NSW Gov funding for services post-Bankstown Metro Opening

 
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
It is obvious to me that neither DJF or Transtopic have used Central or Town Hall in peak hour. Anybody who has knows what I'm talking about when waiting for your train on a completely packed platform 1,2 or 3 only to see that it is full already as it arrives and you can't even get on the train because it is so full. People still try to get on and they are hanging out the door and there is a whole thing where they try to push in  but can't fit in.

The guard can't close the doors because he is completely reliant on the trains cameras if it has them to see when it is safe to close the doors and the station attendant is overwhelmed by all the people on the platform. The guard can barely see 2 carriages ahead because of this crowding and the train continues to sit for several minutes. So now the train is late and so is every single one behind it which may already be waiting in the tunnel behind this stationary train. Finally after maybe even 4 minutes at the platform the guard manages to get the doors shut unless some idiot tries to hop on at the last moment delaying the train even longer.

DJF talking in channels is clear that he is talking only in theory because anybody who knows and uses Town Hall and Central knows that theory is just bulldust. Even if you have the same stopping patterns there will still be different destinations meaning you will still have people waiting on the platform for their train.

There is also a need to take in to consideration the cumberland line and it's 4 trains an hour and how it fits in to all these extra services.
simstrain
The crucial point you continually overlook sims, is that the new CBD rail line will add another 3 stations in the CBD core, Central Metro, Pitt St and Martin  Place, and it will spread the interchange load, reducing platform congestion at the existing stations.  It wouldn't matter whether the new line is metro or ST.  It's irrelevant making comparisons with existing conditions.  For example, Bankstown metro commuters heading for North Shore and Macquarie Park destinations will have a direct run and will no longer have to interchange and Eastern Suburbs commuters with similar destinations will be able to interchange at Martin Place instead of Town Hall.

The proposed ATP/ATO upgrade won't come into effect until the new CBD metro line is operating and perhaps I mistakenly assumed that you were aware of this.  I agree with you to a point that the signalling upgrade alone won't allow for higher frequencies on the lines as they currently exist, but that won't be the case after the new line opens.  The other significant factor is that the signalling upgrade will allow for the introduction of moving block signalling in place of the outdated fixed block.  This will allow trains to safely travel at higher speeds with closer headways.

It's going to allow for 24tph to operate on all of the existing lines through the CBD with DD trains or the government wouldn't be wasting its money.  Just accept it's underway.  It's already been confirmed that T4 on the ESR will increase by 30% from 18tph to 24tph (it's actually a 33% increase).

Sponsored advertisement

  simstrain Chief Commissioner

No I am not overlooking that point transtopic because at the moment it is only 4 x T3 trains an hour. The vast majority of all T2 traffic and probably more now that they are re introducing via regents park services. You might be taking some away but then you still adding capacity elsewhere. Also platform 1 at town hall still shares platform space with platform 2. You still will have full platforms and people waiting for there train and with all stations between redfern and strathfield on the T2 there will be even more pressure at these platforms.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
No matter how many obstacles you put up sims, it's now going to happen.  I don't have to justify it because the decision has already been made, whether you agree with it or not.
  Totoro Locomotive Driver

Just my view here: absolutely nothing is impossible. The idea of running a separate train network under the bridge would have sounded impossible 15 years ago, but here we are. Everything else is just a matter of time, cost and engineering.

I reckon the new city Metro stations will absolutely reduce the burden on the existing CC stations. The use of screen doors, single stopping patterns (e.g. T1 only across the bridge) and more services (including NIFs) terminating/starting from Central will all massively help underground congestion as well. These all seem likely given the large amount of resources being poured into the upgrades at Central.

Just my take.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

I thought I'd revive this YASP (Yet Another Sydney Planning) thread, with my thoughts on where we could/should be heading.  I realise none of this will happen, these are just my thoughts on where I think we should be investing.

1) Western Line.  Rather than amplification, I think the way to upgrade capacity here is with longer trains.  But I also think this corridor is ripe for performance (ie speed) improvements.  My brief here is:
- Central (ST) to Parramatta along the mains: average 120kph capability (Parra to Lewisham) for an overall 15min transit time.
- Penrith - Parramatta (with one stop) also 30min.
- Increase the standard platform length to 200m
- Increase the platform length to 240m at Blacktown and Penrith (Parra is already 240m).
- Next rolling stock procurement to be M-T pairs in a cabless format (as per the D sets) for the B sets, to standardise on 10 car trains on that sector.  In the interim, a software update for the A sets, allowing 12 car trains (4+8 and straight 12) should it be needed (ie Penrith-Blacktown-Parra-Sydney express)

It would mean removing most of the crossovers and using high speed points for those few that remain, plus probably the Flemington platforms and a few other minor re-alignments.  But the goal is Penrith to Sydney in 30 min for BM trains (with 2 intermediate stops), 45min from Penrith/Schofields with 8 or 9 intermediate stops.

Even though this would greatly improve the utility of the service and address the looming capacity issues from far Western Sydney, the main reason to do it is cost.  Cutting ~25min each way out of the schedule means far greater seat KM per dollar.

A Western Express (extending this line into a new CBD terminal) would improve this service even further, but there will be Metro and LRT interchange at Central, and until those systems fill up with their own catchment capacity, it's not essential, and that project can stand or fall on it's own merits.

2) North Shore.  Amplification.  This might seem a bit odd, but stick with me.  It's a performance rather than capacity upgrade.  Hence, it's a triple rather than quad, with a few exceptions.  The goal is to achieve St Leonards to Hornsby (17km) in 10 minutes, including a stop at Chatswood, possible on 2 of the 3 roads (the new one, and presumably the UP road).  The whole route is boarded at (~)60 now, which means bumping this up to 120.  

Further, platforms 2&3 at Nth Sydney, the Chatswood platforms and Hornsby are extended to 200m min, but ideally 240m (and the option to extend Nth Sydney to 400m).

WTF ... ?

Running all the West, rather than all the North, into ST clearly creates capacity issues for Central Coast and Newcastle services.  So I propose to hub Newcastle trains out of Nth Sydney.  Central Coast services run over the SHB, alternating directions.  

But ... what about the 10 car NIFs?

I propose the D sets be split into 4+4 and 6+6 formats.  4+4 runs Gosford-Chatswood-Strathfield-Gosford over the SHB, peak frequency of 10min - more than enough to make up for the seat reduction.

To minimise the slots taken up by interurbans on both the Shore and the West (to 2/hr peak), Newcastle and BM service (at least in peak) operates as 6+6 D Sets.  But ... at Penrith/Gosford the split.  Lead 6 car set runs express to/past Wyong, the all to Newcastle.  Lead 6 runs express to Lawson, then all to Mt Vic, rear 6 runs all to Lawson (alternatively Springwood/Katoomba)

That still leaves Sector 2 as the problem child of the network, but there are plenty of options.  I must say, I think removing the Illawarra locals from Sector 2 and effectively returning them to Sector 1 is less than idea IMHO.  It appears the Illawarra Locals are going to function a bit like another second sector, terminating at ST serving both sectors 2 and 3.  It's not inconceivable this will eventually be Campbelltown (out T8) and Cronulla, as well as South Coast and Highlands direct.

Western Metro?

Personally, I would cancel the Western Metro (and have thought that since seeing it's proposed route - basically no greenfields at all).  It's trying to provide an S-Bahn/RER type service in a metro format.  The problem the WM is trying to solve is the extisting S-Bahn/RER system is inefficient because it's trying to offer a metro type service (as well).  The problems on the main west is we are attempting to run parallel sectorised/unified S-Bahn services over are the hardware is set up for U-Bahn/S-Bahn/Regional.  Fix the problems with the existing surface network, and the Metro spend can go somewhere else completely greenfield - like the Northern Beaches.

If the WM is cancelled - (and there is a 2 year window for this to be viable) - then a Western Express with the Western Line upgrades would deliver most of the same benefits: Syd CBD to Parra in 20min, every 3 min, all day.  The Bays gets an LRT branch, Sydney Olympic Park gets a dedicated HR service of some sort, and the (lower) main north gets service upgrades.  How exactly is unlcear, some sort of conversion of the Inner West to a high frequency service with it's own (new) path into the city is my suggestion (leaving Sector 2 ion the lurch a bit)
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Western Metro

Why cancel it? Its going to do the job well. It achieves most of what you mentioned in the western line section at much lower cost and disruption, offers a few new Greenfield stations. Removes the inefficient Olympic park shuttle ties a number of major junctions and areas together and provides a high capacity link from Central to West. The only Metro thing about it is the name which some people cannot seem to get over.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

The only Metro thing about it is the name which some people cannot seem to get over.
RTT_Rules

There is also the cost, and the user experience.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The only Metro thing about it is the name which some people cannot seem to get over.

There is also the cost, and the user experience.
djf01
Metro is cheaper for the gain

User's don't generally care as we have seen by the NW Metro which ahs increased ridership through the ECRL despite forcing a change of train and less seats.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

Western Metro

Why cancel it?
RTT_Rules


$11bil
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

- Increase the standard platform length to 200m
- Increase the platform length to 240m at Blacktown and Penrith (Parra is already 240m).
djf01
Of all your crazy ideas these 2 stood out as the only ones which aren't crazy. The only problem being Central suburban, town hall and wynyard stations.
  Totoro Locomotive Driver

Metro West will cost upwards of $20B. But given the scope and impact of the project, that’s still an absolute *bargain*. Metro has a well-proven proven funding model at this point, as well. There’s zero reason to cancel it given the benefits (new housing and commercial developments) that will support jobs and economic uplift along the entire route. Any government that dares cancel it at this stage would suffer absolute outrage from voters.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

Metro West will cost upwards of $20B. But given the scope and impact of the project, that’s still an absolute *bargain*. Metro has a well-proven proven funding model at this point, as well. There’s zero reason to cancel it given the benefits (new housing and commercial developments)
Totoro

My issue with the WM is it doesn't serve enough new greenfields/brownfields sites for what it is.  A 25km metro should support 15-20 new high/medium density redevelopment sites.  As metro routes go, two major commercial centres at each end address the format's main problem (need for high loadings at the extremities), which is a good thing.  It just needs more greenfields/brownfields infill IMHO.  I also wonder what the post COVID appetite for inner city redevelopment will be.

Basically, $20bil is more than enough to fix all the problems with the legacy surface network, and buy a fleet of driverless SD trains to run on it, and still leave plenty of cash left over for metro extensions.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Western Metro

Why cancel it?


$11bil
djf01
And just how much do you think all that other work you mentioned will cost and in terms of cost per extra passenger capacity generated, the Metro is cheaper and far less intrusive.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
- Increase the standard platform length to 200m
- Increase the platform length to 240m at Blacktown and Penrith (Parra is already 240m).
Of all your crazy ideas these 2 stood out as the only ones which aren't crazy. The only problem being Central suburban, town hall and wynyard stations.
simstrain
While I almost agree and yes Sydney should have 200m stations and trains, the cost even in the suburban stations would be enormous. Property buy-back, slewing tracks, moving points and other signally.

Maybe you could implement a policy that all new work must be to allow for 200m stations, but this will take decades to have a significant impact before the project could be implemented. Yes I agree you would start at express stop stations and go from there but on the lines currently not designed for this $$$$.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Metro West will cost upwards of $20B. But given the scope and impact of the project, that’s still an absolute *bargain*. Metro has a well-proven proven funding model at this point, as well. There’s zero reason to cancel it given the benefits (new housing and commercial developments)

My issue with the WM is it doesn't serve enough new greenfields/brownfields sites for what it is.  A 25km metro should support 15-20 new high/medium density redevelopment sites.  As metro routes go, two major commercial centres at each end address the format's main problem (need for high loadings at the extremities), which is a good thing.  It just needs more greenfields/brownfields infill IMHO.  I also wonder what the post COVID appetite for inner city redevelopment will be.

Basically, $20bil is more than enough to fix all the problems with the legacy surface network, and buy a fleet of driverless SD trains to run on it, and still leave plenty of cash left over for metro extensions.
djf01
The infill stations are large population centres and/or transfer points.

High density living will remain popular and continue to grow, there are numerous reasons why. CV-19 has driven remote working, but it still not the only option and for many jobs still not an option.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

- Increase the standard platform length to 200m
- Increase the platform length to 240m at Blacktown and Penrith (Parra is already 240m).
Of all your crazy ideas these 2 stood out as the only ones which aren't crazy. The only problem being Central suburban, town hall and wynyard stations.
While I almost agree and yes Sydney should have 200m stations and trains, the cost even in the suburban stations would be enormous. Property buy-back, slewing tracks, moving points and other signally.
RTT_Rules

The current thinking at TfNSE seems to be to eventually operate the Main North as it's own sector entirely out of Sydney Terminal.  (D Sets might have changed that).  It makes sense because of the topology, and because the North has the most inter-urbans and is basically only one suburban route.  However the Strathfield flyovers mean the western line's topology is no less suitable.  

Running the western line entirely out of ST means there is no issue of extending UG platforms.  The western line (west of Parra) has widely spaced stations, few stations, and few/no small curvy island platforms.  Many platforms are already 200m.  Platform extensions of the main west are not huge $$$.  

So that is the genesis of this idea: run the West into ST rather than the North, and that enables longer trains at a reasonable cost.

FWIW, this is not intended as an alternative to the WM (but the I can see why the WM's business case might be relying of Western Line overcrowding), rather an alternative of amplification of Granville - Strathfield.



My suggestion is
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

Metro west is happening because construction started in November last year. With this government when things get started they generally get completed.

Stations with intercity services do already have those 200m stations as DJF suggested and it is probably time for the government to consider more of these intercity services instead of more suburban services and terminate them at ST.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
I thought I'd revive this YASP (Yet Another Sydney Planning) thread, with my thoughts on where we could/should be heading.  I realise none of this will happen, these are just my thoughts on where I think we should be investing.

1) Western Line.  Rather than amplification, I think the way to upgrade capacity here is with longer trains.  But I also think this corridor is ripe for performance (ie speed) improvements.  My brief here is:
- Central (ST) to Parramatta along the mains: average 120kph capability (Parra to Lewisham) for an overall 15min transit time.
- Penrith - Parramatta (with one stop) also 30min.
- Increase the standard platform length to 200m
- Increase the platform length to 240m at Blacktown and Penrith (Parra is already 240m).
- Next rolling stock procurement to be M-T pairs in a cabless format (as per the D sets) for the B sets, to standardise on 10 car trains on that sector.  In the interim, a software update for the A sets, allowing 12 car trains (4+8 and straight 12) should it be needed (ie Penrith-Blacktown-Parra-Sydney express)

It would mean removing most of the crossovers and using high speed points for those few that remain, plus probably the Flemington platforms and a few other minor re-alignments.  But the goal is Penrith to Sydney in 30 min for BM trains (with 2 intermediate stops), 45min from Penrith/Schofields with 8 or 9 intermediate stops.

Even though this would greatly improve the utility of the service and address the looming capacity issues from far Western Sydney, the main reason to do it is cost.  Cutting ~25min each way out of the schedule means far greater seat KM per dollar.

A Western Express (extending this line into a new CBD terminal) would improve this service even further, but there will be Metro and LRT interchange at Central, and until those systems fill up with their own catchment capacity, it's not essential, and that project can stand or fall on it's own merits.

2) North Shore.  Amplification.  This might seem a bit odd, but stick with me.  It's a performance rather than capacity upgrade.  Hence, it's a triple rather than quad, with a few exceptions.  The goal is to achieve St Leonards to Hornsby (17km) in 10 minutes, including a stop at Chatswood, possible on 2 of the 3 roads (the new one, and presumably the UP road).  The whole route is boarded at (~)60 now, which means bumping this up to 120.  

Further, platforms 2&3 at Nth Sydney, the Chatswood platforms and Hornsby are extended to 200m min, but ideally 240m (and the option to extend Nth Sydney to 400m).

WTF ... ?

Running all the West, rather than all the North, into ST clearly creates capacity issues for Central Coast and Newcastle services.  So I propose to hub Newcastle trains out of Nth Sydney.  Central Coast services run over the SHB, alternating directions.  

But ... what about the 10 car NIFs?

I propose the D sets be split into 4+4 and 6+6 formats.  4+4 runs Gosford-Chatswood-Strathfield-Gosford over the SHB, peak frequency of 10min - more than enough to make up for the seat reduction.

To minimise the slots taken up by interurbans on both the Shore and the West (to 2/hr peak), Newcastle and BM service (at least in peak) operates as 6+6 D Sets.  But ... at Penrith/Gosford the split.  Lead 6 car set runs express to/past Wyong, the all to Newcastle.  Lead 6 runs express to Lawson, then all to Mt Vic, rear 6 runs all to Lawson (alternatively Springwood/Katoomba)

That still leaves Sector 2 as the problem child of the network, but there are plenty of options.  I must say, I think removing the Illawarra locals from Sector 2 and effectively returning them to Sector 1 is less than idea IMHO.  It appears the Illawarra Locals are going to function a bit like another second sector, terminating at ST serving both sectors 2 and 3.  It's not inconceivable this will eventually be Campbelltown (out T8) and Cronulla, as well as South Coast and Highlands direct.

Western Metro?

Personally, I would cancel the Western Metro (and have thought that since seeing it's proposed route - basically no greenfields at all).  It's trying to provide an S-Bahn/RER type service in a metro format.  The problem the WM is trying to solve is the extisting S-Bahn/RER system is inefficient because it's trying to offer a metro type service (as well).  The problems on the main west is we are attempting to run parallel sectorised/unified S-Bahn services over are the hardware is set up for U-Bahn/S-Bahn/Regional.  Fix the problems with the existing surface network, and the Metro spend can go somewhere else completely greenfield - like the Northern Beaches.

