• Advertisement

NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Sydney / New South Wales Transport Discussion

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Tonymercury » Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:17 am

Rails wrote:The thing I find interesting is that all those supporting the existing network and its expansion (that may possibly go for the former Railcorp execs too) seem to have no interest in what is actually the best solution for each line and Sydney itself. I



I've said this before - but here goes again.

That is probably not the case at all, for remember that Christie, one of the people quoted in the SMH, proposed metros, so I suspect that many do not have a problem with metros but can't see much good in what is actually underway, but cannot see much in the way of anything happening, other than talk, to fix the rest of the system.
Tonymercury
 
Posts: 2590
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 3:14 pm
Location: Botany NSW
Has thanked: 260 times
Been thanked: 335 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Rails » Thu Dec 21, 2017 1:00 pm

Tonymercury wrote:
Rails wrote:The thing I find interesting is that all those supporting the existing network and its expansion (that may possibly go for the former Railcorp execs too) seem to have no interest in what is actually the best solution for each line and Sydney itself. I



I've said this before - but here goes again.

That is probably not the case at all, for remember that Christie, one of the people quoted in the SMH, proposed metros, so I suspect that many do not have a problem with metros but can't see much good in what is actually underway, but cannot see much in the way of anything happening, other than talk, to fix the rest of the system.


I'm not sure that Christie proposing a couple of separate future Metro lines in 2001 changes what I said at all, especially reading what he stated in the 2010 SMH backed review. You could see the resistance to any changes using Metro to the existing network, as if its a protected species that must be a Railcorp run DD network. This whole hands off the DD network because it belongs to Railcorp attitude. Even if certain lines make more sense as Metro, perform better and their conversion makes the lines substantially cheaper to run to allow for more future rail (a point consistently ignored by those who solely want DD). Christie was very clear that Metro was an afterthought for the future, aimed at lines that followed bus routes and were more difficult to build as DD but still manually run and part of Railcorp.

In the end you can't fix everything at once. A line was drawn in the sand and we moved to a 3 tier network which I believe was the best choice. Despite what many claim, I believe the two biggest issues with the current network are the Epping - Chatswood - Central - Sydenham sections and the CBD to Western and Northern lines. These are both dealt with in part by the two committed Metro lines (although I admit we are yet to see the final configuration of the West Metro) but that is certainly not the complete solution. There is plenty more to do and it will involve DD upgrades too. However I certainly think it would have been a huge mistake to drop that full 20b into the existing network like the ex Railcorp execs wanted, we should see a much better result when it's all done (including better sectorisation, hopefully resulting in faster DD suburban/ Intercity trains running where they make sense) and we will get more rail longer term without the huge Cityrail subsidy.
Rails
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 10:35 am
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby tonyp » Thu Dec 21, 2017 1:15 pm

I've heard about this "three tier rail network" previously. What is the third tier? It can't be the tram because that's one of the two road tiers. :?

A tram is a bus on rails, not a train on the street.
Perpetually on a T3 to "I. P. Pavlova, přestup na Metro. Příští zastávka, Náměsti Míru"
User avatar
tonyp
 
Posts: 7516
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 1:31 am
Location: Shoalhaven
Has thanked: 787 times
Been thanked: 916 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Rails » Thu Dec 21, 2017 1:17 pm

tonyp wrote:I've heard about this "three tier rail network" previously. What is the third tier? It can't be the tram because that's one of the two road tiers. :?

A tram is a bus on rails, not a train on the street.


Tier 1: Single Deck
Tier 2: Suburban Double Deck
Tier 3: Intercity Double Deck

Hopefully longer term Tier 3 will include faster train too, may not be DD either.
Rails
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 10:35 am
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby simonl » Thu Dec 21, 2017 3:09 pm

Linto63 wrote:
simonl wrote:They've already been re-elected in 2015. Hard to see that they would have been without some actual action on the NWRL.
Seats in the north-west are all rock solid Liberal (Baulkham Hills 70/30 2 party preferred, Castle Hill 80/20, Epping 66/33) so was never going to bring about a change in government.

A joke, right? There would have been an enormous loss of face if they'd have backed away from any kind of NWRL which would have lost them seats across Sydney and perhaps the state. Independents and minor parties would have had a field day, particularly in the upper house.

GazzaOak wrote:I'm bloody surprised how labor cowarded out of that idea

I'm sure that is to do with the price which they would not pay. What hospitals would they close given that could get the sale of the poles and wires through the party room and I don't believe they could borrow the money either.
simonl
 
Posts: 7960
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 7:03 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia
Has thanked: 847 times
Been thanked: 364 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Transtopic » Thu Dec 21, 2017 8:14 pm

Rails wrote:Hopefully longer term Tier 3 will include faster train too, may not be DD either.

The contract for the new DD Intercity trains has recently been awarded to a company in South Korea, so it will be a long time before any SD replacement is considered, if at all. They're a clone of the Oscars with upgraded seating (2+2) and other special features. I can't recall exactly what the maximum speed will be, but it will be at least 130 km/hr, similar to the Oscars and Waratahs, which regretably is rarely utilised.
Transtopic
 
Posts: 680
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:10 pm
Has thanked: 177 times
Been thanked: 121 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Rails » Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:02 pm

Transtopic wrote:
Rails wrote:Hopefully longer term Tier 3 will include faster train too, may not be DD either.

The contract for the new DD Intercity trains has recently been awarded to a company in South Korea, so it will be a long time before any SD replacement is considered, if at all. They're a clone of the Oscars with upgraded seating (2+2) and other special features. I can't recall exactly what the maximum speed will be, but it will be at least 130 km/hr, similar to the Oscars and Waratahs, which regretably is rarely utilised.


Yes, sorry, I'm talking about something different to the normal Intercity services, more medium to high speed rail (so faster than the new 160 km/h DD trains) on a new path, say Canberra to Newcastle, thus I said longer term. I may be dreaming though :lol:

Medium term, since it doesn't seem we will be able to see these new Intercity trains stretch their legs on the existing corridors, I personally would like to see them run on a fast line from Campbelltown to Parramatta via the new Western Airport and St Marys. However I'm hearing talk that we may see a Metro to Liverpool instead which I think would be a missed opportunity for that path but that may also be wrong as I don't know their source.
Rails
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 10:35 am
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Transtopic » Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:26 pm

Tonymercury wrote:
Rails wrote:The thing I find interesting is that all those supporting the existing network and its expansion (that may possibly go for the former Railcorp execs too) seem to have no interest in what is actually the best solution for each line and Sydney itself. I



I've said this before - but here goes again.

That is probably not the case at all, for remember that Christie, one of the people quoted in the SMH, proposed metros, so I suspect that many do not have a problem with metros but can't see much good in what is actually underway, but cannot see much in the way of anything happening, other than talk, to fix the rest of the system.

Exactly Tony. Much of the criticism about the metro is the way it's being implemented by cannibalising sections of the existing network, with little thought being given to how it impacts on it, not the metro concept in itself. Anyone who makes a legitimate criticism about the metro implementation is immediately branded a heretic by some of these metro advocates and smeared with the accusation of being out of touch and a "protector" of the existing Sydney Trains network. Far from it. We'd all like to see a more efficient and cost effective rail network, which would include separately operated metros, but it can't be achieved by bastardising the existing network by picking off bits and pieces to fit in with a metro strategy.

I think Rails is being disingenuous by suggesting that Christie proposed a separate metro system "as an afterthought for the future", when it was a clear commitment for the longer term expansion of rail services into areas without rail. It was more than "just a couple of separate future Metro lines" as Rails puts it, but a comprehensive network based on a "H" configuration, with lines from Miranda to the Northern Beaches, Sydenham to Parramatta via the CBD and the south west to the north west via Parramatta. Hardly an "afterthought". Whether or not he proposed it as part of the then Railcorp operations is irrelevant, as it could have been hived off in the future as a separate privately operated network by the government of the day. The fact that he proposed new metro lines along high frequency strategic bus routes without a rail service is a positive outcome isn't it?

As I've said many times before, I support a segregated metro system, but I'm totally against conversion of any part of the existing network to metro operation, unless it can be demonstrated that it doesn't compromise existing services across the whole network. That's something that hasn't been properly considered in the current metro projects.

