The other thing I did notice this morning is that the overhead is up now on the future down track through platform 4 from north of Glenfield station to as far as the southern fly over. I wonder if there may be an intention to bring platform 4 in to use before the opening of the SWRL?My guess is that the Oct 2013 timetable has already planned all the SWRL services and currently shows them starting/terminating at Glenfield (with the intention of simply extending to Leppington when the line opens). So P1 and P4 would be good candidates for East Hills services, and P2 and P3 would be good for Liverpool services, and there would be no waiting for trains to cross on the level.
The Combined Services Route (CSR) carries signals, communications and compressed air along the alignment. It requires more than 200kms of conduit (pipe used to carry cables and facilitates all signaling and energising of the rail line. The project aims to complete the CSR works in late June or early July.
The Glenfield interchange update mentions overhead wiring installation on the closedown 10-11 August. My reading of the trackwork calendar is that this closedown will not affect the East Hills line, so I am guessing that this will involve overhead installation from platform 1 (and possibly 2) to the northern flyover.Has anyone seen what was done during this closedown? Do they have overhead all the way from platform 1 to the northern flyover yet?
Has anyone seen what was done during this closedown? Do they have overhead all the way from platform 1 to the northern flyover yet?
I'm feeling a bit lonely in this thread! Do we have any commuters who can provide an update?
There's nothing noticable from on the train. There's a lot more stanchions up and plenty of signals (currently covered in black bags with white Xs over them). The turnout is still sitting on the side of the track at Mac Fields, so not sure what the rush was there to get it built. The points from the P3 side to the northern flyover got connected up to the flyover track some time back prior to this shutdown, but that's all I've noticed in physical stuff. There's a lot of guys constantly out and about doing what appears to be signalling work.I agree, they will likely be disconnecting the old track when the eastern end of the northern flyover is brought into service, and it looks as if all that is needed for this to happen is a single shutdown weekend.
Northern flyover still no change - OHW has been up there for probably a good 6 months now. The last bit of work swapping over and connecting up the track I guess won't be done until they're about to commission it if they are going to do what the original plan was (ie remove the old track and the only way to up east hills is via the flyover). If they were going to leave the old track there and join the new up with a set of points, I would have expected them to have done that by now. As it is, there's no ballast sitting where the new track would be, nor any signs that work is happening there, so I guess one Monday morning we'll be on the train and suddenly going up and over.
Nice work with the continued updates maestroThanks, I was wondering if anyone was reading them
The picture of Leppington station seems to show three platforms.Maybe it's not the best angle of Leppington, with the Dickson Rd bridge construction in the way, but there are four platforms (two islands). If you have a look at my photo from the same location on page 11 of this thread (photo taken before the bridge started being built) you can see it a bit more clearly. Also, just in front of the station are two turnouts sitting side-by-side, the left one to split the up track between platforms 1 & 2, and the right one to merge the down track after leaving platforms 3 & 4. The documentation I have seen on the SWRL indicated that Leppington is to have 4 platforms and is intended to be a significant bus interchange. It is also possible that they are considering extending the SWRL both north and south, in which case Leppington would be the rail interchange between the two (otherwise four platforms just seems to be overkill).
Does Rossmore yard allow the SWRL to be extended to say Baderies Creek?
Presumably, a track diagram is available somewhere.
It is also possible that they are considering extending the SWRL both north and south, in which case Leppington would be the rail interchange between the two (otherwise four platforms just seems to be overkill).Having two island platforms with four sides, rather than say just two side platforms is not really over kill, as the extra platforms allows long turnback-dwell times, and reduces the chance that trains will be blocked trying to arrive or depart. Long turnback-dwell of say 20 minutes allow trains to arrive 10 min. late, and still have 10 left to return on time. Short turnback times are false economy, as trains that arrive late, return late.
I, too, was wondering what would happen to Rossmore with the intended extension. If they extended through the yard, then they would use the middle two roads (which would be annoying if they were to still use it for stabling). The alternative would be to split off between Leppington and Rossmore so as to pass the yard to the North or South, possibly with a second bridge crossing the creek just to the east of the yard.
I haven't seen a detailed track diagramm, but I think the publicity video showed EP with two platforms (a single island) and Leppington with 4 platforms (two islands) and Rossmore with 10 roads (each road capable of stabling two 8-car trains).
Having two island platforms with four sides, rather than say just two side platforms is not really over kill, as the extra platforms allows long turnback-dwell times, and reduces the chance that trains will be blocked trying to arrive or depart. Long turnback-dwell of say 20 minutes allow trains to arrive 10 min. late, and still have 10 left to return on time. Short turnback times are false economy, as trains that arrive late, return late.I'm all in favour of good turnaround times (far better that a train is waiting for 20 minutes longer, compared to all the passengers having to wait due to follow-on delays), but there is the entire Rossmore yard for this. If this were the sole reason, then a single island platform (two tracks) would be sufficient (such as at Bondi Junction).
If an extension past Rossmore uses the two middle and straight sidings, at least the track centres appear to be wide enough to allow for safety fences between running lines and sidings, like turnback sidings at say Kingsgrove and Chatswood.Yeah, fair enough. Although it would make the yard a bit more awkward (although it wouldn't be used anywhere near as much).
Has anyone seen anything around where the extension may go? I'm thinking possibly north through Badgery's creek (new airport station?) and then either an interchange with the Western line between St Mary's and Werrington, or just join onto the end of the quad at St Mary's and run a loop back into the CBD. This whole area (north and south of St Mary's) is a near-term growth area.
We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.