"Anyway, shoud by some miricle this even happens the negatives are minimal".
I would not describe the negative impact of the Old South line losing its direct services to the city as "minimal". I would describe it as one of the easiest ways to completely ruin the West's public transport. I would give an example of how bad of an idea it is, but off the top of my head I can't actually think of another system around the world where it was changed to actively make the destination most people are trying to get to harder to reach. You described the business case earlier as a "brain fart", but I think even that's generous.

The "vision" implies that the users of the line at the time are predominately going to Paramatta CBD, ie like the NWRL, going via ECRL becasue thats where most of them want to go. Right now for SWRL and southern Main south stations to Paramatta this isn't the case but perhaps its a longterm plan by the govt to grow Paramatta CBD so much this is the case as there is a phsyical limitation to the size of Sydney CBD and the cost on infrastructure trying to catter for this growth over the next 35 years.

Even running the line to Epping is questionable by some as Eastwood is a major location and then to ECRL. Epping which I've argued in the past is now a transport hub and this would be my choice.

I think something from Nth main to Paramatta will happen in due course, but more than likely be an extension off the Inner NWRL project via Top Ryde, ie running to Epping then to Para or turning west and via Eastwood and then to Para. And as you said before then running 1 or 2 stops SW of Para CBD to service that rail free area. This line would make more sense to continue to the WS airport, if there is such a need than the Western Metro.

Meanwhile I'm confident the current plan of extending the SWRL to near the airport will come true, at some point. Its simple and cheap to do and then connects the two airports and Sydney CBD in one movement.

Meanwhile I'm confident the current plan of extending the SWRL to near the airport will come true, at some point. Its simple and cheap to do and then connects the two airports and Sydney CBD in one movement.

Unfortunately, that's not the plan at the moment if you're suggesting it as an extension of the Sydney Trains' network.  To get from WSA to Sydney Airport and/or the CBD, passengers would have to change twice at Bradfield and Glenfield.  Of course it could change if there is a change of government at next year's state election.  Then again the business case for extension and conversion to metro may not stack up, as Infrastructure Australia found with the St Marys metro link, not that it has stopped the State and Federal governments pushing ahead with it anyway.

Meanwhile I'm confident the current plan of extending the SWRL to near the airport will come true, at some point. Its simple and cheap to do and then connects the two airports and Sydney CBD in one movement.Unfortunately, that's not the plan at the moment if you're suggesting it as an extension of the Sydney Trains' network.  

To get from WSA to Sydney Airport and/or the CBD, passengers would have to change twice at Bradfield and Glenfield.  Of course it could change if there is a change of government at next year's state election.  Then again the business case for extension and conversion to metro may not stack up, as Infrastructure Australia found with the St Marys metro link, not that it has stopped the State and Federal governments pushing ahead with it anyway.

The NSW govt transport website updated 8/Feb/2022 says SWRL providing an extension of the existing passenger line to Aerotropolis (my bad on the last bit, I had Airport in my head).

Yes it would be better for the line to connect to the actual airport, but for the 20 -40 people an hour actually doing this if cross platform is provided its less of an issue.

At this stage there is no plan in the NSW transport site to convert the SWRL to Metro. Rather just some high level comments "vision" to maybe occur some time in the remote distant future when a rail line will be something many of us here may no longer need. The line from Epping to Paramatta would need to be built first, don't hold your breath on this one.

Between now and when ever this may happen, then will likely be 4 - 5 changes of govt.

The Airport Metro link didn't make sense, because no rail connection to WSA makes economic sense. A fleet of on demand maxi taxi's is the only thing that makes economic/practical sense for the next 5 - 10 years. Charge each rider $10 to get to what ever railway station they want on the T5 / T1 and the govt will be billions ahead.

Melbourne Airport moves more people today in early stages of post CV-19 recoverey than WSA will do in 2040 and the only way its getting a railway because the feds are throwing an obsence amount of money at it. Its not finaically justified either.  Gold Coast airport is busier than WSA will be in 2035 and its rail connection part of the QLD ALP's SEQQIP project has gone quiet. Adelaide is busier than WSA, no railway there or plans for one. Canberra, maybe within 10 years the LR will be extended.

Again the WSA Metro is being built to prevent the WSA business district from being a white elephant, nothing more, nothing less.

https://transportsydney.wordpress.com/2022/04/19/could-sydney-be-getting-a-new-80km-metro-line/
The map used in this project has no less than 4 railway lines to WSA, an airport that will be competing for 10th busiest in the country in 10 - 20 years time. Most of the intial traffic are boxes and boxes do not use Metro's. The shortest line is Leppington at 9km away, the rest are 20 - 30km. M2 is 27 km in a straight line from Westmead.

- The N-S Metro line is reasonably visionary, if everything comes through as far as buisiness district is concerned and some housing growth and still at least a decade away from annoucement to complete the southern half.

- Extension of SWRL as DD, yeah nice to have, but we have other priorities this side of 2040.

- Conversion of SWRL is up there with HSR to Adelaide

- Extension of M2 to the airport is up there with HSR to Perth.

The NSW govt transport website updated 8/Feb/2022 says SWRL providing an extension of the existing passenger line to Aerotropolis (my bad on the last bit, I had Airport in my head).

Yes it would be better for the line to connect to the actual airport, but for the 20 -40 people an hour actually doing this if cross platform is provided its less of an issue.

At this stage there is no plan in the NSW transport site to convert the SWRL to Metro. Rather just some high level comments "vision" to maybe occur some time in the remote distant future when a rail line will be something many of us here may no longer need. The line from Epping to Paramatta would need to be built first, don't hold your breath on this one.

I haven't been able to find any reference on the government's websites to the proposed conversion of the SWRL to metro either (other than the 2056 network map), but there obviously must have been a submission made to the Federal government for funding for the business case by the State government for it to be included in the Federal budget.  This wouldn't be an initiative of the Federal government alone.  It's clearly a project proposed by Sydney Metro, not Sydney Trains, and is the first stage of the 'new' Cumberland Line to Epping.  The Epping to Parramatta link doesn't need to be built first and would be the last part of the link to be needed, not that I agree with the whole concept.

It's unlikely that cross platform interchange at Bradfield would be possible, as current plans for the St Marys metro have a separate station box, with so far no interface with either the SWRL or Metro West extensions, other than having a future common concourse.  If the SWRL metro concept doesn't get up and it reverts to the existing network extension, then there would need to be 6 platforms at Bradfield if all of the proposed lines were to be separated.

I agree with you that a rail connection to WSA probably isn't warranted at this early stage, but the Federal and State governments have nonetheless committed to it as a matter of priority.

If they legitimately try to pursue converting the SWRL and the Old South line to metro, they're much dumber than I thought. That's a sure fire way to anger pretty much all the commuters who use those lines. It wouldn't be the first time they've upset an area of Sydney they were previously trying to appeal to (see the Covid response in South-East Sydney).

Polls show Labor will likely win the election (and good riddance to Scott if they do). If they get in, I very much doubt the Govt continues with this idea.

What polls are you looking at? The polls I see show both parties getting hammered with Scotty likely to lead a minority government with independents, palmer and one nation members calling the shots.

A new metro line will not take over the main south. While there is still freight that moves along the main south there can be no dedicated metro on those tracks. What I am seeing is that it is probably that the metro could take over the SWRL but terminate in a new elevated terminus at Glenfield. This could result in a quad extension to Ingleburn with T2 and T5 trains terminating there.

The NSW govt transport website updated 8/Feb/2022 says SWRL providing an extension of the existing passenger line to Aerotropolis (my bad on the last bit, I had Airport in my head).

Yes it would be better for the line to connect to the actual airport, but for the 20 -40 people an hour actually doing this if cross platform is provided its less of an issue.

At this stage there is no plan in the NSW transport site to convert the SWRL to Metro. Rather just some high level comments "vision" to maybe occur some time in the remote distant future when a rail line will be something many of us here may no longer need. The line from Epping to Paramatta would need to be built first, don't hold your breath on this one.

I haven't been able to find any reference on the government's websites to the proposed conversion of the SWRL to metro either (other than the 2056 network map), but there obviously must have been a submission made to the Federal government for funding for the business case by the State government for it to be included in the Federal budget.  This wouldn't be an initiative of the Federal government alone.  It's clearly a project proposed by Sydney Metro, not Sydney Trains, and is the first stage of the 'new' Cumberland Line to Epping.  The Epping to Parramatta link doesn't need to be built first and would be the last part of the link to be needed, not that I agree with the whole concept.

It's unlikely that cross platform interchange at Bradfield would be possible, as current plans for the St Marys metro have a separate station box, with so far no interface with either the SWRL or Metro West extensions, other than having a future common concourse.  If the SWRL metro concept doesn't get up and it reverts to the existing network extension, then there would need to be 6 platforms at Bradfield if all of the proposed lines were to be separated.

I agree with you that a rail connection to WSA probably isn't warranted at this early stage, but the Federal and State governments have nonetheless committed to it as a matter of priority.

Is Sydney Metro a stand alone entitty now providing the direction for furture expansion of suburban rail projects?

The fact that its not any govt website apart from some sketch for what 2056 might look like is a clue on how serious we should consider this at this time. Prior to converting SWRL, some $30 - 40B of rail projects not yert committed to needs to be built, ie Epping to Paramatta and then what ever to the south main plus finish the WSA Metro to south terminus etc etc etc. I very much doubt they would start from the south end, the north end makes far more sense for this new Metro to Epping.

St Mary's is preexisting, Bradfield isn't, so until there is a station design but still as long as the change isn't painful. Think Sydney airport station for lots of walking.

M2 will never get to the airport this side of 2100. There will be no need for 6 platforms on land that currently is occupied by chickens.

WAS metro is being built for the business park, not the airport and the business park is being built to justify the airport. the airport could be closed tomorrow and it would make no change on the WAS Metro or business park projects.

A new metro line will not take over the main south. While there is still freight that moves along the main south there can be no dedicated metro on those tracks. What I am seeing is that it is probably that the metro could take over the SWRL but terminate in a new elevated terminus at Glenfield. This could result in a quad extension to Ingleburn with T2 and T5 trains terminating there.

And this is where it all falls over.

With no Metro from Paramatta south to Glenfiled, then why convert SWRL to Metro?

Convert SWRL to Metro, need to buld a new stabling yard (unlikely a big deal, needed anyway)

Why run via the business park from the north then to Glenfield? Why not just extend the SWRL to Aerotroplis? The need for through traffic is minor as Aertoplis will be the major commuter hub. Ther airport traffic is minor.

A new metro line will not take over the main south. While there is still freight that moves along the main south there can be no dedicated metro on those tracks. What I am seeing is that it is probably that the metro could take over the SWRL but terminate in a new elevated terminus at Glenfield. This could result in a quad extension to Ingleburn with T2 and T5 trains terminating there.

Does freight not have its own track from Campbelltown to the Bankstown line?

Is Sydney Metro a stand alone entitty now providing the direction for furture expansion of suburban rail projects?

No, I doubt it.  Sydney Metro and Sydney Trains are stand alone agencies under the Transport for NSW umbrella.

The government seems to be going out of its way to avoid any extensions to the Sydney Trains' network by preferencing the metro expansion instead, including taking over the SWRL

The fact that its not any govt website apart from some sketch for what 2056 might look like is a clue on how serious we should consider this at this time. Prior to converting SWRL, some $30 - 40B of rail projects not yert committed to needs to be built, ie Epping to Paramatta and then what ever to the south main plus finish the WSA Metro to south terminus etc etc etc. I very much doubt they would start from the south end, the north end makes far more sense for this new Metro to Epping.

WAS metro is being built for the business park, not the airport and the business park is being built to justify the airport. the airport could be closed tomorrow and it would make no change on the WAS Metro or business park projects.

They must be serious about it by including funding in the Federal Budget for the business case.  AFAIK, none of the other projects you have mentioned have received any funding.  I don't think that they have given the Epping to Parramatta link a high priority compared with some of the other proposals.

I agree that the current WSA metro proposal is more to do with property development along the corridor, including the Aerotropolis, for the State government's pet third city project.  Providing a rail link with the airport is a secondary consideration and next to useless for that role anyway, as Infrastructure Australia determined.

@RTT_Rules Cross-platform at Bradfield probably won't be a thing. Plans have it being an island platform. The only way I could see cross-platform being a thing there is if they set it up like Bankstown where the Sydney Trains and Metro platforms are end to end. Given that they plan to extend the metro to Macarthur, this is a very unlikely solution

A new metro line will not take over the main south. While there is still freight that moves along the main south there can be no dedicated metro on those tracks. What I am seeing is that it is probably that the metro could take over the SWRL but terminate in a new elevated terminus at Glenfield. This could result in a quad extension to Ingleburn with T2 and T5 trains terminating there.

Does freight not have its own track from Campbelltown to the Bankstown line?

Freight still uses the main south for various traffic including using the triangle at granville to go from the western line to southern line. Accessing Yennora and Minto yards can not be done by the freight line either.

A new metro line will not take over the main south. While there is still freight that moves along the main south there can be no dedicated metro on those tracks. What I am seeing is that it is probably that the metro could take over the SWRL but terminate in a new elevated terminus at Glenfield. This could result in a quad extension to Ingleburn with T2 and T5 trains terminating there.

And this is where it all falls over.

With no Metro from Paramatta south to Glenfiled, then why convert SWRL to Metro?

Convert SWRL to Metro, need to buld a new stabling yard (unlikely a big deal, needed anyway)

Why run via the business park from the north then to Glenfield? Why not just extend the SWRL to Aerotroplis? The need for through traffic is minor as Aertoplis will be the major commuter hub. Ther airport traffic is minor.

There is a freight terminal at Yennora, which branches in a southerly direction off the Old South Line.  I suspect that when the Western Sydney Freight Line from the Western Line to the SSFL is built, it will connect with the Yennora facility and access and freight from the Old South Line will be removed.

With the proposal for the 'new' Cumberland Line metro to Epping, not that I agree with it, I assume that once freight is removed from the Old South Line, it opens the door for conversion to metro.  The 2056 plan shows it as a single metro line, without a parallel Sydney Trains line to Granville.  The extension and conversion of the SWRL is merely the first stage as part of the longer term plan.  In the short term, metro trains would terminate at Glenfield, probably using the centre platforms (2 & 3).  T8 South Line services would use platforms 1 & 4 and connect with the East Hills Line.  The centre track pair from Glenfield through Liverpool to Parramatta and beyond would ultimately be converted to metro.

If this project proceeds, which is by no means certain, then the current Sydney Trains stabling yard at Rossmore would be converted to service metro rolling stock.  That then begs the question, where to build an alternative stabling yard for Sydney Trains?

From my reading between the lines, I don't think that the St Marys metro link will connect directly with the SWRL extension, metro or not.  However, I still think it's a mistake not to extend the SWRL one stop from the Aerotropolis to the airport terminal.

This is a further demonstration of the absurdity of having two incompatible rail systems, when the airport and Aerotropolis could be connected seamlessly from all directions with a single system.  It was always the intention for the SWRL to extend to St Marys and Narellan, but this got shafted when the metro protagonists took over.

With the very real prospect of changes of government, both State and Federal, over the next 12 months, this could all be turned on its head.

A new metro line will not take over the main south. While there is still freight that moves along the main south there can be no dedicated metro on those tracks. What I am seeing is that it is probably that the metro could take over the SWRL but terminate in a new elevated terminus at Glenfield. This could result in a quad extension to Ingleburn with T2 and T5 trains terminating there.

Does freight not have its own track from Campbelltown to the Bankstown line?

Yes, it does, but not on the Old South Line north of Cabramatta.

@RTT_Rules Cross-platform at Bradfield probably won't be a thing. Plans have it being an island platform. The only way I could see cross-platform being a thing there is if they set it up like Bankstown where the Sydney Trains and Metro platforms are end to end. Given that they plan to extend the metro to Macarthur, this is a very unlikely solution

That's right.  There will be separate station boxes at the airport terminal and Aerotropolis for the Metro West extension and also for the SWRL extension, metro or otherwise, at the Aerotropolis.  All will be connected by common overhead concourses.  No cross platform interchange will be possible I'm afraid.  That's why there would need to be 6 platforms at the Aerotropolis station because of the current plan to separate all services, which would be incompatible, including the metro lines.  It's such a waste, when we didn't need to go down this path to satisfy some ideological whim.

Again I'll state we l8ve in a country where 5 y plans are subject to numerous changes 10 y plans are of less value than toilet paper.

Once again I'll refer you to Google SEQIP. A 20y plan for SEQ implemented and mostly abandoned party done by the same ALP govt and the new ALP after Newman has mostly ignored as far as transport is concerned.

So yes again 35 y plans involving 30B metro projects that won't get funding for at least 10 years and take another 10y to complete is barely worth getting excited about.

As for different rail technology. Sorry I completely disagree with this statement, build using latest technology. The rail network is moving to stand alone lines anyway. The days of one train type that can run anywhere by a driver trained to operate it everywhere are behind us.

Once the freight is removed from the south main there are no operational road blocks for conversion to metro and not running to WSA is really no big deal, again 20 - 40 people per hour have to use a concourse, a drop in the ocean that change platforms at Straithfield.

...no I don't support this metrofication of the SWRL and South main as I believe there are bigger fish to fry. If the EPRL is built, then I see no value in converting the line south.

Rather just extend Epping Metro (M3) to Smithfield and extend the SWRL to Aerotroplis, job done. Then operates services to T5 and City via East Hills.

Liverpool services extended to Glenfield.


M3 can later be extended to the Aerotroplis

You don't need 6 platforms, Metro on 2min timetable can terminate in one.

For DD, I'd have two plats, one each for each service.

The new rail line to western sydney airport, the airport looking for a problem will it use a new type of rolling stock specific for the airport line?

Again I'll state we l8ve in a country where 5 y plans are subject to numerous changes 10 y plans are of less value than toilet paper.

If there is anything that the pandemic showed us, it is that many Australians consider toilet paper to be a precious, valuable & sought after commodity. They were willing to fight for a bog roll....

One thing to remember regarding this discussion is that NSW Treasury is already delaying future mega projects given cost and budget issues. There has been so many large cost blow outs with NSW projects added with the ongoing context of inflated material and labour costs, that the govt is intending to delay some future projects.

eg.
L2&L3 cost $3.15B instead of $1.6B,
Sydney metro budget is now $17B instead of the original $12B
Sydney West metro has already increased in expected cost by $3B before worked even started
Westconnex cost $21B from the original $14.8B

That's a lazy $15B in blow outs, enough to build WSA metro! In this current environment, one would think that it would be politically impossible to justify an absurd project to convert SWRL to metro. Still, stranger things have happened...

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/cost-blowouts-to-force-government-to-make-hard-decisions-on-mega-projects-20220316-p5a560.html

The new rail line to western sydney airport, the airport looking for a problem will it use a new type of rolling stock specific for the airport line?

WSA line is stand alone and by reports here will use wider rollingstock and 25 kV AC traction power.

is this a problem? Hardly. Most rail systems are hamstring by outdated narrow (including Sydney) profiles. India, 2nd Class AC is 6 comfy seats across with arm rests. Thats 20% more productivity per car than a Red rattler. Sydney DD's were a cheap way to solve a capacity problem in a small part of the network, not an ideal solution but it worked for 50 years until this trick and making all trains 8 cars no longer worked. So when building a green field line you look forward not back.

Wider rollingstock means less cars per 100 people carried = less cost in rollingstock and cheaper platforms. Alos reduces the requirement for DD and supports DDA requirements.

25 kVA means lower cost OH. Not sure if M2 has 25 kVA, but it should and likewise it should have had wider rollingstock.

As for WSA airport, yes it was needed for freight and to provide reserve for international flights hit with minor delays that was costing $10m's pa. If Mascot was 24h, there would be no need for WSA, but alas not the case. Perhaps Richmond RAAF base should have been converted to dual user as an alternative.

Hence the problem to build an aiport 50km away from the existing and away from the bulk of the population without it repeating the 2nd airport failures of the past. Make it freight, force some domestic use, build a business hub near by under the banner of Aerotroplis that its all aviation related.  To make this viable, you need PT, hence knock up a railway line  at the lowest possible cost. DD's do not enter into this equation. The govt has the Olympic Park shuttle hole in the bucket to justify why you don't use DD.

Again I'll state we l8ve in a country where 5 y plans are subject to numerous changes 10 y plans are of less value than toilet paper.

If there is anything that the pandemic showed us, it is that many Australians consider toilet paper to be a precious, valuable & sought after commodity. They were willing to fight for a bog roll....

One thing to remember regarding this discussion is that NSW Treasury is already delaying future mega projects given cost and budget issues. There has been so many large cost blow outs with NSW projects added with the ongoing context of inflated material and labour costs, that the govt is intending to delay some future projects.

eg.
L2&L3 cost $3.15B instead of $1.6B,
Sydney metro budget is now $17B instead of the original $12B
Sydney West metro has already increased in expected cost by $3B before worked even started
Westconnex cost $21B from the original $14.8B

That's a lazy $15B in blow outs, enough to build WSA metro! In this current environment, one would think that it would be politically impossible to justify an absurd project to convert SWRL to metro. Still, stranger things have happened...

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/cost-blowouts-to-force-government-to-make-hard-decisions-on-mega-projects-20220316-p5a560.html

For these complex infrastruture projects with literally thousands of interfaces so its not too un surprising there is a blowout from the intial studies to final project cost.

Additionally, was there scope change during the project?

NWRL Metro was however closer to budget, so potentially the common link is avoiding the city with its 200 years of development, redevelopment, some to detailed plans, others not so.

Private sector often does similar, cuts the guts out of a project to get it passed knowing it will go over cost. ie its easier to beg for forgivness rather than ask for permission.

SWRL Metro conversion is not going to happen.

The rail network is moving to stand alone lines anyway. The days of one train type that can run anywhere by a driver trained to operate it everywhere are behind us.

It's extremely unlikely that the Sydney Trains' network will move to stand alone lines without further amplifications.  It wouldn't be justified for outer suburban lines anyway.  I also question the need for metro stand alone lines when its maximum frequency of 30tph relative to the demand would only be warranted in the inner city core.  

The Bankstown Line metro on its own certainly wouldn't warrant that level of frequency and capacity in the longer term.  Having one branch at either end would suffice and make greater use of its inherent capacity, while expanding the rail network into other regions at the same time.  

This was the original intention, e.g. the metro to the south branching to Cabramatta/Lidcombe and Hurstville.  That's why I keep banging on about the capacity on the cross harbour metro tunnel being wasted without further branching and preferably to regions without an existing rail service.

SWRL Metro conversion is not going to happen.

How can you be so certain about that, not that I support it?  That's the current plan, which is there in black and white in the Federal Budget.  This would appear to be the next cab off the rank following Metro West, unless there is a change in policy by a future government of either persuasion.

SWRL Metro conversion is not going to happen.

How can you be so certain about that, not that I support it?  That's the current plan, which is there in black and white in the Federal Budget.  This would appear to be the next cab off the rank following Metro West, unless there is a change in policy by a future government of either persuasion.

How do you know it will?

There was in the past

- Plans to Metro all of Sydney
- Plans to Metro Inner NW
- Plans to build EPRL
- Plans to build lower ESR
- Plans to Metro to Hurtsville
- Plans to build the SW Metro to Liverpool
- Repeatitly annouced plans to extend the NW metro a lousy 2km to Richmond line and even into Marsden Park.
- Plans to extend the LR Paramatta Phase 2

Again what plan? Its not on NSW transport site, the one organisation which you would think would have this information.

There are big maps on the Metro project construction sites saying it will be extended to Liverpool and Le Perouse? When?

Again I'll refer you to the SEQIP, it was a plan a far more serious plan, many items ticked off, a major political show piece of the Beatie Qld govt. Shown in lights, then ignored after 5 years by the very govt who introduced it and not followed by the same party today, good luck trying to find it today. I looked for a few min, QR website is absent.

Metro West is a 8-9 year project. If its to start after Metro west construction ends, then thats in around 2 maybe 3 state election cycles.

Lets all talk the pros and cons along with all the other wish list items for what this forum, but treating it as a "fait accompli", yeah nah. Unless the NSW govt has placed the project in its 5 year budget forward cost estimates, we may as well be talking about the first train line on Mars.

Again, happy to discuss merits, but lets not count the chickens because the hen to lay those eggs won't be born for 3 genrations.