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.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

There is no reason to terminate at Glenfield outside of the reasons S3 mentioned. You mentioned running trains around a terminated train but that creates a block and one less T8 train that can run to Campbelltown and Macarthur. It is better for scheduling to run the train through to Leppington which can easily handle the terminating traffic as of 2020.

Even with all these terminating trains you can still run 4 x T8 trains an hour to/from Leppington in peak hour. There will only be a need for 2 x regents park services in peak hour in any case and these could terminate at Liverpool. Quadding the line from Glenfield to Ingleburn would allow some T2 or T5 services to terminate at Ingleburn.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
There is no reason to terminate at Glenfield outside of the reasons S3 mentioned. You mentioned running trains around a terminated train but that creates a block and one less T8 train that can run to Campbelltown and Macarthur. It is better for scheduling to run the train through to Leppington which can easily handle the terminating traffic as of 2020.

Even with all these terminating trains you can still run 4 x T8 trains an hour to/from Leppington in peak hour. There will only be a need for 2 x regents park services in peak hour in any case and these could terminate at Liverpool. Quadding the line from Glenfield to Ingleburn would allow some T2 or T5 services to terminate at Ingleburn.
simstrain
OK sims, I understand your argument about T2 services starting/terminating at Leppington instead of Glenfield to avoid conflicts between terminating and through services at a major rail junction.  I concede that it would be a simpler operational procedure for T2 services to continue to and from Leppington.  The main reason why I was suggesting Glenfield as the terminus for T2 was because, if as you suggest, that most commuters from Leppington and Edmundson Park change at Glenfield to T8, it seemed a waste to continue T2 beyond Glenfield, when T5 at an increased frequency can provide a connecting link.

Looking beyond the current situation, there's the prospect of Leppington services and any extension of the SWRL being diverted to the CBD via the East Hills Line (T8) when the Bankstown Line is removed from the City Circle.  This could free up at least 10tph through both arms of the CC with the current signalling and even more when ATO is introduced, with the additional capacity being shared between the SWRL and increased T8 services to/from Campbelltown/Macarthur.

The proposed north/south metro link between St Marys and Western Sydney Airport still isn't set in stone and there's no guarantee that it will proceed, although it could still be a longer term option.  As I've said many times on these threads, I'm hoping that the Federal and State governments will finally come to their senses and realise that the bleeding obvious solution in the short term is to extend the SWRL directly to the airport and later to St Marys.  It would still provide access to the airport from most of the main Western Sydney regional centres as well as providing a more direct and faster link with the CBD via the East Hills Line.  There would be substantially more services on the SWRL direct to the CBD, which is all the more reason why it would need to go via the East Hills Line.

Getting back to T2, there are a number of alternative operating patterns which could be considered in conjunction with T5 and even T8.  The situation is very fluid.  

One possible scenario, and this is by no means the only one, is for the restored T2 services via Regents Park being diverted to Campbelltown instead of the SWRL.  As far as I know, there are no direct services between Campbelltown and Liverpool since the Cumberland line was re-directed to Leppington. The bulk of services on T8 would continue on the East Hills Line.  T5 could be split between Leppington and Campbelltown at an increased frequency, reinstating a direct service between the latter and Parramatta without having to change at Glenfield.  Fortunately, the track layout and flyovers at Glenfield allows for the flexibility of merging services on its 4 platforms without crossing conflicts.  Platforms 3 & 4 at Parramatta are grossly underutilised and they could easily accommodate the increase in services on T5.

It's a toss-up whether T2 services via Granville and Regents Park respectively should start/terminate at Campbelltown or Liverpool (discounting the SWRL).  With T5 thrown into the mix, which adds to the complexity, I tend to favour Campbelltown via Regents Park route at a 6tph and Liverpool via Granville at 8tph.  With T5 services added to the Liverpool via Granville route at an increased frequency, that could potentially boost services on that corridor to as high as 12 to 16tph to Parramatta and the CBD.  Having only 2tph in the peak on the Regents Park route is absurd.  It would warrant at least 4tph in the off-peak increased to 6tph in the peak.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

All your solutions transtopic require re complicating the system and in doing so you immediately reduce how many services can run.

