Chatswood to Sydenham Metro to open early

 
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5V-0IT4aXU&t=287s

It would appear Chatswood to Sydenham Metro section will open ahead of time, ie early next year, rather than 2024.

Two potential senario's

1) The construction rate for this section is ahead of time?
2) Bankstown section starting was too late?

Sponsored advertisement

  viaprojects Assistant Commissioner



Two potential senario's

1) The construction rate for this section is ahead of time?
2) Bankstown section starting was too late?
RTT_Rules

neither - news story .. project is on time for each stage .. with a chance the city section opening early if testing works out ..

ie a decision to open per stage is finally made on the metro project ..
  Yappo Chief Train Controller

It would appear Chatswood to Sydenham Metro section will open ahead of time, ie early next year, rather than 2024.
RTT_Rules
There doesn't seem to be any realistic way that this section can open early next year/before the election. There's still a lot of work to do on the stations and even if that is all finished by the end of 2022 you still need at least 6 months of line testing.

And that testing period could blow out if any issues arise, it could end up being 9 or 12 months of testing...
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

It would appear Chatswood to Sydenham Metro section will open ahead of time, ie early next year, rather than 2024.
There doesn't seem to be any realistic way that this section can open early next year/before the election. There's still a lot of work to do on the stations and even if that is all finished by the end of 2022 you still need at least 6 months of line testing.

And that testing period could blow out if any issues arise, it could end up being 9 or 12 months of testing...
Yappo
The rolling stock and systems won't have to be tested as it did with the nw metro opening and so 9-12 months will not be needed. It is after all now just an extension of an existing rail system and not an entirely new system. The stations will be pretty much done by march and the trains will be able to run through while they are being finished just as it was done on the nw metro.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Rolling stock can be tested on the existing line and existing stock can be used to commission the new line in parallel.

Provided the tracks are clear and everything OK for trains to start they can test the running.

Stations can be finished in parallel provided they don't interfer with the trains operation.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
I personally doubt they would come out and say if they didn't think they could achieve it leading up to the election.

Yes, from a political perspective the current govt would benefit from a pre election opening as while they started and opened the NWRL in their term, more than the ALP did during their 11y stint. The bulk of the new rail projects 4 x the length of NWRL are still under construction.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
This was also reported in the SMH and my interpretation is that the metro conversion of the Bankstown Line will be delayed beyond the planned opening in 2024 because of cost overruns and practical issues in the conversion.  In comparison, conversion of the ECRL was fairly straight forward as it was only a decade old and station platforms were straight requiring minimal modifications.  

The conversion of the legacy Bankstown Line isn't so straight forward.  It was originally intended to straighten all platforms on the Bankstown Line to meet metro standards, but this was found to be impractical because of the restricted rail corridor.  That was the first compromise and instead it was decided to install gap fillers on the curved platforms, which adds another layer of complexity and reliability.  It's also been reported that modifications to some stations have been restricted to only accommodate 6 car metro trains instead of the proposed ultimate train length of 8 cars.

The likely delay in opening the full line to Bankstown is probably why the government has brought forward the opening from Chatswood to Sydenham, which could operate independently of the Bankstown Line, but whether that will be before the next State Election in March 2023 is a moot point.  I have never been in favour of the Bankstown Line metro conversion and would have preferred that the line extended to Miranda on the Cronulla Line via Sydney Airport International Terminal and Brighton le Sands along a new rail corridor.  

The argument that the Bankstown Line metro conversion frees up capacity on the City Circle is valid to some extent, but equally, terminating the Airport Line at Central or diverting it to the unused platforms at St James, where cross platform interchange would be possible to the City Circle, would free up similar additional capacity.  The existing Bankstown Line with the proposed digital signalling upgrade and ATO could provide a similar level of service up to 15tph to what is proposed for the metro and with double the number of seats, and dare I say it, a similar journey time.

Strange that this has popped up in the middle of a Federal Election campaign. Is it meant to bolster the LNP's faltering prospects?

Sydney Metro: NSW government could open flagship rail project in stages (smh.com.au)
  alleve Train Controller

Location: T4 Illawarra Line
This was also reported in the SMH and my interpretation is that the metro conversion of the Bankstown Line will be delayed beyond the planned opening in 2024 because of cost overruns and practical issues in the conversion.  In comparison, conversion of the ECRL was fairly straight forward as it was only a decade old and station platforms were straight requiring minimal modifications.  

The conversion of the legacy Bankstown Line isn't so straight forward.  It was originally intended to straighten all platforms on the Bankstown Line to meet metro standards, but this was found to be impractical because of the restricted rail corridor.  That was the first compromise and instead it was decided to install gap fillers on the curved platforms, which adds another layer of complexity and reliability.  It's also been reported that modifications to some stations have been restricted to only accommodate 6 car metro trains instead of the proposed ultimate train length of 8 cars.

The likely delay in opening the full line to Bankstown is probably why the government has brought forward the opening from Chatswood to Sydenham, which could operate independently of the Bankstown Line, but whether that will be before the next State Election in March 2023 is a moot point.  I have never been in favour of the Bankstown Line metro conversion and would have preferred that the line extended to Miranda on the Cronulla Line via Sydney Airport International Terminal and Brighton le Sands along a new rail corridor.  

The argument that the Bankstown Line metro conversion frees up capacity on the City Circle is valid to some extent, but equally, terminating the Airport Line at Central or diverting it to the unused platforms at St James, where cross platform interchange would be possible to the City Circle, would free up similar additional capacity.  The existing Bankstown Line with the proposed digital signalling upgrade and ATO could provide a similar level of service up to 15tph to what is proposed for the metro and with double the number of seats, and dare I say it, a similar journey time.

Strange that this has popped up in the middle of a Federal Election campaign. Is it meant to bolster the LNP's faltering prospects?

Sydney Metro: NSW government could open flagship rail project in stages (smh.com.au)
Transtopic
You are correct, Bankstown line stations are only being converted for 6 car trains. Check out some of Transport Vlog's videos and you can see on the platforms where the upgrade works just suddenly stop.

I would rather have the Bankstown line terminate at St James instead of the T8. More people use the T8, it's more important that it travels the whole way round as opposed to the Bankstown line. Same reason the T9 terminates at Central instead of the T1. Plus the T8s service frequencies are closer to the T2. Realistically speaking though the platforms at St James could not be used.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The Airport line line should never have used the current surface plats at Central, certainly 22/23 is not fit for purpose (multiple personal experience) for use as a station for airport trains. If at all possible it should have used the unused platforms.

In principle I totally agree that St James spare platforms should have been used for terminating anything, most likely T9 as the demand on others ie Bankstown and Airport as their demand is higher and will grow faster than T9. But the more I discuss this with people in construction the more the simple answer No, No NFW as this opens up numerous issues with modern engineering design and construction interacting with 100 year old abandoned part completed works. One Mining guy told me he was surprised the abandoned tunnels were simply not filled with concrete, which is what would be required today.

Airport line, which is basically city to eventually East Hills will be a very busy corridor within a decade or so and will be stand alone with no other services using the tracks. Macuthur will only take the extra pair of tracks from East Hills then express via Sydenham.

The City Circle would have needed relief from some of its current services. So eventually there will be 20 trains per hour coming off the Inner West tracks and southern track feeder
ie
From West, Inner West and Liverpool services
From South, Macuthur and East Hills via Airport

So Bankstown or something had to go and Bankstown was the obvious choice as it was and is stand alone. Liverpool easily managed and may eventually likely be Metro anyway.

.....

Regarding the platform lengths on Bankstown line.
Yes its not surprising when you look at the Bankstown line on Sat view the issues raised. I think this is why the origianal plan was a long shut down, basically so the entire platforms could be cut back and track completely realigned. But with the opposition to long shut, this is outcome. I suspect in future they will still do it, but that issue is for the distance future when the frequency is maxed out and the permanent fix is required and the line converted to 8 car length again.

.....

On a similar topic to why for some of the rail projects are being done around Sydney the way they are, spoke with a friend last night who used to live in a house backing close to Asquith station, they along with all their neighbours (all on uncondensed blocks, ie Qtr ac) were basically forced out about 10 + years ago (they were last to sell and her son now lives in a townhouse situated over where their pool used to be). What the govt did/is still doing to accomdate the growth in Sydney is that any land near a railway station that gets flagged for redevelopment to higher density gets "incentives" from the govt. So the govt flagged locations as prime for redevelopment based on railway spare capacity and how much of the local housing was still the traditional Qtr acre blocks, older houses etc. Basically looking at land based on number of bodies per m2 and starting with the lowest number next to railway corridors with easy growth options. My friend is in a govt job that gives her access to security, strategy etc and helps to shape policy that is bi-partisan so she can see what is happening from both sides of the fence.

Anyway, basically we discussed the Bankstown line corridor. Her comments, she said anyone who thinks a dozen or so trains an hr on that corridor will cut in within next 10 - 20 years is dreaming. She said people down that way including the local Mayor need to accept that this corridor within a decade of the Metro opening will start looking more like the lower NSL high rises than low density suburbia. She also said the line will no doubt reach Liverpool within a decade or so of opening as this will be required to access the route to Paramatta and its future CBD.

She said look at the Paramatta Metro station precint, they didn't need to do that for just add the station. There is also a very good reason why the Paramatta Metro station is not next to the HR line, its Paramatta CBD starting to become more like Sydney with multiple station options. Those old run down low rise properties will be replaced with modern, denser, taller office and some resisdential towers. This is the start of the growth boom and the private sector wants the infrastruture in place to justify investment.
  viaprojects Assistant Commissioner



She said look at the Paramatta Metro station precint, they didn't need to do that for just add the station. There is also a very good reason why the Paramatta Metro station is not next to the HR line, its Paramatta CBD starting to become more like Sydney with multiple station options. Those old run down low rise properties will be replaced with modern, denser, taller office and some resisdential towers. This is the start of the growth boom and the private sector wants the infrastruture in place to justify investment.
RTT_Rules

lol ..parramatta station then parramatta square was not going to wait for any under ground train line .. so they have taken the next block of council owned property for the metro station .. too many tower block's in the rail path way ..

parramatta CBD has changed .. now we have a metro work site as the new hole and soon a museum hole while the others are near completion ..
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE


She said look at the Paramatta Metro station precint, they didn't need to do that for just add the station. There is also a very good reason why the Paramatta Metro station is not next to the HR line, its Paramatta CBD starting to become more like Sydney with multiple station options. Those old run down low rise properties will be replaced with modern, denser, taller office and some resisdential towers. This is the start of the growth boom and the private sector wants the infrastruture in place to justify investment.
lol ..parramatta station then parramatta square was not going to wait for any under ground train line .. so they have taken the next block of council owned property for the metro station .. too many tower block's in the rail path way ..

parramatta CBD has changed .. now we have a metro work site as the new hole and soon a museum hole while the others are near completion ..
viaprojects
The location always had multiple factors in the final decision, but the ability to completely redevelop was high up the list.
  Yappo Chief Train Controller

It would appear Chatswood to Sydenham Metro section will open ahead of time, ie early next year, rather than 2024.
There doesn't seem to be any realistic way that this section can open early next year/before the election. There's still a lot of work to do on the stations and even if that is all finished by the end of 2022 you still need at least 6 months of line testing.

And that testing period could blow out if any issues arise, it could end up being 9 or 12 months of testing...
The rolling stock and systems won't have to be tested as it did with the nw metro opening and so 9-12 months will not be needed. It is after all now just an extension of an existing rail system and not an entirely new system. The stations will be pretty much done by march and the trains will be able to run through while they are being finished just as it was done on the nw metro.
simstrain
This is both optimistic and a little naive, with respect. There's a lot more E&S intergration required with the tunnel & station equipment. You can't rush the electrical systems (this was done with NW and there were problems), signalling & comms systems. To my understanding each system needs to be individually extensively tested for diff scenarios, along with redundency testing and then full system ops testing. It's a very long compliance checklist, they will overtest before the regulators sign off on each system. From what I've read elsewhere, Ausgrid is especially strict on confirming stable power supply systems before they will energise the bulk power supply points for full line testing? The rolling stock are really not much of an issue.

Reportedly, the tunnels still have at least 6 months of work to do BEFORE you can start dynamic testing which then needs at least a minimum of 6 months. And as I said, that assumes that no issues are found which prolongs the testing period. There's plenty of examples of metro tunnel projects which took longer on the testing front.

It would be great if it did open earlier, but the late 2023 opening date is still the most realistic imho. I'd give a March opening date a very low chance at this time subject to further updates in the next 3 months.
  Yappo Chief Train Controller

I personally doubt they would come out and say if they didn't think they could achieve it leading up to the election.
Yes, from a political perspective the current govt would benefit from a pre election opening
RTT_Rules
Of course the govt would benefit from a pre election opening, that is why they came out and made this statement as they have been recently having political troubles. When are infrastructure projects not used for political purposes?

It's a potential and "it could open". The Prem & Min are just spruiking the project - as they rightly should - and engaging in a bit of conjecture & bluff that it could open earlier. Let's see what they say in 6 months time....
  alleve Train Controller

Location: T4 Illawarra Line
Airport line, which is basically city to eventually East Hills will be a very busy corridor within a decade or so and will be stand alone with no other services using the tracks. Macuthur will only take the extra pair of tracks from East Hills then express via Sydenham.

She said look at the Paramatta Metro station precint, they didn't need to do that for just add the station. There is also a very good reason why the Paramatta Metro station is not next to the HR line, its Paramatta CBD starting to become more like Sydney with multiple station options. Those old run down low rise properties will be replaced with modern, denser, taller office and some resisdential towers. This is the start of the growth boom and the private sector wants the infrastruture in place to justify investment.
RTT_Rules
Why divert Macarthur trains from the Airport line? They'll already be sharing tracks with Airport trains when in the City Circle so their service frequency is already dependent on them. Sydenham won't need the T8 trains, as it'll be served by the Metro and the T4 (and maybe the SCO since it won't be stopping at Wolli Creek). St Peters and Erskineville won't need T8 trains as they'll be served well above what they need by Hurstville T4 trains. The only benefit diverting trains off the Airport line gives is providing interchange between the T8 and Metro before Central, but it comes at the cost of taking trains away from the Airport line, which is where trains are needed most (particularly at Green Square during peak hour, those platforms really need to be widened). All I would agree with there is that the quad should be extended to East Hills, and all-stoppers should terminate at East Hills.

I think its a stretch to say that the Parramatta Metro and Train stations are like the city stations, giving multiple options. They're one block apart, closer to each other than even St James and Martin Place. The only stations in the city closer together than Parramatta/Parramatta are Town Hall/Pitt St, which are basically the same station. Only reason they're separate is because of the way Town Hall is designed. Parramatta stations are separate for the same reason, and the Govt is using it as an opportunity to revitalise the block the station is in.
  viaprojects Assistant Commissioner

Parramatta stations are separate for the same reason, and the Govt is using it as an opportunity to revitalise the block the station is in.
alleve


it's the last section of land Parramatta council owned the state government can use for any project .. it's only a part win for council as they don't have the cost of removing the car park under the councils redevelopment plan to the river ...but a major loss for the next few years for the area .. ie the station would have been built under parramatta square if the state gov done there job faster ..
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
Current planning is for all T8 services to use the Airport Line after the Bankstown Line metro conversion is completed.  The Airport Line is currently being upgraded to run 18tph with the current signalling, which incidentally is the current frequency on the City Circle Inner via Museum.  The Illawarra Local through Sydenham will only be used by SCO, and possibly future SHL, Intercity and South Line Regional services which will cross to the Illawarra Dive at the new Erskineville crossovers to Sydney Terminal.

It's unclear what will happen when the digital signalling upgrade is completed, which will bring the City Circle frequency up to 24tph per direction.  It will depend on whether it's feasible to upgrade the Airport Line further to 24tph or whether the spare capacity on the Illawarra Local via Sydenham will be utilised for an additional 6tph x T8 services to the City Circle.

Just BTW, with regard to the location of the Parramatta metro station, the original Parramatta to Chatswood Rail Link proposed a new station box directly below the existing station, which from memory allowed for 4 platforms.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Why divert Macarthur trains from the Airport line? They'll already be sharing tracks with Airport trains when in the City Circle so their service frequency is already dependent on them. Sydenham won't need the T8 trains, as it'll be served by the Metro and the T4 (and maybe the SCO since it won't be stopping at Wolli Creek). St Peters and Erskineville won't need T8 trains as they'll be served well above what they need by Hurstville T4 trains. The only benefit diverting trains off the Airport line gives is providing interchange between the T8 and Metro before Central, but it comes at the cost of taking trains away from the Airport line, which is where trains are needed most (particularly at Green Square during peak hour, those platforms really need to be widened). All I would agree with there is that the quad should be extended to East Hills, and all-stoppers should terminate at East Hills.

I think its a stretch to say that the Parramatta Metro and Train stations are like the city stations, giving multiple options. They're one block apart, closer to each other than even St James and Martin Place. The only stations in the city closer together than Parramatta/Parramatta are Town Hall/Pitt St, which are basically the same station. Only reason they're separate is because of the way Town Hall is designed. Parramatta stations are separate for the same reason, and the Govt is using it as an opportunity to revitalise the block the station is in.
alleve
Why, it simple, it speeds up the SW services.

SW, East Hills, Revsby, Sydenham, Redfern, Central.

Airport is East Hills all to Central via Airport line.

Pushing the SW lines through the Airport line unless there is a significant traffic from SW to Airport line stations is pointless.

Re Paramatta
Well some people in this group consider the two stations to be a world a part and a major failing in its design.

Yes I agree they are close to each other, Sydney Trains Vlog guy did a real time walk from one to the other, if I recall it was 6min. But also paert of a longterm plan to de centralise Paramatta PT so to speak.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
Why divert Macarthur trains from the Airport line? They'll already be sharing tracks with Airport trains when in the City Circle so their service frequency is already dependent on them. Sydenham won't need the T8 trains, as it'll be served by the Metro and the T4 (and maybe the SCO since it won't be stopping at Wolli Creek). St Peters and Erskineville won't need T8 trains as they'll be served well above what they need by Hurstville T4 trains. The only benefit diverting trains off the Airport line gives is providing interchange between the T8 and Metro before Central, but it comes at the cost of taking trains away from the Airport line, which is where trains are needed most (particularly at Green Square during peak hour, those platforms really need to be widened). All I would agree with there is that the quad should be extended to East Hills, and all-stoppers should terminate at East Hills.

I think its a stretch to say that the Parramatta Metro and Train stations are like the city stations, giving multiple options. They're one block apart, closer to each other than even St James and Martin Place. The only stations in the city closer together than Parramatta/Parramatta are Town Hall/Pitt St, which are basically the same station. Only reason they're separate is because of the way Town Hall is designed. Parramatta stations are separate for the same reason, and the Govt is using it as an opportunity to revitalise the block the station is in.
Pushing the SW lines through the Airport line unless there is a significant traffic from SW to Airport line stations is pointless.

RTT_Rules
But that nonetheless is what is planned.  The Airport Line is being upgraded to increase frequency from 10tph to 18tph by running all T8 trains through it to Central.  It will include the current T8 services via Sydenham in peak hours (4tph) and the additional 2tph ex Revesby and 2tph ex Campbelltown.  I assume that Campbelltown/Macarthur services will run express from Revesby to merge with the all stations Revesby services at Wolli Creek.

I agree that some Campbelltown/Macarthur services should run via Sydenham for a faster express journey as the Illawarra Local will be grossly underutilised with only the SCO Intercity services effectively using it in peak hours.  South Regional services which will also use it will be mostly outside peak hours.  The long term plan may be for the Illawarra Local from Wolli Creek Junction to Sydney Terminal via the Illawarra Dive to be used exclusively by Intercity and Regional services which would effectively make it redundant from the Erskineville crossovers to Central Suburban.  It may also tie in with the Sydney Terminal Area Reconfiguration project, where I suspect that all lines through Redfern will be slewed across in parallel to platforms 9 & 10.

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/news-and-events/media-releases/rail-revolution-presses-ahead
  alleve Train Controller

Location: T4 Illawarra Line
Why divert Macarthur trains from the Airport line? They'll already be sharing tracks with Airport trains when in the City Circle so their service frequency is already dependent on them. Sydenham won't need the T8 trains, as it'll be served by the Metro and the T4 (and maybe the SCO since it won't be stopping at Wolli Creek). St Peters and Erskineville won't need T8 trains as they'll be served well above what they need by Hurstville T4 trains. The only benefit diverting trains off the Airport line gives is providing interchange between the T8 and Metro before Central, but it comes at the cost of taking trains away from the Airport line, which is where trains are needed most (particularly at Green Square during peak hour, those platforms really need to be widened). All I would agree with there is that the quad should be extended to East Hills, and all-stoppers should terminate at East Hills.

I think its a stretch to say that the Parramatta Metro and Train stations are like the city stations, giving multiple options. They're one block apart, closer to each other than even St James and Martin Place. The only stations in the city closer together than Parramatta/Parramatta are Town Hall/Pitt St, which are basically the same station. Only reason they're separate is because of the way Town Hall is designed. Parramatta stations are separate for the same reason, and the Govt is using it as an opportunity to revitalise the block the station is in.
Why, it simple, it speeds up the SW services.

SW, East Hills, Revsby, Sydenham, Redfern, Central.

Airport is East Hills all to Central via Airport line.

Pushing the SW lines through the Airport line unless there is a significant traffic from SW to Airport line stations is pointless.

Re Paramatta
Well some people in this group consider the two stations to be a world a part and a major failing in its design.

Yes I agree they are close to each other, Sydney Trains Vlog guy did a real time walk from one to the other, if I recall it was 6min. But also paert of a longterm plan to de centralise Paramatta PT so to speak.
RTT_Rules
It speeds up SW services by a small amount (via Sydenham is 2-3 stops [Sydenham, St Peters, Redfern] at slower speed limits, via Airport is 4 stops [the Airports, Mascot, Green Square] at higher speed limits) at the trade off of taking services away from the Airport. Putting SW lines through the Airport isn't pointless because it means the Airport gets more services. Given what Mascot and especially Green Square were like pre-Covid, the Airport line won't get away with only being served by Revesby all-stop trains (or East Hills, if they end up extending the quad). The most strategic thing to do is have all T8 trains head through the Airport.

I would also be one of those people who considers the location of Parramatta Metro Station to be a major failing in its design. It's far enough away from the train station to make interchange a PITA, but close enough where it doesn't actually serve a different area. It's the worst of both options.
  alleve Train Controller

Location: T4 Illawarra Line
Transtopic I assume that Campbelltown/Macarthur services will run express from Revesby to merge with the all stations Revesby services at Wolli Creek.
They'd have to given that the only station that has platforms on the outer tracks is Revesby
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
It speeds up SW services by a small amount (via Sydenham is 2-3 stops [Sydenham, St Peters, Redfern] at slower speed limits, via Airport is 4 stops [the Airports, Mascot, Green Square] at higher speed limits) at the trade off of taking services away from the Airport. Putting SW lines through the Airport isn't pointless because it means the Airport gets more services. Given what Mascot and especially Green Square were like pre-Covid, the Airport line won't get away with only being served by Revesby all-stop trains (or East Hills, if they end up extending the quad). The most strategic thing to do is have all T8 trains head through the Airport.

I would also be one of those people who considers the location of Parramatta Metro Station to be a major failing in its design. It's far enough away from the train station to make interchange a PITA, but close enough where it doesn't actually serve a different area. It's the worst of both options.
alleve
Re: Airport line
Fair comments.

Then it would be best to complete the quad to East Hills and minimise the stops and interaction with East Hills - Airport and wasting time stopping at these stations. Only stop Revesby or East Hills and then Wolli Creek and all to city.

Re: Paramatta
The new station is being built under a major new development pricint.

Changing services is done at Westmead.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The T8 should have 20 trains an hour via the airport line. Signalling is not a problem as I have said many times as the current system can do 20 trains an hour. The problem with frequency has always been platform congestion, slow train speed and dwell times. As for trains going in to the CC via Sydenham they can take the 4 banktown paths in via platform 17 and out via platform 19. There will not be any extra T2 trains happening that is for certain with it's multi stop pattern mix.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
The T8 should have 20 trains an hour via the airport line. Signalling is not a problem as I have said many times as the current system can do 20 trains an hour. The problem with frequency has always been platform congestion, slow train speed and dwell times. As for trains going in to the CC via Sydenham they can take the 4 banktown paths in via platform 17 and out via platform 19. There will not be any extra T2 trains happening that is for certain with it's multi stop pattern mix.
simstrain
It's already been announced that the existing signalling and power supply is being upgraded on the Airport Line to allow up to 18tph.  It's currently running at 10tph.  Whether it can be further upgraded ultimately to 24tph with the digital signalling when it is introduced remains to be seen.  Under current plans, all T8 services will run via the Airport Line after the Bankstown Line conversion.  The current peak T8 services via Sydenham will be diverted to the Airport Line along with an extra 2tph each from Revesby and Campbelltown.

Bankstown Line services currently run 6tph on the CC via Town Hall and 4tph via Museum.  There will also be an extra 4tph on T2 via Town Hall bringing it up to 18tph with a mixed stopping pattern.  Those extra services will most likely be the reinstated Liverpool via Regents Park service.
  WimbledonW Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
Are there any intermediate crossovers between Chatswood and Sydenham?

There would be 1-4 xovers at Chatswood.
  alleve Train Controller

Location: T4 Illawarra Line
Are there any intermediate crossovers between Chatswood and Sydenham?

There would be 1-4 xovers at Chatswood.
WimbledonW
I know that there is a crossover south of Chatswood currently being used by the metro as a turnback. There are also crossovers in both directions north of Chatswood, and crossovers in both directions north of Sydenham (as well as numerous entrances into the maintenance facility). I'm not sure if there's any other than that.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: mrmoopt, RTT_Rules, Transtopic

Display from: