tonyp wrote:Sydney's quick-fix capacity "solution" of the 1960s
How much if that was to avoid running more services?
tonyp wrote:Sydney's quick-fix capacity "solution" of the 1960s
Try getting on a Singapore MRT with luggage at Tanah Merah station in the morning peak hour, where you have to interchange from the short Changi Airport branch. I've sometimes had to wait for up to 3 trains before I could get a toehold. Similarly in London, you're scarcely able to get on a Piccadilly Line tube train from Heathrow with airport passengers' luggage cluttering up the aisles. It's not a problem exclusive to double deck trains. The Hong Kong Airport Express is the best I've been on which has dedicated luggage racks either side of each door (2 doors per carriage), although you pay a premium fare, which is worth every cent. It's also far more comfortable, with 2+2 transverse seating, than the basic cattle class metro. I'd gladly accept this style of metro train if it was introduced on the proposed outer suburban metro lines to service Badgerys Creek Airport. Much like Perth tonyp!tonyp wrote:There's nothing worse than arriving at an airport with a double deck service and wanting to get on the train with your suitcases to find a solid wall of people staring at you when the few available doors open.neilrex wrote: You often see people complaining about the issue of "dedicated luggage storage facilities", usually people who never use public transport anyway. I don't know how superior the metro is supposed to be compared to the double deckers for this.
If Sydney Trains could achieve Perth running times over that otherwise seemingly excellent set of lines between Airport and Leppington, we might start getting somewhere. Then you just need more suitable trains. And it's not an ideological agenda, in terms of effectiveness as mass transit, it's all about capacity and speed.Transtopic wrote: I'd gladly accept this style of metro train if it was introduced on the proposed outer suburban metro lines to service Badgerys Creek Airport. Much like Perth tonyp!
Just remember, Sydney trains are deliberately driven slowly because they are deliberately scheduled slowly.tonyp wrote:If Sydney Trains could achieve Perth running times over that otherwise seemingly excellent set of lines between Airport and Leppington, we might start getting somewhere.
You need to microchip me with that statement Glen to save you having to say it to me all the time!Glen wrote: Just remember, Sydney trains are deliberately driven slowly because they are deliberately scheduled slowly.
Simple as that.
Yes indeed. As I commented on another forum, the speed board limits on the East Hills Line express tracks are ridiculously conservative. The maximum posted speed between East Hills and Glenfield is 125km/h and further east it varies between 80-110km/h. A higher more consistent speed limit should be possible over the whole length.tonyp wrote:You need to microchip me with that statement Glen to save you having to say it to me all the time!Glen wrote: Just remember, Sydney trains are deliberately driven slowly because they are deliberately scheduled slowly.
Simple as that.
Can I add that the speed boards are also set at lower speeds and have been for a very long time, even on the relatively new East Hills to Glenfield section. This predates the "slowdown".
Tell me about it as I develop depression watching the 30 and 40 km/h speedboards going up along CSELR. Micromanaged to death like everything else in NSW transport.Glen wrote: Yes that's right, there's a culture developed in Sydney over many years that is risk averse in the extreme, or put another way a deep belief that CMA (cover my arse) trumps all common sense in terms of signalling, scheduling, speed boards etc.
Someone once said to me that if the airlines were THAT conservative they'd never lift a plane off the ground.
They're just Perth S Bahn-style trains with wider inter-carriage connections. What's this "metro" business?mandonov wrote:Media had access to one of the trains today: https://au.news.yahoo.com/video/watch/3 ... -on-seats/
It's a straight copy of the trains supplied for the Singapore Circle line.tonyp wrote:They're just Perth S Bahn-style trains with wider inter-carriage connections. What's this "metro" business?mandonov wrote:Media had access to one of the trains today: https://au.news.yahoo.com/video/watch/3 ... -on-seats/
matthewg wrote:
It's a straight copy of the trains supplied for the Singapore Circle line.
.
More of your ideology, low on facts. Yes, it is annoying to have to get onto a very crowded service - onto ANY kind of train, at any place. It is sometimes unavoidable. But guess what ? Metro trains also often have "walls of people". This is probably a real problem at Sydney Airport, for about 20 minutes a day. I have often arrived at Sydney airport from overseas around the morning peak, and never had a problem. Maybe I was lucky, every time.tonyp wrote:[There's a massive loss of available space for people with mobility restrictions (luggage, wheelchairs, prams, etc) in a double deck train compared to a single deck (and in a double deck bus compared to a single deck articulated bus for that matter), plus a single deck has far more doors which means those with mobility restrictions can find a place to park themselves and their luggage etc more readily. The two entrances/vestibules per car in a double deck tend to become crowded with standees in peaks because crowds don't distribute evenly in double deck cars. There's nothing worse than arriving at an airport with a double deck service and wanting to get on the train with your suitcases to find a solid wall of people staring at you when the few available doors open.
.
That says it all. Doesn't passenger amenity matter any more? Treat everyone like cattle seems to be the contemporary norm.Frosty wrote:I like the look of the Crossrail train surprised about the amount of seat padding considering the recent controversy in the UK of hard train seats. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/0 ... seats-due/
I find your comments pretty ideological actually and not supported by real-life which, like you I have also experienced around the world. Nobody seriously uses double deckers for the type of inner-urban work they do in Sydney. The French try on RER but they can only do it by adding an extra door per carriage (meaning significant loss of seats) and the service is now showing the strain.neilrex wrote:
More of your ideology, low on facts.
Every time I read something like this about the double-deck vs single-deck debate in Sydney, my mind always switches to visions of the south coast service in Sydney and the Perth train system and it can't be fooled about which one works and which one doesn't.Transtopic wrote: That says it all. Doesn't passenger amenity matter any more? Treat everyone like cattle seems to be the contemporary norm.