Possible Metro and Rail Network Changes

[rtt_rules]

I think you've got your lines crossed here. There's no plan to extend Metro West south of Bradfield. It's Metro WSI that's going south to Oran Park and Macarthur. Metro West, west of Kemps Creek, will pass through a depot site next to the Kemps Creek Resource Recovery centre, then turn south next to the alignment of Metro WSI (there's space reserved for this) and pass through Business Park, Airport and terminate next to Bradfield Metro WSI Station. There's no problem affecting development for rail coming from the north because there' will be a large park on the north side of the Bradfield station sites.

Didn't think there was and I said not justified, maybe I mis read your post.

[Transtopic]

There were two track pairs proposed between Bradfield and the airport terminal and business park - one for the metro line from St Marys now under construction and the other for the Metro West extension from Westmead. The Metro West tunnels haven't been built yet and could easily be modified for DD if needed. New station boxes have to be built alongside the existing boxes and I doubt if any modification to the design would be needed at all.

Agree the tunnel could be built as DD and then Metrofied.

Not sure how it impacts but as Metro West is 25kVAC the OH clearances and insulation will need to be suited to this or at least upgradable. This is why M1 was left 1500 VDC.

The issue is purely timing and cost. Which project will fund the tunnels and station and time frames? For now I'm predicting ST to Bradfield and thats it.

What's the point of building a SWRL extension as DD then converting it to metro later? It should be one or the other from the start. The government has already stated that the current review will consider options as either Sydney Metro or Sydney Trains for both the WSA extension and SWRL extension. Metro West doesn't even come into it as far as I can see. There are also implications for the future of the New Cumberland Line

[Transtopic]

The original plan to extend the NW line to Marsden Park was before the WSI airport loomed large on the regional transport planning scene. When the airport/aerotropolis project got underway, they changed that plan to M1 terminating at Schofields and Metro WSI extended north to Schofields.

That may be so, but I don't think that's going to make much difference to the commuter flow from Marsden Park to the major employment centres at Macquarie Park, Lower North Shore and CBD, which will dwarf whatever eventuates at Bradfield and the airport precinct. Even Parramatta is likely to draw more commuters.

If most are travelling towards the east, then why should they have to go one stop to interchange at Schofields? It would make no difference to those travelling on M1 from east of Schofields to the west, as they would still have to interchange anyway. The only people who would be affected would be those interchanging from the Richmond Line to the west, who would have to make two interchanges at Schofields and Marsden Park, but they would also be in the minority.

The Metro West extension will go to Bradfield. There's no chance of the Leppington line being extended to WSI. It will be lucky to make it to Bradfield (hence the emergence of "South Bradfield") because the Bradfield development authority is getting shirty about any tunneling from the south because it will hold up development on the south side of Bradfield. More likely to be a move to extend Metro WSI to South Bradfield, even Oran Park, so there's no further ground disturbance within Bradfield. They want to get the surface development started asap.

That's assuming that the Metro West extension actually goes ahead. It may or may not and no one knows at this stage. The SWRL may not go to WSIA either, but no one knows until the review is released. Nonetheless, the plan had been to extend the SWRL from Leppington to at least Bradfield which would require two track pairs from the south - WSA Metro and SWRL extensions - and two from the north - WSA Metro and Metro West. As you know, it was proposed to have three track pairs meet at Bradfield, as the WSA Metro is a continuous line and the SWRL and Metro West extensions are incompatible. Whether this is still on the cards remains to be seen.

[Transtopic]

Why would you travel to Sydney Airport via Metro West?

The point is MW will be the E-W spine that connects all major locations from Bradfield City to Mascot Airport and move Sydney 1 step closer to being a 30min city. This corridor also seems to be the major hub for most densification projects.

There are no plans to extend Metro West from Hunter St to Sydney Airport. There is a proposal for a separate metro line from Randwick to Kogarah via Sydney Airport, but they're just lines on a map. It's still a roundabout way to get from Bradfield to Sydney Airport via Metro West, when there is a much more direct and quicker route via the SWRL.

[rtt_rules]

Agree the tunnel could be built as DD and then Metrofied.

Not sure how it impacts but as Metro West is 25kVAC the OH clearances and insulation will need to be suited to this or at least upgradable. This is why M1 was left 1500 VDC.

The issue is purely timing and cost. Which project will fund the tunnels and station and time frames? For now I'm predicting ST to Bradfield and thats it.

What's the point of building a SWRL extension as DD then converting it to metro later? It should be one or the other from the start. The government has already stated that the current review will consider options as either Sydney Metro or Sydney Trains for both the WSA extension and SWRL extension. Metro West doesn't even come into it as far as I can see. There are also implications for the future of the New Cumberland Line

1. Simple, gets the immediate line open to meet an election promise, but doesn't compromise the longterm strategy and as its built this way from the start conversion is fairly straight forward and doesn't take months / years.

2. MW is off the table for immediate consideration, this doesn't mean its off the table completely.

3. I think the review will likely conclude
A. Yes, Metro WSA will be completed from Macuthur to Scofields as Phase 1, 2 and 3. Phase 1 nearly done, Phase 2 to the south to start in 2028, Phase 3 to start shortly after. To e completed with 4 - 5 years of starting.

B. M1 extension to Scofields to start in 2028, open in 2031.

C. SWRL will be extended to meet the WSA Metro at Rosemore or Bradfield Sth where the line veres East for some reason.

This is the lowest possible outlay to the govt and manages cash flow reasonably well and prevents over servicing of Bradfield City and Airport district with lowest cosntruction risk.

D. MW extension both East or West will not be approved to proceed until between 2030 and 2034, but likely following an election.

E. NCL will not proceed until all the above mentioned projects with regard to Metro WSA and SWRL projects are complete and not affected by any of the above and 1000% sure that the SWRL extension will be done with Metrofication in mind.

[rtt_rules]

As you know, it was proposed to have three track pairs meet at Bradfield, as the WSA Metro is a continuous line and the SWRL and Metro West extensions are incompatible

I think this was in the initial back of the envelop sketches and I doubt the compatibility of train technology would have made much difference as sectorisation would have driven this anyway.

Anyway, bring forward some commonsense and realisation money doesn't grow on trees and we get back to reality on what is really needed.

1. WSA Metro Macuthur to St Mary's, done deal
2. SWRL, does it need to run to the city or further north and what do we actually get for these extra billions?
3. MW, when does it really need to arrive in the bigger picture construction timeline?

[rtt_rules]

There are no plans to extend Metro West from Hunter St to Sydney Airport. There is a proposal for a separate metro line from Randwick to Kogarah via Sydney Airport, but they're just lines on a map. It's still a roundabout way to get from Bradfield to Sydney Airport via Metro West, when there is a much more direct and quicker route via the SWRL.

As you said there are lines on the map from govt sources that show MW going to a number of locations and Kogarah via the Airport is just one of them and as I've said in the past these are all maybes until the ground is dug up.

I'm aware they are looking for more train capacity to the whole Zetland / Green Square area.

Again its not about Bradfield City to Mascot, its about a spine E-W railway that connects nearly all major Sydney destinations in one reasonably efficent railway in both speed and passenger capacity.

The option of travelling via the SWRL and T8 will still be there for those who want it, but there is very much unlikely to be a underuterlised railway built north of Rosemore just to parallel two other railways with same stops. Maybe when the area has a few million people, but not this side of 2050.

[Transtopic]

What's the point of building a SWRL extension as DD then converting it to metro later? It should be one or the other from the start. The government has already stated that the current review will consider options as either Sydney Metro or Sydney Trains for both the WSA extension and SWRL extension. Metro West doesn't even come into it as far as I can see. There are also implications for the future of the New Cumberland Line

1. Simple, gets the immediate line open to meet an election promise, but doesn't compromise the longterm strategy and as its built this way from the start conversion is fairly straight forward and doesn't take months / years.

2. MW is off the table for immediate consideration, this doesn't mean its off the table completely.

3. I think the review will likely conclude
A. Yes, Metro WSA will be completed from Macuthur to Scofields as Phase 1, 2 and 3. Phase 1 nearly done, Phase 2 to the south to start in 2028, Phase 3 to start shortly after. To e completed with 4 - 5 years of starting.

B. M1 extension to Scofields to start in 2028, open in 2031.

C. SWRL will be extended to meet the WSA Metro at Rosemore or Bradfield Sth where the line veres East for some reason.

This is the lowest possible outlay to the govt and manages cash flow reasonably well and prevents over servicing of Bradfield City and Airport district with lowest cosntruction risk.

D. MW extension both East or West will not be approved to proceed until between 2030 and 2034, but likely following an election.

E. NCL will not proceed until all the above mentioned projects with regard to Metro WSA and SWRL projects are complete and not affected by any of the above and 1000% sure that the SWRL extension will be done with Metrofication in mind.

Again, all pure speculation with no evidence to support your assertions.

[Transtopic]

The option of travelling via the SWRL and T8 will still be there for those who want it, but there is very much unlikely to be a underuterlised railway built north of Rosemore just to parallel two other railways with same stops. Maybe when the area has a few million people, but not this side of 2050.

There were never plans to extend Metro West south of Bradfield where it would terminate, so there were only two track pairs to the south - one to Macarthur as an extension of the WSA Metro and the other to Leppington as an extension of the SWRL. What makes you think a SWRL extension would be underutilised? You don't know what you're talking about.

I suggest you wait until the results of the current reviews are released before making unsubstantiated claims.

[rtt_rules]

The option of travelling via the SWRL and T8 will still be there for those who want it, but there is very much unlikely to be a underuterlised railway built north of Rosemore just to parallel two other railways with same stops. Maybe when the area has a few million people, but not this side of 2050.

There were never plans to extend Metro West south of Bradfield where it would terminate, so there were only two track pairs to the south - one to Macarthur as an extension of the WSA Metro and the other to Leppington as an extension of the SWRL. What makes you think a SWRL extension would be underutilised? You don't know what you're talking about.

I suggest you wait until the results of the current reviews are released before making unsubstantiated claims.

Yes, MW will not head south of Bradfield, as I said to Tony, never said it would.

I very much doubt there will be two track pairs south of Bradfield, just one. SWRL will not operate parallel to WSA Metro, rather just junction at a suitable station.

What makes me think its underuterlised, alot!
1) It wasn't part of the intial plan for good reason
2) The existing T2 services around 20 stations, clearly for now and near future at least the SWRL is not a major source of commuters that its not services seperately.
3) The pool of commuters in this area is low, Leppington has less commuters than Edmonton, yes it will grow, but how much in the next decade?
4) The new Bradfield CBD will not be a home for commuters travelling to Sydney's CBD or anywhere on the city to south side, rather other way round

Finally you would only spend the few billion or so to do this if the WSA Metro couln't handle the capacity. As I said before I'm not against the concept, its just I cannot see it being economically justified. Minn's wants and needs a quick win. A project that has his name on it to take to the next election. If he approved the WSA sth extension this will take 5 years and not his project anyway, rather LNP.

If Minn's wants the SWRL to run to Bradfield, then this is 5 years and a higher risk profile project. Where as Rosemore or Bradfield Sth is 3 years, low risk, simple and fast.

MW is a project that ties most of Sydney's major destinations together.

SWRL extension is a project that connects low density residential areas to nothing more than the Sydney CBD with a large gap in the middle (Holsworthy). As for access to Bradfield and the airport, the projected commuters to the airport can use the bus, which is what they do for other similar sized airports in Australia. WSA Metro will connect SW residents to Bradfield and WSA IA.

[rtt_rules]

Found this from 2018 which shows the full proposed WSA Metro St Mary's to Macuthur and extension of SWRL
https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/system ... onMaps.pdf
(how much is superceeded or changed?)

Few observations

St of St Mary's

- I think the E-W alignment of St Mary's UG station is deliberate action to avoid affecting current and future surrounding properties as the railway would be rising up underneath a green space that will never be developed. More than likely the radius and incline is outside that of DD capabiilty.

- Also explains why the put the railway in now and put it underground for much of the corridor between the airport and St Mary's, because a large part of the corridor is to be eventually built over as part of the outer Sydney orbital is basically over the top of the railway for most of the corridor Nth of the airport.

Looking south of Bradfield

- Junction of WSA Metro and SWRL at Rosemore / Sth Bradfield (although the current offical name for the location these properties is in is called Bringelly so I'm going with it will likely be called Sth Bradfield)

- Likely statuib location is just south of Bringelly Rd bounded by Robison Rd to the south, A9 to west and Jersey Rd to the East, which would make sense and ideal location for a major railway station.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Bradf ... FQAw%3D%3D

- This site is about 2.4 km south of Bradfield City, so there will very unlikely be a station in between.

- The site is about 4.4 km from the start of the Rosemore stabling yards or 6.1 km from Leppington station, so yes there is likely a strong chance that an intermediate station would also be built called "Rosemore". Likely location is just South of the King St intersection on Bringelly Rd which is just west of the stabling yards between the 2.5 and 3.0 km mark from Leppington Station.

- How the extension will run past the stabling yards, who knows, like Tallawong, there doesn't seem to be an obvious route left for future consideration to do so especially with the bridge to the immediate east of the first points into the yard. I think potentially a junction from the stabling tracks between the Eastwood Rd over pass and the Kemps Crk railway brigde and allow the line to run to the nth of the stabling yards. Yes, right where the existing cross over points are located.

Alternatively further east where there is a slight bend to the south in the tracks, however this would require significant earth works and a new bridge for East wood road, but likely more logical location for the rail operations.

Looking at the current traffic patterns
- Oran Park etc resisdents wouldn't drive to Leppington over the main south unless its purely for parking and / or travellingon the T5. Extension of SWRL to Sth Bradfield would help both senarios. Likewise an extension of the WSA Metro to the south.

- Extension of the SWRL further nth to Bradfield doesn't support this, this would purely be aimed at people working at Bradfield, WSA and WSA IA and/or travellers.

Therefore a roughly 5 km extension of the SWRL with two surface stations terminating at the junction is the most feasible and likely outcome. 5km of low CAPEX rail costruction, two stations on terminating with a pair of cross overs leading into the station all on a very E-W straight alignment, pretty simple low cost stuff that Minn's could have done within 3y.

[Geo101]

I suggest you wait until the results of the current reviews are released before making unsubstantiated claims.

You would have wonder if branching is an option/preferance, otherwise, the Bradfield station is underground so one would expect that it would only have one short-term extension? Doubt very much there will be any quad lines, especially if any tunnelling is involved.

Either south towards Cambelltown, or east to Glenfield.

South would require a ~25km line to new pastures, verses a ~5km line to Leppington Stabling Yard with existing conections to populated areas such as Campbelltown/Parramatta/etc via Glenfield.

Either way, it would boil down to wether they wanted existing population centers to access WSI, or grow the metro network?

[Transtopic]

You would have wonder if branching is an option/preferance, otherwise, the Bradfield station is underground so one would expect that it would only have one short-term extension? Doubt very much there will be any quad lines, especially if any tunnelling is involved.

Either south towards Cambelltown, or east to Glenfield.

South would require a ~25km line to new pastures, verses a ~5km line to Leppington Stabling Yard with existing conections to populated areas such as Campbelltown/Parramatta/etc via Glenfield.

Either way, it would boil down to wether they wanted existing population centers to access WSI, or grow the metro network?

My major criticism of the metro is that branching is off the agenda, because "they don't do that with new metro lines overseas". Unlike many of the Asian and European cities, Sydney is a low density city and cannot justify a single line delivering 30 to 40 tph without branching. It's a wasted opportunity to make use of that core capacity by not branching on its extremities where demand and frequency would be lower. Only one branch outside each end of the core would be needed and with computerised driverless operation, I can't see what the problem would be.

The new M1 line is a case in point. Is it ever going to need 30 to 40 tph? It could have branched on the northside to either the Northern Beaches from Victoria Cross or Parramatta from Epping and on the southside to Revesby/East Hills or Hurstville from Sydenham, which would provide much more relief to the existing network than it currently does. Unfortunately, it's too late now as provision hasn't been made for stub tunnels.

In the case of the rail links with WSIA and Bradfield, the incompatibility of the two metro lines was a major blunder. Although the WSIA Metro and Metro West will have the same power source (25kV AC), the WSIA Metro infrastructure will be limited to 4 car trains and Metro West will be longer trains of I believe 7 cars, but longer than the current M1 carriages. Not sure if the Metro West trains will be the same wider profile as the WSIA Metro stock.

If the two lines had been compatible, then they could have branched/merged north of the Airport Business Park Station with a single line, instead of what is currently proposed with two separate lines, with the Metro West terminating at Bradfield and the WSIA Metro continuing through to Macarthur/Campbelltown via Oran Park and Narellan. The SWRL extension from Leppington could then be extended to the WSIA Terminal or Business Park for which space has been reserved.

I can't see the SWRL and extension being converted to metro without any extension of M1 from Bankstown to Glenfield via Liverpool, which is by no means certain. Then there is the question of replacing the Rossmore stabling yard for Sydney Trains.

I agree that the SWRL extension would provide more immediate benefit for connecting WSIA and Bradfield to Campbelltown, Liverpool and Parramatta via Glenfield. The south extension from Bradfield to Macarthur via Oran Park and Narellan could be along way off.

[rtt_rules]

My major criticism of the metro is that branching is off the agenda, because "they don't do that with new metro lines overseas". Unlike many of the Asian and European cities, Sydney is a low density city and cannot justify a single line delivering 30 to 40 tph without branching. It's a wasted opportunity to make use of that core capacity by not branching on its extremities where demand and frequency would be lower. Only one branch outside each end of the core would be needed and with computerised driverless operation, I can't see what the problem would be.

Branches is certainly done OS, is it common, no but it does happen in certain locations but there is good reason to avoid it as you are repeating the exact problem Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane are sepending $10's B to fix.

Does Sydney need to 30 - 40 t/h today? Probably not, does it need it in operating life the rolling stock being introduced on M1, M2 and M3, yup! Again refer to the denisification plans by the NSW govt. When M1 was first proposed especially the additional Tallwaong station, the out crys were "building a line to cows". M1 SW, "building a metro to low density housing", how times changed quickly.

The new M1 line is a case in point. Is it ever going to need 30 to 40 tph? It could have branched on the northside to either the Northern Beaches from Victoria Cross or Parramatta from Epping and on the southside to Revesby/East Hills or Hurstville from Sydenham, which would provide much more relief to the existing network than it currently does. Unfortunately, it's too late now as provision hasn't been made for stub tunnels.

Its already proving that the NBL branch capability would not have been a smart move. Rergardless NB area has largely for decades opposed a railway.

I'm not against branching M1, however not south of Epping or east of Bankstown and the data supports this.

In the case of the rail links with WSIA and Bradfield, the incompatibility of the two metro lines was a major blunder. Although the WSIA Metro and Metro West will have the same power source (25kV AC), the WSIA Metro infrastructure will be limited to 4 car trains and Metro West will be longer trains of I believe 7 cars, but longer than the current M1 carriages. Not sure if the Metro West trains will be the same wider profile as the WSIA Metro stock.

Not quite,
- M1 was built to use existing infrastructure and operate mostly in tunnels
- MW is being built to operate mostly in tunnels but using best available technology, ie 25 kVAC to lower construction and operating costs
- M WSA is being built to operate mixed surface and underground and using best available technology, ie 25 kVAC to lower construction and operating costs

This is the same approach applied to most major city commuter networks. Why does everything have to be back wards compaitable to the steam era?

If the two lines had been compatible, then they could have branched/merged north of the Airport Business Park Station with a single line, instead of what is currently proposed with two separate lines, with the Metro West terminating at Bradfield and the WSIA Metro continuing through to Macarthur/Campbelltown via Oran Park and Narellan. The SWRL extension from Leppington could then be extended to the WSIA Terminal or Business Park for which space has been reserved.

Wouldn't matter, branching is avoided and they are doing this whole Bradfield district once, not having to knock down buildings and close off streets in the future for 5 years while they add another pair of tracks.

Your focus seems to be getting SWRL to WSA IA at all costs.

I can't see the SWRL and extension being converted to metro without any extension of M1 from Bankstown to Glenfield via Liverpool, which is by no means certain. Then there is the question of replacing the Rossmore stabling yard for Sydney Trains.

I personally don't think so either, I think NCL will eventually start from Glenfield or Liverpool.

I don't think M1 will run to Glenfield as they will extend it west of Liverpool if they extend it at all.

Replacing the stabling yards isn't a big ask. If NCL and M1 are extended to take over SWRL etc, then there will be displacements elsewhere with retiring DD stock. Also not hard to build a few extra yards elsewhere. At the end of the day regardless of which trains runs on the SWRL they need to be purchased and stored somewhere.

I agree that the SWRL extension would provide more immediate benefit for connecting WSIA and Bradfield to Campbelltown, Liverpool and Parramatta via Glenfield. The south extension from Bradfield to Macarthur via Oran Park and Narellan could be along way off.

M WSA Sth extension will be complete by the early 30's (5 - 6 years after starting), roughly the same time the SWRL extension to WSA would take to be completed, so same same.

Extension Sth of M WSA to be up and operating to the SWRL surface station junction would take 4 to 5 years for both projects to be completed.

[boxythingy]

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/projec ... ern-sydney

What will the internal fitout be like?

Will they include some racks like this? Otherwise what good will they be https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... e_rack.JPG