T5 services aren't going to be increased unless the Parramatta terminators are moved to via regents park instead. The T5 will not be going to Campbelltown unless an extra track pair is built between Glenfield and Campbelltown. That is why I bought up getting a start by quadding to Ingleburn.

The T2 isn't going to be decreased or terminated at Glenfield. It is not a waste in sending the T2 to Leppington as Glenfield is now laid out to handle the cross platform interchange just like Chatswood and it allows the network to operate more efficiently by keeping the T2 and T8 separated. In this instance it is better to get people to change then to change the trains.

The T3 closure allows and extra 8 services around the city circle and not 10 as you proclaim and the metro should go to Birrong and then to Cabramatta on an elevated section above the existing line freeing up Sefton to Carramar from the ST network. The third track between Homebush and Lidcombe then separates the via regents park path from the via Granville path.

With the T3 line out of commission there is some re working of the tracks around Erskineville, Macdonaldtown, Eveleigh and the flyovers that could occur to separate south coast intercity from the T4 to at least Hurstville, move the locals on to the T3 platforms at Redfern, suburbans on the the current T2 platforms. Suburban T1 and T9 services could then be re diverted across the bridge using the flyovers.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

The T5 will not be going to Campbelltown unless an extra track pair is built between Glenfield and Campbelltown. That is why I bought up getting a start by quadding to Ingleburn.
simstrain

Not going to happen Sims!  (Been dying to say that).

If there is amplification on the Main South post metro/revival of via Regents Park, the place that needs amplification is Cabramatta to Liverpool.

The T2 isn't going to be decreased or terminated at Glenfield. It is not a waste in sending the T2 to Leppington as Glenfield is now laid out to handle the cross platform interchange just like Chatswood and it allows the network to operate more efficiently by keeping the T2 and T8 separated. In this instance it is better to get people to change then to change the trains.
simstrain

I think the point here is T2 is operated like a milk run, to the point where it's useless at getting people to the CBD, still by far the primary destination for most PAX.  

The T3 closure allows and extra 8 services around the city circle and not 10 ...
simstrain

As I understand it, 4 of those 8 (or maybe 6 of 10 in the current timetable) are Liverpool via Granville trains.

It seems to me this whole threat came about because of a few unflattering media reports of passengers losing their direct to city services post metro.  A politician has said "fix it", and the slots freed up by converting T3 to metro are being used for ... T3.  Now there is a surprise.

Clearly, the intention was for The Regents Park triangle to operate as shuttles feeding Metro at Bankstown and/or HR at Lidcombe & Liverpool/Cabramatta.  The whole (questionable) business case for the Bankstown Metro relies on this.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Why the heck would you need to amplify Cabramatta to Liverpool for? There are only 14 trains an hour in this section. Post metro conversion those 4 T3 trains will become the Bankstown shuttle and/or via regents park services. There won't be any need for any more then that. There are high speed points at Cabramatta and Liverpool has 2 x terminating platforms.

You are very much wrong on the Glenfield to Campbelltown not needing amplification especially if as mentioned elsewhere the overhead will eventually start extending south of Macarthur. This very much is in need of amplification as it would allow express services to pass all stops services in this section. Very useful for providing more Southern highlands services in to Central.

I'm not sure what you mean by milk run but if it was so bad at what it does then why do so many people use the via Granville services and so little use the service to Bankstown from Liverpool? Sure it would be nicer if it was faster but that doesn't mean it is useless at what it does.

4 of those 8 are not former via Granville services and I have no idea where you got that crazy idea from. There are 8 T3 trains an hour in peak (4 to Lidcombe and 4 to Liverpool). There are also 8 T2 services an hour via Granville and there are 4 Homebush or Parramatta terminators. What they did was make the Liverpool T3 services a limited stop service to tempt people from Liverpool off the T2 via Granville but that only saves so much time.

In turn they added extra stops like Burwood and Newtown on to the T2 via Granville service but this doesn't really slow the T2 down since it always get slowed by the all stops services now that it is on the locals instead of the suburbans. The old 49 minute services are no longer possible on the current run plan.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Why the heck would you need to amplify Cabramatta to Liverpool for? There are only 14 trains an hour in this section. Post metro conversion those 4 T3 trains will become the Bankstown shuttle and/or via regents park services. There won't be any need for any more then that. There are high speed points at Cabramatta and Liverpool has 2 x terminating platforms.

You are very much wrong on the Glenfield to Campbelltown not needing amplification especially if as mentioned elsewhere the overhead will eventually start extending south of Macarthur. This very much is in need of amplification as it would allow express services to pass all stops services in this section. Very useful for providing more Southern highlands services in to Central.

I'm not sure what you mean by milk run but if it was so bad at what it does then why do so many people use the via Granville services and so little use the service to Bankstown from Liverpool? Sure it would be nicer if it was faster but that doesn't mean it is useless at what it does.

4 of those 8 are not former via Granville services and I have no idea where you got that crazy idea from. There are 8 T3 trains an hour in peak (4 to Lidcombe and 4 to Liverpool). There are also 8 T2 services an hour via Granville and there are 4 Homebush or Parramatta terminators. What they did was make the Liverpool T3 services a limited stop service to tempt people from Liverpool off the T2 via Granville but that only saves so much time.

In turn they added extra stops like Burwood and Newtown on to the T2 via Granville service but this doesn't really slow the T2 down since it always get slowed by the all stops services now that it is on the locals instead of the suburbans. The old 49 minute services are no longer possible on the current run plan.
simstrain
Full line separation is the way of the future, prevent one line disrupting another. Which is essentially how the Metro is designed and operates.

"Milk run" = > "All or lots of stops", ie same as a milk delivery run.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Full line separation is the way of the future, prevent one line disrupting another. Which is essentially how the Metro is designed and operates.

"Milk run" = > "All or lots of stops", ie same as a milk delivery run.
RTT_Rules

Full separation is not possible with the Sydney trains network. How do you separate T2 inner west from T2 via granville which run on the same line but have different stopping patterns? How do you separate T9 from T1, freight, intercity and regional services? Separation is good but on this path it is not necessary since there is no bottleneck at Cabramatta or along either path and I have no idea why people think there is.

The problem is east of Homebush and not west of Homebush. The turnback at Lidcombe wasn't for any congestion to the west but was so they could use those former paths to run more T1 services.

I still have no idea why the milk run is an issue when it picks up lots of paying passengers along the way. Sure I would love a faster journey but that isn't going to happen along the via Granville route in 2020.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
All your solutions transtopic require re complicating the system and in doing so you immediately reduce how many services can run.

T5 services aren't going to be increased unless the Parramatta terminators are moved to via regents park instead. The T5 will not be going to Campbelltown unless an extra track pair is built between Glenfield and Campbelltown. That is why I bought up getting a start by quadding to Ingleburn.

The T2 isn't going to be decreased or terminated at Glenfield. It is not a waste in sending the T2 to Leppington as Glenfield is now laid out to handle the cross platform interchange just like Chatswood and it allows the network to operate more efficiently by keeping the T2 and T8 separated. In this instance it is better to get people to change then to change the trains.

The T3 closure allows and extra 8 services around the city circle and not 10 as you proclaim and the metro should go to Birrong and then to Cabramatta on an elevated section above the existing line freeing up Sefton to Carramar from the ST network. The third track between Homebush and Lidcombe then separates the via regents park path from the via Granville path.

With the T3 line out of commission there is some re working of the tracks around Erskineville, Macdonaldtown, Eveleigh and the flyovers that could occur to separate south coast intercity from the T4 to at least Hurstville, move the locals on to the T3 platforms at Redfern, suburbans on the the current T2 platforms. Suburban T1 and T9 services could then be re diverted across the bridge using the flyovers.
simstrain
Firstly sims, some of your assertions need to be challenged.  

There is more than enough capacity at Parramatta Station to accommodate additional T5 services, which I suggest should be a minimum of 4tph, regardless of their origin.  Currently there are only 6tph through Platforms 3 & 4 in the morning peak, with 4 x T2 Parramatta terminators and 2 x T5 Cumberland Line.  They are grossly underutilised while Platforms 1 & 2 operate at their current full capacity of 20tph.  If services for T5 were increased to 4tph and adding that to the T2 South Line services between Liverpool and Merrylands, that would equate to 12tph on the South Line, which shouldn't be a challenge, even if the current signalling needs to be upgraded.  There's no need to move the T2 Parramatta terminators, although they could be in the longer term with further track amplifications on the Western Line, allowing T2 to become an exclusive South Line service.

Even if T5 was split between Campbelltown and Leppington at 2tph each, that would only bring the track frequency up to 12tph between Campbelltown and Glenfield with T8 services, which the current single track pair should be able to cope with.  Quadruplication south of Glenfield is only likely to be required when electrification is extended into the Southern Highlands, allowing additional suburban services, from say Picton, and the extension of Intercity services directly to Central.

Secondly, if you read the timetable, you will note that since the last review, there are now 10tph on the T3 Bankstown Line to the City Circle.  In the peak, 6tph use the flying junctions at Central to cross over to T2 and the City Circle Outer via Town Hall and the remaining 4tph continue into the City Circle Inner via Museum.

The City Circle Outer via Town Hall is maxed out at 20tph with the current signalling (14tph T2 + 6tph T3) and the City Circle Inner via Museum is currently at 18tph (4tph T3 + 4tph T8 via Sydenham + 10tph T8 via Airport Line), with 2 spare slots.  When the Bankstown Line is taken out of the equation, that potentially frees up 12tph on the City Circle, including the current 2 spare slots.  That's just on the basis of the current signalling without taking into account further upgrades.

Your suggestion that the metro should continue from Bankstown to Cabramatta on the existing alignment via an elevated section is purely fanciful and hardly bares further comment.  In my view, the metro will permanently terminate at Bankstown and even an extension directly to Liverpool is questionable.  In hindsight, although I still wouldn't have supported the whole metro conversion of the Bankstown Line, they would have been better off in sticking with the original plan to extend the metro to Cabramatta and Lidcombe with a further extension from Cabramatta to Liverpool via segregated tracks.  Obviously, the interaction with freight services made this untenable, although the separation could have been done at a cost.

As for T2, the question is, where should it terminate, whether via Regents Park or Granville?  If most SWRL (let's call it T6 now that the Carlingford Line has closed) commuters change at Glenfield to T8 via East Hills, then I still maintain that it seems a waste to extend T2 to Leppington, when increased T5 Cumberland Line services could provide this link.  Once the Bankstown Line services are removed from the City Circle, it would be logical to redirect all SWRL services to the CBD, apart from the Cumberland line, via the East Hills Line.  Perhaps all T2 services via both Regents Park and Granville should start/terminate at Liverpool, assuming it has the capacity at the terminating platforms to do so.  Enhanced T5 Cumberland Line services from both Campbelltown and Leppington and any extension of the SWRL, could provide the link to Liverpool and Parramatta.  The only loser unfortunately in this scenario would be Casula, which would be the only station denied a direct link to the CBD without the need to interchange.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

I never said they couldn't be increased. I said they aren't going to be increased. Those Parramatta terminators take up multiple slots and so before you go and talk about there being plenty of spare capacity you should think again. This is the exact same reason why you don't terminate at Glenfield unless there is a reason as S3 mentioned to do so. You lose slots and capacity by doing so and your 20 trains an hour line can quickly be halved to 10 or less.

Transtopic, you don't seem to take in to account losses from multiple stopping patterns and terminating trains where there isn't a dedicated turn back platform.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

I will agree the metro extension to Liverpool is not going to happen. My metro extension beyond Bankstown is just my idea of what should happen and not something that I think will happen.

I'm not sure where you are getting your T2 maxing out at 20 trains an hour. Looking at tripview this morning there is only 11 T2 trains an hour in peak. 3 parramatta and 8 leppington services. There are no homebush terminators in peak hour. There are 4 outer circle T3 services giving you a grand total of only 15 services an hour in peak.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

There is no question at all as to where the T2 should terminate. Leppington is perfectly fine to terminate T2 services. Your T8 Leppington services can be achieved without any need whatsoever to terminate T2 at Glenfield. Leppington also has the Rossmore stabling facility to handle the capacity needed for all your T2, T5 and T8 services.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
I never said they couldn't be increased. I said they aren't going to be increased. Those Parramatta terminators take up multiple slots and so before you go and talk about there being plenty of spare capacity you should think again. This is the exact same reason why you don't terminate at Glenfield unless there is a reason as S3 mentioned to do so. You lose slots and capacity by doing so and your 20 trains an hour line can quickly be halved to 10 or less.

Transtopic, you don't seem to take in to account losses from multiple stopping patterns and terminating trains where there isn't a dedicated turn back platform.
simstrain
You said "T5 services aren't going to be increased unless the Parramatta terminators are moved to via regents park instead".  That implies that there is no further capacity through Platforms 3 & 4 at Parramatta with the current operating pattern, which is 6tph. However, I beg to differ.

The Western Main Up track through Platform 3 is bi-directional between Harris Park and Parramatta, with a single bi-directional crossover east of the Parramatta platforms and a double bi-directional crossover west of the platforms.  I cannot see why an additional 2tph T5 Cumberland Line services couldn't be accommodated with the flexibility available with the current bi-directional track configuration and signalling. This would still only bring it up to 8tph.  I expect that in the longer term, if further track amplification is constructed east of Parramatta (ignoring the metro), then the T2 Parramatta terminators will be eliminated and diverted to the South Line via either Regents Park or Granville.  

By eliminating the terminators, that will allow Platforms 3 & 4 at Parramatta to cater for significantly increased frequencies, including T5.  Actually, even now there's no reason why the existing terminators couldn't be extended to terminate at Blacktown instead, as there is more than enough spare capacity on the quad west of Parramatta.  If I may be so bold to suggest, it equates with your argument about T2 terminating at Leppington instead of Glenfield.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
I will agree the metro extension to Liverpool is not going to happen. My metro extension beyond Bankstown is just my idea of what should happen and not something that I think will happen.

I'm not sure where you are getting your T2 maxing out at 20 trains an hour. Looking at tripview this morning there is only 11 T2 trains an hour in peak. 3 parramatta and 8 leppington services. There are no homebush terminators in peak hour. There are 4 outer circle T3 services giving you a grand total of only 15 services an hour in peak.
simstrain
You misunderstood what I was saying. I was referring to T1 services maxing out at 20tph through Platform 1 at Parramatta and obviously the reverse in the evening peak through Platform 2.  

The current pattern through Platform 1 in the morning peak is 8tph ex Penrith, 2tph ex St Marys, 2tph ex Richmond, 4tph ex Schofields and 4tph ex Blue Mountains Intercity.  That's a total of 20tph.  All Western Line services, except T5, merge to Platforms 1 & 2 at Parramatta.  This means that there are limited opportunities to increase direct services from west of Parramatta to the CBD without further track amplifications.  Contrary to the government's spin, Metro West will have negligible impact, but that's another story.

With regard to T2, there are actually a total of 14tph into the City Circle Outer via Town Hall.  8tph ex Leppington, 4tph ex Parramatta and 2tph ex Ashfield.  As I previously mentioned, there are also 6tph ex Bankstown crossing over at the flying junctions to the City Circle Outer, bringing it up to its current maximum frequency of 20tph.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
There is no question at all as to where the T2 should terminate. Leppington is perfectly fine to terminate T2 services. Your T8 Leppington services can be achieved without any need whatsoever to terminate T2 at Glenfield. Leppington also has the Rossmore stabling facility to handle the capacity needed for all your T2, T5 and T8 services.
simstrain
OK sims, I'll concede on that point, but for no other reason than Casula maintains a direct service to the CBD.  Otherwise if feasible, T2 could start/terminate at Liverpool, with T5 providing the connecting link with T8.  I still maintain that if T2 continues to Leppington, then they should be the Regents Park services at 6tph with the Granville services starting/terminating at Liverpool at 8tph.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: