(So beware Countrylink passengers, your in for a walk!)

I'm sure all 3 of them will be absolutely gutted.

Regarding awsgc24's post (to prevent eyestrain from over quoting), why can't a train terminate P2, shunt fowards and return to Leppington P3.

If there is no siding, a terminating train (as suggested above) may get in the way of through trains to or from Leppington. If the timetable requires a 5 minute turnround time, then small problem. But if the timetable requires a 15 minute turnround time, then through pax may be delayed 10 minutes. Not having a siding clear of the through tracks is "False Economy".

In the scheme of things, a siding "only" requires a modest amount of extra track - say 200m - and perhaps one extra turnout.

Think of centre turnback sidings at the following places:
Bankstown
Kingsgrove
Martin Place
Central P24/P25

Epping P1/P2 (siding on side) Due to lack of space clear of the ECRL dives, this had to be build on the side rather than as a centre siding.

Lakemba (abolished)
Petersham (abolished)

Centre turnback platforms as distinct from sidings not included.

And the chances of needing a Leppington to Glenfield shuttle are? Unless there is a shutdown, I would consider it redunant infrastructure that has very little value.

If there was an incident, then at worse there maybe 5-10 minute delays.

''A connection to a new CBD relief line that fed trains via Sydenham would allow more network-wide growth than any alternative,'' a rail industry source said. ''This is because the network could allow more trains to approach the CBD from the south west via Sydenham than from any other feed.

What a weird comment.  If there is a need to have increased capacity via Sydenham then why not enter the City Circle via Town Hall?  I'm fairly sure that the locals will not be running at 20tph due to the effect of the stopping trains.  This would need the Erskenville-Sydenham sextuplication though.

(So beware Countrylink passengers, your in for a walk!)

I'm sure all 3 of them will be absolutely gutted.

You wouldnt think it but sometimes there can be quite a few people who do travel to/from the South Coast.

From Glenfield to the South Coast about 35km as the crow flies off on a side track  

SWRL should keep going out to Camden via Oran Park although that may mean cuts to services on Glenfield - Campbelltown/Macarthur  

From Glenfield to the South Coast about 35km as the crow flies off on a side track  

SWRL should keep going out to Camden via Oran Park although that may mean cuts to services on Glenfield - Campbelltown/Macarthur  

I even had to re-read to see where I got derailed!

How far is Leppington from Camden? The plans call for possible extensions as the need arises, so is it a distance thing that stops the SWRL from going to Camden now?

about 12km from Leppington to Narellan and 4km more to Camden.

IMHO going all the way to Camden is a waste as there is no further oppourtunity for residential growth. It's all happening in the section from Narellan and north along Camden Valley way and Northern Road.

(So beware Countrylink passengers, your in for a walk!)

I'm sure all 3 of them will be absolutely gutted.

Hey, there's more than 3 of us; just only 3 of us paying full fare!

All weekend South Coast services will extend to Bondi Junction (So beware Countrylink passengers, your in for a walk!)

Couldn't they change at Sydenham for a Bankstown Line or Airport Line service to a Central platform closer to…oh wait, that'll take longer 'cos they would have to wait for the change.

I'm sure all 3 of them will be absolutely gutted.

Oh Snap! Mind you, if they're going south, one might use that Bundagong Bus from (Wollongong or Albion Park) to Moss Vale, then change to a CountryLink train.

As for the Leppington branch: 11.4 kilometres for two stations? I'd expect that for yonder Pakenham Line, but not there! I also wonder about the viability of extending to Camden, or Bringelly (like the Christie Plan 2001 suggested).

Epping P1/P2 (siding on side) Due to lack of space clear of the ECRL dives, this had to be build on the side rather than as a centre siding.

That one seemed odd to me.  I am curious as to whether there was an engineering reason that the dives were built such that they restricted the width.  If the down ECRL dive were moved a little to the west once it clears the tunnel, and its junction shifted north to near the bus tunnel, it seems even now there would be room for the turnback to be built between the tracks.

A centre road turnback may require the main line(s) to slew with excessively sharp curves, which might impose speed restrictions. This is not something that can be determined on the back of an envelope. Given that centre road turnbacks seem to be current policy (Gordon, Kingsgrove, Hornsby, Revesby, Homebush, etc.) one can only suppose that the slew issue is the problem.

Given that centre road turnbacks seem to be current policy (Gordon, Kingsgrove, Hornsby, Revesby, Homebush, etc.) one can only suppose that the slew issue is the problem.

You can add on to that the Macarthur station upgrade as well. They're adding to the current current west side single platform turnback with a center turnback, which includes putting a buffer stop on what is the current down main line, and creating a new down main that goes around the outside of the current platform 3.  See Figure 3b here:

http://www.tca.nsw.gov.au/ArticleDocuments/166/ref%20summary.pdf.aspx