Railway Observations for 2022.

Sydney / New South Wales Transport Discussion
User avatar
ScaniaGrenda
Posts: 1118
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:46 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Scania,Volvo or Mercedes Buses

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by ScaniaGrenda »

I'm not saying PTA is a one stop place we could all learn from however it is definitely just one of the many examples of where other states could acquire a vast knowledge of from on how to do it better. Now I know someone is going to shout "population density" and all but why should that matter? The system needs to be built to function for the needs of tomorrow & beyond, not yesterday & certainly not today.

It is planned to withdraw the Endeavors / XPT's / XPLORERS by 2023 (We're creeping up close to that & no date of when the new trains will enter service) but the mistake I'm seeing is it still being reliant on diesel somewhat, yes the trains will consist Hybrid technology meaning electricity will be obtained from overhead pantographs where applicable and diesel where there isn't overhead wiring but why is the state not using this opptunity to jump ahead prepare and electrify lines outside of the Sydney & Intercity network, waiting until possibly 2056 to start there & then if that's what their still aiming for is a big waste of time and I'm also sure trains like the Hunter J-sets will long be out of service by then.

NSW from my POV sees the majority of things as "We'll get to it when the time suits" & unless again your within Sydney then projects get left for years where by then demand has grown significantly and you've got services still running on 2008 capacity levels but no one is interested in even remotely fixing it. Try getting on a train afternoon rush hour after Hamilton station for those heading back to Maitland, in most cases the seats on the two car rail train are already at capacity after the train departs from Hamilton, if a page was taken from the WA book, I believe lines like the Hunter would have had enough sets built to enable a 4 car system and I'm not saying it would be 100% resolver to all problems but it does put the issues about capacity to finally rest for such a line. Would a 4 car services be needed all day? No and there are instances where two car services still perfectly suits but peak hour on a two car is like trying to shove all those people into a rigid bus, it's embarrassing and shows how much the rail network flops.

(Yes I know this goes way way off topic about Rail observations however I wanted to add my 2c as a frustrated commuter myself)
Transport enthusiast & photographer / videographer since 2016, documenting & preserving our local Transport History through videos & photos.
Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: Railway Observations for 2022

Post by Linto63 »

The business case for electrifying the Hunter line will be dependent on the freight operators wanting it. The case for electrifying solely or a half-hourly two-car service would be weak. The capacity problems may well come down to political interference, e.g. the two sets that operate the Bathurst Bullet had to be sourced from somewhere, and may have well come from the Hunter. IIRC some Hunter services used to previously operate as four-car sets.
Aurora
Posts: 925
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 10:54 pm
Favourite Vehicle: C set
Location: Sydney Reg 3

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by Aurora »

That is exactly why these lines weren’t electrified decades ago, the case for it is weak where you have trains running every hour if you are lucky.
An asset of NSW. All opinions/comments are strictly my own.
M 5885.
User avatar
Campbelltown busboy
Posts: 2127
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 1:23 pm
Location: Ruse/Campbelltown City NSW

Re: Railway Observations for 2022

Post by Campbelltown busboy »

Linto63 wrote: Wed Oct 05, 2022 1:45 pm The business case for electrifying the Hunter line will be dependent on the freight operators wanting it. The case for electrifying solely or a half-hourly two-car service would be weak. The capacity problems may well come down to political interference, e.g. the two sets that operate the Bathurst Bullet had to be sourced from somewhere, and may have well come from the Hunter. IIRC some Hunter services used to previously operate as four-car sets.
Most of the endeavour fleet are rostered on the Southern Highlands line whitch includes a daily direct Goulburn to Sydney service that gets 2 cars added at Moss Vale on the north bound service and drops 2 cars at Moss Vale on the south bound service
User avatar
ScaniaGrenda
Posts: 1118
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:46 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Scania,Volvo or Mercedes Buses

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by ScaniaGrenda »

The view points on how to build & design a network back then may have been different understandably but I'd imagine with the vast advances of technology overtime & now the growth of regional areas that mindset certainly has to have changed. Again you don't build a network to just cope with the needs of today, you build it to cope with the future in mind. Why build something which your only going to have to come back and do up in two years for example when it could just as easily be built to cope with the demand for the next 15 years in mind?

I can understand the Hunter line not being the first and foremost case to always be front & centre through I've also always advocated there's never been a better time than now that we should be making upgrades even if it's going to come in stages (stage one, two, three etc) we're literally building so many new housing estates and developing new suburbs but where is the investment into the public transport / train services that is going to get those who aren't driving into the City? if we're going to keep up on this hourly business then we're not going to make any progress, who wants to wait 40 minutes or an hour for the next train? Should be half hourly throughout the day and then hourly later into the night.

Currently running the Hunter Line as it is is exactly a perfect case of what not to do, there's places that can still survive on a similar system like the Hunter line at present but the Hunter line itself (and I'm sure other Trainlink lines?) are due for a much needed overhaul whether you as a resident or occasional traveler agree or not. Time to stop with running the trains like it's still 2008 and instead build with 2035-2040 demand in mind otherwise your just asking for the system to fall down on it's legs and not being able to cope with the increased growth.
Transport enthusiast & photographer / videographer since 2016, documenting & preserving our local Transport History through videos & photos.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21567
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by boronia »

The early non-suburban electrifications (BMT, CCN, SCO) were necessitated by the volume of heavy freight traffic on the lines, not by passenger trains (although these did benefit as a bonus). The Hunter lines never warranted it, especially after diesel locos became comparable to electrics in terms of operational capability.
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
User avatar
jpp42
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 8:27 pm

Re: Railway Observations for 2022

Post by jpp42 »

Linto63 wrote: Wed Oct 05, 2022 1:45 pm The business case for electrifying the Hunter line will be dependent on the freight operators wanting it. The case for electrifying solely or a half-hourly two-car service would be weak. The capacity problems may well come down to political interference, e.g. the two sets that operate the Bathurst Bullet had to be sourced from somewhere, and may have well come from the Hunter. IIRC some Hunter services used to previously operate as four-car sets.
The Hunter has a dedicated fleet - I believe that at least one of the sets for the Bathurst Bullet came from removing weekday peak services on the South Coast (south of Kiama); there used to be two sets down there at weekday peak hours allowing for more frequency. Now, a number of weekday runs are now permanently buses as the single set can only manage a 2-hour frequency. Also, I understand there was a reduction in the number of spare/protection sets that used to be held at Meeks Rd, resulting in more bustitution when there are problems.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by tonyp »

My references to the Perth system are about technology and operational methodology. Nothing to do with the population of the city, but a lot to do with the geographical spread. As it has in Perth, rapid transit rail is proving an ideal solution for Sydney. As the metro expands, it's important to start taking the load off the suburban system so that it can function better.

It's hard to see how we can reduce the operating cost though, as the RTBU is not prepared to reduce crews, no matter how much technology and automation is added. Indeed, the situation with the NIFs indicates that they're even prepared to rip technology out. This is the albatross around our necks that the taxpayer is paying dearly for. One has to question then whether it's worthwhile introducing automation or other performance enhancements when they won't reduce operating costs.
User avatar
Campbelltown busboy
Posts: 2127
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 1:23 pm
Location: Ruse/Campbelltown City NSW

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by Campbelltown busboy »

The issue with the Trainlink intercity DMU fleet is there are only about 20 or so 2 car trains that is made up of 14 Endeavours and around 6 or more Hunter J sets whitch makes it hard to improve frequentcy levels on the non electrified section on intercity lines
Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: Railway Observations for 2022

Post by Linto63 »

tonyp wrote: It's hard to see how we can reduce the operating cost though, as the RTBU is not prepared to reduce crews, no matter how much technology and automation is added.
Not the RBTU's job to reduce crews, that is the government's responsibility. The RBTU leadership is doing what it's put there to do, i.e. maximise the benefits for its members.

While there may be some legitimate safety concerns, the NIF dispute is as much about feather bedding, anyone being objective can see that. Doubt there has ever been a guard's union anywhere that has just willingly accepted its members being replaced by DOO, yet plenty have been introduced. So it all boils down to the government not having the courage of its convictions to see things through. Hasn't been helped by having an umpire that both sides acknowledge is powerless.
User avatar
Swift
Posts: 13247
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:23 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra
Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by Swift »

If they're not required they're not required. The union is there to look after the pay and conditions, not to run the business. I don't like employers or employees to have too much sway.
NSW, the state that embraces mediocrity.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: Railway Observations for 2022

Post by Transtopic »

Linto63 wrote: Wed Oct 05, 2022 7:11 pm
tonyp wrote: It's hard to see how we can reduce the operating cost though, as the RTBU is not prepared to reduce crews, no matter how much technology and automation is added.
Not the RBTU's job to reduce crews, that is the government's responsibility. The RBTU leadership is doing what it's put there to do, i.e. maximise the benefits for its members.

While there may be some legitimate safety concerns, the NIF dispute is as much about feather bedding, anyone being objective can see that. Doubt there has ever been a guard's union anywhere that has just willingly accepted its members being replaced by DOO, yet plenty have been introduced. So it all boils down to the government not having the courage of its convictions to see things through. Hasn't been helped by having an umpire that both sides acknowledge is powerless.
I agree, although the NIF dispute on the intercity network should be looked at in a different context to DOO on the suburban network. There will obviously be a different operational environment on the intercity network, with longer 10-car NIF trains and some shorter platforms, compared with a standardised 8-car train suburban network.

I'm somewhat ambivalent about the need for guards on the suburban network in the longer term, particularly once the GoA2 upgrade is rolled out. The Waratah suburban rolling stock is designed with built-in conversion to DOO, as well as ATO, and the implementation of ATP across the network is nearing completion. Sydney Trains has also been trialling fixed platform gap fillers at Circular Quay and with the possible introduction of PSDs at the busier stations once the GoA2 upgrade is completed, that could make guards on the suburban network redundant. I don't think that the RTBU would have as strong a case to argue for the retention of guards in that scenario compared with the intercity network, nor indeed the regional network. Time will tell how this plays out, but I think that the RTBU would be facing a losing battle here and they would be wiser in negotiating a retraining and redundancy package.

On the matter of extension of electrification, the new CAF bi-mode fleet, assuming it ever gets here, will defer that need for at least a few decades. However, with fossil fuels having a limited future, alternative power sources, including extension of electrification, will eventually have to be considered. In saying that, I could envisage an earlier extension of electrification on the Southern Highlands Line, initially to Picton and then to at least Moss Vale, as Sydney's population spreads further into that region, just as it has to the Central Coast, Blue Mountains and South Coast.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by tonyp »

If you have GoA2, you have a driver sitting there doing nothing while the train drives itself. In other systems, in this case the driver basically becomes a guard and there's definitely no second crew member. The strength of the RTBU's stance with the NIFs suggests that they won't agree to that. The financial equation is that, if automation doesn't displace crew, then the investment doesn't stack up because, rather than saving costs, you're incurring even more costs.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by Transtopic »

tonyp wrote: Wed Oct 05, 2022 11:01 pm If you have GoA2, you have a driver sitting there doing nothing while the train drives itself. In other systems, in this case the driver basically becomes a guard and there's definitely no second crew member. The strength of the RTBU's stance with the NIFs suggests that they won't agree to that. The financial equation is that, if automation doesn't displace crew, then the investment doesn't stack up because, rather than saving costs, you're incurring even more costs.
What a preposterous thing to say. With GoA2, the driver is not sitting there doing nothing. He/she is actually a pair of eyes looking out for obstructions on the track and is able to intervene in an emergency situation, just as they do with manual operation. GoA4 requires a much higher order of isolation of track at significantly higher capital cost to enable a driverless system to operate safely, which may not stack up on a cost/benefit analysis. This is not always practicable on legacy rail networks where they share with or operate alongside other rail uses. GoA2 is the preferred model in these circumstances, which can still have a significant benefit. The success or otherwise of the Bankstown Line conversion to GoA4 will be a telling example of whether this strategy is sustainable on a cost/benefit analysis.

You continually prattle on about the need to convert the whole Sydney Trains network over time to driverless metro operation. You're long on vision, but short on how in practical terms it can be achieved. It's not as easy an exercise as you seem to suggest, and dare I say, totally impracticable. Please enlighten me.
matthewg
Posts: 1704
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 1:11 pm

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by matthewg »

Transtopic wrote: Thu Oct 06, 2022 12:30 am
What a preposterous thing to say. With GoA2, the driver is not sitting there doing nothing. He/she is actually a pair of eyes looking out for obstructions on the track and is able to intervene in an emergency situation, just as they do with manual operation.
IMHO this is a dangerous mode of operation. The automation is a lower grade as a 'human' is directly supervising but the supervision job is dull and boring. How long do you think you would be paying attention to the view ahead if there was no corresponding action to focus on?

So you have automation that relies on human supervision and a human who regularly loses 'situational awareness' as the job is so dull.

I've been on a GoA2.5 Metro where the passengers could see the driver (glass wall behind the driving position). I observed the 'operator' press two buttons labelled 'ATO' - which were spaced so that you had to use both hands to activate the mode, then get a book out of his bag and spent the rest of the trip out to the terminus reading his book, only occasionally looking up at the track ahead. Most of the trip was above ground, although fully fenced track. I stood behind him in the passenger area and observed the track ahead the entire trip (being the 'gunzel' that I am).

Had there been an obstruction or some other incident, there is no way this operator would have reacted in time, his mind was elsewhere.

Almost certain this train operator was breaking the rules and had a supervisor seen this, been subject to disciplinary action, but it's human nature. The supervision job is dull, and the operator's attention will drift.

This is not actually new science - automation engineers know this stuff. More than one factory plant has been seriously damaged when the automation tripped out but the control room supervisors had 'zoned out' or were distracted by 'activities' at the time.

I give it 10-15 years and the 'conventional' network will start moving to GoA4. The current action by the unions is just boosting the business case for replacing them entirely. Technology changes or even removes jobs. It's always been so. The railways are not immune. Trains of the future will only have 'customer service personnel on board. There will be no drivers or guards or even any 'safe working' qualified staff.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by tonyp »

On a couple of GoA2 systems without platform screen doors that I've ridden, the "driver" supervises/operates the doors - effectively acting as the guard. I would think that PSDs would be a key factor in upgrading a GoA2 to a GoA4. Given the exceptional safety record of GoA4 systems, it's no wonder that the common view is that having crew on board is actually a safety hazard. Full automation reduces the risks. Our other issue in Sydney though is the staggering operating cost associated with having two crew on board.
matthewg
Posts: 1704
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 1:11 pm

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by matthewg »

tonyp wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 9:38 am I would think that PSDs would be a key factor in upgrading a GoA2 to a GoA4. Given the exceptional safety record of GoA4 systems,
I've ridden two level 4 systems (unattended operation) systems that did not have platform doors. I believe they did have some sort of RADAR system looking along the platforms. PSDs are not a 'technical requirement' if your safety regulation will permit it.
London's DLR has staff operating the doors as I understand UK rail legislation REQUIRES a suitably trained staff member on board. If they have to be there, they might as well do something useful. There have been noises made that the law needs to be changed to allow LU to operate GoA4 tube lines.

One of the systems I rode subsequently did have a station fatality, I looked up the report on the accident. The platform RADAR detected the person who jumped and immediately applied full emergency braking to the incoming train. But the person was inside the emergency braking distance. There were the usual claims that if a human had been driving the accident could have been avoided, but the report noted that since the person jumped within the braking distance anyway, the outcome would have been identical.

Now a human driver, seeing a 'suspicious' person on the platform edge ahead MAY initiate braking before they actually jump, but I suspect that a lot of the time this will make little to no difference to the outcome.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by Transtopic »

matthewg wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 2:10 pm
tonyp wrote: Sat Oct 15, 2022 9:38 am I would think that PSDs would be a key factor in upgrading a GoA2 to a GoA4. Given the exceptional safety record of GoA4 systems,
I've ridden two level 4 systems (unattended operation) systems that did not have platform doors. I believe they did have some sort of RADAR system looking along the platforms. PSDs are not a 'technical requirement' if your safety regulation will permit it.
London's DLR has staff operating the doors as I understand UK rail legislation REQUIRES a suitably trained staff member on board. If they have to be there, they might as well do something useful. There have been noises made that the law needs to be changed to allow LU to operate GoA4 tube lines.

One of the systems I rode subsequently did have a station fatality, I looked up the report on the accident. The platform RADAR detected the person who jumped and immediately applied full emergency braking to the incoming train. But the person was inside the emergency braking distance. There were the usual claims that if a human had been driving the accident could have been avoided, but the report noted that since the person jumped within the braking distance anyway, the outcome would have been identical.

Now a human driver, seeing a 'suspicious' person on the platform edge ahead MAY initiate braking before they actually jump, but I suspect that a lot of the time this will make little to no difference to the outcome.
It would be astounding if a new GoA4 system today did not have platform screen doors, which should be a minimum requirement, whether or not on a new metro line or an existing converted line. There have been suggestions that even Sydney Trains would introduce PSDs on the busier stations when GoA2 is rolled out across the network. They have been having trials on the platforms at Circular Quay with rigid rubber gap fillers as a prelude. GoA2 will enable trains to stop at the correct position automatically to align with the PSDs. It would be a similar exercise to the gap fillers on the Bankstown Line conversion, although I understand that in that instance they will be retractable on the platforms.

Sorry, but I don't buy your argument that GoA2 with a driver/observer would be unsafe because of boredom in not directly driving the train. A driver/observer who is not paying attention would be clearly visible to other drivers/observers on passing or approaching on adjoining tracks and would risk disciplinary action.

I cannot see the legacy Sydney Trains, let alone NSW Trainlink, networks ever being converted to GoA4. The cost, not to mention the practicality, wouldn't be feasible. Just accept that GoA2 is a much cheaper and practical alternative which still has significant benefits. Along with the limited application of PSDs on the busier stations, particularly in the CBD, it can provide a service approaching metro standards, not to mention significantly more seats. There's no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It would be better to focus on building new metro lines to areas not currently serviced by rail, such as cross regional links, without the compromises which have to be made in converting existing legacy lines to driverless GoA4.

That doesn't mean to say that it would still require guards with GoA2, particularly on the suburban network. The Waratahs are designed for conversion to Driver Only Operation and ATO and yet they have operated on the network from day 1 without any industrial action because they enabled operation with guards until such time as they become redundant, when further infrastructure upgrades are undertaken. I think DOO will be inevitable, at least on the suburban network, but that's a fight for another day.

I put to you the same question I put to tonyp. Please enlighten me on any major surface legacy mixed rail networks in the world, as distinct from segregated underground lines, which have successfully converted to driverless GoA4 and how in fact it can be done in practice without major disruption to existing services? I'm still waiting for an answer.

In the case of the NIF, it's a different situation and operational environment. The NIF, unlike the Waratahs, was essentially designed for DOO from the very beginning and hence the current stand-off between the RTBU and the government. An independent report commissioned by the union established that the current safety features on the trains, and within the environment in which they would operate, are unsafe without further infrastructure upgrades. The government relied upon a desktop analysis from the UK by the safety regulator, without even a physical on-site inspection of the trains, which is laughable.

You are misinformed about the current action by the RTBU in their dispute with the government about a new enterprise agreement and the separate matter of the NIF safety issues. It is the government which is at fault, by continually reneging on what appears to have been successful negotiations between the union and Transport for NSW on both issues. This has been backed up by the Fair Work Commission, which may I remind you was stacked by the previous Federal LNP government. The FWC has approved continuing industrial action as being "protected" and the union is quite within their rights, or should it only be relevant when it rules in favour of the government or employers? What else would you expect them to do when they are being stymied by the government in backing down on past agreements and continuing with genuine negotiations? The RTBU isn't the only public sector union in conflict with the government over pay and conditions. Your anti-union bias is unbecoming.

It would be smarter on the part of the government if it had addressed the safety concerns of the NIF much earlier and the longer term redundancy of guards, by offering retraining as drivers or other roles, as well as a generous redundancy package for those who wished to retire earlier. The government has to face up to the fact that there is a cost in any transition, which can't be ignored. You can't just push people off the cliff and expect no reaction.
Aurora
Posts: 925
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 10:54 pm
Favourite Vehicle: C set
Location: Sydney Reg 3

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by Aurora »

A bit of misinformation there, the NIF is absolutely relevant to the EA negotiations, it is only with the EA negotiations over the past 16-odd months that they have ‘decided’ to do these NIF actions. Without the EA negotiations, the timing of the NIF actions would have been different, that is, whenever the EA negotiations instead started. This argument is just a ploy because they want to look for 6% pay rises as part of the EA, and the government knows this, once NIF changes are locked in, union will continue the actions as they will not accept 2-3%, with the government having agreed to NIF changes for effectively nothing in return.

Secondly, the government and agency has already provided for a ‘customer service guard’ role to maintain employment for the Guards, to say they were going to fall off a cliff is untrue, falling off a cliff would have been retrenching them all, like what happened to many workers in other industries during the various COVID lockdowns.

To me this is not about one way or the other, as both parties are to blame with misinformation and their own agendas, with taxpayers paying the ultimate price.
An asset of NSW. All opinions/comments are strictly my own.
M 5885.
matthewg
Posts: 1704
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 1:11 pm

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by matthewg »

Aurora wrote: Sun Oct 16, 2022 1:13 am A bit of misinformation there, the NIF is absolutely relevant to the EA negotiations,
The NIF was specified 5+ years ago as a DOO train, but TfNSW / Government deferred negotiating over the new operating model till the EBA expired. This has been a massive blunder on their part and worked right into the RBTUs hands who are desperate to keep jobs for their members. The RBTU has outclassed TfNSW negotiators at every turn and is doing a far better job representing the interests of their members than the government is for their side.

And I don't think NSW Labor will publicly support them - if Minns comes out firmly on the side of the Union, he's as good as lost the election to a bunch of incompetents as 'pandering to unions' is a line that will be hard to fight off. I don't think he's that dumb. He's trying to walk a middle line for better or worse.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by Transtopic »

Aurora wrote: Sun Oct 16, 2022 1:13 am A bit of misinformation there, the NIF is absolutely relevant to the EA negotiations, it is only with the EA negotiations over the past 16-odd months that they have ‘decided’ to do these NIF actions. Without the EA negotiations, the timing of the NIF actions would have been different, that is, whenever the EA negotiations instead started. This argument is just a ploy because they want to look for 6% pay rises as part of the EA, and the government knows this, once NIF changes are locked in, union will continue the actions as they will not accept 2-3%, with the government having agreed to NIF changes for effectively nothing in return.

Secondly, the government and agency has already provided for a ‘customer service guard’ role to maintain employment for the Guards, to say they were going to fall off a cliff is untrue, falling off a cliff would have been retrenching them all, like what happened to many workers in other industries during the various COVID lockdowns.

To me this is not about one way or the other, as both parties are to blame with misinformation and their own agendas, with taxpayers paying the ultimate price.
That's a matter of opinion, depending on which side of the political fence you come from. The union wanted to keep the safety issues of the NIF separate from the EA negotiations, but the government insisted that they be combined. The NIF issue was effectively resolved, with the government agreeing to modify the fleet, but then reneged unless the EA was also included in any settlement. Hence the current stand-off. At least David Elliott made some headway in the negotiations with the union, but he was undermined by some of his cabinet colleagues and has since been pulled into line. So far, the FWC has backed the union, which can't be ignored.
User avatar
Swift
Posts: 13247
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:23 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra
Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by Swift »

I have to say, David Elliott has been like a different person since he left the police portfolio.and took up the difficult transport one. He's easily the state Liberal MP I have any respect for. Totally lost it for Dom and Glad more so.
He's a lot less obnoxious than the former one and it's a shame ideologues in his party are spoiling his progress in sorting this out.
NSW, the state that embraces mediocrity.
User avatar
ScaniaGrenda
Posts: 1118
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:46 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Scania,Volvo or Mercedes Buses

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by ScaniaGrenda »

Minor-ish change but on Transportinfo on their trip planner someone seems to have changed the Hunter lines Colour icon from a burgundy colour to Blue?
Transport enthusiast & photographer / videographer since 2016, documenting & preserving our local Transport History through videos & photos.
User avatar
Campbelltown busboy
Posts: 2127
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 1:23 pm
Location: Ruse/Campbelltown City NSW

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by Campbelltown busboy »

What is the box on one side the vestibule of the crew compartment end of some M set driving trailers when others have a single seat on ether side of the crew compartment door
Aurora
Posts: 925
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 10:54 pm
Favourite Vehicle: C set
Location: Sydney Reg 3

Re: Railway Observations for 2022.

Post by Aurora »

They will all have them eventually, more space needed for equipment due to the ATP project.
An asset of NSW. All opinions/comments are strictly my own.
M 5885.
Post Reply

Return to “Discussion - Sydney / NSW”