuplication of the Western Line from Homebush to Granville is another major infrastructure project that should be given greater priority.

This is a project I have a great deal of trouble understanding.  It's about achieving sectorisation, not more capacity.


There was a draft schematic diagram prepared by Transport for NSW in 2013, posted on another site, which proposed an additional track pair between Homebush and Granville to complete the sextuplication.  I've been trying to copy it here, so far without success, but I will continue to do so.

Upload screenshots to imgur and post a link?


Looking well into the future, I can see a need for a further express tunnel from Parramatta to the CBD, to allow for further expansion of services from the Western, South (including Regents Park), Northern and Intercity Lines as well as moving the South Line services off the T2 Inner West Line for a faster express service.


I think a well designed (ie 240m platform Smile Western Express would eliminate the need for that.

This is how I see a post Metro world looking:
Western Sector:
(Mountains -) Penrith - Parramatta - Wyngaroo
Richmond - Parramatta - Wyngaroo

Potentially 24 x 10/12 car trains an hour, 15-20min from Parra to Wyngaroo, up near 40k PAX per hour peak capacity.

Harbour Bridge Sector:
(Gosford -) Hornsby - Epping - City - Chatswood - Hornsby (- Gosford/Newcastle)
Leppington - Liverpool - City - Nth Sydney - Chatswood(/St Leonards/Gordon ?)

In addition, low capacity/4 car or SD network hubbing out of Bankstown:
Bankstown - Lidcomb
Bankstown - Liverpool
Bankstown - Parramatta
and
Parramatta - Liverpool

NB: This type of service is extremely cost ineffective, but that's the price of Metro Smile.



City Circle Sector:
Ashfield - City Circle - Airport - Revesby
Homebush - City Circle - Revesby - Campbelltown
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE

I have no idea how they plan on terminating the Western Metro, or which DD line will be converted in that process.  Inner West perhaps? Smile



Main reason is that the Bankstown Metro has now been truncated from connecting to Liverpool and hence leaving a messing interaction with the existing network that has messy shuttles over short lengths of track which do nothing for cost or practicality.

I don't think that will be such a big deal to extend the metro.  Fortunately, they are not building the new stations across the ROW (which is more tyhan can be said for the Leppington Car sheds).  


Agree with the Sexup from Sydenham to Erskinville, corridor is mostly there and partly built.
Question, could these two extra tracks then connect up to the unfinished Redfern and Central platforms?

Personally, I would, as there is 4km of surface route already in existance here.  I wouldn't be using the unfinished platforms, I'd be using the *finished* ones.


I wouldn't run it via Museam (not that popular and most people walk towards Pitt Street from what I noticed, rather via new Pitt Street station and termination at St James, where most of the station is ready and waiting and doesn't need a huge amount of work and 250m from popular Martin Place.

The Pitt St corridor will be taken by Metro.  The St James centre platform tunnels (AFAIK) are completed, with flyover, almost as far as College St


Adding extra platforms at Wynyard would be huge cost.
It would be.  But fortunately Bradfield had them built in the 1930s.  (BTW, appreciate an update on platform 1&2, since the carpark closed)


I did the numbers before on Quad to Chatsood, not needed any time soon and likely for a few decades if not more. The NWRL Metro will solve most of this issue and adding express tunnel between Nth Sydney and St Leonards solves the slow running for upper shore users.

Basically, Metro is not needed (at least in terms of capacity) for the same reason.  It's about solving the operational problems of adding *another* new line to the network.

My last post on the subject was something of a brain fart (at least more than usual) considering the implications of the Western Express, which I think will be inevitable now.

Metro will eliminate the need for extra capacity on the North Shore, but the wex creates numerous operational problems, not least being Northern interurbans.  Personally, I think the right solution to that is Via Chatswood, allowing the main north to be single track in part to create a fully isolated NSFL.  Amplification of Chatswood-Hornsby would be one of the cheapest in the city because the route is fairly short, and much of the pre-work (including many of the bridges) has already been done.  The problem will be Chatswood Station, being both a hub, and permanently restricted to 2 platforms thanks to Metro *and* the sale of the air space above/near it.
djf01
I don't think the Western Metro will reclaim any DD trackage. Its basically just another line with stations in places that currently have no direct access to rail. T2 will remain an issue that needs to be solved.

So yes keep Bankstown, build the SEX UP to Eskinville, tap into Redferm 11 and 12, Central 26 and 27, then yes they can go via Pitt Street under the Metro or to side and then end at St James, build a shunt neck and you have 20 trains per hour capacity. If you can practically get the trains to Wynyard from St James which I think was a plan many years ago, go for it. The shunt neck can be north of the station for which I know there is room.

So T3 will use the CBD relief line, Leppington can join, but needs a tunnel starting a minimum from Ashfield now as well. Then in future extend further west in stages (whether tunnel or surface, ie Straithfield, then Lidcombe, then Gladsville, along with extra tracks between Bankstown and freight junction. T3 and T2 are now separated from most of the rest of the network and have huge large capacity growth options, apart from the main south from Gladsville.

The Inner West capacity can now grow to match the requirements from Easy Hills and Airport. The East Hills direct peak services can use the Inner West connection to the circle in peak.

On Nth side, no the extra space on the alignment is a devil in disguise, you don't want to use that excessively curavatious corridor. It might be there and free, but its horrible for two tracks, adding 2 more is an insult, it takes 9min to go only a few km. The problem is the extra capacity was seen as a bonus to be used for the ECRL and Central Coast services before that, between the two they basically left nothing left for growth for NSL. The NW metro and city connection Metro is a work in progress so its done, it will solve the issue of ECRL traffic and leave capacity for 30-40 years to come, no need for terminators to Chatswood, they need to be further up the line where people actually come from, not where they get off. The North Main needs its own fix, the western Metro is likely to save some capacity off the western line and leave access for the north main, but obviously not now. But it will come.

Leppington, whats the story there? I thought it was supposed to branch off before Eastwood Road bridge?

Remove South Coast services from ESR for growth on Cronulla and Hurtsville lines and quad to Sutherland.

So end result, you have growth capacity for next 40-50 years.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner


There isn't any empty slots on the inner west or else there would be more services on the inner west as it is. 12 trains an hour is all that can run on the inner west with all of the stopping patterns. Regents park services are not returning any time soon.In the morning peak on the T2 Inner West Local, there are currently 8tph from Leppington/Liverpool via the South Line, 4tph from Parramatta and 2tph from Ashfield, a total of 14tph.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is my understanding that it would be limited to a cap of 16tph with the existing mixed stopping pattern, compared with a potential 20tph (24tph with ATO) with a single all stops operating pattern.  That's assuming that there would be no crossover from the Illawarra Line via the flying junctions at Central post Bankstown Line conversion to metro.
Transtopic

I hadn't realised the ashfield terminators had been re introduced. So that makes it even less viable for the current liverpool via bankstown services to be moved on to the inner west. What is more likely to happen is they will be moved on to the T8.

You also have to take in to account the cumberland line services as well and the fact that running regents park services would reduce frequency due to conflicting moves at lidcombe by about 4 trains an hour. So unless 2 extra tracks and the cbd relief are built between strathfield and lidcombe that is not happening.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

putting the metro underground to bankstown solves these issues as well. It would also provide a significantly faster service to everybody west of bankstown on the T3.
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
putting the metro underground to bankstown solves these issues as well. It would also provide a significantly faster service to everybody west of bankstown on the T3.
simstrain
Create the SW limited stop express Metro to Bankstown and Liverpool.
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

Your forgetting that the bankstown line is actually a very slow line.  Fairly low line speeds.  There is a reason why going via lidcombe or granville is faster than the bankstown express
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Your forgetting that the bankstown line is actually a very slow line.  Fairly low line speeds.  There is a reason why going via lidcombe or granville is faster than the bankstown express
tazzer96
Actually it isn't slower on limited stops. The reason why bankstown is slow is because for the most part it is all stops. The current evening limited stops service via bankstown takes 54 minutes to Liverpool. Without stopping at marrickville, campsie and lakemba that would be 48 minutes. There is probably at least 5 more minutes by removing all stops between sydenham and Bankstown.
  Ethan1395 Junior Train Controller

Location: An OSCar H Set
The Carlingford line hasn't be able to support a 30min frequency for years and even if it was upgraded to this level I think its unlikely to see the numbers to justify the 6 tracks alone to Clyde. 6 tracks is required to Gladsville to enable T2 to be removed off the western line.

Overall what should have happened to Carlingford years ago was upgraded to DOO and then 2 x two car sets operate shuttle from Carlingford to Clyde, passing at Rosehill. Carlingford line is now unfortunately about to be killed off so this is all a mute point.
RTT_Rules
Actually the Carlingford Line was running at a 30 minute frequency this year and passing at the Parramatta Road level crossing (link to cab view video) after the November 2017 timetable, but unfortunately the services were cut down to a 45 minute frequency in March, alongside making weekend Cumberland Line services only shuttle between Liverpool and Quakers Hill among other service cuts.
I did read a comment saying that patronage went up on the Carlingford Line with the 30 minute frequency, but I don't know how true that is, but I agree that anything less than 2 trains per hour is simply not sufficient to be convenient, even 2 trains is not enough, 4 trains per hour should be the minimum.

Having 16 doors open for long periods is a blatant waist of money that should have been stopped years ago to a more typical standard of doors closing automatically after X many seconds with push button reopen, or one step further and push button open to begin with, works in Qld.
RTT_Rules
Glad to see we agree here, apparently button doors were trialed on C-Sets and G-Sets and people did not like them, but people should be educated on the benefits of button doors:
-lower maintenance costs as there is less wear and tear on the doors.
-passengers are not unnecessarily exposed to the elements when the door is open only to have no one get on or off.
-lower dwell times when few doors are open.
The manual doors could be introduced line by line to get the passengers used to it, the New Intercity Fleet (NIF) appears to have door buttons and I'm hoping they won't be decorative or only used for Wondabyne and Zig Zag, but be used at every stop since most intercity passengers are already used to manual doors on the V-Sets.

Your vision is the "govt always cutting jobs" is completely screwed. NSW has close to record low unemployment and the current govt has created so many jobs its not funny. Just because you don't work for the govt as a public servant doesn't been you don't work. As for your previous comments, drivers and guards looking for work. If you have been paying attention to the likes of Sim's, the number of trains and in effect train crew jobs is capped by the bottle necks in the network, fix them and the number of trains on the network will increase along with jobs, even if the odd one or two sections is converted to Metro, which itself creates hundreds of operational and support jobs.
RTT_Rules
I agree with simstrain about the bottlenecks and agree that new CBD lines are needed for new services, I personally would like to see a new city circle with underground stations at Darling Harbor , Barangaoo (under the metro stop), Circular Quay (under the existing station), Sydney Opera House, Wooloomooloo, and back to new platforms at Central, this would take strain of the antiquated Town Hall Station as people often use it for Darling Harbor, and also the Light Rail.

As for employment, I don't see it being the governments best interest when we see:
-Intercity trains from South Korea
-Suburban trains from China
-Metro trains from India
-Light rail vehicles from France
-Buses from Germany and Malaysia
Maybe when the government makes it priority to put every Australian in employment, then we are ready for crewless metros and driver only operation (DOO) in certain areas.

Cannot terminate at East Hills with current track arrangement, need to extend the Quad.

Most people won't catch a train to shop in the next suburb anyway. Eskinville has very low patronage and doesn't justify more trains. The issue is you have 3 stations within a 500m triangle. There is actually an argument to close Eskinville or potentially Macdonaldtown. Removing one of these stations along with little used Clyde post Carlingford line would reduce running costs.

The problem with much of the Sydney network is that the traffic volumes are too high to operate a commonsense timetable on the existing network infrastructure, hence we have ridiculous, non consistent, non clockface stopping patterns on many lines in peak. Making it worse, the theory that everyone should have a single seat trip, ie not change trains. One of the advantages of the total Metro project being stand alone is that it is basically forced to be almost everything that Sydney Trains struggles to achieve.
RTT_Rules
Even if trains can't terminate at East Hills with the current track arrangement, surely the the connection times at Revesby can be improve, 10-12 minutes is certainly too long, and speaking of connection times.

If one doesn't have a car. they need to use public transport for everything, including the shopping, and improving conneciton times and making logical stops wouldn't just be for the shoppers, it would improve the network as a whole.
Erskineville/St Peters and East Hiils Line stations are not on a triangle, they are on intersecting lines, it's just that one of those lines doesn't stop at said stations. Erskineville received 1,960 daily passengers in 2013, I don't think there is any need to close the station, you could make arguments for Macdonaldtown (1,110 daily passengers) due to it's close proximity to Newtown, but I don't think the locals would be too happy, and Clyde (710 daily passengers) would be better off being moved to a more central location between Granville and Auburn, so it can still serve the industrial area, as well as the Auburn Maintenance Centre.
You  could also make an argument for closing Tempe (1,190 daily passengers) due to it's extreme proximity to Wolli Creek, but I feel it might be better off in a more central location between Sydenham and Wolli Creen, closer to the IKEA store.

Everyone having a single seat trip is ridiculous, but needing a three seat trip is also ridiculous when one ore more of those trips is significantly short distance between to adjacent stations, having to catch three trains between St Marys and Revesby is reasonable, having to catch three trains between Turella and St Peters is certainly not.
I do agree with the standalone aspect of the Metro is one sense, just not the incompatible sense, a good example is Glenfield, you can interchange between T2/T5 and T2 services and the tracks never cross each other, but during trackwork, T8 services can be rerouted to Leppington for example to reduce the amount of passengers in replacement buses, and consequentially, cars.

It's also worth asking, if Sydney Trains was somehow able to provide V-Set comfort levels on suburban trains and provide a high enough frequency to get everyone a seat during peak, would patronage increase, making people abandon the convenient car that gets caught in Sydney traffic, for a longer, yet more comfortable commute?

Remove South Coast services from ESR for growth on Cronulla and Hurtsville lines and quad to Sutherland.
RTT_Rules
Removing South Coast services from the Eastern Suburbs Line will also benefit as less suburban passengers will be also on intercity trains, while they are at it, have intercity trains no longer stop at Redfern and consider stopping at Sydenham for Bankstown Line interchange. Although I did read one comment saying the passengers numbers couldn't justify the Sydenham stop, but I don't know how true this is.
  Transtopic Assistant Commissioner

Here's the schematic of a proposal for the sextuplication from Homebush to Parramatta which I mentioned in my earlier post.

  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
The Carlingford line hasn't be able to support a 30min frequency for years and even if it was upgraded to this level I think its unlikely to see the numbers to justify the 6 tracks alone to Clyde. 6 tracks is required to Gladsville to enable T2 to be removed off the western line.

Overall what should have happened to Carlingford years ago was upgraded to DOO and then 2 x two car sets operate shuttle from Carlingford to Clyde, passing at Rosehill. Carlingford line is now unfortunately about to be killed off so this is all a mute point.
Actually the Carlingford Line was running at a 30 minute frequency this year and passing at the Parramatta Road level crossing (link to cab view video) after the November 2017 timetable, but unfortunately the services were cut down to a 45 minute frequency in March, alongside making weekend Cumberland Line services only shuttle between Liverpool and Quakers Hill among other service cuts.
I did read a comment saying that patronage went up on the Carlingford Line with the 30 minute frequency, but I don't know how true that is, but I agree that anything less than 2 trains per hour is simply not sufficient to be convenient, even 2 trains is not enough, 4 trains per hour should be the minimum.

Having 16 doors open for long periods is a blatant waist of money that should have been stopped years ago to a more typical standard of doors closing automatically after X many seconds with push button reopen, or one step further and push button open to begin with, works in Qld.
Glad to see we agree here, apparently button doors were trialed on C-Sets and G-Sets and people did not like them, but people should be educated on the benefits of button doors:
-lower maintenance costs as there is less wear and tear on the doors.
-passengers are not unnecessarily exposed to the elements when the door is open only to have no one get on or off.
-lower dwell times when few doors are open.
The manual doors could be introduced line by line to get the passengers used to it, the New Intercity Fleet (NIF) appears to have door buttons and I'm hoping they won't be decorative or only used for Wondabyne and Zig Zag, but be used at every stop since most intercity passengers are already used to manual doors on the V-Sets.

Your vision is the "govt always cutting jobs" is completely screwed. NSW has close to record low unemployment and the current govt has created so many jobs its not funny. Just because you don't work for the govt as a public servant doesn't been you don't work. As for your previous comments, drivers and guards looking for work. If you have been paying attention to the likes of Sim's, the number of trains and in effect train crew jobs is capped by the bottle necks in the network, fix them and the number of trains on the network will increase along with jobs, even if the odd one or two sections is converted to Metro, which itself creates hundreds of operational and support jobs.
I agree with simstrain about the bottlenecks and agree that new CBD lines are needed for new services, I personally would like to see a new city circle with underground stations at Darling Harbor , Barangaoo (under the metro stop), Circular Quay (under the existing station), Sydney Opera House, Wooloomooloo, and back to new platforms at Central, this would take strain of the antiquated Town Hall Station as people often use it for Darling Harbor, and also the Light Rail.

As for employment, I don't see it being the governments best interest when we see:
-Intercity trains from South Korea
-Suburban trains from China
-Metro trains from India
-Light rail vehicles from France
-Buses from Germany and Malaysia
Maybe when the government makes it priority to put every Australian in employment, then we are ready for crewless metros and driver only operation (DOO) in certain areas.

Cannot terminate at East Hills with current track arrangement, need to extend the Quad.

Most people won't catch a train to shop in the next suburb anyway. Eskinville has very low patronage and doesn't justify more trains. The issue is you have 3 stations within a 500m triangle. There is actually an argument to close Eskinville or potentially Macdonaldtown. Removing one of these stations along with little used Clyde post Carlingford line would reduce running costs.

The problem with much of the Sydney network is that the traffic volumes are too high to operate a commonsense timetable on the existing network infrastructure, hence we have ridiculous, non consistent, non clockface stopping patterns on many lines in peak. Making it worse, the theory that everyone should have a single seat trip, ie not change trains. One of the advantages of the total Metro project being stand alone is that it is basically forced to be almost everything that Sydney Trains struggles to achieve.
Even if trains can't terminate at East Hills with the current track arrangement, surely the the connection times at Revesby can be improve, 10-12 minutes is certainly too long, and speaking of connection times.

If one doesn't have a car. they need to use public transport for everything, including the shopping, and improving conneciton times and making logical stops wouldn't just be for the shoppers, it would improve the network as a whole.
Erskineville/St Peters and East Hiils Line stations are not on a triangle, they are on intersecting lines, it's just that one of those lines doesn't stop at said stations. Erskineville received 1,960 daily passengers in 2013, I don't think there is any need to close the station, you could make arguments for Macdonaldtown (1,110 daily passengers) due to it's close proximity to Newtown, but I don't think the locals would be too happy, and Clyde (710 daily passengers) would be better off being moved to a more central location between Granville and Auburn, so it can still serve the industrial area, as well as the Auburn Maintenance Centre.
You  could also make an argument for closing Tempe (1,190 daily passengers) due to it's extreme proximity to Wolli Creek, but I feel it might be better off in a more central location between Sydenham and Wolli Creen, closer to the IKEA store.

Everyone having a single seat trip is ridiculous, but needing a three seat trip is also ridiculous when one ore more of those trips is significantly short distance between to adjacent stations, having to catch three trains between St Marys and Revesby is reasonable, having to catch three trains between Turella and St Peters is certainly not.
I do agree with the standalone aspect of the Metro is one sense, just not the incompatible sense, a good example is Glenfield, you can interchange between T2/T5 and T2 services and the tracks never cross each other, but during trackwork, T8 services can be rerouted to Leppington for example to reduce the amount of passengers in replacement buses, and consequentially, cars.

It's also worth asking, if Sydney Trains was somehow able to provide V-Set comfort levels on suburban trains and provide a high enough frequency to get everyone a seat during peak, would patronage increase, making people abandon the convenient car that gets caught in Sydney traffic, for a longer, yet more comfortable commute?

Remove South Coast services from ESR for growth on Cronulla and Hurtsville lines and quad to Sutherland.
Removing South Coast services from the Eastern Suburbs Line will also benefit as less suburban passengers will be also on intercity trains, while they are at it, have intercity trains no longer stop at Redfern and consider stopping at Sydenham for Bankstown Line interchange. Although I did read one comment saying the passengers numbers couldn't justify the Sydenham stop, but I don't know how true this is.
Ethan1395
On a 30min frequency, the Carlingford is likely simply too expensive for the potential ridership. The line isn't long enough to fil a train of even 4 cars outside peak. Remember the NSL which runs through far greater density running every 3-10min and more than 3 x the length still doesn't fill outside peak and shoulder peak. How do we expect Carlingford for 6 stations, some the least used in the network contribute reasonable numbers?

It should have been made DOO years ago, running 2 car shuttles, more like a tram to Clyde, then maybe you could run far more frequently.

Anyway the line is dead, so all a mute point.

Some of those things should be made here, not all as the volumes don't justify, but NSW and Sydney especially has lowest unemployment in country and close to what is considered full employment levels. End Comment!

The issues of needing to change trains, sometimes three times on one line is an outcome of the network capacity issues and the inefficiency created. As the numbers inconvenienced is very small compared to the full commute, it would cost alot of money to pick up this small change. Cheaper and easier to let them drive. Remember Sydney Trains is MASS TRANSIT, designed for masses, not individuals.

Connection times are driven by other factors, the timetablers I'm sure do what they can with what they have. Not every connection will be perfect. In Brisbane it used to be on 30min timetable, you had either a 3min connection or 27min connection at Roma Street, couldn't have both.

Re-routing services by other lines is a luxury and expensive one at that. Its also not practical in Sydney in peak and unlikely to occur if the other lines are already at capacity train frequency wise. The usual practice in most countries is you change trains. The events that cause this are also rare and hence how much money to throw at a non-problem?

The Carlingford Line offers 3 seats per passenger to anyone wanting to use it, doesn't seem to be filling trains does it? A V-set seat comfort level is again a luxury for which who will pay? The network needs $2 in every $3 from the taxpayer to operate now. Hence I very much doubt comfort levels is a key driver to getting more people to use trains in peak as most lines are running sardine capacity levels and hence ~30% of people don't even have a seat now. If the NWRL runs full trains, the whole seat argument will be dead and buried forever.  

If you look at the overlapping timetables, not all stops are there for passenger reasons, rather need to have trains slowed without simply stopping at a red light every service due to capacity issues, which sets a mindset the trains always late! So, why not just stop at a station? each station adds 30-45sec to the service running time.

Its been stated a few times here, the Inner West completely screws up the SW services as both compete to access the same tracks for 12km with opposing stopping patterns, hence the SW services yield to the Inner West by having extra stops. I'm sure the same occurs on the Southern line.


To reduce the cost of Sydney Train, obviously more bodies on trains is needed. But my question would be, how many more CBD services could fit on the network in AM peak? I doubt not too many more due to numerous bottle necks. The untangle program opened up some slots and improved some reliability, but those benefits have been eaten up by now. However in AM peak still have a very much tangled network.

For example
Y-link services need to fit in empty slots from Leppington SW trains, Liverpool via Bankstown, Parramatta all to CBD, western line and Richmond Line. If anyone of those has a problem, so will Y-link which could affect others in a knock on effect. If nothing else the Metro will at least be stand alone no risk of another line using its tracks.
  Ethan1395 Junior Train Controller

Location: An OSCar H Set
FINALLY GOT AROUND TO RESPONDING, been busy with life and had no time sorry.

On a 30min frequency, the Carlingford is likely simply too expensive for the potential ridership. The line isn't long enough to fil a train of even 4 cars outside peak. Remember the NSL which runs through far greater density running every 3-10min and more than 3 x the length still doesn't fill outside peak and shoulder peak. How do we expect Carlingford for 6 stations, some the least used in the network contribute reasonable numbers?

It should have been made DOO years ago, running 2 car shuttles, more like a tram to Clyde, then maybe you could run far more frequently.

Anyway the line is dead, so all a mute point.
RTT_Rules
You are right that the line is not long enough, that is one of the reasons I suggested connecting it to the Inner West locals (not my original idea), the short line length also contributes to it's low patronage, but it's low frequency does also. Does the Olympic Park line justify it's 10 minute frequency (5 minute services, two stations, 4 carriages weekdays, 8 carriages (Waratahs) weekends?

I'll believe the line is dead when I see the Parramatta Light Rail being built, should it be the case, I would turn my focus on connecting the Olympic Park services to the Inner West locals instead.

Your idea about the 2 carriage shuttles is well thought out as it doubles frequency with minimal extra cost and they could have used the old 2 carraige K-Sets that use to perform Newcastle Suburban services, but it still has the underlying issue of it being a short shuttle from nowhere to nowhere.

Some of those things should be made here, not all as the volumes don't justify, but NSW and Sydney especially has lowest unemployment in country and close to what is considered full employment levels. End Comment!
RTT_Rules
Probably little point talking about economical issues on a rail forum, but may I leave it at this, Newcastle is part of NSW is one of the hardest places in the country to find work, it's also the place where trains were once built, now it's the place where trains are offloaded from ships from overseas.

The issues of needing to change trains, sometimes three times on one line is an outcome of the network capacity issues and the inefficiency created. As the numbers inconvenienced is very small compared to the full commute, it would cost alot of money to pick up this small change. Cheaper and easier to let them drive. Remember Sydney Trains is MASS TRANSIT, designed for masses, not individuals.

Connection times are driven by other factors, the timetablers I'm sure do what they can with what they have. Not every connection will be perfect. In Brisbane it used to be on 30min timetable, you had either a 3min connection or 27min connection at Roma Street, couldn't have both.
RTT_Rules
Sydney Trains is mass transit, but having trains stop at interchange stations and providing reasonable connections is not too much to ask, and would help people to commute to work in places other than the city, the entire reasons that the T5 Cumberland Line exists is because NOT everyone travels to the city.

One of the could things about the new Metro route is that T4 Illawarra Services will need to stop at St Peters and Erskineville, removing the 3 seat short journey, I also hope it will justify stopping all services (including South Coast) and Sydenham for better interchange, and removing Redfern from South Coast services.

Re-routing services by other lines is a luxury and expensive one at that. Its also not practical in Sydney in peak and unlikely to occur if the other lines are already at capacity train frequency wise. The usual practice in most countries is you change trains. The events that cause this are also rare and hence how much money to throw at a non-problem?
RTT_Rules
Far point, can't argue there.

The Carlingford Line offers 3 seats per passenger to anyone wanting to use it, doesn't seem to be filling trains does it? A V-set seat comfort level is again a luxury for which who will pay? The network needs $2 in every $3 from the taxpayer to operate now. Hence I very much doubt comfort levels is a key driver to getting more people to use trains in peak as most lines are running sardine capacity levels and hence ~30% of people don't even have a seat now. If the NWRL runs full trains, the whole seat argument will be dead and buried forever.
RTT_Rules
I suggested the comfort idea to encourage people to use trains off-peak for other reasons than work or study including shopping and leisure, if the trains takes twice as long as driving, the train having twice the comfort level could be a key motivator. I only mentioned peak because it would be important to have enough seats in peak, and making seats more comfortable leads to less seats overall.

Yes, currently our Double Deck services require at least twice the frequency, single deck would require more, and I'm not actually against single deck trains, I think they may even prove more efficient in areas such as lower dwell times, and lower maintenance, I'm only against automated trains (they are safe but not good economically) and minimal seating.

I may be against the metro but I certainly hope it succeeds in getting people out their cars, I'm from Newcastle and I've seen exactly what car culture can do to a place when you tear out the public transport.

If you look at the overlapping timetables, not all stops are there for passenger reasons, rather need to have trains slowed without simply stopping at a red light every service due to capacity issues, which sets a mindset the trains always late! So, why not just stop at a station? each station adds 30-45sec to the service running time.

Its been stated a few times here, the Inner West completely screws up the SW services as both compete to access the same tracks for 12km with opposing stopping patterns, hence the SW services yield to the Inner West by having extra stops. I'm sure the same occurs on the Southern line.
RTT_Rules
More tracks are definitely needed between Strathfield to Parramatta (8 from Central to Strathfield, and 6 from Strathfield to Parramatta), and more CBD lines are needed to take on the extra services.

Southern line is less of an issue than Inner West as all services on the South line stop at all stations, but quadding the line would allow for faster services now that you mentioned it. Thinking express services only stopping Glenfield, Liverpool, Warrick Farm, Cabrammata, Fairfield, Granville, etc.

Here's the schematic of a proposal for the sextuplication from Homebush to Parramatta which I mentioned in my earlier post.

Transtopic

This definitely needs to be done, and Homebush needs to lose it's role as a terminus.
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
You are right that the line is not long enough, that is one of the reasons I suggested connecting it to the Inner West locals (not my original idea), the short line length also contributes to it's low patronage, but it's low frequency does also. Does the Olympic Park line justify it's 10 minute frequency (5 minute services, two stations, 4 carriages weekdays, 8 carriages (Waratahs) weekends? I'll believe the line is dead when I see the Parramatta Light Rail being built, should it be the case, I would turn my focus on connecting the Olympic Park services to the Inner West locals instead. Your idea about the 2 carriage shuttles is well thought out as it doubles frequency with minimal extra cost and they could have used the old 2 carraige K-Sets that use to perform Newcastle Suburban services, but it still has the underlying issue of it being a short shuttle from nowhere to nowhere.
Ethan 1395
Caringlingford is history, but the change I don't agree with, anyway the end is neigh!

Terminating at Olympic park is not a bad idea, Homebush is a termination station of convenience and its fairly easy to squeeze two extra tracks in to connect to Olympic Park, but actually thinking some more I'd run through to Lidcombe and terminate there via Olympic Park.

Forcing St Peters and Eskinville onto Southern Services is a mistake, should only be served by Hurtsville.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

You are right that the line is not long enough, that is one of the reasons I suggested connecting it to the Inner West locals (not my original idea), the short line length also contributes to it's low patronage, but it's low frequency does also. Does the Olympic Park line justify it's 10 minute frequency (5 minute services, two stations, 4 carriages weekdays, 8 carriages (Waratahs) weekends? I'll believe the line is dead when I see the Parramatta Light Rail being built, should it be the case, I would turn my focus on connecting the Olympic Park services to the Inner West locals instead. Your idea about the 2 carriage shuttles is well thought out as it doubles frequency with minimal extra cost and they could have used the old 2 carraige K-Sets that use to perform Newcastle Suburban services, but it still has the underlying issue of it being a short shuttle from nowhere to nowhere.
Caringlingford is history, but the change I don't agree with, anyway the end is neigh!

Terminating at Olympic park is not a bad idea, Homebush is a termination station of convenience and its fairly easy to squeeze two extra tracks in to connect to Olympic Park, but actually thinking some more I'd run through to Lidcombe and terminate there via Olympic Park.

Forcing St Peters and Eskinville onto Southern Services is a mistake, should only be served by Hurtsville.
RTT_Rules

It isn't easy to squeeze 2 extra tracks in or otherwise it would already have been done. The only way is to put the suburban in to a tunnel from strathfield to lidcombe and even then you would have to build another tunnel or flyover so as not to conflict with current lines and reduce capacity even further near the flemington sheds.

Totally dumb idea on both accounts.
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE

It isn't easy to squeeze 2 extra tracks in or otherwise it would already have been done. The only way is to put the suburban in to a tunnel from strathfield to lidcombe and even then you would have to build another tunnel or flyover so as not to conflict with current lines and reduce capacity even further near the flemington sheds.

Totally dumb idea on both accounts.
simstrain
You are right Sim's, there isn't a cleared ROW there now to lay two pairs of rails!

Seriously you need to think a bit further before commenting or at least ask for details. The Inner West finishes on south side, so yes you need to cross over and this could be simply a dive, difficult because there is a under pass of the railways a few hundred metres to west. So the corridor will need to be widened, then dive. Yes a few houses will get bull dozed in process.

When I said not hard, just look further west to previous works doing similar approach.
  Transtopic Assistant Commissioner


It isn't easy to squeeze 2 extra tracks in or otherwise it would already have been done. The only way is to put the suburban in to a tunnel from strathfield to lidcombe and even then you would have to build another tunnel or flyover so as not to conflict with current lines and reduce capacity even further near the flemington sheds.

Totally dumb idea on both accounts.
simstrain
You obviously missed the schematic diagram prepared by Transport for NSW which I posted earlier for a proposed sextup between Homebush and Parramatta. They don't appear to see it as a problem, although whether it is implemented is another matter.

You will note that the additional track pair runs via a surface route from the termination of the Inner West Local at Homebush to just before Lidcombe where it merges with the existing Suburban line, continuing through to Granville.  The new tracks as well as existing tracks are all slewed through Flemington Station avoiding the need for construction of additional platforms. Platforms 1 & 2 at Flemington are closed, leaving only platforms 3 & 4 on the new tracks.  

In parallel with the merging of the new tracks with the Suburban tracks before Lidcombe, the Suburban tracks are diverted into a tunnel which continues to before Clyde, where it surfaces and continues on the Northern side of the rail corridor to link with the existing Western Line northern track pair between Granville Junction and Harris Park.  The Western Line southern track pair at this point connects in parallel with the Western Line northern track pair.  Clyde Station and all connections to the Carlingford Line are closed. Strangely, Harris Park Station is also completely closed and I don't see the logic for that.  I'm sure the locals will have something to say.

The effective outcome of this proposal would be that the extended T2 Local Line would be completely segregated from the Western Line tracks. It would not allow T2 services to terminate at Parramatta as they now do.  Whether this is a good thing is open to conjecture.  There are also advantages in completely separating T1 and T2 through the busy Homebush to Granville corridor, leaving T2 as the all stations service and the Western Line T1 tracks for fast express.

Aside from the inability to extend all stations services to Parramatta, the only other downside I can see is that the line frequency of T2 via the Locals would be restricted by having to continue the mixed stopping pattern of all stations and limited stop services from Liverpool via the South Line.  The all stations service could potentially run from Bankstown (post metro) via Lidcombe to the CBD, complemented by starters from Ashfield in the peak.  No more terminators at Homebush. Liverpool via Granville to run all stations to Lidcombe, then Strathfield, Burwood, Ashfield, Newtown, Redfern and Central.  Liverpool to Bankstown should continue, interchanging with the metro.  Regrettably, there would be no room for reinstating a Liverpool via Regents Park service.

Currently, the Inner West Local (T2) has a limit of about 16tph with the mixed stopping pattern.  With ATO, it may be able to be increased to around 18 to 20tph, compared to a potential maximum frequency of 24tph with a single operating pattern.

There would undoubtedly be possible variations to the sextuplication scheme proposed by Transport for NSW, but it is a good place to start.
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE

It isn't easy to squeeze 2 extra tracks in or otherwise it would already have been done. The only way is to put the suburban in to a tunnel from strathfield to lidcombe and even then you would have to build another tunnel or flyover so as not to conflict with current lines and reduce capacity even further near the flemington sheds.

Totally dumb idea on both accounts.You obviously missed the schematic diagram prepared by Transport for NSW which I posted earlier for a proposed sextup between Homebush and Parramatta. They don't appear to see it as a problem, although whether it is implemented is another matter.

You will note that the additional track pair runs via a surface route from the termination of the Inner West Local at Homebush to just before Lidcombe where it merges with the existing Suburban line, continuing through to Granville.  The new tracks as well as existing tracks are all slewed through Flemington Station avoiding the need for construction of additional platforms. Platforms 1 & 2 at Flemington are closed, leaving only platforms 3 & 4 on the new tracks.  

In parallel with the merging of the new tracks with the Suburban tracks before Lidcombe, the Suburban tracks are diverted into a tunnel which continues to before Clyde, where it surfaces and continues on the Northern side of the rail corridor to link with the existing Western Line northern track pair between Granville Junction and Harris Park.  The Western Line southern track pair at this point connects in parallel with the Western Line northern track pair.  Clyde Station and all connections to the Carlingford Line are closed. Strangely, Harris Park Station is also completely closed and I don't see the logic for that.  I'm sure the locals will have something to say.

The effective outcome of this proposal would be that the extended T2 Local Line would be completely segregated from the Western Line tracks. It would not allow T2 services to terminate at Parramatta as they now do.  Whether this is a good thing is open to conjecture.  There are also advantages in completely separating T1 and T2 through the busy Homebush to Granville corridor, leaving T2 as the all stations service and the Western Line T1 tracks for fast express.

Aside from the inability to extend all stations services to Parramatta, the only other downside I can see is that the line frequency of T2 via the Locals would be restricted by having to continue the mixed stopping pattern of all stations and limited stop services from Liverpool via the South Line.  The all stations service could potentially run from Bankstown (post metro) via Lidcombe to the CBD, complemented by starters from Ashfield in the peak.  No more terminators at Homebush. Liverpool via Granville to run all stations to Lidcombe, then Strathfield, Burwood, Ashfield, Newtown, Redfern and Central.  Liverpool to Bankstown should continue, interchanging with the metro.  Regrettably, there would be no room for reinstating a Liverpool via Regents Park service.

Currently, the Inner West Local (T2) has a limit of about 16tph with the mixed stopping pattern.  With ATO, it may be able to be increased to around 18 to 20tph, compared to a potential maximum frequency of 24tph with a single operating pattern.

There would undoubtedly be possible variations to the sextuplication scheme proposed by Transport for NSW, but it is a good place to start.
Transtopic
Interesting comments Trainstopic.

Yes, seemed doable enough, not its not free, but still a reasonable plan that the Western Metro won't mitigate but allows for increased train frequency to uterlise the Bankstown line departure.

- Removal and closure of half of Flemington station, makes sense
- Removal and closure of Clyde, makes sense (post Carlingford)
- Closure of Harris Park station, hmm, doesn't make sense
  Ethan1395 Junior Train Controller

Location: An OSCar H Set
Caringlingford is history, but the change I don't agree with, anyway the end is neigh!

Terminating at Olympic park is not a bad idea, Homebush is a termination station of convenience and its fairly easy to squeeze two extra tracks in to connect to Olympic Park, but actually thinking some more I'd run through to Lidcombe and terminate there via Olympic Park.

Forcing St Peters and Eskinville onto Southern Services is a mistake, should only be served by Hurtsville.
RTT_Rules
Running through the Lidcombe would still prove beneficial if other services still terminate at Lidcombe (e.g. Bankstown) or Lidcombe is a stop not near others on other lines (e.g. Western), but other than, wouldn't turning around at Olympic Park and heading back to the City be more cost efficient?

I know why trains currently terminate at Homebush but it needs to change as it's part of an underlying issue - timetabling that assumes everyone wants to go to the city and back, Homebush only gets 2 trains an hour travelling west compared to other stations getting 4, making it a poor place for a terminus. Still beats the old timetable, trains terminated at Homebush but never (apart from a few early morning services, etc) served it as an intermediate station, if you wanted to travel just one stop from Homebush to Flemington, you had to catch 2 trains.

So disagreements with St Peters and Erskineville, they should only be served by all-stops Illawarra services, just as long as they get 15 minute frequency.
I said that South Coast Intercity services should stop at Sydenham to interchange with Bankstown, and they should NOT stop at Redfern (too close to Central, and skipping Redfern doesn't create a short 3 seat journey situation).

It isn't easy to squeeze 2 extra tracks in or otherwise it would already have been done. The only way is to put the suburban in to a tunnel from strathfield to lidcombe and even then you would have to build another tunnel or flyover so as not to conflict with current lines and reduce capacity even further near the flemington sheds.

Totally dumb idea on both accounts.
RTT_Rules
Wouldn't be easy at all, but what would you suggest doing about Homebush being an inconvenient terminus, or the highly inefficient Olympic Park shuttle?

Aside from the inability to extend all stations services to Parramatta, the only other downside I can see is that the line frequency of T2 via the Locals would be restricted by having to continue the mixed stopping pattern of all stations and limited stop services from Liverpool via the South Line. The all stations service could potentially run from Bankstown (post metro) via Lidcombe to the CBD, complemented by starters from Ashfield in the peak. No more terminators at Homebush. Liverpool via Granville to run all stations to Lidcombe, then Strathfield, Burwood, Ashfield, Newtown, Redfern and Central. Liverpool to Bankstown should continue, interchanging with the metro. Regrettably, there would be no room for reinstating a Liverpool via Regents Park service.
Transtopic
Could the six tracks be extended to Parramatta?

T2 Inner West Local and T2 South/Leppington need to be seperated. Bankstown post metro is another option I considered as it would be the only way to efficiently service Birrong and Yagoona afterwards. How much frequency is justifiable on the Inner West locals, could we have 12 trains an hour? 4 an hour to Bankstown, 4 an hour to Olympic Park, and 4 an hour to Parramatta, may not be so efficient having so many branching paths though.

- Removal and closure of Clyde, makes sense (post Carlingford)
- Closure of Harris Park station, hmm, doesn't make sense
RTT_Rules
Clyde station would be better off moved to a central location between Granville and Auburn, that way it could still service the industrial area, but also the Auburn Maintenance Centre.
A similar example is Tempe, it's current location close to Wolli Creek would be better serviced by a footbridge to the Wolli Creek concourse, if Tempe was moved to a halfway point between Sydenham and Wolli Creek, it would be more useful (closer to IKEA for example) and would justify it's existance.

Closing Harris Park certainly doesn't make sense, close one smaller station and all of a sudden people could make arguments to close other smaller stations, but it's smaller stations like Harris Park and Erskineville that make up the numbers that give the larger stations their patronage.
One of the main reasons the Newcastle CBD line didn't get more patronage is because there wasn't enough suburban traffic from smaller stations to feed it since suburban lines and stations closed throughout the 20th century.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Just because someone in transport nsw could draw on a piece of paper it doesn't mean it is possible. Of all the clearways projects that needed to be done this would have been the most important one and yet we ended up with turnbacks because reality set in and it was not possible.

If any dive is going to happen in that area RTT it will have to be to the east of homebush and not the west with a tunnel from there to lidcombe for the suburban. Locals can stay above ground to service homebush and flemington. Why the heck would you waste time and effort just to move the inner west service to Olympic park for. That is a stupid idea that would drag the network even further into quagmire and the same would apply to transtopics carlingford line idea.

DJF, the western metro is not taking any DD line over or going anywhere near the current main alignment. It will be underground the whole way in brand new tunnels heading out through the bays district and will terminate at Westmead underground.
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
A few points

- Clyde is a waste of space, its proximity to Granville is such that its quicker to walk to Granville than wait for the next train (Google says 9min, but its possible to reduce by 2-3min if they wanted to very cheaply). Its prime function is junction station for Carlingford Line. Moving it is a waste of money and not practical as you cannot move it closer to Auburn.

- Eskinville and St Peters and potentially Redfern should not be on the southern Coast services, the route is already long and painful enough. Who from the South Coast is travelling to the Eskinville and St Peters? Basically no one. So if its a 3 seat journey, who cares.

- Tempe, I agree it would be better placed about 400-500m north, Wolli Creek is not the issue as there is no easy pedestrian access between the two across the river. Maybe closure of Tempe (If I recall the usage is actually low) outright is a more efficient solution with easy walking access provided to Wolli Creek, but this won't happen. Best way is to not have the same train service service both stations to save time.

- If I recall correctly, either Birrong or Yagoona gets very little usage. I think its Birrong. If the Metro was to be extended west to Liverpool directly, a new station could be build south of Yagoona to service this area and then the Bankstown to Junction line closed. The all Liverpool trains via Reagents park would need to run via Straithfield to the city. Currently no capacity to do so, you need a 4th pair of tracks or western Metro depopulate the Western services so much you open up slots.

- A dive from Locals to northside much occur west of the bridge west of Homebush, not before. Too complex. Yes those are lines on a map, but its not that hard to do, yes some houses will go or you dive prior to Homebush and head west 100% underground. For the western services this is probably the easiest as you don't need stations.
  Transtopic Assistant Commissioner

Just because someone in transport nsw could draw on a piece of paper it doesn't mean it is possible. Of all the clearways projects that needed to be done this would have been the most important one and yet we ended up with turnbacks because reality set in and it was not possible.

If any dive is going to happen in that area RTT it will have to be to the east of homebush and not the west with a tunnel from there to lidcombe for the suburban. Locals can stay above ground to service homebush and flemington. Why the heck would you waste time and effort just to move the inner west service to Olympic park for. That is a stupid idea that would drag the network even further into quagmire and the same would apply to transtopics carlingford line idea.

DJF, the western metro is not taking any DD line over or going anywhere near the current main alignment. It will be underground the whole way in brand new tunnels heading out through the bays district and will terminate at Westmead underground.
simstrain
What are you talking about sims?  Don't be so dismissive.  It's not just someone drawing lines on a piece of paper as you put it, but an official planning document prepared by TfNSW.  They would have carried out an extensive investigation to assess its feasibility before proposing such a scheme, so it's obviously possible.  It's irrelevant whether it's accepted as Government policy.  Most likely they ignored it because of their reluctance to invest any substantial funds in upgrading the existing network infrastructure, instead focussing on their metro agenda.  This may come back to bite them at the next election.  

You seem to ignore the fact that the Clearways program was an initiative of the previous Labor Government.  This sextuplication proposal came later under the Liberal's watch.  TfNSW who proposed the scheme didn't even exist under Labor. I understand that it was prepared in 2013, two years after the Liberals came to power.  So get your facts straight mate.

I'm puzzled by your reference to my "Carlingford Line idea".  The only thing I've mentioned is the bleedingly obvious proposal to close the line altogether.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

A few points

- Clyde is a waste of space, its proximity to Granville is such that its quicker to walk to Granville than wait for the next train (Google says 9min, but its possible to reduce by 2-3min if they wanted to very cheaply). Its prime function is junction station for Carlingford Line. Moving it is a waste of money and not practical as you cannot move it closer to Auburn.

- Eskinville and St Peters and potentially Redfern should not be on the southern Coast services, the route is already long and painful enough. Who from the South Coast is travelling to the Eskinville and St Peters? Basically no one. So if its a 3 seat journey, who cares.

- Tempe, I agree it would be better placed about 400-500m north, Wolli Creek is not the issue as there is no easy pedestrian access between the two across the river. Maybe closure of Tempe (If I recall the usage is actually low) outright is a more efficient solution with easy walking access provided to Wolli Creek, but this won't happen. Best way is to not have the same train service service both stations to save time.

- If I recall correctly, either Birrong or Yagoona gets very little usage. I think its Birrong. If the Metro was to be extended west to Liverpool directly, a new station could be build south of Yagoona to service this area and then the Bankstown to Junction line closed. The all Liverpool trains via Reagents park would need to run via Straithfield to the city. Currently no capacity to do so, you need a 4th pair of tracks or western Metro depopulate the Western services so much you open up slots.

- A dive from Locals to northside much occur west of the bridge west of Homebush, not before. Too complex. Yes those are lines on a map, but its not that hard to do, yes some houses will go or you dive prior to Homebush and head west 100% underground. For the western services this is probably the easiest as you don't need stations.
RTT_Rules

1. Who said anything about clyde outside of that is where an underground tunnel from strathfield could emerge near the old clyburn station.
2. They aren't and never will be. They might however be on the illawarra or t8 via sydenham line post bankstown metro.
3. Tempe already gets skipped by most illawarra services already.
4. There is no regular or peak regents park services (outside of 3 off peak services) and never will be unless the sixth track is built between strathfield and lidcombe. All capacity is taken on the T2.
5. There will be no dive to the north side from the locals ever. That is a stupid stupid idea. A tunnel starting from the east of homebush and 2 extra tracks to lidcombe is the only option. There will be no extension of the homebush terminator to olympic park.
6. While the current government is in charge look for more metro lines rather then any new DD infrastructure.
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE

1. Who said anything about clyde outside of that is where an underground tunnel from strathfield could emerge near the old clyburn station.
2. They aren't and never will be. They might however be on the illawarra or t8 via sydenham line post bankstown metro.
3. Tempe already gets skipped by most illawarra services already.
4. There is no regular or peak regents park services (outside of 3 off peak services) and never will be unless the sixth track is built between strathfield and lidcombe. All capacity is taken on the T2.
5. There will be no dive to the north side from the locals ever. That is a stupid stupid idea. A tunnel starting from the east of homebush and 2 extra tracks to lidcombe is the only option. There will be no extension of the homebush terminator to olympic park.
6. While the current government is in charge look for more metro lines rather then any new DD infrastructure.
simstrain

One of the negative side effects of the Metro is that it was announced Illawarra  would stop at additional stops. The interurbans all have too many suburban stops now, they don't need to be stopping at such insignificant locations, Metro or not!

An election win by the LNP in March 2019 is no longer a done deal. Opening of the Metro tram in Newcastle and even city tram is not going to undo alot of the damage created by the idiots who seem to forget that to lead democratic govt means you need to be popular and not pi$$ on people.

If there was to be a change of govt, the Bankstown Metro is likely to be cut unless its simply too far gone. Short of actually boring the tunnels beyond the point of no return, I'm not sure when the dead line would be.
  Transtopic Assistant Commissioner

Assuming the Bankstown Line metro goes ahead, which is by no means certain if there is a change of government, then the options for servicing St Peters and Erskineville are via the Illawarra Main (eastern track pair) for services to/from Hurstville/Cronulla/Waterfall or the Illawarra Local (western track pair) to/from Campbelltown via the East Hills Line.  I don't think it would be appropriate for Campbelltown express services to stop at these inner city stations.   They should be serviced from the Illawarra Line.  Post metro,   the Illawarra Local should be reserved strictly for express services.  To overcome the problem of South Coast Intercity services being stuck behind the all stations services through St Peters and Erskineville, a crossover should be installed between the Local and Main tracks north of the junction with  the ESR to allow access directly from the Local to the Illawarra Dive through to Sydney Terminal.  This would mean that the South Coast Intercity services would bypass St Peters and Erskneville and have to terminate at Central, rather than running through to Bondi Junction.  If the Labor Party wins office and cans the metro, then it would probably have to end at Sydenham, if connecting it to the Metro West isn't feasible, although it would be my preference.

I've given some further thought to the sextuplication proposal from Homebush to Parramatta which I posted earlier and appears it was based on the premise that the outer track pair from Westmead to St Marys would become the Main express  tracks, including platforms 3 & 4 at Parramatta.  The inner track pair would become the Suburban slower all stops tracks, including platforms 1 & 2 at Parramatta.  This simplifies turnback arrangements at St Marys, with the crossover between adjoining tracks.  However, the Y-link for the Cumberland Line between Merrylands and Harris Park, connecting to the  "Main" tracks complicates this because the need to stop at Harris Park (pl 3 &4).  This could be one reason why they proposed closing Harris Park.  It would actually make more sense to retain the southern track pair as the Suburban all stops line, leaving platforms 3 & 4 and closing platforms 1& 2 on the fast Main tracks.  The only change needed to the proposed sextup to achieve this would be to connect the tunnel at the eastern end near Lidcombe with the existing Main instead of the Suburban Line with the Suburban connecting in parallel with the Main, if you get my drift.  Then that mucks up the terminating arrangement on adjoining tracks at St Marys, as the outer track would then become the all stops tracks.  A further complicating factor in all of this is how the new lines from the North West and Badgerys Creek will integrate with the existing Western Line.  There's no guarantee it will be a metro line, inspite of their intentions.
  Ethan1395 Junior Train Controller

Location: An OSCar H Set
EDIT: Merged information from this post with information on my next post on the next page to keep the post's content and related discussion relevant.

I hope I am not breaking any rules doing this, doesn't appear to be so, but please let me know so I can revert my changes.
Thank You Smile

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.