An EccoTran petition re the NWRL tunnels if anyone is interested ... Please join this campaign: http://chn.ge/15ac9EJYes, because having awarded the tunneling contracts a month ago, the Government is really going to listen to a minority bunch of self-interested nobodies from an irrelevant local "action" group
Yes, because having awarded the tunneling contracts a month ago, the Government is really going to listen to a minority bunch of self-interested nobodies from an irrelevant local "action" groupI take it that's a "no" then ?
This thread has been dead for a month for a reason. The whole NWRL "debate" on this forum getting ridiculous - especially with all the minority interests and associated championing of 1000 alternative schemes. I can't remember any thread in the last 6 years going on as pointlessly and with as much armchair postulating as this one.
Here are the bare facts:
- It will be single-deck to Chatswood.
- It will be driverless and separate to CityRail/Sydney Trains.
- It will eventually be privatised.
- You will have to change trains at Chatswood for the first years of operation.
- Lots of weak-kneed and frankly spoiled commuters will suddenly have to stand if they want their nice new trains (in a manner that's reminiscent of the civilised world).
- Richmond has a direct rail connection, and given the proximity of Rouse Hill to Schofields, that line does not need another (in other words, use the damn transport that's nearest to you, instead of being stupid/elaborate, clogging up everything and going 20 mins to another location).
- Parramatta-Epping failed every feasibility study going back a decade for a reason.
There will be other transport decisions that compliment the NWRL plan, and others which will be the result of the NWRL. Those decisions will be made in the future when the bloody thing opens in 2019.
Yes, I do think there are some questions to be answered re: the NWRL, but that's because the Government won't stray off-message and give us detailed information/answers. I'm also mindful that there is a reason the Government weighed up all the options and came up with this particular design. There are financial, urban planning and other issues at play; it's more than just Gladys going "ooh shiny metros, let's ignore double-deck", and armchair Railpagers responding with "Buses ftw" or "these tunnels aren't how I would do it, whinge whinge".
The NWRL will be built to the aforementioned specs whether you like it or not. Petitions won't change a thing. Neither will this thread (all 56 pages of circular rubbish). If you actually care this much about the NWRL (or other transport plans), go work in Finance, Planning, Transport, or for a consultancy firm.
A change of government will result in the NWRL not being built at all. Much like Julia's promise to connect Parramatta to Epping. If only the search worked on this forum we could dig up that old thread.????To be fair... that's largely Barry's fault that one, because he refused to accept the funding. Julia just did the logical thing and said "Don't want it? Too bad so sad... We'll give it to another state then."
To be fair... that's largely Barry's fault that one, because he refused to accept the funding. Julia just did the logical thing and said "Don't want it? Too bad so sad... We'll give it to another state then."
Not one of BOF's finest moments.I'm pro union (though not the current batch of unions which have devolved into self-serving membership organisations as opposed to organisations that genuinely work for their members), but a lot of the stuff that they're doing right now is logical, except refusing that funding that was on the table. If they'd done it cheap, it would have covered a decent proportion of the costs, and could probably have been operated as a yo-yo.
If the ECRL Project cost was reduced, I'm sure the feds contribution would follow.
There was one time the PERL should been built and that was when the ECRL was built, now I'm not so sure as the standalone Overhead project costs seem to make an expensive project for the effort. I think it will happen, but not for some time and there are far more priorties and I think Bazza's move on the NWRL and the deicison to use different technology, ie automated Metro is the right one longterm as it will enable cheaper roll out and operationof HR, assuming the govts of the future build on it rather than leaving it fester as a standalone line to Chatswood. The intergration argument is a wannk, what have CR being doing over last few years, untangling the network so it operated more like seperate systems where delays on one don't affect the other. With NWRL, you still have same, except peope have to change trains, big deal. My thinking is there is more demand from the NWRL and the PCRL provides relief for a small number of users.
Once the tunnel under the harbour is done I'm thinking its capacity will be consumed by Taffic with terminators to Chatswood, NWRL and I see a Nth beaches route being floated as providing faster more reliable access to the city.
The PERL could be either DD or Metro, it probably won't matter much and as others suggest be a simple yo-yo. In the mean time the govt needs to take action and reduce the cost of the Carlingford line by looking at DOO.
You need money, the will, no NIMBY's.
But as I said at the start, I'm a newbie in all this. So aside from the politics, could someone please tell me why this wouldn't work?
You need money, the will, no NIMBY's.You might have a point there. But there will eventually be money for it, at least. Either this or some future NSW government is going to want to build a second harbour crossing. These ideas are just making use of the money more efficiently.
The only way I can see major infrastructure being built on a epic scale is the installment of a Communist run government for a decade.
Monorail? 58km of monorail? No, my friend. It is slow. It has no capacity. It is a bastard to deal with in the event of a breakdown.I'm not talking about the sort of monorail that Sydney used to have. That would indeed be folly. I'm talking about the sort of monorail they use in China and Japan for mass transport where there isn't any space on the ground for anything else. I'm thinking Bombardier Innovia 300, since that has the smallest turning radius. They're spec'd at 80km/h top speed and a capacity of about 90 passengers per car at 4 pax/m^2, with a maximum of 8 cars per train. But let's consider half that passenger capacity.
Knockdown rebuild of the Sydney Harbour Bridge? No, my friend. Your cost estimates are courageous, but what you have not considered is the timeframe of construction and the inconvenience. This is not a matter of NIMBYs. You are talking about messing with national heritage.It is lunacy to put critical infrastructure on the national heritage list and no longer allow yourself to improve it or replace it when it gets old. I have no words for the level of silliness that Australia has accomplished with this. The amount of extra wasted money that would be thrown away if we are forced to add another harbour tunnel instead is ridiculous. And as I said, I'm not talking about changing the design beyond adding a second deck and a monorail line.
Tunnelling is preferred because it disturbs the least amount of existing infrastructure and environment, utilising "new" space rather than trying to reorganise space that is already in use. FWIW, I would tunnel a rail line starting at Homebush, with underground platforms at Strathfield, Five Dock, Balmsin, Barangaroo, Wynyard (new P7/8 same level as 5/6), World Square, Central (relocated P14/15 underground) and feeding back onto the Main above ground through Sydney Yard.That's at least $12 billion worth of cost right there, possibly much more. Now *that* is what I call unworkable.
Knockdown rebuild of the Sydney Harbour Bridge? No, my friend. Your cost estimates are courageous, but what you have not considered is the timeframe of construction and the inconvenience. This is not a matter of NIMBYs. You are talking about messing with national heritage.If they continue cutting back on the on going maintenance budget, they may well have to knock it down thru neglect. Have you been over the bridge lately? If you have a close looks at the Northern side there serious paint flaking off the main structural members with plenty of rust to show.