Possible Metro and Rail Network Changes

[rtt_rules]

Sigh. You're very confused. You are chopping and changing what you've said. Read your own previous posts. Be clear next time you challenge something that you are just guessing based on what you think should or would happen.

There was a proposal, with an alignment and station locations completed by TNSW. There was work completed by local councils on the alignment too. Just because you haven't seen this doesn't mean it does not exist. You can see the overall alignment via Prariewood in many different publicly released documents. It's not based on nothing. Work was done. That was all I said.

Of course nothing has been preserved, no one said it had. Well outside the station box at WSA. No other money has been allocated to the project, no one is supporting it. How is this any different to the Bankstown to Liverpool Metro extension or the Westmead to Kogarah Metro. That doesn't mean TNSW have done no future planning work. They all have planned alignments and station locations allocated. Sorry, but that's a nonsense argument.

This proposed alignment was created before there was any HSR proposal. That HSR proposal now exists with a business plan. IF it is built, that changes the initial work done. It's mere existence seems to have helped make the previous solid Metro extension via Prariewood a blurred indicative corridor for the future. It can now be something different as I said. It's possible it won't change either. It's open.

The previous proposal was by any definition outside your own opinion was an express service. With the goal of moving passengers between the 3 cities within certain travel times. Different to the WSA Metro, different to M1. Not different to the West Metro itself, which was designed to meet a 20 minute journey time. Although questioned by the public, the only time that 20 minute journey time was "officially" discounted, was by the new Labor Government. Why? Because they never intended to extend the line to WSA. They wanted more stations between the CBD and Parramatta which ended up huge waste of time and money.

Removing this restriction on the West Metro extension would likely result in more stations. Making it more of a local service. That was all I said. It's really a simple premise. I can't make this any more clear. I'm happy to talk transport, but this is repetitive and a waste of time . I'm not discussing it with you any further.

No confusion on my part.

Yes, detail design of MW-West, M1-Liverpool, Parramatta to Kogragh is all the same level, not much.

The concept design requirements is also the same. Average station spacing of 2 - 3 km where relevent etc.

HSR will not significantly impact on the design strategy of MW-West as again the two lines have different purposes and the purpose of MW has not changed because of HSR. Final station locations will highly unlikely be impacted by HSR.

[Transtopic]

I know it's not designed to transport passengers to and from the Harbour CBD,

YIK, but it’s what many seem to believe is how it should be - The old radial “Everything has to go to Central” paradigm.

Nonetheless, it's still important to have a rail connection with the CBD as well. The SWRL extension could have offered both, including from the SHL, Campbelltown, Liverpool and Parramatta. I expect that when WSI is eventually sold to a private operator, they will be competing hammer and tongs with KSA for customers, which they should.

The ETCS for Sydney Trains is Level 2 and not Level 4. I think it will happen sooner than you think.

L4 - Whoops! - Freudian slip - I’ll be on the bolshie watch list again
- Actually I’m expecting it soon, but just not all of it. It’s a fair size job.

Most of the early groundwork has been done with completion of the ATP rollout. ETCS - Level 2 is the next phase. I can't see why it couldn't be completed by at least 2040 if not sooner. Trains can still drive automatically over sections of the same line where ETCS is completed and manually over sections awaiting completion.

[tonyp]

While the network has been upgraded with electrification, quadrulication, better drainage etc, much of the original infrastructure has been replaced in like-for-like renewals. So we still have tightly curved sections built to allow steam trains to climb, flat junctions, narrow platforms at cbd stations etc and all the constraints that come with these. NSW has not seen the level of rebuilding track on better alignments that Queensland, Victoria and to a lesser extent, Western Australia have.

Obviously you haven't studied the curve and gradient diagrams. Most of the Sydney system is well aligned, except over some of the terrain north of the harbour.

Perth runs its modern fast services on lines that were built in the 1880s and not realigned since then. I don't think Melbourne has had any realigning, nor needs it. Brisbane is a basket case.

[Linto63]

Some of Perth’s lines were realigned when electrified in the 1990s, e.g. the Fremantle line where a number of platforms, Claremont, Cottesloe etc, were rebuilt to allow for higher approach speeds.

While Brisbane and Melbourne may not have seen significant realignments, immediately beyond there have been e.g. the Sunshine Coast line being rebuilt north of Caboolture and in Victoria between Bacchus Marsh and Ballarat.

Ad for Sydney, there are hardly any platforms between Central and Parramatta that either aren’t on a curve or have one either side. If you were building that line today you would build on a much straighter alignment.

[tonyp]

Some of Perth’s lines were realigned when electrified in the 1990s, e.g. the Fremantle line where a number of platforms, Claremont, Cottesloe etc, were rebuilt to allow for higher approach speeds.

While Brisbane and Melbourne may not have seen significant realignments, immediately beyond there have been e.g. the Sunshine Coast line being rebuilt north of Caboolture and in Victoria between Bacchus Marsh and Ballarat.

Ad for Sydney, there are hardly any platforms between Central and Parramatta that either aren’t on a curve or have one either side. If you were building that line today you would build on a much straighter alignment.

The Perth realignments were very minor. Sydney-Granville was built straight in the 1850s. The curves are a result of track amplification through built-up areas since then.

[Linto63]

Result being that it is no longer well aligned.

[tonyp]

Result being that it is no longer well aligned.

80-100 km/h coming into and out of a major city terminus is as good as you'd expect on any legacy railway and it's not seriously those fairly gentle curves that are the limiting factor.

[rtt_rules]

Obviously you haven't studied the curve and gradient diagrams. Most of the Sydney system is well aligned, except over some of the terrain north of the harbour.

Perth runs its modern fast services on lines that were built in the 1880s and not realigned since then. I don't think Melbourne has had any realigning, nor needs it. Brisbane is a basket case.

Perth has undergone significant moderisation, which isn't and wasn't hard considering in 1990 it was far from a signifcant network with just a few lines.

Brisbane, agree and in part a legacy of its old NG step down platform design. Hence all the new lines have straight approaches and platforms with only minor curves if any at all. To Brisbane's credit, the Beenleigh line is currently being upgraded and realigned for improved track speed for express GC services.

Sydney on the surface looks straight, but at track level is only one step up from Brisbane's basket case status. Even on the so called straight lines suffer from cheap amplification projects which only slowed track speed. You just need to spend a short time looking at drivers RKD's and Google streetview photos taken from platforms to see how something that should be straight has a friggin dogleg or elbow in the track. I think we were talking about one particular station on the main western corridor about a year ago. Track in one direction had a speed board about 20 km/h faster than the reverse due to an awkward dogsleg that didn't really have a reason to be there, but just was likely from something from the past.

Then we have the classic former Rookwood Cementry station, removed what 50 years ago and the so called Western Main express tracks still take a curve around the former empty space (between Church St and Railway St, Lidcombe for anyone looking).

To the best of my knowledge the only significant track deviation undertaken in Sydney in the last 50 years was when the NSL was moved east to enable a larger height clearance for Ryde Road / Pacific Hwy intersection upgrade. Replacement bridges for Cook River and Paramatta River also however none of this was for the benefit of speed.

NSW govt is spending billions on a new signal system. I would like to see what a few billion might to spread around the network in key locations where especially express services are operating over 20 km/h lower than they could at various locations.

[anything_analogous]

Result being that it is no longer well aligned.

80-100 km/h coming into and out of a major city terminus is as good as you'd expect on any legacy railway and it's not seriously those fairly gentle curves that are the limiting factor.

Well it’s 30-70kmh for a chunk of the inner part of the Illawarra line; Ashfield has a 50kmh slowdown on the suburbans; but other than that largely not too bad yeah - but then they do sh!t like add unnecessary pointwork with slow turnout speeds and persistent TSRs west of flemington, or the 10kmh slowdown on the mains into strathfield resulting from safety culture downstream from the failure to grade separate important junctions over many decades.

[anything_analogous]

To the best of my knowledge the only significant track deviation undertaken in Sydney in the last 50 years was when the NSL was moved east to enable a larger height clearance for Ryde Road / Pacific Hwy intersection upgrade. Replacement bridges for Cook River and Paramatta River also however none of this was for the benefit of speed.

NSW govt is spending billions on a new signal system. I would like to see what a few billion might to spread around the network in key locations where especially express services are operating over 20 km/h lower than they could at various locations.

I don’t think the north shore line bridgeworks at Ryde road resulted in speed increases though, the curve radii on either side barely changed and it was only a small shift in alignment with the new bridge structure, you can see it here in the 1982 vs 1986 aerial views.
https://portal.spatial.nsw.gov.au/porta ... a8075238cb

[rtt_rules]

To the best of my knowledge the only significant track deviation undertaken in Sydney in the last 50 years was when the NSL was moved east to enable a larger height clearance for Ryde Road / Pacific Hwy intersection upgrade. Replacement bridges for Cook River and Paramatta River also however none of this was for the benefit of speed.

NSW govt is spending billions on a new signal system. I would like to see what a few billion might to spread around the network in key locations where especially express services are operating over 20 km/h lower than they could at various locations.

I don’t think the north shore line bridgeworks at Ryde road resulted in speed increases though, the curve radii on either side barely changed and it was only a small shift in alignment with the new bridge structure, you can see it here in the 1982 vs 1986 aerial views.
https://portal.spatial.nsw.gov.au/porta ... a8075238cb

Thanks for the photos, unfortunatley I'm old enough to remember it being done. And sorry for the confusion I wasn't meaning to say the speed had improved, rather to the best of my knowledge its the only realignment in ST since the 1980's.

[anything_analogous]

I don’t think the north shore line bridgeworks at Ryde road resulted in speed increases though, the curve radii on either side barely changed and it was only a small shift in alignment with the new bridge structure, you can see it here in the 1982 vs 1986 aerial views.
https://portal.spatial.nsw.gov.au/porta ... a8075238cb

Thanks for the photos, unfortunatley I'm old enough to remember it being done. And sorry for the confusion I wasn't meaning to say the speed had improved, rather to the best of my knowledge its the only realignment in ST since the 1980's.

Richmond line was straightened around schofields with the duplication and LXR works in the 2000s.

[rtt_rules]

Thanks for the photos, unfortunatley I'm old enough to remember it being done. And sorry for the confusion I wasn't meaning to say the speed had improved, rather to the best of my knowledge its the only realignment in ST since the 1980's.

Richmond line was straightened around schofields with the duplication and LXR works in the 2000s.

Excellent

[anything_analogous]

Richmond line was straightened around schofields with the duplication and LXR works in the 2000s.

Excellent

Epping-thornleigh third track did what they could to cut into the meaty bits of curves as much as possible too, that was mid-2010s, the lines and terrain are just more constrained in Sydney than all the others.

[Oldfart]

Most of the early groundwork has been done with completion of the ATP rollout. ETCS - Level 2 is the next phase. I can't see why it couldn't be completed by at least 2040 if not sooner. Trains can still drive automatically over sections of the same line where ETCS is completed and manually over sections awaiting completion.

Yeah, I thought the timing would be something like that. ETCS is a logical next step to improve much of the Sydney Trains network, and in ways discernible to the general public. But, I’m in my seventies, so 2040 is probably beyond my "anticipated relevance horizon”.

[Oldfart]

1 - Once WSA opens, freight will largely leave Mascot and a number of low cost options also move across.

2 - I'm happy to wait 10 min longer for for my bage if it means I don't have a +40min trip across the city.

3 - You don't spend $30 B to poach pax. WSA many target audience is the population centre of the western part of the city.

1 - Why do you think freight is leaving SYD? - It's planning air cargo to more than double to 1.4 million tonnes annually, driven by e-commerce and high-value, time-critical goods, with added facilities planned nearby - It expects 80% of freight in passenger plane belly holds, whereas WSI will probably focus more on dedicated freight aircraft operations - Western Sydney Airport (WSI) will provide an initial capacity for 220,000 tonnes, growing to 1.8 million tonnes annually over several years - Air freight is often high value and urgent; so like a lot of passengers, it will often gravitate to the nearest air freight facility.

2 - As discussed earlier, WSI is operationally superior is so many ways - So people on the cusp, (as opposed to those in the far East End of Sydney) might be swayed not only by the better baggage handling - but the flight being 15 minutes shorter due less taxying and holding, due to the airport’s design - with consequent better fuel efficiency and cheaper fares - with no delays due to poor visibility because it has a full Cat IIIB instrument landing system (enabling full auto land) - plus taxiway lights that specifically guide aircraft to their specific gate, (and automatically separate it from other aircraft, ground vehicles and intruding people/animals in poor visibility) - systems which detect and prevent emerging incidents and delays - and systems that enable automatic information sharing and decision-making between flight crews, refuelling units, baggage handlers, push-back crews, etc. to minimise delays and other risks - and pilot guidance units at each bay, that not only accurately position the aircraft for disembarkation, but can detect and warn of any ground obstructions in its path with LiDAR.

3 - Western Sydney people (and relatives, friends and value-tourists visiting it) will be its main market, probably for about 3 decades. But WSI has a much greater potential capacity (similar to Heathrow) than the historically and geographically more constrained SYD airport. After 3 decades the advantages of WSI will become increasingly apparent and demand will arise to make getting there faster and easier from more of Greater Sydney. It’s a very long term thing. SYD will never become exactly like (the even more constrained, but located virtually next to London's financial district) London City Airport, but that’s the sort direction (lower volume, but higher margins) in which it will evolve.

BTW, London is a great case study of how different airports (Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted, Luton, London City, Southend) don’t all provide exactly the same product - each tailors itself to make the most of their specific location, demographics and airport characteristics. SYD and WSI will mutually evolve around their respective and changing markets. The competition between them (already evident in SYD’s emerging plans) and other airports competing with them, will probably mostly be good for their users

[Oldfart]

2 - It raises the interesting idea that a line, say serving WSI airport, could operate both fast suburban services (with relatively short trains and station gaps of 4 to 5 km), and longer HSR expresses that cross Greater Sydney even faster then go onward to serve regional areas beyond.

Korea experimented it but it didn't work well.
https://kojects.com/2018/09/12/incheon- ... -railroad/

That’s a very interesting article, and I’m not surprised that combination was not successful. But it’s not quite what I was suggesting though:

- Using the Guangzhou line 18 fast metro (160kph) as an example; it has both express and stopping services, with passing loops at key stations so that the time difference between express and stopping services ’end to end’ remains substantial.
- Having HSR go to an airport should probably not be primarily for passengers from the same city (can be an option if they are willing to pay the premium, but it's really a better job for a fast metro with strategically located en-route stations such as where it crosses lines from other parts of the city).
- The HSR should only be going via the airport only so that it can transfer people between trains and planes (like Frankfurt-am-Main in Germany). Virtually nobody catches the HSR between the Airport and Frankfurt’s main station itself; they use the more frequent S-Bahn for that.
- What I am suggesting is that there might be an option where HSR and the Fast Metro can substantially share the same tracks, by doing what Guangzhou 18 does with passing loops for the (probably less frequent) HSR at selected stations. It makes for a cheaper shared track solution for two different types of services.
- So for example, if we had a HSR that ran from Central to Canberra, it could stop at WSI to pick up passengers heading south off arriving flights. In the other direction, it could offload passengers (from say, the southern highlands) who want to fly from WSI.

And I emphasise, I am not proposing this is what should be done, just that the emerging technology being used in Guangzhou might have applications here to enable a single line to have two functions. Thinking back to the earlier proposals for what is now Metro West, there was contention about whether it should be a fast train to Parramatta, or a a line with lots of suburban stops. The Guangzhou line 18 solution could have enabled both.

[tonyp]

But, I’m in my seventies, so 2040 is probably beyond my "anticipated relevance horizon”.

I think that's an excellent way of phrasing it! I think the horizon has actually disappeared anyway. I had hoped that things would look up after the 2010s, but it has all just slipped back into the old doomed cycle.

The disastrous failure of Mitchell's Causeway, after doing its job wonderfully for nearly 200 years (shades of Roman roads), highlights the perpetual failure to invest adequately in our existing infrastructure, highlighting the warped priority of promoting glamour, but marginally effective, high speed rail just at this time. Compounding the sudden severing of the Great Western Highway is the terrible decision made back in the 1990s to reduce the Main West to single track between Wallerawang and Tarana, presumably just to save maintenance money.

The last Coalition government did a lot to repair the important links to the Central West, including building numerous passing tracks (including at Rydal in that single-tracked bottleneck) to boost rail capacity again, reopen Millthorpe as a passenger station, plan to reopen Wallerawang Station, introduce the Bathurst Bullet, order a new country train fleet and start planning work on the Blackheath to Little Hartley road tunnel which would have bypassed Mitchell's route. The tunnel was cancelled by the new Labor government - their final act being just last month iirc, just before the failure of the causeway.

With the Great Western Highway cut, diverted traffic has turned central Lithgow into gridlock and Bells Line of Road is getting a workout for its whole length, which could have flow-on effects on Metro M1 crowding, if there wasn't such limited parking. There's little spare capacity on the Main West to offer any significant rail relief to the road disaster.

Beside this disaster on one of the states' three most essential corridors, posturing about HSR seems a trite indulgence, fiddling while Rome burns, so to speak. The Feds now need to pick up that HSR money and deposit it on the Central West corridor immediately. But they're more interested in political gestures.

[rtt_rules]

Excellent

Epping-thornleigh third track did what they could to cut into the meaty bits of curves as much as possible too, that was mid-2010s, the lines and terrain are just more constrained in Sydney than all the others.

Interesting and thats for sharing, was there any changes to speed boards?

[rtt_rules]

1 - Why do you think freight is leaving SYD? - It's planning air cargo to more than double to 1.4 million tonnes annually, driven by e-commerce and high-value, time-critical goods, with added facilities planned nearby - It expects 80% of freight in passenger plane belly holds, whereas WSI will probably focus more on dedicated freight aircraft operations - Western Sydney Airport (WSI) will provide an initial capacity for 220,000 tonnes, growing to 1.8 million tonnes annually over several years - Air freight is often high value and urgent; so like a lot of passengers, it will often gravitate to the nearest air freight facility.

2 - As discussed earlier, WSI is operationally superior is so many ways - So people on the cusp, (as opposed to those in the far East End of Sydney) might be swayed not only by the better baggage handling - but the flight being 15 minutes shorter due less taxying and holding, due to the airport’s design - with consequent better fuel efficiency and cheaper fares - with no delays due to poor visibility because it has a full Cat IIIB instrument landing system (enabling full auto land) - plus taxiway lights that specifically guide aircraft to their specific gate, (and automatically separate it from other aircraft, ground vehicles and intruding people/animals in poor visibility) - systems which detect and prevent emerging incidents and delays - and systems that enable automatic information sharing and decision-making between flight crews, refuelling units, baggage handlers, push-back crews, etc. to minimise delays and other risks - and pilot guidance units at each bay, that not only accurately position the aircraft for disembarkation, but can detect and warn of any ground obstructions in its path with LiDAR.

3 - Western Sydney people (and relatives, friends and value-tourists visiting it) will be its main market, probably for about 3 decades. But WSI has a much greater potential capacity (similar to Heathrow) than the historically and geographically more constrained SYD airport. After 3 decades the advantages of WSI will become increasingly apparent and demand will arise to make getting there faster and easier from more of Greater Sydney. It’s a very long term thing. SYD will never become exactly like (the even more constrained, but located virtually next to London's financial district) London City Airport, but that’s the sort direction (lower volume, but higher margins) in which it will evolve.

BTW, London is a great case study of how different airports (Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted, Luton, London City, Southend) don’t all provide exactly the same product - each tailors itself to make the most of their specific location, demographics and airport characteristics. SYD and WSI will mutually evolve around their respective and changing markets. The competition between them (already evident in SYD’s emerging plans) and other airports competing with them, will probably mostly be good for their users

1.
Much of the optional Airfreight as in dedciated freighters is moving to WSA because they don't gets lots in Mascot and cannot operate 24/7 as after hours is when alot of freighters actually fly. This is also pretty much the situation that happened at DXB with cargo planes going to DWC and since a large fleet of trucks going back and forwards. Yes I'm aware of belly airfreight.

2.
Baggage waiting times at Mascot are minimal. Never had to wait more than a few minutes, both domestic and internation.

Yes WSA has a modern baggage system, thats more for internal purposes not benefit of passenger who still gets their bag in similar time frame. Remember airports use all sorts of tricks to manage customer expectations waiting for baggage including deliberately putting planes at distant gates to slow down the passenger transfer time from plane to baggage.

Yes, the new airport has all the bells and whistles and it should do its new. The govt has clearly started the airport off with the concept of automation which is excellent news. But will it be significantly faster in flight time, maybe. But I'm still nearly 1h from the CBD / eastern parts of Sydney. Will it have lower fares, but if saving what $20 - 30 on a ticket to be replaced by a $30 - 50 train ticket that overall takes longer is not smart economics.

From UAE, Mascot over Brisbane is about $100 more per ticket, sometimes. But is it the airline charging because they get charged or charging because they can. I think its both. Emirates has lost alot of traffic from Brisbane. The flight via Singapore is gone and one flight cut back to B777.

3.
I agree WSA may over time see Mascot lower its charges and probably wouldn't be hard to do so. But this is decades away. Mascots's revenue is $1.7B with a healthy profit so this will help and potentially some traffic going to WSA will actually improve the efficency of Mascot such that it has less delays etc.

Agree they compete of sorts, but they largely surround the city and support their respective regional areas, however Heathrow gets roughly half of all the traffic due to proximty, access etc.

- Apart from the small constrained City Heathrow is the cloest at 26 km. heathrow is on the west side of London on its own, apart from Gatwick all the others are near each other on east and north side.
- Gatwick is next at 45 km and gets half the numbers of Heathrow. Gatwick is also limited in catchment as its close to the sea and its nearest competitor is Heathrow.
- Stansted is another 18km further out and gets rougly half that of Gatwick

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airports_of_London

[anything_analogous]

Epping-thornleigh third track did what they could to cut into the meaty bits of curves as much as possible too, that was mid-2010s, the lines and terrain are just more constrained in Sydney than all the others.

Interesting and thats for sharing, was there any changes to speed boards?

They’re quicker over the M2 and up to cheltenham, but then because they had to squeeze through cheltenham beecroft and pennant hills stations and the road bridge structures through that part of the corridor, they’re a little slower: and then can’t accelerate to 115 when it does straighten out because they need to merge back onto the original line over an x75. One kinda wonders what the point of building third platforms at pennant hills and cheltenham was if they were not going to do beecroft anyway, and the new platforms at cheltenham and pennant hills don’t get used much for stopping services if at all.

[anything_analogous]

Compounding the sudden severing of the Great Western Highway is the terrible decision made back in the 1990s to reduce the Main West to single track between Wallerawang and Tarana, presumably just to save maintenance money. The last Coalition government did a lot to repair the important links to the Central West, including building numerous passing tracks (including at Rydal in that single-tracked bottleneck) to boost rail capacity again, reopen Millthorpe as a passenger station, plan to reopen Wallerawang Station, introduce the Bathurst Bullet, order a new country train fleet and start planning work on the Blackheath to Little Hartley road tunnel which would have bypassed Mitchell's route. The tunnel was cancelled by the new Labor government - their final act being just last month iirc, just before the failure of the causeway.

With the Great Western Highway cut, diverted traffic has turned central Lithgow into gridlock and Bells Line of Road is getting a workout for its whole length, which could have flow-on effects on Metro M1 crowding, if there wasn't such limited parking. There's little spare capacity on the Main West to offer any significant rail relief to the road disaster.

Singling the main line west of wallerawang to Tarana occurred under either Greiner or Fahey I believe, before carr came in. I will say it improves accessibility in theory doing this, although you could achieve it whilst retaining the benefits of double-tracking too just by having points to allow stopping trains to call at the one accessible platform and the switch back to the track they need in direction of travel like I believe they do at some of the other double-tracked stops around the place.

I believe there is a bit more capacity they could unlock on the main west if they wanted to squeeze and to do non-ideal things like terminate additional trains at Blacktown, and if they were capable of doing things like building a simple turnback track at emu plains. The full-length mariyungs can also carry a lot more passengers than the dmus can so if capacity really is that constrained then it makes no sense to through-run diesels infrequently and attempting express stopping patterns rather than force them to change to emus and run both more frequently.

[Linto63]

Then we have the classic former Rookwood Cementry station, removed what 50 years ago and the so called Western Main express tracks still take a curve around the former empty space.

Straightening it would have no impact on line speed. Not worth rebuilding a whole section of track, relocating lineside equipment, stanchions etc to save a few seconds.

The last Coalition government did a lot to repair the important links to the Central West, including building numerous passing tracks (including at Rydal in that single-tracked bottleneck) to boost rail capacity again, reopen Millthorpe as a passenger station, plan to reopen Wallerawang Station, introduce the Bathurst Bullet, order a new country train fleet.

The last government's interest in the Central West was as much about poor paralleling as anything else. The Bathurst Bullet was one, as was the decision to build the depot for the Civitys at Dubbo. The Wallerawang announcement was made a few months before the last election, so not unreasonable to also classify this as a pork barrel. Wouldn't put the ordering of the Civitys down as a Coalition initiative, just a case of it being in office at the time when TfNSW advised that the existing fleet was approaching life expiry.

...planning work on the Blackheath to Little Hartley road tunnel which would have bypassed Mitchell's route. The tunnel was cancelled by the new Labor government - their final act being just last month iirc, just before the failure of the causeway.

At $19 billion, that project was was never going to get off the ground. The cost benefit ratio would have been very poor, particularly with it proposed to be toll free.

Singling the main line west of wallerawang to Tarana occurred under either Greiner or Fahey

Gresham to Newbridge in September 1990, so in the Greiner government's first term, Wallerawang to Tarana in December 1995, so in the Carr government's first term.

[anything_analogous]

Then we have the classic former Rookwood Cementry station, removed what 50 years ago and the so called Western Main express tracks still take a curve around the former empty space.

Straightening it would have no impact on line speed. Not worth rebuilding a whole section of track, relocating lineside equipment, stanchions to save a few seconds… December 1995, so in the Carr government's first term.

In isolation yeah probably not, but the entire main line trunk from central to Granville all curves appear to be capable of increasing speeds from 80kmh to 100kmh or at the very least 90kmh on sections where freight runs, and as well the pointwork could/should be rationalised, that would net you worthwhile time savings. Probably has to wait for etcs though. And more possible if they did actually sextuple it.
You sure on the December 1995 date? If so then yes it was under carr but only 7-8 months after he took office so the plans to single it were likely already on the books and they just approved it and got to work.

[rtt_rules]

Straightening it would have no impact on line speed. Not worth rebuilding a whole section of track, relocating lineside equipment, stanchions to save a few seconds.

Very true, but this is the problem, all these issues, few seconds here and there all add up. This section is boarded at 80 km/h, I'm assuming because its curving here and there. the whole section from Lidcombe to Central is mostly 70 - 80 km/h. The Mains gets 90 and even briefly 100 for a few km. A corridor this alignment should really be 120 - 160 km/h for express tracks.

re: Reopening of Wallerawang - TBH, the LNP did alot for this corridor bringing the Bathurst Bullet, increasing it to two services and committig to fix the tunnel issue to lithgow. So I wouldn't simply dismiss it as porkbarrelling.

At $19 billion, that project was was never going to get off the ground. The cost benefit ratio would have been very poor, particularly with it proposed to be toll free.

Wasn't my comment you replied to but agree, they wanted to for sure as this has come up many times over the last 40 years, almost as much as nuclear power and like nuclear power gets dismissed based on cost. The proposal and the toll free proposal is still aligned with support by the LNP for this corridor, road and rail.

Single tracking - TBH, either party, does it really surprise us this happened? Maybe not done well but that it happened. Double track beyond the commuter belt in Oz is very rare and limited to usually large volume mineral freights ie Hunter and CQ coal and this corridor lost alot of freight and pax services during the 70's and 80's with the final straw being the diversion of nearly all / all interstate National Rail services via Forbes in 1993. Vic did the same thing for the Ballarat line when it was realigned as part of the Fast Regional Rail project. But then screwed themselves because people started to use trains again when they became faster and modern.