Contrary to Rails' opinion, I don't agree that certain lines make more sense as Metro to the existing network, inferring conversion. Let's take an example. The Inner Western T2 Line is often identified in this category and on the face of it, it makes sense, but it currently has a mixed operating pattern of all stations and semi-express services from the South Line. If it were to be converted to metro, say from Homebush to the CBD, the South Line services would be pushed onto the already congested Suburban and Main tracks from Strathfield to the CBD shared by T1 Western and Northern Line services, soon to be increased by diversion of Upper Northern Line services via Strathfield. There just isn't enough capacity on the Suburban and Main tracks to cater for all of these services, let alone provide for any future capacity.

Despite the government's spin, it's a myth that the proposed West Metro will address this capacity deficiency and I dare anyone to suggest otherwise. The West Metro, which I actually support, services a new rail corridor through the Inner West and it will do bugger all to relieve congestion on the existing T1 Western and Northern Lines. We don't even know yet where the West Metro station will be located in Parramatta, allegedly allowing interchange for Outer Western Line commuters to the metro, a dubious claim at best. Why would you bother? There's more Western passengers that get off at Parramatta than get on. The real issue is the need to have the capacity to increase more services from the Western, Richmond, South and Northern Lines through the congested corridor from Granville to the CBD. The West Metro won't do that. Converting the Inner West Line to Metro will only exacerbate the situation and then you have the problem of how it will extend into the CBD. Converting the City Circle to metro isn't an option, despite the wishful thinking of some. The only pragmatic solution is to provide more track capacity on the Sydney Trains network from Granville to the CBD, which essentially means an express tunnel, preferably following the previously proposed City Relief Line route from Eveleigh to Barangaroo. An expansion of track capacity through the Inner West corridor would allow the Inner West Line to operate with a single all stops pattern with greater frequency. It doesn't have to be a metro.

Converting existing lines to metro is a waste of money, when there are limited funding recourses. The money would be better spent on infrastructure upgrades to the existing network AND new segregated metro lines servicing inner city areas without a rail service. As far as the relative operating costs are concerned between the existing network and a metro system, then obviously the latter is clearly superior. That doesn't mean to say that the operating costs of the existing network couldn't be substantially reduced, if there was the political will to implement reforms, in spite of union opposition. There is a huge investment in the current rail network and you don't wastefully throw the baby out with the bathwater, just because you have a different ideological bent on how it should be run. However, I fear our current bunch of politicians are a gutless lot and look for the easy way out, at the public's expense.
Transtopic
 
Posts: 680
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:10 pm
Has thanked: 177 times
Been thanked: 121 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby GazzaOak » Fri Dec 22, 2017 8:29 am

Transtopic wrote:Despite the government's spin, it's a myth that the proposed West Metro will address this capacity deficiency and I dare anyone to suggest otherwise. The West Metro, which I actually support, services a new rail corridor through the Inner West and it will do bugger all to relieve congestion on the existing T1 Western and Northern Lines. We don't even know yet where the West Metro station will be located in Parramatta, allegedly allowing interchange for Outer Western Line commuters to the metro, a dubious claim at best. Why would you bother? There's more Western passengers that get off at Parramatta than get on. The real issue is the need to have the capacity to increase more services from the Western, Richmond, South and Northern Lines through the congested corridor from Granville to the CBD. The West Metro won't do that. Converting the Inner West Line to Metro will only exacerbate the situation and then you have the problem of how it will extend into the CBD. Converting the City Circle to metro isn't an option, despite the wishful thinking of some. The only pragmatic solution is to provide more track capacity on the Sydney Trains network from Granville to the CBD, which essentially means an express tunnel, preferably following the previously proposed City Relief Line route from Eveleigh to Barangaroo. An expansion of track capacity through the Inner West corridor would allow the Inner West Line to operate with a single all stops pattern with greater frequency. It doesn't have to be a metro.

Converting existing lines to metro is a waste of money, when there are limited funding recourses. The money would be better spent on infrastructure upgrades to the existing network AND new segregated metro lines servicing inner city areas without a rail service. As far as the relative operating costs are concerned between the existing network and a metro system, then obviously the latter is clearly superior. That doesn't mean to say that the operating costs of the existing network couldn't be substantially reduced, if there was the political will to implement reforms, in spite of union opposition. There is a huge investment in the current rail network and you don't wastefully throw the baby out with the bathwater, just because you have a different ideological bent on how it should be run. However, I fear our current bunch of politicians are a gutless lot and look for the easy way out, at the public's expense.


I think there should be an relief line for the west. That my idea is to dig out 4 lines starting from Parramatta (2 for metro, 2 for express double deckers) to cbd, and that where 60% of western line/blue mountain trains goes. There should heaps of stations on the line serving the metro, but however 3-4 major stations to also serve the western line/BM trains. Then the line should split up (maybe at central), with the express line heading and terminating at Bangaroo, and the metro line continue towards the east
White ribbon day is most sexist thing ever
User avatar
GazzaOak
 
Posts: 848
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:53 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 50 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Rails » Fri Dec 22, 2017 9:44 am

Transtopic,

I don't believe I was being disingenuous at all. From what I recall, in the 2001 plan, Christie was clear that Metro was to be an option to only even be considered in a few decades and only after all the DD changes were completed since they mirrored existing "good" Bus routes. I don't think that the Metro line details were mentioned at all in his documentation unlike all the Ciyrail changes that were well detailed. The Metro just appeared as dots on his long term map. I liked them but the document still read as if they weren't nearly as well considered as the Cityrail changes and that there was no consideration at all to using Metro to improve existing lines.

After two tilts at separate Metro from the then Labor Government and talk of conversion of the North Shore, Bankstown, Inner West and Hurstville lines to Metro, the Christie SMH backed 2010 review showed a very strong push back on Metro, they reduced Metro to only be considered for a line from Parramatta to Barangaroo via the Metro west reserved corridor and well into the future (30 years I think?). It's all history now though as the new Government have gone down the Metro path but improved it by tackling the hardest part, making changes to the existing network.
Rails
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 10:35 am
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Rails » Fri Dec 22, 2017 10:40 am

I should add that I hope people aren't suggesting I am trying to disparage Christie. I am certainly not. I do think he and the other Railcorp execs believe in their plans and want to see them implemented but I think that Sydney has changed a lot since 2001 and this sort of plan looks different now. The focus has to take in to account the requirements of today. Sydney population was something like 3m in the days this plan was being thought about and suburban living was the focus. We are now heading towards 6m and minimising sprawl with a focus on higher density and centres. We needed to move to something that better deals with this. Unfortunately the DD trains are too slow and limited in their configuration for some tasks. That doesn't mean we don't need those DD but we need Metro too.

There are just certain existing lines that would not be run as DD if you were building them today and would improve if they were Metro. I am certainly not suggesting everything should be Metro. Ironically one of the biggest complaints about the original Metro proposals was that they did nothing for the existing network. Then they change the design to help relieve the existing network and they are now evil for "cannibalising" the existing network. They can't win! That is probably because what the opposition is really saying is we don't want anything but DD. Even with no metro for 30 years, for these people I'm sure there will be some reason that SD should not be implemented.
Rails
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 10:35 am
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Tonymercury » Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:25 am

Tonymercury
 
Posts: 2590
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 3:14 pm
Location: Botany NSW
Has thanked: 260 times
Been thanked: 335 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Rails » Fri Dec 22, 2017 12:24 pm

As I mentioned in my response above, we don't yet know exactly how the West Metro will integrate but I have mentioned on here before how the West Metro could substantially improve the Western corridor by taking over the stations from Parramatta to Blacktown. This allows all DD trains from Blacktown to Richmond and Penrith + Blue Mountains services to run express to the CBD (stopping at Seven Hills, Westmead, Parramatta and Strathfield). I would run these fast services on the mains as its own sector and terminate at Central. So if you're getting on at Blacktown, Westmead or Parramatta you would use the Metro for a direct trip to the Northern and Central CBD or if heading to Strathfield (interchange), Redfern or Central you use the DD. You can also use the DD if you're going to the North Shore and beyond with a simple change to the CBD Metro at Central. This would also allow for the DD Northern and North Shore line to become a separate sector running on the Suburban tracks from Strathfield to the CBD.

So since we are building a North South High Capacity Metro through the CBD and an East West Metro seems to be on the way, I personally think the number 1 candidate for Metro conversion is the Airport line. This line really exposes the weakness of the current DD trains. It would be much better with more frequent 3 door single deck trains allowing for much better performance and capacity. I thought it was best connected to the West Metro to free up a lot of space on the Circle and East Hills line (or maybe move the Hurstville locals to the circle) but that seems off the cards. At a minimum I would separate it out with a continuation through Central to a new station in the CBD to interchange with the CBD Metro. That would mean you could run dedicated Airport rail stock. This would be a post 2030 conversion.

Now that the Bankstown line has gone mostly Metro, from here you could probably leave the Metro conversions as it does get more difficult. As per the final Labor metro plan, there are probably only two lines that would be considered for Metro (Hurstville and Inner West) since even in its own sector as per above, you wouldn't convert the Northern and North Shore lines. I think that a Hurstville to Malabar via ESR works well and other than dealing with the DD line is easier to convert then other lines, however since they appear to be sending the West Metro through the CBD and down to Malabar that removes the likelihood of an extension of the ESR as Metro. The branch of the CBD Metro to Hurstville would have helped relieve the Illawarra line but it seems that is no longer on the cards either.

The big issue is always the Inner West & South lines. It doesn't work well in its current configuration as a DD line and separating it out is not easy either. I can think of a few ways to deal with it however they would all require decent investment. Probably more than I should go through in this thread but the aim would certainly be to have the Metro take over the all stops services from Parramatta and the South line run express. That's the aim of all the conversions, best of both worlds and actually does see investment in and improvement of the DD network.
Rails
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 10:35 am
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby tonyp » Fri Dec 22, 2017 12:37 pm


After speaking (in French!) with French people in the know, it's been pretty-well established that this line doesn't in reality achieve the claimed 30 tph except in occasional bursts. It's effectiveness apparently maxes out at about 24 tph. As for those trains, they're double-deckers no matter how many doors. Now they're automating them so that the "driver" can give full attention to the doors/dwells. They've really been taken to the outer limits of that format. Simply not as good as a single deck train.

Rails wrote: As per the final Labor metro plan, there are probably only two lines that would be considered for Metro (Hurstville and Inner West) since even in its own sector as per above, you wouldn't convert the Northern and North Shore lines. I think that a Hurstville to Malabar via ESR works well and other than dealing with the DD line is easier to convert then other lines, however since they appear to be sending the West Metro through the CBD and down to Malabar that removes the likelihood of an extension of the ESR as Metro. The branch of the CBD Metro to Hurstville would have helped relieve the Illawarra line but it seems that is no longer on the cards either.

Don't stop at Hurstville - go to Wollongong thanks, with in part a new underground alignment. I'm dead serious. If the journey takes less than an hour it's well within the parameters of a metro service.
Perpetually on a T3 to "I. P. Pavlova, přestup na Metro. Příští zastávka, Náměsti Míru"
User avatar
tonyp
 
Posts: 7516
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 1:31 am
Location: Shoalhaven
Has thanked: 787 times
Been thanked: 916 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby grog » Fri Dec 22, 2017 12:41 pm



RER A unfortunately doesn’t perform to 30tph as timetabled and so they are dropping it back to ~24-25tph.

https://rera-leblog.fr/nouveaux-horaires-rer-a-2018/

Google translation:
WHAT CHANGES?

This new offer must improve the reliability of the service expected by all travelers. It is in the continuity of the realization of important infrastructure projects for the improvement of the line , within the framework of the master plan of the line A. Thus, the new offer must allow:

- To reduce delays,
- To propose a simpler service adapted to the needs of displacement and to the continuous increase of the traffic,
- To offer new journeys without change.


In the central section, the offer is homogenized with a train every 2 min 20 in the morning and every 2 min 30 in the evening. Indeed, the current goal of a train every 2min30 for 30min, then 2min for 1h in one of the two directions of traffic and 2min30 again, is not realistic: the slightest incident, the repercussions are important. With this new offer, there will be an operating margin to absorb small risks, the supply will be more robust. It is estimated that 40% of current incidents can be corrected more quickly with this new offer.
grog
 
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 7:09 am
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 39 times
Been thanked: 118 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby tonyp » Fri Dec 22, 2017 12:51 pm

And yet we're promised that one day, Sydney Trains will be able to better 20 tph with two door per car double deckers.
Perpetually on a T3 to "I. P. Pavlova, přestup na Metro. Příští zastávka, Náměsti Míru"
User avatar
tonyp
 
Posts: 7516
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 1:31 am
Location: Shoalhaven
Has thanked: 787 times
Been thanked: 916 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Myrtone » Fri Dec 22, 2017 12:58 pm

Is anyone here still opposed to the metro?
Myrtone
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 11:29 am
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby simonl » Fri Dec 22, 2017 5:23 pm

Myrtone wrote:Is anyone here still opposed to the metro?

Yes. Refer to Transtopic's post above.
simonl
 
Posts: 7960
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 7:03 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia
Has thanked: 847 times
Been thanked: 364 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Myrtone » Fri Dec 22, 2017 5:35 pm

I used to think he was completely opposed to it, but apparently he does support segregated metro lines in inner city areas not served by any heavy rail. Look at the Bradfield plan, there were plans for lines in the Southeast and one along Victoria road, all part of the existing network.
Myrtone
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 11:29 am
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Fleet Lists » Fri Dec 22, 2017 6:48 pm

That is the whole thing.
Some people may have been totally opposed to the metro concept of which I dont think there are many now.
But there are still people who are opposed to Metro in certainly locations. Some agree with inner city areas as you say while others they think it may be suitable for longer distances but not where heavy rails already operates and so on.
So the question is rather a loaded one.
And I am not saying whether I fit into any of those categories.
Living in the Shire.
User avatar
Fleet Lists
Administrator
 
Posts: 20292
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 11:49 am
Location: The Shire
Has thanked: 996 times
Been thanked: 1091 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Frosty » Fri Dec 22, 2017 7:06 pm

Some objections to the metro in the inner city lefties is it’s going to be operated by a private operator which they equate to privatisation of public transport.
Frosty
 
Posts: 1713
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2015 7:16 pm
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 111 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby GazzaOak » Fri Dec 22, 2017 9:00 pm

Frosty wrote:Some objections to the metro in the inner city lefties is it’s going to be operated by a private operator which they equate to privatisation of public transport.


This is why you don't listen to them...
White ribbon day is most sexist thing ever
User avatar
GazzaOak
 
Posts: 848
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:53 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 50 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Transtopic » Fri Dec 22, 2017 10:07 pm

Myrtone wrote:I used to think he was completely opposed to it, but apparently he does support segregated metro lines in inner city areas not served by any heavy rail. Look at the Bradfield plan, there were plans for lines in the Southeast and one along Victoria road, all part of the existing network.

You're quite correct Myrtone, I'm not opposed to the metro concept, just the way it's being implemented and that's a legitimate criticism despite views to the contrary. I'm not getting bogged down in the DD v SD debate, which has already been done to death.

The whole point of my argument is to highlight the lack of meaningful investment in further infrastructure upgrades to the existing network, which will still be required, notwithstanding the continued expansion of the metro system, which I also actually support, although not at the expense of conversions. Others may have a different opinion, but then that's life isn't it?

It's one thing for the government to order more DD trainsets, but if there isn't the track capacity to run them through the most congested parts of the network without further upgrades, then what's the point of it? It's already bursting at the seams.

It will be interesting to see the final recommendations of the Joint Commonwealth/State Western Sydney Rail Needs Study, which was supposed to be released by now. There is obviously some difference of opinion between the two levels of government and it doesn't take a genius to figure out what that might be. I suspect that the Commonwealth might have the upper hand if it commits to a substantial funding allocation, on its terms.
Transtopic
 
Posts: 680
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:10 pm
Has thanked: 177 times
Been thanked: 121 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby Myrtone » Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:39 pm

The current plan is even for the second harbour crossing to only be accessible to private metro trains, not standard double decked rolling stock. Apparently that has something to do with the road authorities not giving back that less steep harbour crossing on the east side of the Bridge.
Myrtone
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 11:29 am
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

Postby grog » Sat Dec 23, 2017 3:29 am

Don’t confuse private operation of a line with private asset ownership. It is a government funded and owned Metro line operated by a private operator in return for money.

As far as the existing lines, there is a massive program about to get underway to roll out ETCS L2 + ATO across existing lines using existing rolling stock to increase capacity. Page 49 of this has a 1 page roadmap with more detail in the rest of the document:

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/sites/ ... rategy.pdf

This infrastructure project pipeline also shows capacity upgrade projects for each existing line in planning:

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/system ... ochure.PDF
grog
 
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 7:09 am
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 39 times
Been thanked: 118 times

PreviousNext


  • Advertisement

Return to Discussion - Sydney / NSW

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 12 guests