NSW Future Rail Plan - NWRL/Metro/Harbour Crossing

[tonyp]

I'm sure that for some time after opening and during the familiarisation phase, there'll be customer service officers on the stations and trains and in the long term there will have to be security staff.

[boronia]

Platform doors at Chatswood

DSC02934 (Small).jpeg (137.47 KiB) Viewed 2435 times

[grog]

I think that all but confirms earlier comments about form factor of the Metro rolling stock. Same platform height, almost the same width as current Sydney Trains rolling stock.

[stupid_girl]

Platform doors at Chatswood

DSC02934 (Small).jpeg

Do the platform gates span the whole 8-car platform or just part of it?

[boronia]

I couldn't tell because that was the only section visible. There are partition walls down the middle of the platforms. I doubt they would provide gates if there won't be carriages on the other side. Perhaps there is allowance for longer sets in the future?

[mandonov]

I couldn't tell because that was the only section visible. There are partition walls down the middle of the platforms. I doubt they would provide gates if there won't be carriages on the other side. Perhaps there is allowance for longer sets in the future?

The trains themselves are extendable to 8 cars when demand warrants it in the future. I noticed at Norwest that there were enough doors for the 6 car trains with just plain glass panels at the far ends of the platform where an 8 car train would actually stop.

I could see Chatswood's doorless section being all towards the southern end, as the platform access points are all to the north.

[grog]

You’d want it in the middle to spread the interchange load over the whole length of the Sydney Trains service to the city.

[boronia]

Passengers at other stations can be encouraged to ride in the front 2 cars.

[rogf24]

The platform seems to have been extended a bit based on a photo I took a while back at Chatswood when they were still installing the doors. In the old photos, the round thingy of the platform went almost right up to the edge but the position of the round thingy seems a bit further back from the edge here.

[neilrex]

there are more escalators at the city end at chatswood, so I don't know why they would be concentrating on the northern end.

[rogf24]

A job posting from Metro Trains Sydney seems to indicate they want to open it by early April 2019.

https://www.seek.com.au/job/37841563

[boronia]

'We will fight them': Labor's plan for rail line takes a hit

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/we-will-fight-them-labor-s-plan-for-rail-line-takes-a-hit-20181219-p50n44.html

[tonyp]

Labor's policy amounts to sabotaging the best chance that Sydney Trains has of freeing itself from some of the line congestion that cripples it. Lets hope that the contracts are locked in before the election.

[rogf24]

Even if the idea of converting this line is flawed, the conversion is the best shot there is at relieving the Sydney Trains network in the quickest amount of time. Doing something else will require lots of new time, pushing way beyond 2024. And time isn't something Sydney Trains has because of patronage growth.

[tonyp]

I think that "flaw", such as it might be, will disappear if in the longer term they extend the line past Bankstown Airport to Liverpool.

[Transtopic]

Even if the idea of converting this line is flawed, the conversion is the best shot there is at relieving the Sydney Trains network in the quickest amount of time. Doing something else will require lots of new time, pushing way beyond 2024. And time isn't something Sydney Trains has because of patronage growth.

An even quicker solution would have been to terminate the extended Metro Northwest at Central as a first stage in conjunction with terminating the Airport Line at Central, which has previously been canvassed.

Removing the Airport Line from the City Circle would free up even more paths than the Bankstown Line (at least 12tph), with a longer term goal to extend it from Central on a new alignment into the Northern CBD (eg Martin Place or St James). The advantage of retaining the Bankstown Line on the City Circle is that it can be split between the inner and outer City Circle via the flying junctions to balance line capacity on T2 (outer) and T8 (inner), with the addition of the Sydenham to Erskineville sextuplication.

The truth is that the Bankstown Line doesn't need conversion to metro operation to upgrade its services, particularly when you consider the disruption arising from the metro conversion and compromises that have to be made for servicing stations west of Bankstown, which the government blatantly ignores. There's no votes for them in what are safe Labor seats, so they don't care. Let's face it, the only reason why the Bankstown Line was selected as an extension of the metro from the CBD was because it was the cheapest option, without having to build a completely new line, which should have been the first priority. The whole metro strategy has been based on the cheap, by cannibalising sections of the existing Sydney Trains network, such as the Epping to Chatswood Rail Link and the Bankstown Line, without any consideration of how it impacts on the broader Sydney Trains network. If the metro lines were planned as a completely segregated system, without impacting on the operational efficiency of the existing network, then they would receive more widespread support.

As an example, Labor's original North West Metro via the Victoria Road corridor to the CBD, which was abandoned when Nathan Rees was rolled as Premier, would have been a far superior option than the current proposal. It was totally segregated from the existing network and although more expensive, would have provided a faster link to the CBD along a new rail corridor heavily reliant on buses. It then had the option of being extended to the south east along the Anzac Pde corridor. This, regrettably, was a lost opportunity.

If the current metro proposal from the North West terminated at Central, as a first stage, and the Airport Line also terminated at Central, there would be no immediate urgency to extend the metro further and would allow time to consider future options. They could be to the south to Miranda via Sydenham or to the west to Parramatta along the Parramatta Rd corridor (Metro West). I personally would have preferred the latter, although via Sydney University and Camperdown, rather than via the Bays precinct. The Bays precinct could be serviced by a future metro line along the Victoria Rd corridor. The problem with the current metro proposal from Central to Sydenham is that there's only one intermediate station at Waterloo, which is a ridiculous situation, when metros typically provide for closely spaced stations through higher density inner city regions.

[swtt]

Even if the idea of converting this line is flawed, the conversion is the best shot there is at relieving the Sydney Trains network in the quickest amount of time. Doing something else will require lots of new time, pushing way beyond 2024. And time isn't something Sydney Trains has because of patronage growth.

An even quicker solution would have been to terminate the extended Metro Northwest at Central as a first stage in conjunction with terminating the Airport Line at Central, which has previously been canvassed.

Removing the Airport Line from the City Circle would free up even more paths than the Bankstown Line (at least 12tph), with a longer term goal to extend it from Central on a new alignment into the Northern CBD (eg Martin Place or St James). The advantage of retaining the Bankstown Line on the City Circle is that it can be split between the inner and outer City Circle via the flying junctions to balance line capacity on T2 (outer) and T8 (inner), with the addition of the Sydenham to Erskineville sextuplication.

It would free up more paths, but tossing everyone off at Central after getting on at the airport stations, would be madness. Losing direct CBD access to the Airport Stations would not be politically viable for any party. This would disrupt far more passengers than the forecast disruptions to the T3.

As an example, Labor's original North West Metro via the Victoria Road corridor to the CBD, which was abandoned when Nathan Rees was rolled as Premier, would have been a far superior option than the current proposal.

It was gone when Morris Iemmas was rolled, not Nathan Rees.

Nathan Rees gave us this (not even half baked) "CBD Metro" (also known as "Rozelle Metro"). Which contained an expensive underwater crossing of Pyrmont/White Bay, when the route could've been served by light rail.

But I do agree - the original NW Metro contained in the 2006 Urban Transport Statement, which had the line run under Victoria Road, was supeior.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Me ... 8_proposal) ("Metro Link" section)

[tonyp]

Metros no longer typically provide for closely-spaced stations through dense inner city areas. The legacy ones do and some new ones might, but the reality nowadays is that underground stations are too expensive and disruptive to build and maintain. A modern metro will be a suburban service with stations at least a coupłe of kms apart. That old inner city role of metros has been assumed by the veritable explosion of new tram systems around the world. These have the advantage of providing more intense coverage than a metro, as well as branching in inner urban areas. They also often supplant the need to be supported by feeder bus services as metros do. The development of the metros and light rail lines in NSW is a facsimile of what's happening globally.

The Sydney metro doesn't cannibalise the Sydney Trains system. It removes parts of it to enable the rest to have the space to function properly. The Sydney Trains system is now operating well beyond its design capacity and is tottering. It needs a decent chunk of services removed from it to enable the rest to work better.

I think it would be a bad idea to terminate the Airport line at Central as many airport users require distribution around the city, beyond Central. Not to mention regular Campbelltown commuters being dumped at Central.

[rogf24]

Classic robbing Peter to pay Paul. Very obvious case here. But what if you didn't need to rob Peter? Just give him a slightly different service he can still be mostly happy about while still paying Paul?

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

[tonyp]

If I was living on the Bankstown line I'd be overjoyed with an increase in frequency to 4 minutes (with capacity for 2 minutes in the future), a slightly faster journey and not a great reduction in seats per hour to complain about - not to mention getting rid of stairs inside the trains! Some people complain about the most incredible things. That's even without mentioning Ecotransit, the advocates for more and better electric transit, complaining about more and better electric transit - nimby do as I say not as I do apparently. Fair dinkum, the world's gone mad.

[boronia]

It would free up more paths, but tossing everyone off at Central after getting on at the airport stations, would be madness. Losing direct CBD access to the Airport Stations would not be politically viable for any party. This would disrupt far more passengers than the forecast disruptions to the T3.

A lot of passengers to/from Airport stations get on/off at Central already; presumably because they are staying in the locality or changing to another line or transport mode. The majority of those using other CC stations are probably visitors to Sydney and would not be voters.

They should be more worried about commuters from the other stations being forced to change.

IIRC, Platform 23 is the only platform that they can use to terminate Airport line trains there, so it might get a bit congested at 12 tph?

But I have always wondered why they don't get the NW Metro to Central as a priority while they are stuffing around with the rest of the line to Bankstown or wherever. Wouldn't this then free up capacity on the North Shore?

[mandonov]

But I have always wondered why they don't get the NW Metro to Central as a priority while they are stuffing around with the rest of the line to Bankstown or wherever. Wouldn't this then free up capacity on the North Shore?

That's exactly what's happening....

It being a 'priority' doesn't make the planning, design, and construction go any faster. The Bankstown conversion isn't what the C&SW will be waiting on, it's the tunnel to the city.

[boronia]

When I made this suggestion some time ago, the response was that it would open as Chatswood to Bankstown.

Good to see the attitude has changed,

[Rails]

Its all history now and I don't know why certain people cant get past this stuff but the original NW Metro proposal was not superior to what we are getting! Is this for real? What part is better?

The small 5 carriage max trains running 22-24 TPH without decent changes?
The duplication of a corridor to Epping just opened in the form of the ECRL?
Lack of direct access for the NWRL to Macquarie Uni, Macquarie Park, North Ryde and Chatswood?
Lack of direct access for the NWRL St Leonards, Crows Nest, North Sydney and Barangaroo?
Not building a proper Barangaroo station?
Continuing to service the important ECRL corridor with 4-6TPH unreliable and slow loading DD?
Trying to interchange a very large number of NWRL passengers bound for these locations at Epping to that 4-6 TPH?
Limiting the Shore with as low as 14 TPH just as you're building units along the rail line?
Entrenching the Cityrail tradition of branching and mixing lines instead of separating and enabling rationalisation?
Not implementing a true backup path for the Shore line that so often breaks the system due to that entrenched tradition?
Giving in particular North Sydney but also St Leonards/ Crows Nest modern stations that can actually deal with the crowds that use them?
Not building a line that will actually allow for the much needed upgrade of Wynyard And Town Hall?
Missing out on running 30 TPH reliable, automated, fast loading SD trains along the Global economic Corridor from the CBD to the Shore and ECRL?
Serving a single direction, peak only corridor vs a corridor that is well utilised in both directions throughout the day?
Serving a small number of passengers at commuter stops like Top Ryde, Monash Park, Gladesville, and Drummoyne with 22-30 TPH over major employment destinations that all of Sydney accesses like Macquarie Park, North Ryde, Chatswood, St Leonards and North Sydney?

If you're one of those people that believe that people only use trains to get from the outer suburbs to the CBD you may think it better.
If you're one of those people who believe that Single Deck trains can only be used for short spaced inner suburban trips you may think its better.
If you're one of those people that believe Sydney trains is the pinnacle of transport and cant be improved on then you may think its better.
If you're one of those people that believe that a 15 min service is good PT and no one ever changes trains then you may think its better.
If you're one of those people that thinks that 6 months of bus replacement outweighs substantial long term benefits then you may think its better.
If you're one of those people that feels that Sydney trains is a protected species, never to be touched rather than a train line owned by the people that should work for the people then you may think its better.

If you're one of those people you're not to be listened to.

[Rails]

If I was living on the Bankstown line I'd be overjoyed with an increase in frequency to 4 minutes (with capacity for 2 minutes in the future), a slightly faster journey and not a great reduction in seats per hour to complain about - not to mention getting rid of stairs inside the trains! Some people complain about the most incredible things. That's even without mentioning Ecotransit, the advocates for more and better electric transit, complaining about more and better electric transit - nimby do as I say not as I do apparently. Fair dinkum, the world's gone mad.

Agree! Not only the frequency and trip time improvements to the CBD but the access to better CBD stations and direct and much faster North Shore, ECRL and NWRL station access for employment. If someone took that away just because they think you should be on a Double Decker train I would be fuming!