NSW Rail Observations - May 2017

[Jurassic_Joke]

Anyone know if we'll see M sets on T1 again during vivid this year, as it was the case with last year?

[Glen]

Possibility of federal money for interurban lines?

http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/stor ... attention/
South Coast’s slow trains get fed govt attention GLEN HUMPHRIES
22 May 2017, 3 p.m.

The slow speed of the train trip between Wollongong and Sydney is mentioned in a federal government report of plans to invest billions in the rail network.
“Among the factors that constrain the speed is that at one location there is a tunnel only large enough for one line, meaning trains often need to wait for the train coming from the other direction before they can pass through.”

I get very tired of press stories every so often that say all we need is more investment to achieve faster trains.

We used to have faster trains, but we deliberately slowed them down.

When will they understand that?

Oh, and whilst Coal Cliff Tunnel is certainly a constraint, as it generally has a maximum of only 6 trains per hour in peaks it is hardly a major cause of slow schedules on the line.

[Transtopic]

I get very tired of press stories every so often that say all we need is more investment to achieve faster trains.

We used to have faster trains, but we deliberately slowed them down.

When will they understand that?

Oh, and whilst Coal Cliff Tunnel is certainly a constraint, as it generally has a maximum of only 6 trains per hour in peaks it is hardly a major cause of slow schedules on the line.

Agree. While tonyp continually bombasts us with comparisons with Perth and other cities' faster services, he fails to acknowledge the geographical constraints that Sydney faces to the north, south and west. That is not a problem that can be easily overcome without considerable funding, which is not readily available. It's not a reflection on the operational efficiency of either Sydney Trains or NSW Trainlink, but the reality of the geography compared with other cities. Of course it would be great if the government of the day decided to reduce travel times by eliminating the curvature on the intercity lines, but at what cost?

On another matter, tonyp is being mischievous in asserting that the faster travel times of a metro service would compensate for the reduction in seating capacity per service. Are you serious? So what if the metro service on the Bankstown Line is 10 minutes faster to the CBD, in the real world, is that really a game changer? Whatever spin you like to put on it, having to run double the number of metro trains to provide the same seating capacity of the existing Sydney Trains network comes at a cost despite driverless operation. Trains cost money don't you know. I'm sceptical of whether 15 tph, with its inherent total capacity, is even warranted on the Bankstown Line.

The same goes for the North West Rail Link. I doubt if 15 tph is warranted. The government makes great play of providing a turn up and go service at a frequency of 4 minutes in the peak, but is it really needed? Let's face it, the government's agenda comes down to providing the same number of seats with double the number of trains, as on the Bankstown line. As I said, this comes at a cost. The total capacity of the metro trains with the majority standing is irrelevant and it's questionable of whether that capacity, with the frequency proposed, will ever be needed. On the North West Rail Link, a frequency of 8 tph in the peak with the existing DD rolling stock could have provided an adequate service, supplemented with 4 tph for the Upper Northern Line to a new cross harbour link. The time differential between a metro service and the existing DD service boils down to a few minutes, so is it really worth all of that additional expense to satisfy an ideological agenda?

[boronia]

The main purpose of developing metros is to encourage high density housing along the lines, which in turn will increase their patronage.

[mandonov]

On another matter, tonyp is being mischievous in asserting that the faster travel times of a metro service would compensate for the reduction in seating capacity per service. Are you serious? So what if the metro service on the Bankstown Line is 10 minutes faster to the CBD, in the real world, is that really a game changer? Whatever spin you like to put on it, having to run double the number of metro trains to provide the same seating capacity of the existing Sydney Trains network comes at a cost despite driverless operation. Trains cost money don't you know. I'm sceptical of whether 15 tph, with its inherent total capacity, is even warranted on the Bankstown Line.

The same goes for the North West Rail Link. I doubt if 15 tph is warranted. The government makes great play of providing a turn up and go service at a frequency of 4 minutes in the peak, but is it really needed? Let's face it, the government's agenda comes down to providing the same number of seats with double the number of trains, as on the Bankstown line. As I said, this comes at a cost. The total capacity of the metro trains with the majority standing is irrelevant and it's questionable of whether that capacity, with the frequency proposed, will ever be needed. On the North West Rail Link, a frequency of 8 tph in the peak with the existing DD rolling stock could have provided an adequate service, supplemented with 4 tph for the Upper Northern Line to a new cross harbour link. The time differential between a metro service and the existing DD service boils down to a few minutes, so is it really worth all of that additional expense to satisfy an ideological agenda?

Not this again.

15TPH at 6 cars per train is perfectly adequate for the expected patronage on the line. That room for expansion is what matters, because the plans for the North West and Bankstown Lines practically show a Burwood sized suburb of towers for every single station.

That's what the line is about. It's one part unlocking capacity, one part serving new areas, and three parts countering endless sprawl at the western fringes by building up in the suburbs.

Does every singe thread really need to come back around to single- vs double-deck? The debate has gone on for years, everyone has chosen a side by now, and nothing is going to change now that we're less than two years out from the first service and buildings are already being demolished for the extension.

[Tonymercury]

While tonyp continually bombasts us with comparisons with Perth and other cities' faster services, he fails to acknowledge the geographical constraints that Sydney faces to the north, south and west.

I suspect that 'deliberately ignores' is the expression you were searching for.

[tonyp]

We used to have faster trains, but we deliberately slowed them down.

Yes but they were very little faster, a few minutes, but not tens of minutes or more.

Speed and capacity are the biggest issues.

While tonyp continually bombasts us with comparisons with Perth and other cities' faster services, he fails to acknowledge the geographical constraints that Sydney faces to the north, south and west.

I suspect that 'deliberately ignores' is the expression you were searching for.

Naturally I'm fully aware of those constraints, not only from general knowledge but having analysed in detail the curve and gradient diagrams for every line. The point is that if there was investment comparable to that put into roads over the years, they would have been able to straighten things out long ago (and some of it is a matter of returning to Whitton alignments).

The southern line is actually surprisingly fast in terms of the stop-start requirements of interurban services. People tend to see it just from the pov of services to Canberra and Melbourne where of course it is less favourable. Likewise about 80% of the south coast line is basically straight and relatively flat (or with grades that don't trouble an electric passenger train). A design has already been done for straightening out the remaining 20% but nobody will act on it.

The Blue Mtns is obviously pretty unsolvable unless you tunnel under them which would defeat the purpose. The northern line isn't as bad as made out south of Wyong (to the north of that it needs realignment), but the only real solution over the river is a very long tunnel which is probably overkill for serving a dormitory residential area, even with such a high population. There are significant other economic activities in Wollongong that generate two-way commuting that make it a higher priority.

I'll try to make my bombardments seem less bombastic in future!

That room for expansion is what matters, because the plans for the North West and Bankstown Lines practically show a Burwood sized suburb of towers for every single station.

That's what the line is about. It's one part unlocking capacity, one part serving new areas, and three parts countering endless sprawl at the western fringes by building up in the suburbs.

This is the point that absolutely everybody is missing. This is planning for the very long-term future. The way Sydney is developing and growing, nothing less than metro-type services is what will be required in the long term. Perth is on the right track in this regard. Other Australian cities are taking longer to wake up but Sydney at least has now woken up.

[captainch]

what amazes me is people who complain about a 10 min service ect wanting more trains ect........................try living in a country town with a 3 hour bus service no night time or week-ends no taxis So you have no car or can't drive your life revolves around a public transport system to go to doctors.shopping ect at least you have a choice of buses,trains,ferrys.taxis.uber I KNOW THE NEXT QUESTION WHY DON'T YOU MOVE! Well some people have lived there all there lives they pay the same taxes so what does N,S.W stand for NEWCASTLE/SYDNEY/WOLLONGONG ANYWERE ELSE FORGET IT! YOU DON'T COUNT! Be gratefull for what you have,you can at least go out!country ppl are paying for light rail/metros/cross city tunnels.things country may never use in their lifetime .There are thousands of empty country rail lines & stations roting away,most big country cities have loss their daily air service mudgee ect,& YET THE FEDERAL GOVT WANT TO MOVE GOVT DEPTS TO PLACES LIKE ARMIDALE??????????? how do you get there,GREYHOUND COACHES DO NOT GO TO BRISBANE VIA THE NEW ENGLAND HIGHWAY ,you have to get 2 coaches one from tamworth change at Tenterfield the catch is you have to get to tamworth so thay means a train & 2 coaches!

[Transtopic]

I don't want to get bogged down in the SD v DD debate which has already been done to death and it's not really appropriate for this thread. All I will say is that I reserve my judgement on the success or failure of the government's pro-metro agenda until we see how it actually works out. I await with baited breath for the first day of operation, particularly with regard to the interchange between the NW Metro and Sydney Trains at Chatswood.

[rogf24]

That room for expansion is what matters, because the plans for the North West and Bankstown Lines practically show a Burwood sized suburb of towers for every single station.

That's what the line is about. It's one part unlocking capacity, one part serving new areas, and three parts countering endless sprawl at the western fringes by building up in the suburbs.

The funny thing about this, the more I think about it, is that along the rail corridor at least, it'll result in a strange new pattern of density that hasn't been seen in Sydney or many cities in the world yet. In fact, probably the only places that have seen it is Moscow, St Petersburg and some former communist cities. Density rises the further you go out from the city centre which is the inverse of the common setting. Not even land-scarce Hong Kong does this, although that can be better described as uniformly dense along rail corridors or at least stations. This new pattern can be seen for both the north west and south west legs. Think about it, these new Burwood-sized town centres located in the north-west will be larger than anything else seen on the North Shore apart from strategic centres, it'll be far larger than Artarmon or Neutral Bay. In the south-west, the planned redevelopments west of Canterbury will be far larger and denser than the redevelopments east of Canterbury, except Waterloo. Of course, there are existing places in Sydney outside of the inner ring that are quite dense but they don't take up an entire rail corridor where the outer leg have areas denser than inner leg.

http://marketurbanism.com/2010/10/19/th ... st-cities/

country ppl are paying for light rail/metros/cross city tunnels.things country may never use in their lifetime .

Same could be said for urban folks know have to pay for country stuff they never use. It's worth noting at about 90% of Australians live in urban areas so it is only proportionally fair that cities get the most attention. If anything, unless it's a cashed up mining town, it's the city people who subsidises lifestyle of rural people.

[Transtopic]

That room for expansion is what matters, because the plans for the North West and Bankstown Lines practically show a Burwood sized suburb of towers for every single station.

That's what the line is about. It's one part unlocking capacity, one part serving new areas, and three parts countering endless sprawl at the western fringes by building up in the suburbs.

The funny thing about this, the more I think about it, is that along the rail corridor at least, it'll result in a strange new pattern of density that hasn't been seen in Sydney or many cities in the world yet. In fact, probably the only places that have seen it is Moscow, St Petersburg and some former communist cities. Density rises the further you go out from the city centre which is the inverse of the common setting. Not even land-scarce Hong Kong does this, although that can be better described as uniformly dense along rail corridors or at least stations. This new pattern can be seen for both the north west and south west legs. Think about it, these new Burwood-sized town centres located in the north-west will be larger than anything else seen on the North Shore apart from strategic centres, it'll be far larger than Artarmon or Neutral Bay. In the south-west, the planned redevelopments west of Canterbury will be far larger and denser than the redevelopments east of Canterbury, except Waterloo. Of course, there are existing places in Sydney outside of the inner ring that are quite dense but they don't take up an entire rail corridor where the outer leg have areas denser than inner leg.

It seems that the government's agenda is driven by an inverse logic to justify a metro style service to the outer suburban fringe. Hence the lack of metro stations in the inner city ring to speed up journey times from the outer suburbs, which is not how typical metro systems operate, servicing a denser inner core, or a far more compact city structure compared with what is typical in Australia. Without the patronage from denser inner city locations, then the alternative is to build up density on the outer reaches of the network, which is essentially in low density areas, but I question whether this strategy will succeed.

My take on this is that the densification should take place in the inner city ring, despite the NIMBY protests, where a metro style service with shorter journey times even while standing would be far more acceptable to the travelling public. For example, an area like North Sydney and Crows Nest which is characterised by lower density semi-detached and terrace dwellings, could have it's density dramatically increased if there was the political will to challenge the NIMBY agenda to reject densification, which is supported by inner city councils like North Sydney. It could have density built up around the metro stations while still maintaining the traditional residential character further away. It's disgraceful that areas so close to the city centre are immune from redevelopment for higher density. Instead the government has taken the easy option of increasing density in the outer suburbs where opposition is not as pronounced, at least in the town centres surrounding a station. Madness in my opinion.

Putting aside the ideological agenda of the government in privatising public transport services, it has to be acknowledged that the early rail transport planners got it right in providing for the separation of inner and outer suburban rail services by having separate express tracks for the outer suburban services through the inner city. The problem with the current metro strategy is that it is trying to satisfy both on a single track pair which isn't going to work, despite the spin to the contrary. It's stuck between a rock and a hard place. I'm not anti-metro, but just want to see an objective analysis of what is the best outcome.

[rogf24]

Without the patronage from denser inner city locations, then the alternative is to build up density on the outer reaches of the network, which is essentially in low density areas, but I question whether this strategy will succeed.

It works in Russia so there's precedent. I wish I could make a Russian reversal joke here but I can't think of anything that works.

[tonyp]

It seems that the government's agenda is driven by an inverse logic to justify a metro style service to the outer suburban fringe. Hence the lack of metro stations in the inner city ring to speed up journey times from the outer suburbs, which is not how typical metro systems operate, servicing a denser inner core, or a far more compact city structure compared with what is typical in Australia. Without the patronage from denser inner city locations, then the alternative is to build up density on the outer reaches of the network, which is essentially in low density areas, but I question whether this strategy will succeed.

My take on this is that the densification should take place in the inner city ring, despite the NIMBY protests, where a metro style service with shorter journey times even while standing would be far more acceptable to the travelling public. For example, an area like North Sydney and Crows Nest which is characterised by lower density semi-detached and terrace dwellings, could have it's density dramatically increased if there was the political will to challenge the NIMBY agenda to reject densification, which is supported by inner city councils like North Sydney. It could have density built up around the metro stations while still maintaining the traditional residential character further away. It's disgraceful that areas so close to the city centre are immune from redevelopment for higher density. Instead the government has taken the easy option of increasing density in the outer suburbs where opposition is not as pronounced, at least in the town centres surrounding a station. Madness in my opinion.

If you look back over the history of our urban town planning for the past several decades you'll see that the emphasis has been on developing Sydney as a polycentric city. It started with Parramatta (over two centuries ago actually) and eventually developed into a double spiderweb pattern based on Sydney and Parramatta. Since then more sub-spiderwebs have developed, not to mention the activity "arc" (whatever it's called at the time) from the NW through Sydney to south Sydney and now to extend out to Bankstown and Liverpool. The suburban-style rail with its multiple express tracks through the inner area doesn't serve this pattern of development well. Metro is the appropriate mode.

The other issue often overlooked is that a lot of inner city residential areas are protected as heritage conservation areas and can't be intensively redeveloped. This factor also produces a Moscow-type pattern in European cities, Prague being a classic example where the urban fabric of the old city is mostly preserved and all the high-rise "panelak" suburbs are further out. You could curse the heritage movement for this situation, or you could actually thank them because Sydney's older attached and semi-detached heritage housing is actually a very efficient user of land (iirc Waverley for example has the highest population density in Sydney), whereas the "mistake" that needs to be undone is all that low-density housing that gobbled up land all over the rest of the Cumberland basin. That's the process that's now in motion.

[Liamena]

A lot of cities in China, the density also rises as you go outwards. That is because, what are now the inner areas have a lot of old three-storey appartments, and the outer areas have 30-storey apartments, although with more space at ground level between them.

The propensity to knock down the old apartments and replace them, or to keep them, seems to depend a lot upon local political agendas in various cities.

The inner areas also have better bus services, but are not well served by the new metro.

[Stu]

On another matter, tonyp is being mischievous in asserting that the faster travel times of a metro service would compensate for the reduction in seating capacity per service. Are you serious? So what if the metro service on the Bankstown Line is 10 minutes faster to the CBD, in the real world, is that really a game changer? Whatever spin you like to put on it, having to run double the number of metro trains to provide the same seating capacity of the existing Sydney Trains network comes at a cost despite driverless operation. Trains cost money don't you know. I'm sceptical of whether 15 tph, with its inherent total capacity, is even warranted on the Bankstown Line.

Development along certain sections of the T3 line and in surrounding areas has been very substantial in recent years. In Canpsie (near the station) there are two new unit blocks plus one due for completion in a few short years, more units that have been recently competed or about to commence construction at Campsie (Canterbury Rd) and Hurlstone Park (New Canterbury Rd).
Development on both sides of Canterbury Stn was already approved before the announcement of the metro, that area in particular has changed so much as all of the light industrial/commercial busnisses have been demolished and replaced with monsterous apartment.

[Liamena]

Rather unusual observation of a Tangara proceeding northwards out of platform 2 at Gordon around 9:30 PM on Monday.

[sunnyyan]

Delays on the Nth Shore this afternoon due to a person injured by train at Milsons Point. Western line trains were running via City Circle, causing minor delays to City Circle services, as there was a train every 1-2 mins.

[Jurassic_Joke]

An S set on T1 late last night, operating one of the final services of the night towards Hornsby via Macquarie

I forgot how awful they were in cold weather ^ cold enough to keep some late night shopping refrigerated

[andy_centralcoast]

The way I read this, Central Coast and Blue Mountains trains will be running through to North Sydney and around the City Circle as passenger services?

http://www.sydneytrains.info/service_up ... 2128FCDDD6
http://www.sydneytrains.info/service_up ... 2128FCDDD6

Haven't seen that done before, but I think it's a good move if correct. 8 car V sets are too long for the City underground stations though, so possibly not correct.

[Swift]

I forgot how awful they were in cold weather ^ cold enough to keep some late night shopping refrigerated

And hot enough to bake potatoes in summer. But didn't you notice how quiet and smooth they run considering they date from the 1970s?
That was really a lucky encounter.

[gilberations]

The way I read this, Central Coast and Blue Mountains trains will be running through to North Sydney and around the City Circle as passenger services?

http://www.sydneytrains.info/service_up ... 2128FCDDD6
http://www.sydneytrains.info/service_up ... 2128FCDDD6

Haven't seen that done before, but I think it's a good move if correct. 8 car V sets are too long for the City underground stations though, so possibly not correct.

Quite a normal operation. Central Coast on weekends is normally only OSCars, so they fit around the Quay. Blue Mountains is 4 cars, so it will fit. Regardless, guard makes short platform announcements and it's all good!

[boronia]

Some weekend BMT services are now 8V.

For CCN:

Trains leave from Central, platforms 16-19. Most trains start and end at North Sydney, some trains run around the City Circle.

Leaving from Pl 16 suggests operating via North Shore?