Metro raises more problems than solutions for public transport

 
Topic moved from News by dthead on 31 Mar 2019 20:19
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
And after doing all this you have less seats in the combined fleets than now.

Yes, but more standing spaces!
djf01
The Metro design solves that problem with its open walk through carriages. Seating longitude on the side.

Sponsored advertisement

  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
And after doing all this you have less seats in the combined fleets than now.

Yes, but more standing spaces!
The Metro design solves that problem with its open walk through carriages. Seating longitude on the side.
RTT_Rules
The issue with the NWRL Metro that the anti-Metro'ers are quickly forgetting is that its not a 40km long line from the city that will just collect bodies along the way dumping most in the city

- From Tallawong to Cherrbrook, about 25min or so travelling time its a typical suburban line, but then it all changes

- Epping is likely to be a major change station, with many getting off to head north or south or leaving Epping station

- At Epping alot more will get on headed to the ECRL stations, total travel time less than about 15min.

- ECRL midway stations there is currently 3-4 x getting off than on including Chatswood, so by the time it has off-loaded its cargo by Chatswood, the turnover for the last 4 stops will have been huge. Anyone continuing to the city likely will have a seat if they want one.

- Leaving Chatswood, we assume the train will be popular with people transferring from the NSL to the Metro for a much faster trip to the city and likely closer to their destination if at B????, Martin Place or Pitt Street. Maybe even Nth Sydney?
  Transtopic Assistant Commissioner

The issue with the NWRL Metro that the anti-Metro'ers are quickly forgetting is that its not a 40km long line from the city that will just collect bodies along the way dumping most in the city

- From Tallawong to Cherrbrook, about 25min or so travelling time its a typical suburban line, but then it all changes

- Epping is likely to be a major change station, with many getting off to head north or south or leaving Epping station

- At Epping alot more will get on headed to the ECRL stations, total travel time less than about 15min.

- ECRL midway stations there is currently 3-4 x getting off than on including Chatswood, so by the time it has off-loaded its cargo by Chatswood, the turnover for the last 4 stops will have been huge. Anyone continuing to the city likely will have a seat if they want one.

- Leaving Chatswood, we assume the train will be popular with people transferring from the NSL to the Metro for a much faster trip to the city and likely closer to their destination if at B????, Martin Place or Pitt Street. Maybe even Nth Sydney?
RTT_Rules
It's a myth that there will be a big turnover of passengers on Metro Northwest at the Macquarie Park stations, or even Chatswood or North Sydney for that matter, when the current bus services from the North West on the M2 Motorway are overwhelmingly bound for the CBD.  There are limited services to Macquarie Park.  It is and will continue to be a widely dispersed Business Park, which isn't conducive to a high capacity metro system. With its abundance of parking compared with other more compact business centres, it will continue to be a car based destination, particularly from the North West.  

There are also some questionable assumptions that passengers on North Shore trains, particularly those who already have a seat, will interchange to the metro at Chatswood for a faster journey to North Sydney or the CBD (post extension).  There will obviously be some whose destination will be more convenient on the metro line, but to what extent that will be remains to be seen.  St Leonards, North Sydney, Milsons Point, Wynyard, Town Hall, Central and even Redfern will continue to be major destinations, so why would you bother changing for a marginally faster journey and most likely having to stand all the way?

Call me old fashioned, out of touch or whatever, but I question the government's strategy of encouraging more interchange to reach the CBD on an expanded metro system, rather than investing in amplification of the existing network to allow single seat journeys to the CBD to continue.  I think they're being incredibly naïve if they think the travelling public will just cop it.  I'm not saying that the metro system shouldn't be expanded, but not as a solution to addressing congestion issues on the current network.  We need both systems to operate in tandem.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

And just to flog a dead horse even more, I think in ~30 years the CBD metro will support the following routes feeder routes:

North:
Richmond - Schofields -> METRO
Londonderry - Marsden Park -> METRO
Aerotropolis - St  Marys - Ropes Creek ->
(Possibly) Hornsby -> Epping -> METRO

South:
METRO -> Lidcombe (probably full conversion)
METRO -> Sefton - Cabramatta - Liverpool - Leppington - Oran Park - (Extension to West Camden still in the pipeline)
METRO -> Sefton - Cabramatta - Liverpool - Leppington - Airport
METRO -> Cabramatta - Liverpool - Bringelli
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
It's a myth that there will be a big turnover of passengers on Metro Northwest at the Macquarie Park stations, or even Chatswood or North Sydney for that matter, when the current bus services from the North West on the M2 Motorway are overwhelmingly bound for the CBD.  There are limited services to Macquarie Park.  It is and will continue to be a widely dispersed Business Park, which isn't conducive to a high capacity metro system. With its abundance of parking compared with other more compact business centres, it will continue to be a car based destination, particularly from the North West.  

There are also some questionable assumptions that passengers on North Shore trains, particularly those who already have a seat, will interchange to the metro at Chatswood for a faster journey to North Sydney or the CBD (post extension).  There will obviously be some whose destination will be more convenient on the metro line, but to what extent that will be remains to be seen.  St Leonards, North Sydney, Milsons Point, Wynyard, Town Hall, Central and even Redfern will continue to be major destinations, so why would you bother changing for a marginally faster journey and most likely having to stand all the way?

Call me old fashioned, out of touch or whatever, but I question the government's strategy of encouraging more interchange to reach the CBD on an expanded metro system, rather than investing in amplification of the existing network to allow single seat journeys to the CBD to continue.  I think they're being incredibly naïve if they think the travelling public will just cop it.  I'm not saying that the metro system shouldn't be expanded, but not as a solution to addressing congestion issues on the current network.  We need both systems to operate in tandem.
Transtopic
I think we could throw this back and forward but the real data will be evident in a few months, so suggesting to bank it until then.

The interchange at Chatswood is only for 4-5 years. whether people would have interchanged at Epping for a route to the cit with DD would depend on differential trip times, time waiting and seating options at Epping. Under DD, we assume the status quo of Epping starters would have continued so yes there would be seats.

The current timetable has an all stopper starting from Epping every 15min in peak so if its crowded with NWRL users then we assume people are changing for a seat then we assume they want to seat. Under DD version of NW there would have still been a change of train to head south for what ever reason, likewise travelling from north to south through Epping.

Overall I don't see a major change in single seat journey's across the network due to the Metro, some will come some will go.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

I had to delete a reply because it wasn't formatting properly but here is what I was trying to post.

Only this route will be metro Narellan, Leppington, Aerotropolis, St  Marys, Ropes Creek, Schofields and Tallawong.

METRO on the Sefton - Cabramatta - Liverpool route is not happening.

The metro extension west of Bankstown will be using a new alignment to Liverpool and not what is left of the T3 or the T2. The whole point of the metro is to keep it separate from the rest of the network and not to use parts of the network which can't be separated.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

The metro extension west of Bankstown will be using a new alignment to Liverpool and not what is left of the T3 or the T2. The whole point of the metro is to keep it separate from the rest of the network and not to use parts of the network which can't be separated.
simstrain

The whole point of adopting a form factor compatible with the existing network is so existing HR could be retasked for Metro.

Keeping it separate will mean building 10km of new metro, through swamp land parallel to an underutilized existing HR line.

As I've argued before, the choices will be:

0) Do nothing (leave Metro terminating at Bankstown with a DD feeder bus network)
1) Convert Sefton-Cabramatta-Liverpool to Metro, including 3km of new metro paralleling HR between Cab & Liverpool
2) Building a new metro line directly to Liverpool from Bankstown
3) Adopt a fleet capable of operating on both networks.

Both (1) & (2) involve spending billions for no other reason than "to keep it separate".
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

2) Building a new metro line directly to Liverpool from Bankstown
djf01

There is one way this could be made "viable".  The Government could allow redevelopment of Darling Harbour into more apartments by relocating the Australian Maritime Museum to Liverpool. /s
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

1 is not happening and while number 2 is the preffered option because of it's cost it is highly unlikely to happen and so 0 is likely to be the status quo. 3 is not going to happen because it defeats the purpose of the metro which is the ability to run high frequency.

As I have said many times before the sefton triangle section of the t3 is more likely to be converted in to a freight line then a metro. The metro will never be able to run on that section of track.
  C3765 Junior Train Controller

In the future when the Bankstown area grows and there is higher demand. They could potentially electrify and extend the twin freight line that stretches from Marrickville to Campsie, to Bankstown and connect it to the existing heavy rail line beyond Bankstown. There is plenty of space next to the existing line which is unoccupied and although they am need to even out the land in some areas, it is possible. The extended line will provide a express service to Bankstown and direct services to the city for passengers beyond Bankstown. The stopping pattern would be: Central, Redfern, Erskineville, St Peters, Sydenham, Campsie (Old Platforms Extended), Bankstown, Yagoona, Birrong then all stations to Lidcombe or Liverpool. As there would be only one stopping pattern up until Birrong it would allow for more services than there currently are. This would be great but probably won’t be needed for another 2-3 decades.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

In the future when the Bankstown area grows and there is higher demand. They could potentially electrify and extend the twin freight line that stretches from Marrickville to Campsie, to Bankstown and connect it to the existing heavy rail line beyond Bankstown.
C3765

Or they could just run Liverpool (& Oran Park) "Expresses" via Chullora.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

From Metro's website (hardly a definitive source I grant you), the green block is 4m long/high

  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
In the future when the Bankstown area grows and there is higher demand. They could potentially electrify and extend the twin freight line that stretches from Marrickville to Campsie, to Bankstown and connect it to the existing heavy rail line beyond Bankstown. There is plenty of space next to the existing line which is unoccupied and although they am need to even out the land in some areas, it is possible. The extended line will provide a express service to Bankstown and direct services to the city for passengers beyond Bankstown. The stopping pattern would be: Central, Redfern, Erskineville, St Peters, Sydenham, Campsie (Old Platforms Extended), Bankstown, Yagoona, Birrong then all stations to Lidcombe or Liverpool. As there would be only one stopping pattern up until Birrong it would allow for more services than there currently are. This would be great but probably won’t be needed for another 2-3 decades.
C3765
No freight line in Sydney will be upgraded to accommodate future pax services and this includes even crossing paths at a junction. They have learnt their lesson and now solely focused on separation.

The connection through Birrong and Yagoona to Bankstown will one day be removed when the Metro is extended to Liverpool, however that happens.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The old network is done as far as expansion is concerned. This current government and even labor would have moved forward with metro west if they were elected. The new system is 100% DDA compliant and disabled persons love the new system and how it provides them with additional independance as shown in the video.

Separation is a good thing as it means no interference from other services and there is no need to retask existing HR for Metro. We know that the existing network and trains will struggle with safety and capacity in the future even with the ATO and possible PSD upgrades mainly due to Town Hall and Central station passenger bottlenecks.

It is the way forward and believe it or not it is the vision of dr bradfield who wanted high frequency single deck trains running in Sydney. Bradfield never had DD's in his plan. This is not to say that I hate the DD's just that I believe the new metro networks will be a breath of fresh air for Sydney.
  Transtopic Assistant Commissioner

The old network is done as far as expansion is concerned. This current government and even labor would have moved forward with metro west if they were elected. The new system is 100% DDA compliant and disabled persons love the new system and how it provides them with additional independance as shown in the video.

Separation is a good thing as it means no interference from other services and there is no need to retask existing HR for Metro. We know that the existing network and trains will struggle with safety and capacity in the future even with the ATO and possible PSD upgrades mainly due to Town Hall and Central station passenger bottlenecks.

It is the way forward and believe it or not it is the vision of dr bradfield who wanted high frequency single deck trains running in Sydney. Bradfield never had DD's in his plan. This is not to say that I hate the DD's just that I believe the new metro networks will be a breath of fresh air for Sydney.
simstrain
However sims, the existing network is not going anywhere and it will remain the dominant system for decades to come.  The cost of replacing it with a completely new metro system would be prohibitive and in fact unwarranted.  Further upgrading including amplification and extension of the existing network will still be needed, particularly servicing outer suburban areas, in tandem with new metro lines servicing the higher density inner city regions without a current rail service.  I envisage that over time Sydney's rail network will evolve into the equivalent of the separate U-Bahn (metro) and S-Bahn (suburban) systems which are common in Europe.  There's no "one size fits all" solution, particularly in a spread out city like Sydney.  I don't agree with the metro expansion into the low density outer suburban region around Badgerys Creek Airport.  It's too far away from the CBD and just isn't typical metro territory.  Extensions of this nature should remain as part of the existing network.
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
Don't disagree, but the Metro expansion can be used to help relieve pressure off the existing network as well as open new areas to rail. This is one of my criticisms of not connecting with the Richmond line and Liverpool stations.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

I envisage that over time Sydney's rail network will evolve into the equivalent of the separate U-Bahn (metro) and S-Bahn (suburban) systems which are common in Europe.
Transtopic


As do I, except in Sydney the rolls will be reversed.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Transtopic I never said the existing network is going anywhere just that it has met it's zenith and something more modern and new is coming. The metro networks can be built to take the stress load off the existing network allowing the existing network to actually become more efficient.
  Transtopic Assistant Commissioner

Don't disagree, but the Metro expansion can be used to help relieve pressure off the existing network as well as open new areas to rail. This is one of my criticisms of not connecting with the Richmond line and Liverpool stations.
RTT_Rules
I don't fully agree that the metro expansion will relieve pressure on the existing network.  In the case of the extension of the Bankstown Metro to Liverpool, then it will obviously have some impact. With regard to the Richmond line, then it's questionable whether commuters will actually bother to interchange to the metro when they already have a seat.  It depends on their destination.  Commuters south of Schofields, which is likely to become the future interchange station, may also weigh up the pros and cons of interchanging.  There is an assumption that Sydney commuters will readily accept having to interchange, rather than having a single seat journey to the CBD, which is questionable IMO.

As I have reiterated numerous times, it's also a myth that Metro West will alleviate congestion on the T1 Western Line.  Welcome as it is as an addition to the rail network, servicing a new rail corridor, it's assertion that it will ease congestion on the Western Line is misplaced.  The only solution to relieve congestion on the Western Line is to amplify the existing rail corridor, via tunnel, into the CBD, allowing increased frequency without the need to interchange.  The metro serves a different purpose.
  matthewg Train Controller

As I have reiterated numerous times, it's also a myth that Metro West will alleviate congestion on the T1 Western Line.  Welcome as it is as an addition to the rail network, servicing a new rail corridor, it's assertion that it will ease congestion on the Western Line is misplaced.
Transtopic
Especially given the Metro West line serves areas not currently served by rail and will be a catalyst for the massive redevelopment of the areas so served. Very little traffic would be taken from the existing line, Metro west may eventually be hard pressed to service it's own station catchments, let alone act as a pressure relief for the existing line - a line that right now is continuing to have high density along its corridor, further increasing the pressure on the line.

The main west needs a Metro line from at least Lidcombe to the city built under it to take over all stations services, leaving the existing surface lines for 'express' running of services originating further out.

But the Metro needs Metro station spacings, not the suburban station spacings of the NW "Metro".  I'd actually build an express tunnel with NO stations from say Lidcombe and turn the main west local into a surface metro - then it can have lots of close stations that are cheap to build/cheap to run instead of not enough stations that are expensive to build and expensive to operate.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

I don't fully agree that the metro expansion will relieve pressure on the existing network.  In the case of the extension of the Bankstown Metro to Liverpool, then it will obviously have some impact. With regard to the Richmond line, then it's questionable whether commuters will actually bother to interchange to the metro when they already have a seat.  It depends on their destination.  Commuters south of Schofields, which is likely to become the future interchange station, may also weigh up the pros and cons of interchanging.  There is an assumption that Sydney commuters will readily accept having to interchange, rather than having a single seat journey to the CBD, which is questionable IMO.

As I have reiterated numerous times, it's also a myth that Metro West will alleviate congestion on the T1 Western Line.  Welcome as it is as an addition to the rail network, servicing a new rail corridor, it's assertion that it will ease congestion on the Western Line is misplaced.  The only solution to relieve congestion on the Western Line is to amplify the existing rail corridor, via tunnel, into the CBD, allowing increased frequency without the need to interchange.  The metro serves a different purpose.
Transtopic

An interchange at schofileds isn't about making people change trains to get in to the Sydney CBD. It is about providing a connection to the north west, Epping and Macquarie uni from the Richmond line.

As for interchanging I believe it is already happening in Sydney at Strathfield where people are getting off T2 services to get on to T1 or T9 services which might only be 5 mintues faster in to the CBD. I know it blows my mind as well but some people are crazy.

The metro west will relieve the western line because passengers that would normally get on a train at Parramatta and Westmead to go in to the city will use the metro instead of a packed western line train. I agree that an interchange at parramatta is unlikely from T1 to Metro since the current train isn't exactly slow but who knows maybe there are some crazy persons that would do this.

There is no chance of a tunnel being built for DD Sydney trains between Parramatta and Central. The metro system is modern, safe and 100% DDA compliant and is the way forward for rail travel in Sydney.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

I will agree with Matthew about somehow seperating the T2 inner west and leppington services but it will need to be a metro and not DD from Homebush at the minimum to central or maybe even to st james.
  Transtopic Assistant Commissioner

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, addressing congestion on the T1 Western Line can't be resolved my Metro West alone.  While Metro West will provide more capacity from Parramatta and Westmead, it won't allow for additional services to meet demand on T1 west of Parramatta and Westmead where the greatest overcrowding occurs.  That's the real issue.  The number of trains from Penrith and Richmond is limited by the available paths from Strathfield to the CBD, which it shares with the Northern Line.  It is already operating at full capacity.  It also isn't feasible or practical to add more services from the west to terminate at Westmead or Parramatta with whole trainloads of passengers interchanging to the metro to complete their journeys into the CBD.  That's a daft idea.

There is limited spare capacity on the Main Line into Sydney Terminal, which apart from Western and Northern Intercity services, now also has to cater for Northern Line services from Hornsby in peak hour, which have been diverted from the ECRL, to allow for conversion to metro.  The Sydney Trains' system is now stretched to the limit, with no room for expanding services from outer suburban and Intercity regions, without forcing interchange to a metro line to access the CBD or anywhere in between, which wouldn't be popular.

Matthewg's  suggestion of building a new metro line paralleling the existing T2 Inner West Line allowing it to cater for express outer suburban services has merit, but the problem is that in rebuilding all of the existing stations underground, it would be far more expensive than just building a new DD express tunnel with perhaps only a few intermediate stations into the CBD, such as at a Barangaroo terminus interchanging with the metro.  The value in that would be that it would significantly increase available express train paths directly into the CBD from the Western, Northern and South Lines.  If South Line services from Leppington, or even reinstating those from Liverpool via Regents Park, could be diverted from T2 to either the current suburban tracks or the new tunnel, that would free up T2 from Homebush or further west with track amplification, for a single all stops operating pattern with greatly increased frequency.  There's nothing to stop introducing compatible SD rolling stock with metro like capabilities through the City Circle and return via the flying junctions at Central.  This was one of the original options proposed for Inner City lines for the 3 tier rail system, which was later dumped in favour of the all metro expansion agenda. There's no need to waste money on converting the T2 Line to metro.

What I find unpalatable is the reluctance of the LNP State Government to consider sensible alternative solutions to upgrading and expanding the overall rail network, which may also involve upgrades to the existing Sydney Trains' system, outside of their ideological preference for a privatised metro system.  I have no problem with developing a separate metro system, primarily serving the higher density Inner City regions, particularly those without a rail service.
  RTT_Rules Dr Beeching

Location: Dubai UAE
Don't disagree, but the Metro expansion can be used to help relieve pressure off the existing network as well as open new areas to rail. This is one of my criticisms of not connecting with the Richmond line and Liverpool stations.
I don't fully agree that the metro expansion will relieve pressure on the existing network.  In the case of the extension of the Bankstown Metro to Liverpool, then it will obviously have some impact. With regard to the Richmond line, then it's questionable whether commuters will actually bother to interchange to the metro when they already have a seat.  It depends on their destination.  Commuters south of Schofields, which is likely to become the future interchange station, may also weigh up the pros and cons of interchanging.  There is an assumption that Sydney commuters will readily accept having to interchange, rather than having a single seat journey to the CBD, which is questionable IMO.

As I have reiterated numerous times, it's also a myth that Metro West will alleviate congestion on the T1 Western Line.  Welcome as it is as an addition to the rail network, servicing a new rail corridor, it's assertion that it will ease congestion on the Western Line is misplaced.  The only solution to relieve congestion on the Western Line is to amplify the existing rail corridor, via tunnel, into the CBD, allowing increased frequency without the need to interchange.  The metro serves a different purpose.
Transtopic
Yes, Liverpool will have a significant impact

The Western Metro will also pull many bodies of the Western services, although I suspect many won't have a choice as the western line trains are curtailed slightly to make room for others.

Schofields, less so as the numbers are clearly less. Assume that most using would be from Blacktown to Richmond headed to the north side, potentially even as far as North Sydney, the Metro will be faster and yes getting on from the start they get a seat. As the Y-link service connects would connect with the Metro, maybe others further south of Bankstown may seen this as a better route to the North side, but numbers obviously small.

It just seems the govt, past and present seem to have zero interest in connecting the north side of the network with the west, ie EPRL and now Metro to Schofields.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: RTT_Rules, Transtopic

Display from: