Infrastructure NSW Report

 
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
I'm not particularly impressed by a 'milestone' report that simply addresses rail freight items as...  

"Assume delivery by ARTC based on user funding model"

Rather than assume perhaps running it past ARTC for something beyond - well anythings possible.

The state should fork up too given it charges freight access changes on the network it controls.

Sponsored advertisement

  rrroLLa Chief Train Controller



They are essentially proposing to converge the Richmond, Western & Northern Lines (already overloaded) with the main south into a single track pair to run through the western arm of the City Circle. It's a variation of the Dick Day plan, without the Western Express relief line.

"djf01"


On second reading I too thought this was crazy.  When I initially skimed through it, I assumed the Inner West would be getting its own track pair leaving the current 6 tracks, with probably a flyover change and the Northern Line moving over to the locals.

There must be more to their plan.  Isn't there more then (or very clost to) 24 trains coming from the Western, Northern and Southern lines already?  Or they are just going to send lots of trains to Sydney Terminal.
  bjwh86 Chief Train Controller

Is it in this plan or the other that the Richmond line would become the Cumberland line?
So the Western line would only be trains from Penrith.
  simonl Chief Commissioner

Location: Brisbane
Is it in this plan or the other that the Richmond line would become the Cumberland line?So the Western line would only be trains from Penrith.
"bjwh86"

That was in neither plan, but a separate leak.
  simonl Chief Commissioner

Location: Brisbane


They are essentially proposing to converge the Richmond, Western & Northern Lines (already overloaded) with the main south into a single track pair to run through the western arm of the City Circle. It's a variation of the Dick Day plan, without the Western Express relief line.

"djf01"


On second reading I too thought this was crazy. When I initially skimed through it, I assumed the Inner West would be getting its own track pair leaving the current 6 tracks, with probably a flyover change and the Northern Line moving over to the locals.

There must be more to their plan. Isn't there more then (or very clost to) 24 trains coming from the Western, Northern and Southern lines already? Or they are just going to send lots of trains to Sydney Terminal.
"rrroLLa"

About par for the course for NSW planning, it seems.
  Speed Minister for Railways

I fully expect to see services culled in favour of more coaches.
"Watson374"

Greyhound, depart Sydney 7am, arrive Coffs Harbour 5:05pm
XPT, depart sydney 7:15am, arrive Coffs Harbour 4:05pm
"zoomwhoosh"
Even if Greiner was in charge of this report, the current government has expanded rail services to Bathurst. They may well be looking at pleasing some regional voters as well as avoiding big new expenditures, unless they attract more headlines on the result than the price.
  bambul Station Master

Location: Sydney

I'll go dig up the 2010 SMH report - it has something about this.
"Watson374"


The SMH Independent Transport Inquiry? I have a copy somewhere buried. The original web site seems to be gone.
"zoomwhoosh"


It's been archived with the State Library. Click on the link to access it.
  Watson374 Chief Commissioner

Location: Fully reclined at the pointy end.

I'll go dig up the 2010 SMH report - it has something about this.
"Watson374"


The SMH Independent Transport Inquiry? I have a copy somewhere buried. The original web site seems to be gone.
"zoomwhoosh"


It's been archived with the State Library. Click on the link to access it.
"bambul"


Ah, thank you!
  rrroLLa Chief Train Controller

What are the odds that the underground bus terminals use Wynyard 1 & 2 and one of the rail reserved corridors to reach Town Hall?
  djf01 Chief Commissioner


AN EXTRA 12 commuters can crowd into each Sydney train carriage in peak hour, and the system should be progressively broken up and sold off, work prepared for Infrastructure NSW's state infrastructure strategy recommends.

The strategy, released on Wednesday, does not call for the privatisation of RailCorp, the state-owned operator of Sydney's trains. But the plan it proposes for Sydney's trains was informed by analysis advocating their gradual privatisation, while avoiding large-scale investments by trying to get more out of the existing network.

The future of Sydney's train system is the main point of difference between the Infrastructure NSW report and a separate transport plan developed by the state's transport department, Transport for NSW.

The Transport for NSW report advocates another harbour crossing, which would add more than 60 per cent capacity for services through the suburbs and the city.

Advertisement
The crossing would be built after the north-west rail link is finished in about 2019, but planning for it would start immediately.

Infrastructure NSW hired London's Interfleet Transport Advisory to ''develop and test a hypothesis that a private franchisee might propose an efficient long-term rail strategy''.

The report, released by Infrastructure NSW yesterday, also looked at how to get more out of the train system while spending little on infrastructure.

One of its recommendations is for more people to fit on peak-hour trains. Peak hour services already run up to 180 per cent of capacity at times.

''It is not unreasonable to assume that trains can carry 50 extra passengers in the short-term (two years), and 100 extra in the medium-term (five years),'' the report says. ''Split between eight coaches, these are increases of only six and 12 passengers per carriage.''

And it says single-deck trains should be introduced between Chatswood and Strathfield to increase capacity over the harbour. This idea was adopted in the Infrastructure NSW plan.

A lot of the supposed benefits of the Interfleet plan would come from privatisation, which has been ruled out by the Transport Minister, Gladys Berejiklian.

The report recommends first privatising the Eastern Suburbs and Illawarra line, which runs largely separate from the rest of the train system. Within five years, other lines should be broken off.

The report also advocates running trains from the north west rail link to Central via Epping and Strathfield, and not only to Chatswood.

This would reduce overcrowding on the north shore when the north-west rail line is finished in 2019. However, Ms Berejiklian, has refused to consider this possibility.

 
"SMH's Jacob Saulwick"


http://smh.drive.com.au/roads-and-traffic/pique-hour-pack-more-commuters-into-trains-20121004-272bg.html
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
Well that hasn't taken too long.

Have to pay the piper (who bought you).
  Oldfart Chief Commissioner

Location: Right base for BK 11R


What are the odds that the underground bus terminals use Wynyard 1 & 2 and one of the rail reserved corridors to reach Town Hall?
"rrroLLa"


Actually not such a bad thing if they're designed to be convertible to light rail, heavy rail or metro at some point in the future when the demand exists.

The mystery for me though is how to feed the locals through to the Shore Line and the suburbans through the City Circle. Yes, I know that's quite possible to do using the flying junctions and/or turnouts just east of Central, but it involves services crossing each other which limits capacity. It's doable probably at up to about 16 TPH, but almost certainly not at 20-24 TPH during the peak. Any thoughts anyone? A flyover to feed the suburbans through Redfern 5/6 allowing the Locals/Bankstown to use 3/4 ????

As usual, the devil is in the detail, and the detail is not in the report.
  mikesyd Chief Commissioner

Location: Lurking

As usual, the devil is in the detail, and the detail is not in the report.
"Oldfart"


The whole thing is high on ideas, but lacking any detail. No change from the ideas and announcements from the previous Government(s).

The only winners are the Consultants who would have been paid the usual Motza for their pages of paper and artists impressions.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner


The mystery for me though is how to feed the locals through to the Shore Line and the suburbans through the City Circle. Yes, I know that's quite possible to do using the flying junctions and/or turnouts just east of Central, but it involves services crossing each other which limits capacity. It's doable probably at up to about 16 TPH, but almost certainly not at 20-24 TPH during the peak. Any thoughts anyone? A flyover to feed the suburbans through Redfern 5/6 allowing the Locals/Bankstown to use 3/4 ????

As usual, the devil is in the detail, and the detail is not in the report.
"Oldfart"


I think this is main the reason the Dick Day metro plan ...



... failed to make the NSW Master Plan. 

The flyover at the location you suggest is really the only way I can see to do it.  And even then it's a dodgy proposition in the space available because the lower roads still have to climb over the Illawarra dive (which is why it has to be a flyover and not a flyunder, which could have steeper momentum grades).

But the biggest issue here is one or both of sectors 2 and 3 would probably need to be shut down for 6 months while it was built.

Perhaps one way to do it is a tunnel under Redfern and under the Illawarra dive.  But the cost of that starts to head towards that of the Western Express, and whole point of this plan is to avoid such heavy infrastructure upgrades.

These problems would not have been apparent to anyone other than us enthusiasts prior to them starting their detailed planning. 

What I suspect has occurred is they got too far into developing this plan for the Transport Master Plan before they realised how unimplementable it is.  The only way to salvage it was with a second harbour crossing (even though the whole point of this scheme was to avert this).  I think this explains why the iNSW and Master Transport plan diverge so much on this point. 

Unfortunately elements of this plan remain in the NWRL project (specifically the smaller tunnel bores and all the extra stabling & maintenance facilities) which is now pretty much entirely dependent on a second harbour crossing to deliver the benefits of that project.  And in the process, the second harbour crossing project is compromised because it's purpose is no longer to deliver the extra rail capacity to Sydney as a whole, but to fix the design problems with the NWRL.

BTW, has anyone seen (or got a link) for the Interlink Rail report to iNSW?  (Interfleet Transport Advisory (April 2012), “Final
 Report of Rail Network Strategic Review”.)?  Note this expert's report is dated April, prior to the gvt's 2nd crossing change of heart.










  djf01 Chief Commissioner


BTW, has anyone seen (or got a link) for the Interlink Rail report to iNSW? (Interfleet Transport Advisory (April 2012), “Final
Report of Rail Network Strategic Review”.)? Note this expert's report is dated April, prior to the gvt's 2nd crossing change of heart.
"djf01"


Found it: http://www.infrastructure.nsw.gov.au/media/16721/interfleet_rail_network_strategy_review.pdf
  simonl Chief Commissioner

Location: Brisbane

What are the odds that the underground bus terminals use Wynyard 1 & 2 and one of the rail reserved corridors to reach Town Hall?
"rrroLLa"


Actually not such a bad thing if they're designed to be convertible to light rail, heavy rail or metro at some point in the future when the demand exists.
"Oldfart"

I think it's pretty bad.  Once the buses go in there, they aren't coming out.  BRT solutions are often advertised as convertible to LR, but this rarely happens.  Ottawa is the only example I can think of where any LR conversion is on the cards.

There's no reason to do this.  The flaws in this "BRT" scheme are so transparent as to hardly be worth typing.

The mystery for me though is how to feed the locals through to the Shore Line and the suburbans through the City Circle. Yes, I know that's quite possible to do using the flying junctions and/or turnouts just east of Central, but it involves services crossing each other which limits capacity. It's doable probably at up to about 16 TPH, but almost certainly not at 20-24 TPH during the peak. Any thoughts anyone? A flyover to feed the suburbans through Redfern 5/6 allowing the Locals/Bankstown to use 3/4 ????

As usual, the devil is in the detail, and the detail is not in the report.
"Oldfart"

I don't think they saw any need to worry about details like that.

There really are poor reasons to mess with this.  It would make more sense to single deck-ify the city circle lines.



I think this is main the reason the Dick Day metro plan ...



... failed to make the NSW Master Plan.
"djf01"

Thanks for reproducing that!

I presume this was the plan that was advanced under the Keneally govt.  I think the Hurstville metro is pretty daft.  That would require all freight to go around via Campbelltown to reach the Illawarra, for a start.  Also, it is not needed to increase capacity in that part of town.
  Watson374 Chief Commissioner

Location: Fully reclined at the pointy end.
I think it's pretty bad. Once the buses go in there, they aren't coming out. BRT solutions are often advertised as convertible to LR, but this rarely happens. Ottawa is the only example I can think of where any LR conversion is on the cards.

There's no reason to do this. The flaws in this "BRT" scheme are so transparent as to hardly be worth typing.
"simonl"


And Seattle, which executed it. The problem is, it's a worthless project.

 
It would make more sense to single deck-ify the city circle lines.
"simonl"


Ouch.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner




I think this is main the reason the Dick Day metro plan ...



... failed to make the NSW Master Plan.
"djf01"

Thanks for reproducing that!
"simonl"


I presume this was the plan that was advanced under the Keneally govt. I think the Hurstville metro is pretty daft. That would require all freight to go around via Campbelltown to reach the Illawarra, for a start. Also, it is not needed to increase capacity in that part of town.[/quote]

This scheme was proposed to address the specific problem of SHB capacity created by the NWRL.  It assumes SD trains and the *same* signaling and operating practices we have now, and thus hardware compatibility, and thus no issue with (out of peak) freight on the Illawara locals.

IIRC you are right about when it emerged: during the previous ALP gvt after the NWRL was reverted back to HR and after the Beecroft alignment was dropped in the NWRL's EIS.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner



http://www.infrastructure.nsw.gov.au/media/16721/interfleet_rail_network_strategy_review.pdf
"djf01"


From page 68 of the expert's report to iNSW:



Note the "crossing of the streams": some SD & some DD across the SHB.  Sectors 2&3 intermingled.  All completely at odds with their privatisation recommendations.
  simonl Chief Commissioner

Location: Brisbane
Western Line to Central (i) completely?  Ouch!
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

Western Line to Central (i) completely? Ouch!
"simonl"


Have a closer look.  Western Line DDs run via SHB & Macqaurie Park.  NWRL & Southern Line SDs run via Strathfield, SHB and the Nth Shore to Hornsby.

Perhaps I should have put quotes around the term "expert's" report Smile.
  simonl Chief Commissioner

Location: Brisbane
Hmm, just a premature termination of the line.

Do they really believe that 30tph is happening?
  Rails Chief Commissioner




The mystery for me though is how to feed the locals through to the Shore Line and the suburbans through the City Circle. Yes, I know that's quite possible to do using the flying junctions and/or turnouts just east of Central, but it involves services crossing each other which limits capacity. It's doable probably at up to about 16 TPH, but almost certainly not at 20-24 TPH during the peak. Any thoughts anyone? A flyover to feed the suburbans through Redfern 5/6 allowing the Locals/Bankstown to use 3/4 ????

As usual, the devil is in the detail, and the detail is not in the report.
"Oldfart"


Shared the exact same thoughts, I agree with the idea that the Western line is a good fit for the City Circle and lines to Campbeltown all running Double Deck trains or that the Inner west and Bankstown lines are most suitable for Single Deck trains to the North Shore I always thought it was too difficult to achieve due to the infrastructure changes required. However, if done, I always envisaged it in conjunction with the PERL as it may be an issue having the Western corridor no longer linking directly to the North Shore employment centres.
  Rails Chief Commissioner



IIRC you are right about when it emerged: during the previous ALP gvt after the NWRL was reverted back to HR and after the Beecroft alignment was dropped in the NWRL's EIS.
"djf01"


It was first floated during the CBD Metro days, before Kenneally I think, its the plan I refer to a lot on these pages but there was a later version, it had SD trains terminate at Hornsby via both the North Shore line and the upper Northern line. I also saw a version that was the same except it included the PERL with the Northern line retaining DD. These were in the dying days of the CBD Metro.
  Piston Train Controller





http://www.infrastructure.nsw.gov.au/media/16721/interfleet_rail_network_strategy_review.pdf
"djf01"


From page 68 of the expert's report to iNSW:



Note the "crossing of the streams": some SD & some DD across the SHB. Sectors 2&3 intermingled. All completely at odds with their privatisation recommendations.
"djf01"


Rainman would say: "Too many plans, there are too many plans, too many plans, just pick a plan, any plan"

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: boxythingy, RTT_Rules

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.