T3 Bankstown Line - West of Bankstown

 
  s3_gunzel Not a gunzel developer

Location: Western Sydney, AU
Routinely? None. Doesn’t change the fact that it’s a permissible station for a termination, and happens when it needs to - say, when a train is late - so while you’re all pissing out your fantasies for what will happen, perhaps keep that in mind.

Sponsored advertisement

  djf01 Chief Commissioner

You do not terminate at Glenfield Transtopic. It is not a station to terminate trains at especially 8 x Granville services + 2 x T5.
simstrain
But it could be (Glenfield a place to terminate trains), and IMHO it makes some sense to do so given the other imbalances in the network.

There used to be 3 facing crossovers Nth of Glenfield. now there are none.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

But it could be (Glenfield a place to terminate trains), and IMHO it makes some sense to do so given the other imbalances in the network.

There used to be 3 facing crossovers Nth of Glenfield. now there are none.
djf01
There is no reason at all for it to be. What imbalance is there to be sorted at Glenfield that can't be sorted at leppington? Leppington has 4 platforms and the rossmore facility to store trains which is why it makes perfect sense for all the T2's to go to Leppington.

There was no need for those 3 facing crossovers since glenfield was upgraded to 4 platforms. There maybe some trains that terminate at glenfield but they would be late at night and done solely for points operation and cleaning. With the SWRL glenfield was designed to become a cross platform interchange station to seperate T2 and T8 and not a terminating station like it used to be.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Routinely? None. Doesn’t change the fact that it’s a permissible station for a termination, and happens when it needs to - say, when a train is late - so while you’re all pissing out your fantasies for what will happen, perhaps keep that in mind.
s3_gunzel

Forget about whether or not trains can terminate at Glenfield as that wasn't what I was getting at. Would you terminate T2 trains in peak hour at Glenfield instead of running them to Leppington?
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

But it could be (Glenfield a place to terminate trains), and IMHO it makes some sense to do so given the other imbalances in the network.

There used to be 3 facing crossovers Nth of Glenfield. now there are none.
There is no reason at all for it to be. What imbalance is there to be sorted at Glenfield that can't be sorted at leppington? Leppington has 4 platforms and the rossmore facility to store trains which is why it makes perfect sense for all the T2's to go to Leppington.

There was no need for those 3 facing crossovers since glenfield was upgraded to 4 platforms. There maybe some trains that terminate at glenfield but they would be late at night and done solely for points operation and cleaning. With the SWRL glenfield was designed to become a cross platform interchange station to seperate T2 and T8 and not a terminating station like it used to be.
simstrain

My view is the Leppington line is the future, it will make sense (perhaps not now) to have Leppington run direct to the city via East Hills, rather than via Lewisham.  Similarly, your (@sims) proposed plan shows how many routes there are from/through/involving Liverpool.  

It makes no sense to deliberately run trains via the longest slowest possible route.  It's costly, inefficient, and provides a terrible/useless service.  On that basis I think it makes sense to have T2 end at Glenfield and Leppington added to T8.  A facing crossover (and matching signalling) would enable P2&3 at Glenfield to operate as a turnback.

TfNSW seem intent on sabotaging the SWRL.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Actually it does makes sense DJF. A faster travel time does not make a rail service more efficient just faster. Capacity is the king here and with the Leppington services going via Granville it means more T8 services can go to Macarthur. The T2 does a job in moving people from Leppington to Glenfield and then it does another job in moving people from Casula to Flemington to the city. If people want to take a faster trip then they interchange across the platform to catch a T8 service.

Sure I would love a faster trip to the CBD but if that faster service doesn't carry many people then it is less efficient. I have done quite a few Sydney trains all stations challenges and I know how much more efficient it is for a reduced total elapsed time for the T2 to go all the way to Leppington then have it terminate at Glenfield and wait for another train to go to Leppington.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
But it could be (Glenfield a place to terminate trains), and IMHO it makes some sense to do so given the other imbalances in the network.

There used to be 3 facing crossovers Nth of Glenfield. now there are none.
There is no reason at all for it to be. What imbalance is there to be sorted at Glenfield that can't be sorted at leppington? Leppington has 4 platforms and the rossmore facility to store trains which is why it makes perfect sense for all the T2's to go to Leppington.

There was no need for those 3 facing crossovers since glenfield was upgraded to 4 platforms. There maybe some trains that terminate at glenfield but they would be late at night and done solely for points operation and cleaning. With the SWRL glenfield was designed to become a cross platform interchange station to seperate T2 and T8 and not a terminating station like it used to be.

My view is the Leppington line is the future, it will make sense (perhaps not now) to have Leppington run direct to the city via East Hills, rather than via Lewisham.  Similarly, your (@sims) proposed plan shows how many routes there are from/through/involving Liverpool.  

It makes no sense to deliberately run trains via the longest slowest possible route.  It's costly, inefficient, and provides a terrible/useless service.  On that basis I think it makes sense to have T2 end at Glenfield and Leppington added to T8.  A facing crossover (and matching signalling) would enable P2&3 at Glenfield to operate as a turnback.

TfNSW seem intent on sabotaging the SWRL.
djf01
I'm with you djf on this score, in spite of sims' objections.  

In the longer term, once track capacity through the City Circle is freed up by the Bankstown Line metro conversion, it would be logical to re-direct trains from Leppington and any extension of the SWRL, to the city via the T8 East Hills Line, which would give a much faster journey than the current convoluted route via Granville, or even Regents Park for that matter.  This would make sense when you're talking about providing the most direct and fastest route between Western Sydney Airport and the CBD.  I'm sceptical of the so-called North/South metro link between St Marys and the Airport getting off the ground, although as I've previously expressed, I can see a future extension of the SWRL from the airport to St Marys to create a continuous Cumberland Line loop via Blacktown, Parramatta and Liverpool.

If as sims suggests that most commuters from Leppington and Edmondson Park change at Glenfield to T8 for a faster journey to the city, then it would make sense, particularly when the SWRL is extended, to re-direct these services via the East Hills Line when the extra track capacity is available.  I disagree with Cumberland Line services reverting to Campbelltown and they should continue to and from Leppington, connecting with Liverpool and Parramatta, having regard to future services on an extended SWRL.  

There's no need for even current T2 services, whether via Granville or possibly Regents Park, starting from Leppington, when the Cumberland Line service will still provide access to Liverpool and Parramatta.  I still maintain, assuming that the Liverpool via Regents Park service is reinstated, that it should start/terminate at Glenfield, which would give all commuters between Casula and Cabramatta a faster semi-express journey to the city.  The via Granville service should start/terminate at Liverpool, as the via Regents Park route will free up capacity for stations north of Cabramatta and it will also continue to benefit from the Cumberland Line services, albiet at a higher frequency.

I attach below the latest Route Knowledge Diagrams for Glenfield for both the East Hills Line and the SWRL. The current track configuration with crossovers allows considerable flexibility in switching trains between the East Hills Line, the Main South Line and the SWRL.  It also shows that it is feasible, as djf alluded to, to terminate Down T2 services at Platform 2 and return via the facing crossover to the Up Main South.  It would not interfere with other services.  It's similar to what happens at Revesby for terminating services where there are 4 tracks.

The only reason why I'm suggesting that T2 services should terminate at Glenfield is to allow Casula to continue to have a direct journey to the city without having to change.  Otherwise, they might as well terminate at Liverpool.


  djf01 Chief Commissioner

Actually it does makes sense DJF. A faster travel time does not make a rail service more efficient just faster. Capacity is the king here and with the Leppington services going via Granville it means more T8 services can go to Macarthur.
simstrain

On it's own, a faster service does increase efficiency.  A route with an out and back time of 150 minutes and a 15 min frequency requires 10 sets to fulfil.  A 120 min journey time requires 8.

Campbelltown has a single amplified trunk route into the city (more or less), that it doesn't have to share with anyone.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Actually it does makes sense DJF. A faster travel time does not make a rail service more efficient just faster. Capacity is the king here and with the Leppington services going via Granville it means more T8 services can go to Macarthur.

On it's own, a faster service does increase efficiency.  A route with an out and back time of 150 minutes and a 15 min frequency requires 10 sets to fulfil.  A 120 min journey time requires 8.

Campbelltown has a single amplified trunk route into the city (more or less), that it doesn't have to share with anyone.
djf01

yet if those trains are all full it doesn't matter if it takes 8 or 10 trains because the train is full. track amplification and seperation is the main goal to making via granville and future via regents park services get down to the times they used to get.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Transtopic how do you propose it is possible to terminate 8 trains an hour in peak and then run 2-4 cumberland line services especially as only platform 3 can be used to terminate and then send a train back out again. By terminating at Glenfield you turn those 8 trains in to 16 trains because they take atleast 2 slots by terminating whereas if you send them to leppington they are only 8 trains because Leppington is setup to terminate 4 trains at a time and to then return them to the city or send them to the rossmore stabling yard. You can continue to run those 8 trains to leppington and still have room for 4 trains an hour to the city via the T8 without any issues whatsoever.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
Transtopic how do you propose it is possible to terminate 8 trains an hour in peak and then run 2-4 cumberland line services especially as only platform 3 can be used to terminate and then send a train back out again. By terminating at Glenfield you turn those 8 trains in to 16 trains because they take atleast 2 slots by terminating whereas if you send them to leppington they are only 8 trains because Leppington is setup to terminate 4 trains at a time and to then return them to the city or send them to the rossmore stabling yard. You can continue to run those 8 trains to leppington and still have room for 4 trains an hour to the city via the T8 without any issues whatsoever.
simstrain
I was actually only proposing 6tph T2 services in the peak starting/terminating at Glenfield and they should be the via Regents Park services.  The T2 via Granville services, say @ 8tph, should start terminate at Liverpool for reasons already expressed.  While with the current track configuration at Glenfield, only Platform 3 can be used to terminate (I got my platform numbers mixed up in suggesting Platform 2), if another crossover was installed north of Glenfield Station between the Down Main South and the Up Main South, then Platform 2 could also become an alternating terminating platform.  

In the peak, there are currently 10tph T8 services from Campbelltown/Macarthur with potentially another 4tph T5 services, all of which could be accommodated by merging through Platforms 1 and 4 at Glenfield without creating any conflicting movements.  With no other services using Platforms 2 and 3, that frees up the Main South Up and Down Lines for terminating T2 services.  I don't see the need for them to continue to and from Leppington, when most as you suggest interchange to the T8 services at Glenfield anyway.  It would be a waste.  Leppington and Edmondson Park commuters would still have the option of using the Cumberland Line, preferably at a higher frequency, if they're not destined for the CBD.

Looking further ahead and assuming that future SWRL services are diverted to the East Hills Line, excluding Cumberland Line services of course, then you could potentially have 6 or more tph from Leppington and any extension of the SWRL, plus 4tph Cumberland Line and 10 or more tph from Campbelltown/Macarthur through the two Glenfield platforms in either peak direction.  Termination of T2 services at Glenfield could be avoided with Liverpool becoming the Terminus.  This unfortunately would leave Casula out on a limb, but it could still be serviced by the Cumberland Line at a higher frequency, which would require interchange at Liverpool to reach the CBD.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: Transtopic

Display from: