T4 and SCO post NIF and T3 Metro conversion

 
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
The current signalling in the CBD already allows 20tph, so it's nonsense to suggest that ATO couldn't increase it further.  24tph seems to be the generally accepted benchmark with ATO and it could even possibly be more.  

What I have proposed is to simplify operations by eliminating crossing conflicts and as far as possible move towards single operating patterns allowing maximum frequencies.  With regard to dwell times, this isn't going to be a major issue when the metro is operational, as it will take a lot of pressure off interchanging on the existing network, particularly at Central, Town Hall and Wynyard.

I haven't suggested that sectorisation should be broken for the suburban services, nor do a see any need for new infrastructure in the short term to realise the outcome which I have proposed.  On the other hand, it's a different matter when addressing capacity constraints on Sector 3 (Western and Northern Lines), notwithstanding Metro West.

The signalling is not what is stopping the network going past 20 trains an hour. 26 trains an hour was done in the past and could be done if Central and Town Hall weren't such an issue. The dwell times especially around the city circle is what locks you to 20 trains an hour. Multiple stopping patterns and train destinations also don't help.

You also aren't simplifying things and have actually complicated it more. With your solution instead of the one cross south of Wolli creek station you will have 2 with the T8 express cross at Wolli Creek and your new cross at eveleigh. You still have the cross south of Wolli Creek for T4 express services except it will be worse because you now have a double cross instead of only a single and so therefore you now have 4 crosses instead of only 1.

Metro isn't going to change anything and to think it will is showing your naivety. Even though the T3 will no longer be using it the T8 will be using it with increased services and nothing you can do can fix the issues that Central, Town Hall and Wynyard have with platform crowding.

Your proposal by it's very nature means breaking sectorisation and so you have suggested it. These little things won't help because we have been down that path with clearways and all that is really being achieved is a fudging of the numbers with no real major improvements. To fix ST means to build major new infrastructure and we know this is not going to happen with this government. We are going to get a metro to somewhere on the T4 in the future and I would suggest it will probably as part of metro west somehow.
simstrain
?

Sponsored advertisement

  C3765 Train Controller

I don’t think this is the most relevant but I think it would be nice to keep all of this in mind. These are the governments initiatives for the next 20-30 years.

Committed Initiatives (0-10 Years)
• Parramatta Light Rail Stage 1
• Parramatta Light Rail Stage 2
• Sydney Metro West
• Sydney Metro Greater West

Initiatives under Investigation (0-10 Years)
• Sydney Metro North-South Rail Link (Tallawong to st Marys)
• Sydney Metro Westmead Rail Link (WSA to Westmead)
• Badgerys Creek Aerotropolis Rail Link (WSA to Leppington)
• WSA to Campbeltown-Macarthur Rail Link
• Duplication of Richmond Line

Initiatives under Investigation (10-20 Years)
• Mass Transit/Train Link to South East
• Light Rail to Bays Precinct
• Parramatta to Kogarah Mass Transit/Train Link
• Parramatta Light Rail Extensions
• Completion of Maldon to Dombarton Railway Line

Initiatives under Investigation (20+ Years)
• Extension of South East Mass Transit/Train Link to Miranda
• Train/Mass Transit Link Macquarie Park to Hurstville via Rhodes
• Parramatta to Northwest Mass Transit/Train Link
• Sydney Metro City and Southwest Extension to Liverpool

Considering the situation we are in, I think it’s suitable to add five years to each of the estimated time of completion to make it more accurate. Although some you may believe they wouldn’t invest in transport for a while, they in fact would to provide employment similarly to how they are proceeding with the Sydney Metro West currently.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

Gee I'm missing (reliable) Railpage.

@Sims, I was way over the top at you with my last post, but haven't been able to get on and fix it.  Please accept my apologies.

That said, one hand you seem to be arguing that in the real world 20tph isn't possible in the real world, but 24tph is possible without ATO, just no dwells.  Which is it?
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
I don’t think this is the most relevant but I think it would be nice to keep all of this in mind. These are the governments initiatives for the next 20-30 years.

Committed Initiatives (0-10 Years)
• Parramatta Light Rail Stage 1
• Parramatta Light Rail Stage 2
• Sydney Metro West
• Sydney Metro Greater West

Initiatives under Investigation (0-10 Years)
• Sydney Metro North-South Rail Link (Tallawong to st Marys)
• Sydney Metro Westmead Rail Link (WSA to Westmead)
• Badgerys Creek Aerotropolis Rail Link (WSA to Leppington)
• WSA to Campbeltown-Macarthur Rail Link
• Duplication of Richmond Line

Initiatives under Investigation (10-20 Years)
• Mass Transit/Train Link to South East
• Light Rail to Bays Precinct
• Parramatta to Kogarah Mass Transit/Train Link
• Parramatta Light Rail Extensions
• Completion of Maldon to Dombarton Railway Line

Initiatives under Investigation (20+ Years)
• Extension of South East Mass Transit/Train Link to Miranda
• Train/Mass Transit Link Macquarie Park to Hurstville via Rhodes
• Parramatta to Northwest Mass Transit/Train Link
• Sydney Metro City and Southwest Extension to Liverpool

Considering the situation we are in, I think it’s suitable to add five years to each of the estimated time of completion to make it more accurate. Although some you may believe they wouldn’t invest in transport for a while, they in fact would to provide employment similarly to how they are proceeding with the Sydney Metro West currently.
C3765
We should take these initiatives with a grain of salt, in the light of current events. In reality, they're nothing more than a wish-list of possible future projects.  Even before the coronavirus became a major issue, there were doubts about whether the Parramatta Light Rail Stage 2 and Sydney Metro Greater West would proceed and the continual delay in finalising the Metro West route into the CBD also raises questions about that project, notwithstanding the just announced calling for Expressions of Interest for two tunnelling contracts between Westmead and the Bays Precinct.  We still don't know what the plan is beyond that and it seems to be a little hasty in calling for EOI at this stage, before the whole route is finalised.  If it's only planned to go to the Bays, even as a first stage, then it's a complete waste of time.

What is conspicuous by its absence in these initiatives, is the lack of any major infrastructure upgrades to the existing Sydney Trains' network, particularly in the inner city regions where the most congestion occurs.  New metro lines alone aren't going to resolve these issues. It's a flawed strategy.  By TfNSW own admission, the existing Sydney Trains' network will continue to provide 80% of all rail services, notwithstanding the new metro lines now under construction.  You would think that it would warrant a far greater investment in upgrading with track amplifications and junction remodelling than the paltry investment so far committed.  The investment in ATO upgrading is a welcome initiative, but it alone won't be enough.

With the Federal Government now heading for near record debt, it can no longer be relied upon to bolster the funding of State infrastructure projects, no matter how warranted.  It's a whole new ball game now, in a post coronavirus future.  You can liken this to the period during and after the Great Depression and the Second World War, when many proposed infrastructure projects were significantly delayed or cancelled altogether.

The other issue with long term plans, is that they are over multiple election cycles and priorities could change with newly elected governments.  Just look how much transport infrastructure plans have come and gone over the last 20 years.

We're now getting off track on this thread about T4 and SCO and this discussion should be continued elsewhere, which I will endeavour to arrange.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

Point taken djf.

In that light, I respond to your previous post with regard to suggested operating patterns on Sectors 1 and 2.  You're pretty close to what I would have suggested, with a few exceptions, mainly because of an anticipated increase in frequencies through the City Circle with the ATO upgrade, which will be the ultimate determining factor.  
Transtopic


I think I understand your scheme properly then.  The differences in the patters we suggested were more about how I imagine it might work not long after implementation, whereas your suggested patterns are close to maxing out the new capability.

But ...

4tph SHL
16tph T8 Campbelltown/Macarthur
8tph T8 Revesby
6tph T8 Badgerys Creek

Did you realise that's 26tph between Glenfield and Revesby?  

That's why I didn't have Leppington on my stopping pattern.

IIRC I had 4tph ex Campbelltown via Sydenham (plus 4 SCO & 4 Highlands)


Sectorisation of all suburban services would be maintained, with the only exception being that SCO services would share the express tracks from Wolli Creek Junction to the Illawarra Dive on the Local with T8 and eventually SHL.  I don't see that as a major issue.

I too was under the impression some T4's might also have crossed over north of Wolli Creek, but I wasn't sure.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
Point taken djf.

In that light, I respond to your previous post with regard to suggested operating patterns on Sectors 1 and 2.  You're pretty close to what I would have suggested, with a few exceptions, mainly because of an anticipated increase in frequencies through the City Circle with the ATO upgrade, which will be the ultimate determining factor.  


I think I understand your scheme properly then.  The differences in the patters we suggested were more about how I imagine it might work not long after implementation, whereas your suggested patterns are close to maxing out the new capability.

But ...

4tph SHL
16tph T8 Campbelltown/Macarthur
8tph T8 Revesby
6tph T8 Badgerys Creek

Did you realise that's 26tph between Glenfield and Revesby?  

That's why I didn't have Leppington on my stopping pattern.

IIRC I had 4tph ex Campbelltown via Sydenham (plus 4 SCO & 4 Highlands)


Sectorisation of all suburban services would be maintained, with the only exception being that SCO services would share the express tracks from Wolli Creek Junction to the Illawarra Dive on the Local with T8 and eventually SHL.  I don't see that as a major issue.

I too was under the impression some T4's might also have crossed over north of Wolli Creek, but I wasn't sure.
djf01
Thanks for pointing that out re 26tph between Glenfield and Revesby.  It would also include between Revesby and Wolli Creek Junction.  I did belatedly realise that, but wasn't able to correct it because of the problems with Railpage.

The mix of services for Campbelltown and Badgerys Creek could be adjusted to say 14 and 6tph or 16 and 4tph, which would bring it into line with a potential line frequency of 24tph.  Who knows, ATO may even allow more.

My reasoning for including the BC services is that I'm sceptical of whether the BC to St Mary's metro link will proceed, at least in the short term if at all.  Extension of the SWRL from Leppington to BC is the most logical route when most of the pre-planning and consultation has already been done.  I envisage that the services via the East Hills Line would be limited stops express, with T2 running at say 6tph from Leppington to the CBD via Granville or Regents Park.  I prefer the Regents Park route.

I was proposing that the T4 Cronulla and Waterfall services would cross from the Local to the Main south of Wolli Creek, so that they merged with the Hurstville all stoppers in a single pattern to Bondi Junction.  T4 would then become completely segregated from SCO after Wolli Creek, which I think is the clear intention with the Hurstville Crossover project.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Gee I'm missing (reliable) Railpage.

@Sims, I was way over the top at you with my last post, but haven't been able to get on and fix it.  Please accept my apologies.

That said, one hand you seem to be arguing that in the real world 20tph isn't possible in the real world, but 24tph is possible without ATO, just no dwells.  Which is it?
djf01
I said the signalling system used to do 24tph around the city circle when we had single deck trains. It no longer can because of the double deck trains, multiple stopping patterns, longer dwell times and the extra capacity being carried now vs then. The restriction is not in the signalling but in the patrons, trains, stopping patterns, interconnection and platforms in the CBD not being able to handle the extra capacity of the network.

This 24tph also occured when there was no ESR and so the ESR was the last time a massive increase in capacity was added to the network. ATO will not achieve what transtopic thinks it will because the ST network is not like the metro. What Transtopic is forgetting is that if you add a train here what will it do there and the drop in capacity you get in doing so.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
Gee I'm missing (reliable) Railpage.

@Sims, I was way over the top at you with my last post, but haven't been able to get on and fix it.  Please accept my apologies.

That said, one hand you seem to be arguing that in the real world 20tph isn't possible in the real world, but 24tph is possible without ATO, just no dwells.  Which is it?
I said the signalling system used to do 24tph around the city circle when we had single deck trains. It no longer can because of the double deck trains, multiple stopping patterns, longer dwell times and the extra capacity being carried now vs then. The restriction is not in the signalling but in the patrons, trains, stopping patterns, interconnection and platforms in the CBD not being able to handle the extra capacity of the network.

This 24tph also occured when there was no ESR and so the ESR was the last time a massive increase in capacity was added to the network. ATO will not achieve what transtopic thinks it will because the ST network is not like the metro. What Transtopic is forgetting is that if you add a train here what will it do there and the drop in capacity you get in doing so.
simstrain
You're so negative sims.  Why would they bother introducing ATO, which TfNSW has acknowledged will allow an increase in service speeds and frequency?  It's not the total answer to the congestion problems on the Sydney Trains network, but it's a good start, until longer term investment in track upgrades including amplifications are implemented.

Why don't you for once offer any positive suggestions of how it can be done in the short term, without any immediate major investment in infrastructure upgrades, which will still be required in the medium to long term?
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Because nothing can fix the ST network except new lines through the CBD. ATO can not help the ST network like how it is being projected by yourself and it isn't magically going to allow our trains to run 20 or 30km/h faster. ATO and ATP will protect against something like Waterfall happening again but if you think they will somehow allow our double deck trains to magically run at metro frequencies you are fooling yourself.

There is nothing you can do in the short term to solve the issues and only huge investment in the form of line separation can fix the problems the ST network faces.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
Because nothing can fix the ST network except new lines through the CBD. ATO can not help the ST network like how it is being projected by yourself and it isn't magically going to allow our trains to run 20 or 30km/h faster. ATO and ATP will protect against something like Waterfall happening again but if you think they will somehow allow our double deck trains to magically run at metro frequencies you are fooling yourself.

There is nothing you can do in the short term to solve the issues and only huge investment in the form of line separation can fix the problems the ST network faces.
simstrain

Read this -

Digital Systems Program
Reviewed 11 Feb 2020


 
  1. Replacing traditional trackside signalling equipment with the latest ‘in cab’ train control technology (European Train Control System Level 2)
  2. Implementing Automatic Train Operation, which assists drivers – who remain in control – to provide reduced and more consistent journey times
  3. Introducing a Traffic Management System to help the railway recover from any disruption quickly and manage the overall network as effectively as possible.
Project overview

The Digital Systems Program will replace current signalling and train control technology with modern, internationally proven, intelligent systems. It will help improve reliability, increase capacity and enhance customer experience on Sydney’s railways.

And this -


SEPTEMBER 2014Rail Corridors Strategic Study - Sydney to WollongongCabinet—in-confidence

7.3 2026 Timetable

For the 2026 timetable, the followingassumptions have been made.

• All H-Sets will have been retired from the

Corridor and replaced with the new rolling

stock. The SWTT can be improved as the

H-Sets are no longer the limiting train.


• The installation of Automatic Train
Protection (ATP) will be complete to Dapto,
and the intercity trains will be allowed to

run to the XPT speed boards - the White

boards. The White Boards will be increased

to 160km/h where the geometry allows;

• Kembla Grange Stabling and Maintenance
yard is built to support the new trains (this
appears to be required because it appears
that the new intercity train will be longer
than the sidings in Port Kembla and too
long for two trains to fit in each siding at
Wollongong).

• Unanderra to Dapto is duplicated.

• The Port Kembla Branch Line is closed for
passenger services.

• The Coniston Junction Grade separation
is built (DOWN trains to Kiama are grade
separated over the Outer Harbour entry road
to allow parallel up and down movements to
Coniston from Unanderra);

• Coniston to Unanderra track enhancement
(as proposed by the TfNSW Maldon –
Dombarton Project Team in 2014) is
completed;

The New Erskineville crossovers (Illawarra
locals to Illawarra mains) are built, allowing
access to / from Sydney Terminal via the
Illawarra Locals at Erskineville;

(PIDS) have been implemented on the
Illawarra Line and South Coast Line;

• All level crossings between Waterfall
and Dapto have been removed by grade
separating the road or footpath from the
railway;

• Curve easings between Austinmer and
Coniston are complete;

• A new fourth platform at Thirroul has been
built;

• New third and fourth platforms at Waterfall
have been built.
The AM peak service pattern will consist of:

• 2.5 x 8 car equivalent express trains from
Dapto to Sydney Terminal;

• 2.5 x 8 car equivalent express from Kiama to
Sydney Terminal;

• 3 x 6 car equivalent all stopping services
from Shell Harbour Junction to Bondi
Junction;

• 2 x 4 car equivalent all stopping services
from Kiama to Wollongong; and

• No metropolitan starter from Waterfall.

The advent of the new rolling stock drives
the need for a new stabling and maintenance
facility.

The service plan is to provide more
frequent services further south to meet
increased customer demand, therefore stabling
further south supports the service plan.

Given that Kembla Grange is on a single track section,
the track between Unanderra and Dapto will
need to be duplicated.

The at - grade cross
between coal trains heading to the Inner
Harbour and passenger trains heading south
from Coniston will need to be resolved by
building a grade separation.


At this point it is proposed that the all stopping
services from Kiama and Nowra terminate on
the third platform at Dapto, to segregate the
single track services from the ones running
to Sydney. This will improve the reliability of
services from Dapto to Sydney.

The 8 car equivalent train is too long for
Bondi Junction platforms and therefore a
shorter version will need to be run.

The full length Intercity will therefore be diverted into
Sydney Terminal via a new set of crossovers at
Erskineville.


This will result in an 8 to 9 minute travel
time saving from Wollongong to Bondi
Junction, compared to the 2013 timetable.


58 equivalent carriages will operate from
Wollongong towards Bondi Junction
(compared to 56 today).


The concept of the new Intercity train fleet has also changed since then to the NIF (D set) with fixed 4 and 6 car sets, enabling operation in 4, 6 or 10 car sets.  I understand that although 8 car sets will also be possible, it is not proposed to use them immediately, although that could come with further orders of 4 car sets.



The service patterns noted are also likely to change from what was proposed at the time, with 10 car sets being used in the peak.  
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

So where do you think a double deck train is going to do 160km/h on the ST network? Even the XPT doesn't do 160km/h in Sydney and 130km/h is the fastest speed I believe they achieve in Sydney. There is no way that 160km/h is achievable even with ATP/ATO. To think that the H sets are the limiting factor for speed is ridiculous. The D sets main benefit over the H set is a more comfortable ride for seated passengers, wifi and usb charging. They aren't any faster then a H set and are just an H set made in South Korea with a few upgrades.

You need to understand what is a thought bubble and what is reality. I'm going to continue reading and researching your reply to come up with more replies.
  s3_gunzel Not a gunzel developer

Location: Western Sydney, AU
So where do you think a double deck train is going to do 160km/h on the ST network? Even the XPT doesn't do 160km/h in Sydney and 130km/h is the fastest speed I believe they achieve in Sydney.
simstrain
115kph is the fastest permitted speed in Sydney.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

I have downloaded the 2014 rail strategy document you mentioned and it most certainly isn't official policy. It is a think tank document from an outside company but I am noticing that you are only taking bits that support your position and not ones that don't. If this link doesn't work then just type in 2014 rail corridor strategy and the first link is the pdf file you need.

Here is that document. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwiR0MKozenoAhUzzTgGHZtHBn0QFjAAegQIBBAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.transport.nsw.gov.au%2Fsystem%2Ffiles%2Fmedia%2Fdocuments%2F2018%2Ftra-000472-redacted.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2ElMFEXm9l5QMwezq-MQt9
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

So where do you think a double deck train is going to do 160km/h on the ST network? Even the XPT doesn't do 160km/h in Sydney and 130km/h is the fastest speed I believe they achieve in Sydney.
115kph is the fastest permitted speed in Sydney.
s3_gunzel

Thanks but doesn't the XPT/Xplorer get to 125km/h on the express tracks along the T8?
  s3_gunzel Not a gunzel developer

Location: Western Sydney, AU
So where do you think a double deck train is going to do 160km/h on the ST network? Even the XPT doesn't do 160km/h in Sydney and 130km/h is the fastest speed I believe they achieve in Sydney.
115kph is the fastest permitted speed in Sydney.

Thanks but doesn't the XPT/Xplorer get to 125km/h on the express tracks along the T8?
simstrain
Possibly; but what happens with the diesel fleet, with their lower Centre of Gravity and the Electric fleet are two different things. For example, the NIF will be restricted to 115.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

So where do you think a double deck train is going to do 160km/h on the ST network? Even the XPT doesn't do 160km/h in Sydney and 130km/h is the fastest speed I believe they achieve in Sydney.
115kph is the fastest permitted speed in Sydney.

Thanks but doesn't the XPT/Xplorer get to 125km/h on the express tracks along the T8?
Possibly; but what happens with the diesel fleet, with their lower Centre of Gravity and the Electric fleet are two different things. For example, the NIF will be restricted to 115.
s3_gunzel

That was what I believed but my friend Transtopic believes the D sets will be travelling at 160km/h courtesy of ATP and ATO according to his post.
  s3_gunzel Not a gunzel developer

Location: Western Sydney, AU

That was what I believed but my friend Transtopic believes the D sets will be travelling at 160km/h courtesy of ATP and ATO according to his post.
simstrain


Yeah good luck with that.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
So where do you think a double deck train is going to do 160km/h on the ST network? Even the XPT doesn't do 160km/h in Sydney and 130km/h is the fastest speed I believe they achieve in Sydney.
115kph is the fastest permitted speed in Sydney.

Thanks but doesn't the XPT/Xplorer get to 125km/h on the express tracks along the T8?
Possibly; but what happens with the diesel fleet, with their lower Centre of Gravity and the Electric fleet are two different things. For example, the NIF will be restricted to 115.

That was what I believed but my friend Transtopic believes the D sets will be travelling at 160km/h courtesy of ATP and ATO according to his post.
simstrain
I didn't suggest that the D sets (NIF) will be running at 160km/h.  That's a statement in the 2014 Rail Corridor Strategy, which by the way is an official consultant's report commissioned by TfNSW, not some independent think tank.  It may not have been officially adopted by the government, but in the absence of any other publicly released strategy, I think it's a good guide to how it may eventually pan out.  Don't forget that this strategy was sidelined when the government gave greater priority to the upgrade of the M1 Princes Motorway, which I think is also needed, but not before the rail upgrade.

What the report actually said was - "The Intercity trains will be allowed to run to the XPT speed boards - the White Boards.  The White Boards will be increased to 160km/h where the geometry allows".  Whether that recommendation is accepted or not remains to be seen.

However, the D sets have a maximum service speed of 160km/h similar to the XPT and you'd expect they would want to utilise it, otherwise why would they bother specifying that speed capability?  If you don't believe me, you can check the official specs yourself.  The H sets have a maximum service speed of 130km/h like the Waratahs.

Before you start shooting your mouth off, you should get your facts straight first.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Then what is it you typed in that long winded post above if you didn't suggest that the white boards could be increased to 160km/h. The report mentions significant alignment upgrades to achieve this including a brand new tunnel between Waterfall and Thirroul to reduce travel time to 65 minutes to / from Wollongong. That report shows that for any of the proposals to happen it requires significant works to be done which is what I have been saying.

There is an assumption of rapid transit to Hurstville in that report and no mention of how to achieve their goals if it doesn't occur. Unless metro gets to Hurstville or that new ST path through to Central or the CBD I talked about happens you can forget about any of what you want to happen occurring.

As mentioned above by S3 Gunzel the maximum service speed of the Oscars is 115km/h and not 160km/h as you believe.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
Then what is it you typed in that long winded post above if you didn't suggest that the white boards could be increased to 160km/h. The report mentions significant alignment upgrades to achieve this including a brand new tunnel between Waterfall and Thirroul to reduce travel time to 65 minutes to / from Wollongong. That report shows that for any of the proposals to happen it requires significant works to be done which is what I have been saying.

There is an assumption of rapid transit to Hurstville in that report and no mention of how to achieve their goals if it doesn't occur. Unless metro gets to Hurstville or that new ST path through to Central or the CBD I talked about happens you can forget about any of what you want to happen occurring.

As mentioned above by S3 Gunzel the maximum service speed of the Oscars is 115km/h and not 160km/h as you believe.
simstrain
There are none so blind as those who will not see.  You haven't taken a bit of notice of what I just said.  I repeat, I didn't suggest that the D sets would be running at 160km/h.  They're not my words, but a quote from the 2014 Rail Corridors Strategy consultant's report.  Likewise the statement that the White Boards will be increased to 160km/h where the geometry allows.  Again, not my suggestion.  Stop trying to twist my meaning when I'm merely quoting comments from the report, without endorsing them one way or another.

The proposed alignment upgrades have nothing to do with increasing speed boards on existing remaining alignments, but will also allow higher speeds to be posted on the new alignments.  It still hasn't been confirmed whether these new alignment upgrades will proceed.

My main purpose in posting a summary of the consultant's report was to highlight the mention of a new crossover from the Local to the Main and the Dive to Sydney Terminal at Eveleigh/Erskineville, which I'm anticipating will still happen.  They just haven't officially announced it yet.  They can't increase frequency and a reduction in journey times for both T4 and SCO, which is an official policy, without it.

Again, I didn't say that the maximum service speed of the Oscars is 160km/h.  It's 130km/h, the same as the Waratahs.  The maximum service speed of the D sets is 160km/h.  I think you're confusing the specified capability of the rolling stock with the speed limits on the network, which are two different things.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Where is your proof that anything you say is going to happen. Where is your evidence to support your claims anywhere aside from this report. S3 just mentioned above that the D sets will be 115km/h in service and not 160km/h as you suggest. The D sets may theoretically be capable of 160km/h but not so in real life.

You don't seem to realise the effect putting 4 x SCO trains on the same path as T3 and T8 via Sydenham will have to city circle services. In peak there will be at least 12 services via Sydenham even after metro conversion of the T3 because of the shortfall of services the T2 can put around the city circle. The airport line can not feed the outer circle and so the T8 will need to provide these services via Sydenham as a balancing act to get 20 trains via the airport.

The crossover at eveleigh will create chaos for the city circle especially if said SCO service broke down at the crossover. Unless you get that sixth track pair between wolli creek and erskineville your solution will not work.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
I give up!
  Totoro Station Master

I think the problem here is a lack of evidence. You’ve both got interesting and reasonable ideas, but its impossible to refute one/both sides of the argument.

Personally I think Sydney’s future rail network will have Metro as the top tier, Sydney trains as a second tier. As “evidence” I submit the following future rail map I saw on a news website once. It was apparently drawn up by someone with some knowledge of the State Govts future rail plans, so it must be true!

https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/australian-economy/map-revels-massive-expansion-of-sydney-metro-network-with-39-new-stations/news-story/7c8344b9c3f42b8ca9dbcc19f0e96108
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

As mentioned above by S3 Gunzel the maximum service speed of the Oscars is 115km/h and not 160km/h as you believe.
simstrain

There is a reason for this, a sort of SRA logic reason.  115kph is the top speed of the slowest vehicles in the CityRail fleet.  No timetable is written requiring a train to faster, because not all can.  Subsequently, there is no reason to put out speed boards faster than 115.  And to make the prophecy self fulfilling.  As the perway only needs to be maintained to a standard where 115 is the top usual speed, even if the geometry allows more.  It means less frequent inspections are required, less timely maintenance to address minor deviations etc.  Same with the XPT 160 boards.  160 is the fastest any NSW train can go, so why would anyone want to board something at 200?

This sort of administrative inertia is highly problematic, and it get reflected in any number of former and current NSW rail employees declaring unequivocally "it can't be done" - when what they are really saying is "I don't know how to do it".

OK, enough dumping on people, I'd like an answer to something I really should know, and *really* should be able to find out on the public record, but it's apparently a terrorist risk to have external scrutiny of (alleged) safety systems.

There is one aspect of our signalling system I do not properly understand.  

1) How far behind a train are signals at STOP?  Is it just the block the train occupies?  Or is it also the preceding block?

2) What is the correct terminology for the various states of the signals?  Stop, Caution, Caution Ahead, Clear ?  Or something else?
  WimbledonW Junior Train Controller

For a diagram of Hurstville North    see http://www.sa-trackandsignal.net/Pdf%20files/Sydney/RC2403.pdf . (*)

For a diagram of Hurstville, Station see http://www.sa-trackandsignal.net/Pdf%20files/Sydney/RC2404.pdf . (*)

(*) Signals shown in full only for lines used by freight trains. Lines not to scale.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: PeeJay, Transtopic, WimbledonW

Display from: