T3 Bankstown Line - West of Bankstown

 
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
With the T3 line out of commission there is some re working of the tracks around Erskineville, Macdonaldtown, Eveleigh and the flyovers that could occur to separate south coast intercity from the T4 to at least Hurstville, move the locals on to the T3 platforms at Redfern, suburbans on the the current T2 platforms. Suburban T1 and T9 services could then be re diverted across the bridge using the flyovers.
- simstrain

The Illawarra Locals already share the T3 platforms at Redfern (7 & 8) with the T8 via Sydenham services in the peak and when T3 is converted to metro then more T8 services via Sydenham will take their place.  The Illawarra Main Platforms 9 & 10 at Redfern are now virtually redundant, unless the Airport Line is diverted from the City Circle and the previous connections at the Central flying junctions are restored.

The current proposal for a new crossover at Hurstville between the Illawarra Main Up and Down tracks, will allow for a single all stations operating pattern between Hurstville and Bondi Junction.  Semi-express T4 services from Cronulla and Waterfall will use the Illawarra Local tracks between Hurstville and Wolli Creek, before crossing over and merging with the all stops services from Hurstville to Bondi Junction.  In this scenario I expect that South Coast Intercity services will also use the Illawarra Local, which are effectively the express tracks, and will cross to the Illawarra Dive to Sydney Terminal via a new crossover north of Erskineville Junction, which has been a long term plan.  The Intercity services will no longer need to cross over at Wolli Creek to access the Illawarra Dive, nor in fact the ESR, leaving the Wolli Creek to Bondi Junction sector as an all stations T4 service.  With an enhanced all stations T4 service between Wolli Creek and Bondi Junction, there will be no need for T8 via Sydenham to service St Peters and Erskineville.  In the longer term, this will also enable future direct Southern Highlands services to cross to the Illawarra Dive to Sydney Terminal.  Regional trains will also benefit.

I don't see the benefit in diverting the T1/T9 Suburbans onto the Inner West Local (T2) as it would only conflict with the  existing T2 services via the City Circle and in fact would not be feasible.  There was a previous proposal to construct a flyover from the Main tracks in Central Yard for T1/T9 services to the Suburban tracks through Central to the Harbour Bridge and the existing Suburban tracks from Redfern diverted to the City Circle, but it has disappeared off the radar since.

Sponsored advertisement

  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The Illawarra Locals already share the T3 platforms at Redfern (7 & 8) with the T8 via Sydenham services in the peak and when T3 is converted to metro then more T8 services via Sydenham will take their place.  The Illawarra Main Platforms 9 & 10 at Redfern are now virtually redundant, unless the Airport Line is diverted from the City Circle and the previous connections at the Central flying junctions are restored.

Transtopic

There isn't that many via Sydenham services in peak hour. According to Tripview there is only 6 such service in the am peak between 6:53am and 8:08am in the morning and 8 services in the pm peak. When the metro takes over it will be those T3 services being redirected and not T8 services redirected off the airport line. Of those 8 T3 services an hour there is no reason why half of those couldn't start and end at Leppington without affecting the T2 terminating at Leppington.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The current proposal for a new crossover at Hurstville between the Illawarra Main Up and Down tracks, will allow for a single all stations operating pattern between Hurstville and Bondi Junction.  Semi-express T4 services from Cronulla and Waterfall will use the Illawarra Local tracks between Hurstville and Wolli Creek, before crossing over and merging with the all stops services from Hurstville to Bondi Junction.  In this scenario I expect that South Coast Intercity services will also use the Illawarra Local, which are effectively the express tracks, and will cross to the Illawarra Dive to Sydney Terminal via a new crossover north of Erskineville Junction, which has been a long term plan.  The Intercity services will no longer need to cross over at Wolli Creek to access the Illawarra Dive, nor in fact the ESR, leaving the Wolli Creek to Bondi Junction sector as an all stations T4 service.  With an enhanced all stations T4 service between Wolli Creek and Bondi Junction, there will be no need for T8 via Sydenham to service St Peters and Erskineville.  In the longer term, this will also enable future direct Southern Highlands services to cross to the Illawarra Dive to Sydney Terminal.  Regional trains will also benefit.

Intercity services will continue to cross at Wolli creek unless a new platform is built on the locals which is extremely unlikely. There are 18 trains an hour in the am peak including the intercity services and they all terminate at Bondi junction and not Central. The T4 will not be getting Erskineville and St Peters because of capacity issues and will continue as they currently do separated from other lines for the most part. The redirected T3 trains will continue to service those stations as well as Tempe on the route to and from the outer T8. More frequent southern highlands services are highly unlikely unless track amplification between Macarthur and Campbelltown occurs.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

I don't see the benefit in diverting the T1/T9 Suburbans onto the Inner West Local (T2) as it would only conflict with the  existing T2 services via the City Circle and in fact would not be feasible.  There was a previous proposal to construct a flyover from the Main tracks in Central Yard for T1/T9 services to the Suburban tracks through Central to the Harbour Bridge and the existing Suburban tracks from Redfern diverted to the City Circle, but it has disappeared off the radar since.
Transtopic

My idea is not diverting the T1/T9 on to the inner west locals. It is using the crossovers at macdonaldtown to re route how the mains, subs and locals run in and out of Redfern and then use the crossovers to merge them properly again at Central. From 7 and 8 at Redfern the locals would then merge back in to platform 17 at Central. From platform 5 and 6 at Redfern you could run 4 T9 into platform 16 while the other 4 could loop around and turn in to T8 services or you could make the circle 24tph and have all 8 run around the circle and increase your T1 services. This would separate T9 from T1 and join it with the T2 Leppington.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
The Illawarra Locals already share the T3 platforms at Redfern (7 & 8) with the T8 via Sydenham services in the peak and when T3 is converted to metro then more T8 services via Sydenham will take their place.  The Illawarra Main Platforms 9 & 10 at Redfern are now virtually redundant, unless the Airport Line is diverted from the City Circle and the previous connections at the Central flying junctions are restored.

There isn't that many via Sydenham services in peak hour. According to Tripview there is only 6 such service in the am peak between 6:53am and 8:08am in the morning and 8 services in the pm peak. When the metro takes over it will be those T3 services being redirected and not T8 services redirected off the airport line. Of those 8 T3 services an hour there is no reason why half of those couldn't start and end at Leppington without affecting the T2 terminating at Leppington.
simstrain
The morning peak is generally measured in the 1 hour period arriving at Central between 08:00 and 09:00. From my observation, the period between 07:30 and 08:30 is similar.  If you stick strictly within these time-frames, you will note that the T8 via Sydenham services are 4tph.  

I don't quite understand your reasoning that T3 services will be redirected after the metro conversion.  They will no longer exist as part of the Sydney Trains network.  Their exclusion from the City Circle frees up another 10tph slots (not 8tph, which you still refuse to acknowledge) and potentially 12tph including the 2 spare slots on the City Circle Inner via Museum.  It seems logical that these additional paths would be taken up by increased T8 services via both Sydenham and the Airport Line and perhaps an increase to 16tph with the mixed stopping pattern for T2 on the Inner West Line. The More Trains, More Services program proposes an increase in frequency on the Airport Line from the current 10 to 15tph, which means that more T8 services would also run express via Sydenham, no doubt including from the SWRL.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
The current proposal for a new crossover at Hurstville between the Illawarra Main Up and Down tracks, will allow for a single all stations operating pattern between Hurstville and Bondi Junction.  Semi-express T4 services from Cronulla and Waterfall will use the Illawarra Local tracks between Hurstville and Wolli Creek, before crossing over and merging with the all stops services from Hurstville to Bondi Junction.  In this scenario I expect that South Coast Intercity services will also use the Illawarra Local, which are effectively the express tracks, and will cross to the Illawarra Dive to Sydney Terminal via a new crossover north of Erskineville Junction, which has been a long term plan.  The Intercity services will no longer need to cross over at Wolli Creek to access the Illawarra Dive, nor in fact the ESR, leaving the Wolli Creek to Bondi Junction sector as an all stations T4 service.  With an enhanced all stations T4 service between Wolli Creek and Bondi Junction, there will be no need for T8 via Sydenham to service St Peters and Erskineville.  In the longer term, this will also enable future direct Southern Highlands services to cross to the Illawarra Dive to Sydney Terminal.  Regional trains will also benefit.

Intercity services will continue to cross at Wolli creek unless a new platform is built on the locals which is extremely unlikely. There are 18 trains an hour in the am peak including the intercity services and they all terminate at Bondi junction and not Central. The T4 will not be getting Erskineville and St Peters because of capacity issues and will continue as they currently do separated from other lines for the most part. The redirected T3 trains will continue to service those stations as well as Tempe on the route to and from the outer T8. More frequent southern highlands services are highly unlikely unless track amplification between Macarthur and Campbelltown occurs.
simstrain
You should read the proposed Hurstville Crossover project summary and it clearly states that the intention is to segregate the T4 Hurstville to Bondi Junction sector as an all stations service on the Illawarra Main tracks with Platforms 3 & 4 at Hurstville as terminating platforms.  The all stations services currently terminate on the Illawarra Local at Platform 2, which conflicts with T4 semi-express services from Cronulla and Waterfall and South Coast Intercity services, not to mention freight.  The Illawarra Local will become the express tracks (including freight for the foreseeable future) and the Illawarra Main the all stations service.  It makes complete sense and perhaps it's time their designations were swapped.

Although there is no specific reference to future operating patterns, as it is outside of the scope of the project, it's reasonable to assume that the current semi-express T4 services from Cronulla and Waterfall will cross over to the Illawarra Main at Wolli Creek, continuing as all stations services to Bondi Junction with a single operating pattern, enabling it to maximise its frequency.

This also implies that South Coast Intercity services will no longer cross over at Wolli Creek to Bondi Junction, but will instead continue to Sydney Terminal via a new crossover to the Illawarra Dive at Eveleigh, which again I have to state is a sensible outcome.  There is no need to construct additional platforms on the Illawarra Local at Wolli Creek to allow interchange to the Airport Line, as South Coast Intercity commuters could interchange at Hurstville.  The introduction of 10 car NIFs will also make it impracticable to operate on the ESR with their underground platforms unable to accommodate the longer trains.

With T4 becoming an all stations service between Wolli Creek and Bondi Junction, there is no need for T8 services to stop at St Peters and/or Erskineville, which I always thought was an absurd choice for an outer suburban express service, although perhaps dictated by the current operating patterns and track configurations.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
I don't see the benefit in diverting the T1/T9 Suburbans onto the Inner West Local (T2) as it would only conflict with the  existing T2 services via the City Circle and in fact would not be feasible.  There was a previous proposal to construct a flyover from the Main tracks in Central Yard for T1/T9 services to the Suburban tracks through Central to the Harbour Bridge and the existing Suburban tracks from Redfern diverted to the City Circle, but it has disappeared off the radar since.

My idea is not diverting the T1/T9 on to the inner west locals. It is using the crossovers at macdonaldtown to re route how the mains, subs and locals run in and out of Redfern and then use the crossovers to merge them properly again at Central. From 7 and 8 at Redfern the locals would then merge back in to platform 17 at Central. From platform 5 and 6 at Redfern you could run 4 T9 into platform 16 while the other 4 could loop around and turn in to T8 services or you could make the circle 24tph and have all 8 run around the circle and increase your T1 services. This would separate T9 from T1 and join it with the T2 Leppington.
simstrain
Too complicated.  Better to stick with what we've got.  KISS!
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

My idea is not diverting the T1/T9 on to the inner west locals. It is using the crossovers at macdonaldtown to re route how the mains, subs and locals run in and out of Redfern and then use the crossovers to merge them properly again at Central. From 7 and 8 at Redfern the locals would then merge back in to platform 17 at Central. From platform 5 and 6 at Redfern you could run 4 T9 into platform 16 while the other 4 could loop around and turn in to T8 services or you could make the circle 24tph and have all 8 run around the circle and increase your T1 services. This would separate T9 from T1 and join it with the T2 Leppington.
Too complicated.  Better to stick with what we've got.  KISS!
Transtopic

AFAIK @Sim's plan is much like the timetable worked pre-clearways.  

I must say though, it seems to me the plan (post CBD metro) for Sydney is Main North (T37, T71 and T93) will run to Sydney Terminal, West will run over the bridge, and south via the Inner West and City Circle.  Blue Mountains NIFs alone will break sectorisation.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

You may be right Transtopic except the T4 will not be picking up Erskineville and St Peters. The T3 trains that will be diverted to the T8 will continue to pick these passengers up.
  Totoro Station Master

@djf01

I must say though, it seems to me the plan (post CBD metro) for Sydney is Main North (T37, T71 and T93) will run to Sydney Terminal, West will run over the bridge, and south via the Inner West and City Circle.  Blue Mountains NIFs alone will break sectorisation.”

Gosh, I really love this idea. Much as I would miss my direct connection to North Sydney on T9, the overall benefits of sectorisation in terms of reliability (and perhaps frequency too?) would be wonderful.

I long for the day that a butterfly flapping its wings at Lidcombe no longer causes delays at Rhodes :p
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
My idea is not diverting the T1/T9 on to the inner west locals. It is using the crossovers at macdonaldtown to re route how the mains, subs and locals run in and out of Redfern and then use the crossovers to merge them properly again at Central. From 7 and 8 at Redfern the locals would then merge back in to platform 17 at Central. From platform 5 and 6 at Redfern you could run 4 T9 into platform 16 while the other 4 could loop around and turn in to T8 services or you could make the circle 24tph and have all 8 run around the circle and increase your T1 services. This would separate T9 from T1 and join it with the T2 Leppington.
Too complicated.  Better to stick with what we've got.  KISS!

AFAIK @Sim's plan is much like the timetable worked pre-clearways.  

I must say though, it seems to me the plan (post CBD metro) for Sydney is Main North (T37, T71 and T93) will run to Sydney Terminal, West will run over the bridge, and south via the Inner West and City Circle.  Blue Mountains NIFs alone will break sectorisation.
djf01
I don't think we can say with any certainty yet how the post CBD metro will affect operations on other lines, particularly T1 and T9, although from reports so far the intention is to use the freed up paths through the City Circle for increased T8 services via both Sydenham and the Airport Line.  There's also the option of diverting the T9 Epping services in the peak, to the City Circle Outer via Town Hall, merging with T2 at the flying junctions and all T8 services using the City Circle Inner via Museum.

On the face of it, your suggestion for all T9 services including Intercity to run via the Mains from Strathfield into Sydney Terminal seems logical, but whether it is achievable politically is another matter.  There have been proposals in the past for this operational pattern to be implemented, but it's never been followed through.  It may be acceptable as an interim measure until further track amplification such as a City Relief Line is built, but that could be a long way off.  Similarly proposals to divert all Richmond Line services via the Cumberland Line haven't progressed any further.

If the LNP is still in power at the time, they would risk upsetting their constituents in the seats of Epping and Ryde, in being denied a direct journey into the Northern CBD by having to change at Central.  There's already been enough discontent with the cessation of the previous direct Sydney Trains service to the CBD via the Epping to Chatswood route.  Even the Labor Party would be wary, as they would be keen to grab the seat of Ryde, which is vulnerable and has been held by Labor in the past.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
You may be right Transtopic except the T4 will not be picking up Erskineville and St Peters. The T3 trains that will be diverted to the T8 will continue to pick these passengers up.
simstrain
I think I might be right.  The Hurstville Crossover project as I have already referred to, clearly states that the intention is to create a segregated all stations service via the Illawarra Main between Hurstville and Bondi junction, leaving the Illawarra Local tracks for express Cronulla/Waterfall, South Coast Intercity and freight services.  The Cronulla/Waterfall suburban services would cross over at Wolli Creek, merging with the Hurstville all stations services to Bondi Junction with a single pattern allowing greater frequency.  Tempe, St Peters and Erskineville for example would receive a significantly enhanced service.

If South Coast Intercity services continued to also cross over at Wolli Creek to the Illawarra Main, there's no justification for them to stop at Tempe, St Peters or Erskineville in order to reach the Illawarra Dive to Sydney Terminal, or Bondi Junction.  All that does is create an unnecessary mixed stopping pattern, which compromises frequency.  The longer 10 car NIF trains will also make this untenable.

Although it hasn't been confirmed yet, I expect that in conjunction with the Hurstville Crossover project, the new crossover north of Erskineville from the Illawarra Local to the Illawarra Main allowing direct access to the Illawarra Dive to Sydney Terminal for SC Intercity trains will be a complementary project.  There will be no further need for outer suburban T8 express service to stop at inner city stations, other than Sydenham.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

AFAIK @Sim's plan is much like the timetable worked pre-clearways.  

I must say though, it seems to me the plan (post CBD metro) for Sydney is Main North (T37, T71 and T93) will run to Sydney Terminal, West will run over the bridge, and south via the Inner West and City Circle.  Blue Mountains NIFs alone will break sectorisation.
I don't think we can say with any certainty yet how the post CBD metro will affect operations on other lines, particularly T1 and T9, although from reports so far the intention is to use the freed up paths through the City Circle for increased T8 services via both Sydenham and the Airport Line.  There's also the option of diverting the T9 Epping services in the peak, to the City Circle Outer via Town Hall, merging with T2 at the flying junctions and all T8 services using the City Circle Inner via Museum.

On the face of it, your suggestion for all T9 services including Intercity to run via the Mains from Strathfield into Sydney Terminal seems logical, but whether it is achievable politically is another matter.  
Transtopic

It's not my suggestion, it's my reading of the tea leaves.  Why else would they even have created the T9 brand?  It's inconsistent with else they've done in terms of naming lines.

The trend has been "metro" style operation - the evidence for it is the way T2 currently operates.  They expect to run high frequency services with simple stopping patterns, and travel times be buggered.

I think the original intention was for Cabramatta to Bankstown only be operated by feeder services to the Metro (needed to generate the patronage to justify it), but a few articles in the press about stations losing direct access to the CBD have squashed that.

The 8 extra slots freed up by the metro replacing T3 I have no doubt were intended to go to T8, but now 4 will likely go to T2 to provide 4tph all stations Liverpool to CBD via Regents Park.

Edit: Another reason to isolate T9 into Central Terminal is it allows that line to be franchised.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

If the LNP is still in power at the time, they would risk upsetting their constituents in the seats of Epping and Ryde, in being denied a direct journey into the Northern CBD by having to change at Central.  There's already been enough discontent with the cessation of the previous direct Sydney Trains service to the CBD via the Epping to Chatswood route.  Even the Labor Party would be wary, as they would be keen to grab the seat of Ryde, which is vulnerable and has been held by Labor in the past.
Transtopic

1) I don't think TfNSW could care less about PAX having to change trains.  In fact I think they would welcome it.
a) It will help post rationalise the metro if more PAX are forcibly channelled onto it at Central.
b) The private Operator of the Metro will be lobbying for this, as a way of cost/profit shifting from the public to private sectors.

2) I think the question really is who are the Lib's constituents?  Are they the voters, or their donaters?

3) I don't think it matters which political party is in power, neither can magically create more heavy rail slots out of thin air.
  Totoro Station Master

@Transtopic

If the LNP is still in power at the time, they would risk upsetting their constituents in the seats of Epping and Ryde, in being denied a direct journey into the Northern CBD by having to change at Central.”

The running of T9 services to Sydney terminal should have no negative impact at Epping; they already have a Metro with cross-platform changeovers at Chatswood. That Metro *will* have direct connections to both North Sydney and three CBD stations by 2024.

As for Sydney terminal, for most commuters, interchange from platforms 8-12 to 16 only takes 2-4 minutes, and this will get only easier/faster with completion of the new Central Walk in 2022.

If terminating T9 services at Central can translate into greater frequencies and fewer speed constraints that would surely outweight any inconvenience of changing trains (for most people). At worst, it should improve reliability on T9.

If I had to guess, I’d say this change might happen in 2022.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The T1 and the T9 are linked to intercity services and so you can never isolate the lines unless you build a whole stack more of them. Certainly you are not going to be able to franchise them because of this.

The T4 is at capacity Transtopic and you think they are going to add 2 extra stations to the T4 post metro conversion. Moving the T3 services to the T8 makes the most sense because you can send 4 to the outer and 4 to the inner just as they do now and the T8 gets extra services and the T4 doesn't get extra patronage imposed on it's already full trains. You should know there is no room on the T2 for the ex T3 services because of the multiple stopping patterns.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
I don't think we can say with any certainty yet how the post CBD metro will affect operations on other lines, particularly T1 and T9, although from reports so far the intention is to use the freed up paths through the City Circle for increased T8 services via both Sydenham and the Airport Line.  There's also the option of diverting the T9 Epping services in the peak, to the City Circle Outer via Town Hall, merging with T2 at the flying junctions and all T8 services using the City Circle Inner via Museum.

On the face of it, your suggestion for all T9 services including Intercity to run via the Mains from Strathfield into Sydney Terminal seems logical, but whether it is achievable politically is another matter.  

It's not my suggestion, it's my reading of the tea leaves.  Why else would they even have created the T9 brand?  It's inconsistent with else they've done in terms of naming lines.

The trend has been "metro" style operation - the evidence for it is the way T2 currently operates.  They expect to run high frequency services with simple stopping patterns, and travel times be buggered.

I think the original intention was for Cabramatta to Bankstown only be operated by feeder services to the Metro (needed to generate the patronage to justify it), but a few articles in the press about stations losing direct access to the CBD have squashed that.

The 8 extra slots freed up by the metro replacing T3 I have no doubt were intended to go to T8, but now 4 will likely go to T2 to provide 4tph all stations Liverpool to CBD via Regents Park.

Edit: Another reason to isolate T9 into Central Terminal is it allows that line to be franchised.
djf01
With respect djf, I think it's a bit of a stretch to suggest that the Northern Line was redesignated as T9 for the purpose of eventually diverting all of those services to Sydney Terminal.  It's perfectly logical to differentiate this service from T1, although it shares the same tracks from Strathfield to the CBD and the North Shore Line.  T1 is from Emu Plains to Berowra and T9 from Hornsby to Gordon.  The fact that the T9 semi-express services are diverted from Hornsby to and from Sydney Terminal in the peak is merely because they can no longer operate via the ECRL, which has been converted to metro, and there are no slots available for them on the Suburban tracks from Strathfield to the CBD and across the Harbour Bridge to the North Shore Line.  This is one of the unfortunate compromises which resulted from the ECRL being eliminated from the Sydney Trains network.  In the off-peak, all T9 services operate through the CBD across the Harbour Bridge.   It's also a bit far fetched to suggest that T9 is being prepared for franchising, as it shares tracks with CCN Intercity and freight and is totally impracticable.  There are other lines such as T4 from Hurstville to Bondi Junction which could more readily be franchised, but I don't agree with that either, as it would still have to share tracks from Wolli Creek to Bondi Junction for Cronulla and Waterfall services.

I agree that the initial Liverpool to Bankstown T3 shuttle services were a contributing factor to justify patronage on the metro.  However, taking sims at his word, if few actually use the existing T3 service from Liverpool to the CBD via Bankstown, then it is less likely they will use it in having to interchange to the metro.  This is reinforced by the unexpected proposed preference of TfNSW for the restoration of the Liverpool via Regents Park services instead of the Liverpool to Bankstown shuttle, which seems to be at odds with their metro strategy.  Perhaps from further investigation, they have eventually realised that the expectation of more interchange to the metro at Bankstown has been overestimated.

Just BTW, the T3 Bankstown Line currently has a frequency of 10tph into the City Circle, with 6tph via Town Hall and 4tph via Museum.  There are still 2 spare slots via Museum, so when the Bankstown Line is converted to metro, there will be a total of 12 extra slots available.

The frequency and stopping patterns with the restoration of the Liverpool via Regents Park services still have to be determined, assuming the preferred Option 2 is adopted.  It could involve replacement of the T2 Parramatta terminators with the Regents Park services and other adjustments to T1 Western Line services between Parramatta and Strathfield. We will just have to wait and see.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
If the LNP is still in power at the time, they would risk upsetting their constituents in the seats of Epping and Ryde, in being denied a direct journey into the Northern CBD by having to change at Central.  There's already been enough discontent with the cessation of the previous direct Sydney Trains service to the CBD via the Epping to Chatswood route.  Even the Labor Party would be wary, as they would be keen to grab the seat of Ryde, which is vulnerable and has been held by Labor in the past.

1) I don't think TfNSW could care less about PAX having to change trains.  In fact I think they would welcome it.
a) It will help post rationalise the metro if more PAX are forcibly channelled onto it at Central.
b) The private Operator of the Metro will be lobbying for this, as a way of cost/profit shifting from the public to private sectors.

2) I think the question really is who are the Lib's constituents?  Are they the voters, or their donaters?

3) I don't think it matters which political party is in power, neither can magically create more heavy rail slots out of thin air.
djf01
Regardless of what TfNSW attitude may be, at the end of the day, it's the politicians who have the final say.  If the party in power sees seats at risk, which could jeopardise their re-election into government, they're more likely to appeal to the voters than their benefactors.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Regardless of what TfNSW attitude may be, at the end of the day, it's the politicians who have the final say.  If the party in power sees seats at risk, which could jeopardise their re-election into government, they're more likely to appeal to the voters than their benefactors.
Transtopic

None of the seats along the T3 are held by the liberals and so they will not affect them getting re elected in 2023. The T3 is a Labor line and so this is why they are screwing over the people who live along this line.

The numbers show that between Liverpool and Bankstown the numbers west of birrong are almost non existent which is why I think the metro should be extended to birrong at the very least until something can be figured out as to which direction it should go beyond Birrong and how to sort out the sefton triangle.

But even so if the line doesn't extend to Birrong and a shuttle runs to Bankstown it will only need to be 4 car services because of the numbers.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
@Transtopic

If the LNP is still in power at the time, they would risk upsetting their constituents in the seats of Epping and Ryde, in being denied a direct journey into the Northern CBD by having to change at Central.”

The running of T9 services to Sydney terminal should have no negative impact at Epping; they already have a Metro with cross-platform changeovers at Chatswood. That Metro *will* have direct connections to both North Sydney and three CBD stations by 2024.

As for Sydney terminal, for most commuters, interchange from platforms 8-12 to 16 only takes 2-4 minutes, and this will get only easier/faster with completion of the new Central Walk in 2022.

If terminating T9 services at Central can translate into greater frequencies and fewer speed constraints that would surely outweight any inconvenience of changing trains (for most people). At worst, it should improve reliability on T9.

If I had to guess, I’d say this change might happen in 2022.
Totoro
I wasn't referring specifically to Epping. As you say, Epping also has the advantage of the metro, which will nonetheless still require interchange at either Chatswood or Central to reach the other CBD stations until the metro line is extended into the CBD in 2024.

On the other hand, those Northern Line stations between Hornsby and Epping and Epping and Strathfield won't have the benefit of a direct journey into the northern CBD as they have been used to, without having to interchange at either Epping in the case of the former and Central in the case of the latter.  Whichever way you look at it, it's a downgrading of services for those affected stations on T9.

I think that you underestimate the level of antipathy towards being forced to interchange to reach the major CBD stations other than Central.
  Transtopic Deputy Commissioner

Location: Sydney
Regardless of what TfNSW attitude may be, at the end of the day, it's the politicians who have the final say.  If the party in power sees seats at risk, which could jeopardise their re-election into government, they're more likely to appeal to the voters than their benefactors.

None of the seats along the T3 are held by the liberals and so they will not affect them getting re elected in 2023. The T3 is a Labor line and so this is why they are screwing over the people who live along this line.

The numbers show that between Liverpool and Bankstown the numbers west of birrong are almost non existent which is why I think the metro should be extended to birrong at the very least until something can be figured out as to which direction it should go beyond Birrong and how to sort out the sefton triangle.

But even so if the line doesn't extend to Birrong and a shuttle runs to Bankstown it will only need to be 4 car services because of the numbers.
simstrain
I agree with you that T3 is an exclusive Labor Line and the current LNP government would be less inclined to respond to valid criticisms of the metro conversion proposal, as there are no votes in it for them.  However, if Labor was in power, then they would more likely to respond to community feedback, if they could see some seats as being at risk.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

I really don't see a new line being built directly between Bankstown and Liverpool along the Milperra road corridor because of the following reasons.

1. The main one is that those areas are not that far by car or existing PT to either the T2, T3 (metro) and T8.
2. The expense of crossing the Georges river at one of the most prone points of flood.
3. It is proposed to just end at Liverpool and not go any further and so this is a great expense for just providing a similar service to what is already there.

I would prefer to see the metro use the existing T3 line to Cabramatta and somehow workout a way to separate metro from ST services between Birrong / Sefton triangle and Cabramatta to allow limited stops via regents park services.

Just a note about something you mentioned before about the Illawarra locals sharing with the T8. There are no T4 or South Coast services that I am aware of that use the Illawarra locals at the moment. Only the T3 and a dozen T8 services a day share the Illawarra locals north of Wolli Creek. In Peak hour all T4/South Coast trains share the the mains and as noted by someone all go to Bondi Junction and will continue to do so in the future even during off peak periods in the future just to keep Central Terminal clear if the T1/T9 need more trains terminating.

Moving the T3 services on to permanent T8 services is the biggest no brainer out there since they already serve Erskineville and St Peters and doing so won't put any extra patronage stress on T4 services and allow the extra patronage that the T8 requires.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

I don't think we can say with any certainty yet how the post CBD metro will affect operations on other lines, particularly T1 and T9, although from reports so far the intention is to use the freed up paths through the City Circle for increased T8 services via both Sydenham and the Airport Line.  There's also the option of diverting the T9 Epping services in the peak, to the City Circle Outer via Town Hall, merging with T2 at the flying junctions and all T8 services using the City Circle Inner via Museum.

On the face of it, your suggestion for all T9 services including Intercity to run via the Mains from Strathfield into Sydney Terminal seems logical, but whether it is achievable politically is another matter.  

It's not my suggestion, it's my reading of the tea leaves.  Why else would they even have created the T9 brand?  It's inconsistent with else they've done in terms of naming lines.

The trend has been "metro" style operation - the evidence for it is the way T2 currently operates.  They expect to run high frequency services with simple stopping patterns, and travel times be buggered.
...
With respect djf, I think it's a bit of a stretch to suggest that the Northern Line was redesignated as T9 for the purpose of eventually diverting all of those services to Sydney Terminal.  It's perfectly logical to differentiate this service from T1, although it shares the same tracks from Strathfield to the CBD and the North Shore Line.  T1 is from Emu Plains to Berowra and T9 from Hornsby to Gordon.  
Transtopic

And yet (from NSW Transport Planner where I looked up T9)
https://i.imgur.com/dK5yfOp.png


I still think post CBD Metro T9 will be sectorised, terminating at Central - thus freeing up 4 slots for T1 in the west.

The trend is clear, they want to operate routes with reduced numbers of stopping patterns and reduced complexity.  We see it in T2 now.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

I really don't see a new line being built directly between Bankstown and Liverpool along the Milperra road corridor because of the following reasons.

1. The main one is that those areas are not that far by car or existing PT to either the T2, T3 (metro) and T8.
2. The expense of crossing the Georges river at one of the most prone points of flood.
3. It is proposed to just end at Liverpool and not go any further and so this is a great expense for just providing a similar service to what is already there.
simstrain

I agree with this assessment up to a point.  I don't think capex metro is being patronage demand driven, it's always been a solution someone wants to build searching for a problem to solve.  The extension to Liverpool may well be seen as a solution to the problem the T3 conversion creates.

IMHO a more likely outcome is the Cabramatta to Bankstown line will be converted to metro, and run a half frequency stopping pattern.  That may extend to Lidcombe as well, it may not.  It would be a relatively cheap conversion, as there is plenty of straight track to build new side platforms beside, and opportunities to put in DAA access without the need for lifts.  A new HR UP platform at Cabramatta allows the current DOWN platform to be a metro turnback.  The whole project would be cheaper than just rebuilding Bankstown Station for the underground metro to Liverpool.

The next step is truncate T5/T2 at Cabrammatta, and extend the metro to Liverpool - then Glenfield.  Then the new airport line can attach from the south and be all singing, all dancing [strike]monorail[/strike] metro.
  Nichole the Otter Station Master

That Metro from Bankstown to Cabramatta idea would require having to rebuild Cabramatta entirely just so it can have a turnback. Not really feasible.

As for Erskineville and St Peters possibly getting T8 services via Sydenham, I presume Leppington or Campbelltown to be the terminus? Platform 1 at the latter is practically disused, so these services could justify use of that platform once again. Then again, most customers from St Peters/Erskineville aren’t really interested in southwest areas to begin with.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: