WS Airport Metro

Sydney / New South Wales Transport Discussion
Post Reply
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

Their thinking would be that the cross-regional link between Tallawong and Macarthur would be far greater priority considering that the airport and new city is, after all, intended to serve western, NW and SW Sydney. Links from the east don't do much for that, except that the link from Parramatta is important in due course. I think Leppington would be considered third in priority.
User avatar
Campbelltown busboy
Posts: 2127
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 1:23 pm
Location: Ruse/Campbelltown City NSW

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Campbelltown busboy »

The transport minister isn't happy with the north south metro as he wanted the western metro to go between the city the new airport via Parramatta
User avatar
eddy
Posts: 3756
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 11:18 am
Contact:

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by eddy »

Campbelltown busboy wrote: Thu Oct 22, 2020 7:47 pm The transport minister isn't happy with the north south metro as he wanted the western metro to go between the city the new airport via Parramatta
That would be the sensible thing through a bigger new station with more room for the eventual HSR in auto alley.

Eastern CBD, Olympic park, Parramatta then the WSA.
Parrahub, an extra option in the public transport menu http://www.parrahub.org.au/
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Transtopic »

tonyp wrote: Thu Oct 22, 2020 12:27 am Their thinking would be that the cross-regional link between Tallawong and Macarthur would be far greater priority considering that the airport and new city is, after all, intended to serve western, NW and SW Sydney. Links from the east don't do much for that, except that the link from Parramatta is important in due course. I think Leppington would be considered third in priority.
That may be so, but I view the Tallawong/Macarthur link as a longer term project, as there's nothing there now other than farmland and even with the best will in the world, it will take some time to develop to a critical mass to warrant a rail link. I'm not suggesting it shouldn't happen, but it doesn't warrant whatever priority it's been given. Planning for it can continue.

In the meantime, there's a ready made catchment right on the airport's doorstep - the South West Growth Region - where significant development already has and continues to take place. This includes Liverpool and Campbelltown, which are the major regional centres in the South West. The last time I looked, they are part of the South West region and the broader Western Sydney region. A SWRL extension to the airport from Leppington could be constructed much sooner at a more modest cost, compared with the broader metro lines and certainly before the metro reaches Macarthur.

By any objective analysis, it should have been the first priority, with the metro links (if they must be) following on as the population increases along its corridors. The only thing that's stopping it is the government's anathema towards anything to do with expanding the existing network, even where warranted, which skews sensible planning decision making.
moa999
Posts: 2923
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 3:12 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by moa999 »

Or you could convert the SWRL to Metro.

Either by extending the airport line to Glenfield.

Or converting much of the Airport Line to Metro giving you a near direct airport connection (well at least Aerotropolis) unless you went to 6 platforms at the Airport.

Or even if you extended M1 from Bankstown to Liverpool, wouldn't be that expensive to link it to again probably Aerotropolis.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Transtopic »

Campbelltown busboy wrote: Thu Oct 22, 2020 7:47 pm The transport minister isn't happy with the north south metro as he wanted the western metro to go between the city the new airport via Parramatta
That will no doubt happen in time, but the problem is that the airport extension couldn't be completed until Metro West is completed, which has now been pushed back into the early 2030's. The intention is to have a rail link completed by the time the airport opens in 2026 and it would probably be a stretch to even complete the airport extension alone from the airport to Parramatta in that time-frame compared with the link to St Marys or SWRL extension from Leppington.
User avatar
Campbelltown busboy
Posts: 2127
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 1:23 pm
Location: Ruse/Campbelltown City NSW

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Campbelltown busboy »

moa999 wrote: Thu Oct 22, 2020 8:22 pm Or even if you extended M1 from Bankstown to Liverpool, wouldn't be that expensive to link it to again probably Aerotropolis.
Where is the direct rail link between the Badgerys Creek airport and Kingsford Smith Mascot
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Transtopic »

moa999 wrote: Thu Oct 22, 2020 8:22 pm Or you could convert the SWRL to Metro.

Either by extending the airport line to Glenfield.

Or converting much of the Airport Line to Metro giving you a near direct airport connection (well at least Aerotropolis) unless you went to 6 platforms at the Airport.

Or even if you extended M1 from Bankstown to Liverpool, wouldn't be that expensive to link it to again probably Aerotropolis.
If they persevere with the metro strategy, in some ways I think it might be better to convert the SWRL to metro as you suggest and terminate it at Glenfield to interchange with Sydney Trains, similar to interchanging at St Marys. Although I'm not a fan of converting existing lines, in this instance it would potentially provide a through route as an extension of the metro link from Parramatta to the Aerotropolis. The need for 6 platforms at the Aerotropolis would be avoided and there would be 2 separate metro lines ultimately being through routed. The conversion would be relatively simple, much like the Epping to Chatswood Rail Link, but probably less disruptive.

However, there is a downside to this as SWRL commuters would have to change trains at Glenfield to reach the CBD. In saying that, I believe this already happens to some degree with those wanting a faster trip to the CBD changing to T8, rather than the circuitous T2 via Granville and the Inner West or T3 via Liverpool and Bankstown. It's still not ideal and it demonstrates the futility of not having a single compatible rail network.

I don't think there's much prospect of converting the Airport Line to metro, or by inference 2 of the East Hills Line tracks, as the quad has to cater for Suburban all stations and express T8 services, long distance Regional trains and probably future through Southern Highlands Intercity trains when electrification is extended on that line.
moa999
Posts: 2923
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 3:12 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by moa999 »


Campbelltown busboy wrote: Where is the direct rail link between the Badgerys Creek airport and Kingsford Smith Mascot
Why do you need one?
London and New York work without direct rail links between its airports.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Transtopic »

Campbelltown busboy wrote: Thu Oct 22, 2020 9:08 pmWhere is the direct rail link between the Badgerys Creek airport and Kingsford Smith Mascot
There isn't one, nor is it proposed. Overseas evidence suggests that there is limited demand for travel between multiple airports in a city. Under current planning, it would be possible to travel between Badgerys Creek and Sydney Airport, by interchanging from the metro to Sydney Trains at the Aerotropolis, then interchanging again at Glenfield to a T8 Airport Line service.

Even under my preferred scenario of having an Airport Express service on the existing network from Badgerys Creek Airport via the East Hills Line to the CBD, it should travel via Sydenham for a faster journey, rather than the Airport Line.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

The Aerotropolis planning report is available for public comment:

https://shared-drupal-s3fs.s3-ap-southe ... ort_v9.pdf
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21566
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by boronia »

Transtopic wrote: Thu Oct 22, 2020 10:15 pm
Campbelltown busboy wrote: Thu Oct 22, 2020 9:08 pmWhere is the direct rail link between the Badgerys Creek airport and Kingsford Smith Mascot
There isn't one, nor is it proposed. Overseas evidence suggests that there is limited demand for travel between multiple airports in a city. Under current planning, it would be possible to travel between Badgerys Creek and Sydney Airport, by interchanging from the metro to Sydney Trains at the Aerotropolis, then interchanging again at Glenfield to a T8 Airport Line service.

Even under my preferred scenario of having an Airport Express service on the existing network from Badgerys Creek Airport via the East Hills Line to the CBD, it should travel via Sydenham for a faster journey, rather than the Airport Line.
Demand would be dependent on how the services are proportioned to each airport. If KSA is kept predominately international and WSA is predominantly domestic, there would be greater need for connection than if there was an equal split.
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
User avatar
marcnut1996
Posts: 604
Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2014 10:21 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Electric buses
Location: Melbourne, previously from Sydney for 9 years
Contact:

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by marcnut1996 »

The official name of WSA is Western Sydney INTERNATIONAL, so I will say a fair share of international flights will use WSA.
Originally a Sydneysider, now a Melburnian
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21566
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by boronia »

"International" would only indicate there will be a Border Force presence.

It would be up to the airlines to decide where they want to land. Market demand and costs would be factors.
Last edited by boronia on Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
moa999
Posts: 2923
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 3:12 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by moa999 »

Like Hobart International??

But there is no plan to forcibly shift any flights.

SYD will remain the cities primary airport for decades.

SWZ will start fairly small.
I see a few main services over the first decade
- MEL and BNE services initially (and slowly growing to other destinations) catering to those in the W/NW. Attractive due to lower travel times
- Freight services due to 24hr ops and access to road networks and warehouses
- Back of clock international services that aren't possible with SYD curfew (eg. AKL 2200 SWZ 2345 / SWZ 0045 AKL 0600) and similar overnight flights to Asia.
- LCC flights (if costs are substantially lower than SYD)

Continuing the Airport Metro to the M1 will also make it far more desirable for those in the NW.
Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Linto63 »

marcnut1996 wrote: The official name of WSA is Western Sydney INTERNATIONAL, so I will say a fair share of international flights will use WSA.
Western Sydney will be most likely be what Avalon is to Melbourne, i.e. primarily used by budget airlines and freighters. The major players will continue to use Mascot.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Transtopic »

moa999 wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 1:48 pm Continuing the Airport Metro to the M1 will also make it far more desirable for those in the NW.
I think that it will be many decades away before the metro will be extended from St Marys to Tallawong or Macarthur. There are other metro proposals which would have greater priority.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

The Captain de Groot of Western Sydney Airport.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gtd4YKuaprw
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21566
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by boronia »

Cost far outweighs benefit: Sydney’s $11b airport rail link slammed

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/cos ... 579yh.html
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Transtopic »

boronia wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:44 pm Cost far outweighs benefit: Sydney’s $11b airport rail link slammed

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/cos ... 579yh.html
I'm not at all surprised. It's about time Infrastructure Australia called out the State government's spin and duplicity to suit its metro and development agenda, when other alternative options were discounted, i.e. extending the SWRL from Leppington.
moa999
Posts: 2923
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 3:12 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by moa999 »


Transtopic wrote: i.e. extending the SWRL from Leppington.
Suspect the cost benefit of that would be even lower.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Transtopic »

moa999 wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 6:45 pm
Transtopic wrote: i.e. extending the SWRL from Leppington.
Suspect the cost benefit of that would be even lower.
Most unlikely. If that did turn out to be the case, I'd be calling in the stewards.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

I went to the IA report to see what it had to say and the profound omission that stood out immediately is that IA failed to consider the line in the context of it being the first stage of a cross-regional link from Tallawong to Macarthur. It considered the St Marys-Bringelly section in isolation and, as the first stage only of a much bigger project that has a wider regional context, of course the initial cost-benefit is going to be poorer. It is going to appear as overkill initially, with its full benefits only materialising as the whole link is extended. I regard IA's conclusion as fundamentally flawed, but no matter to the the SMH which has naturally jumped on it gleefully as another example of this "incompetent" government.

If this approach was applied to the first stage of any larger project, we'd never get anything started at all.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by Transtopic »

tonyp wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 7:59 pm I went to the IA report to see what it had to say and the profound omission that stood out immediately is that IA failed to consider the line in the context of it being the first stage of a cross-regional link from Tallawong to Macarthur. It considered the St Marys-Bringelly section in isolation and, as the first stage only of a much bigger project that has a wider regional context, of course the initial cost-benefit is going to be poorer. It is going to appear as overkill initially, with its full benefits only materialising as the whole link is extended. I regard IA's conclusion as fundamentally flawed, but no matter to the the SMH which has naturally jumped on it gleefully as another example of this "incompetent" government.

If this approach was applied to the first stage of any larger project, we'd never get anything started at all.
The IA report did acknowledge the St Marys link as part of a longer term North-South cross-regional route from Tallawong (actually Schofields, but lets not quibble about that) to Macarthur. How can you measure the benefits when those extensions are so far into the future, if ever, particularly as the proponent (NSW Government) doesn't appear to have included them in the business case? IA is correct in assessing the project on its merits as a stand alone project compared with other options as a first stage on the basis of the evidence presented.

The business case was peer reviewed and found to be deficient in some aspects of its assumptions and conclusions and IA had every right, if not responsibility, to take them into account. The IA assessment noted:-

"The potential benefits of a North-South Rail Link were investigated in the 2018 Western Sydney Rail Needs Scoping Study. This study outlined how the link could offer city-building opportunities and new possibilities for housing, jobs and investment in the Western Parkland City. It also investigated two additional rail connections for the Western Parkland City: an east–west connection from the Aerotropolis to Greater Parramatta, and a south–west connection from the Aerotropolis to Leppington. The investigations in the Western Sydney Rail Needs Scoping Study showed that alternative rail connections from the Western Parkland City could potentially perform better than the North-South Rail Link from an economic, social and environmental perspective. There was insufficient evidence in the 2018 Study that a rail service for the north-south corridor would be the most appropriate option at this time".

What they're saying is that the North-South link doesn't warrant the highest priority "at this time" compared with the alternative options which are potentially better performing in the immediate future. It doesn't rule out the North-South link for future consideration, which I think is perfectly reasonable. At the end of the day, it boils down to a question of priorities, not one being more superior to the other.

One thing I noticed in the report was that the proposed metro rolling stock for the North-South link will be wider than the current trains on Metro Northwest and its extension to Bankstown. Interoperability will therefore not be possible. This explains why there will not be through running at Schofields where the lines meet. How many more incompatible systems do we have to have?

It's getting a bit tiresome when you continually bag the SMH for doing their job, which is to report the news without fear or favour. It's not their opinion. I'd put a lot more trust in it than that other rag, which is nothing more than an apologist for the LNP.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: WS Airport Metro

Post by tonyp »

The Telegraph certainly gets stuck into the NSW government if something is not right, but the difference from the SMH is that the Telegraph, in terms of the present government, commends things that are good and condemns things that are not, while the Herald continually emphasises only the bad with the Liberal government. The roles of the two newspapers have reversed over the last few decades. The Herald went down after the Fairfaxes lost control and the Telegraph has become more serious and professional in the last few years to take up the slack left by the Herald.

IA's acknowledgement of the project as part of a larger one was so brief you'd miss it if you blinked, yet it's a critical point. The other issue is that there needs to be a rail connection to the airport and western city right from the beginning to help it get going. We all know what historically happens when you kick off with a "temporary" bus connection, promising a rail link later. You and I have both lived through it. The temporary becomes permanent and the project languishes and withers and development is constrained for want of a good, fast, high-capacity transit connection. It's very much worth wearing what might be an initial poor cost-benefit in order to kick-start the project and enable it to grow and prosper. The line will come into its own after a few years at most. The KSA airport line would no doubt have also had a poor cost-benefit at the outset, but then came all the lineside development and economic activity that it generated. Green Square grew out of nothing because of the airport line. Before that, there was nothing there but dying factories. The same will happen out west.

IA's reference to "incompatible" line and rolling stock standards is also quite ignorant. It's very important to keep metro lines isolated from each other, otherwise we have the problems of the suburban system when something goes wrong. The initial Tallawong-Bankstown line and rolling stock was compromised to adapt to the constraints of the two major sections of legacy line it incorporated. With further new lines that don't incorporate legacy infrastructure, it's important to allow metro to adopt its own best standards without constraint. The line to the existing standards will be extended to Schofields and a new line with some different specifications according to its specific needs will pick up from there to Macarthur.
Post Reply

Return to “Discussion - Sydney / NSW”