If the WM is cancelled - (and there is a 2 year window for this to be viable) - then a Western Express with the Western Line upgrades would deliver most of the same benefits: Syd CBD to Parra in 20min, every 3 min, all day.  The Bays gets an LRT branch, Sydney Olympic Park gets a dedicated HR service of some sort, and the (lower) main north gets service upgrades.  How exactly is unlcear, some sort of conversion of the Inner West to a high frequency service with it's own (new) path into the city is my suggestion (leaving Sector 2 ion the lurch a bit)
djf01
This is my second go at responding to your post after my previous extended reply disappeared into the ether after being timed out, so I'll try to be as concise as I can.

You will no doubt recall that DD trains were introduced to the Sydney rail network in the 1960s to increase capacity as an alternative to extending every suburban platform to allow for running longer trains, as it was considered to be more cost effective.  Extending the platforms on the underground wasn't considered to be feasible.  That same consideration prevails to this day, except in the case of limited platform extensions for the longer V-sets and proposed 10 car D-sets operating on Intercity routes.  I therefore think that it is unlikely that suburban Waratah sets will be extended to 10 or 12 cars.

However, I can see a future for a Western Express style service on T1 utilising the 10 car D-sets from Penrith to Sydney Terminal via the Western Main as a segment of the BM Intercity service, stopping only at St Marys, Blacktown, Parramatta and Strathfield.  It will be much faster with the ATP/ATO upgrade.  Looking into the future, it could operate at up to 6tph in conjunction with 6tph BM and up to 12tph CCN if the latter's North Shore services are diverted to ST via Strathfield.

This would only be possible if the sextuplication between Homebush and Granville is completed.  It could be constructed at a modest cost within the existing rail corridor, partly on the surface and partly underground, without any intermediate stations.

In the longer term, an express tunnel could be extended into a new CBD terminal, as proposed for a City Relief Line.

I agree with you that it would be more logical for the T9 Northern Line services to utilise the existing grade separated flyovers at Strathfield to merge with the Suburban tracks through the CBD to the North Shore Line.  It could form a sector from Hornsby to Berowra via Strathfield and the CBD.

The Suburban tracks from Strathfield to the CBD and North Shore Line could be shared with semi-express T1 services from Penrith and Richmond, terminating at North Sydney/Lindfield/Gordon.  

I can't see the need to amplify the North Shore Line any further now that Metro Northwest is being extended into the CBD.  At best, the sharp curves between St Leonards and Waverton could be eased by realigning the tracks across the the rail corridor reserved for future quadruplication, which is unlikely to be now needed.  The North Shore Line should become a single all stations pattern which will also be speeded up with the ATP/ATO upgrade.  The Central Coast services via the North Shore Line should be diverted from Hornsby to Sydney Terminal via Strathfield.

With regard to Sector 2, it's perfectly logical that all T4 suburban services should be part of Sector 1 to Bondi Junction.  It now appears that all Sector 2 T8 services will be diverted via the Airport Line to the City Circle, leaving the Illawarra Local between Wolli Creek Junction and the Illawarra Dive at Erskineville/Eveleigh exclusively for Intercity and Regional services.

While I don't think that Metro West should be cancelled, I believe that it should be deferred, as I don't see it as being as a high priority, in terms of relieving congestion on the existing Western Line.  If this is the major justification for its priority, which appears to be the case, then it's misplaced.  While it will no doubt increase the catchment area of the overall rail network, it will do bugger all for relieving congestion on the exiting outer suburban Western rail corridor.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
Stations with intercity services do already have those 200m stations as DJF suggested and it is probably time for the government to consider more of these intercity services instead of more suburban services and terminate them at ST.
simstrain
That's a good idea sims, except that I wouldn't exclude more suburban services as well.  As I commented in my previous post with regard to a Western Express service using 10 car D-sets from Penrith to Sydney Terminal as part of the BM Intercity sector, it could also be feasible to introduce a similar service with 10 car D-sets on the CCN Intercity sector, running from Gosford/Wyong via the Northern Line.  They could be those services which currently run via the North Shore Line in the peak.  

A suggested stopping pattern could be Wyong and/or Gosford, Woy Woy, Berowra, Hornsby, Epping, Eastwood, Rhodes, Strathfield and ST.  Except for Rhodes, all of those stations already have 200m platforms.  In the case of Rhodes, which is now a major employment centre, the platforms could easily be extended as part of the proposed quadruplication.  It could have a frequency of 4tph in the peak, which would augment the existing T9 suburban services at Epping, Eastwood and Rhodes @8tph, which are the busiest stations between Hornsby and Strathfield.  These services would be in addition to existing Gosford/Wyong all stations services via the Northern Line, which also stop at Epping.

Those travelling from Gosford/Wyong, and indeed Newcastle, to North Shore destinations from Chatswood to North Sydney would have the option of interchanging to T1 at Hornsby or Metro Northwest at Epping, which would probably be quicker in the latter case.

On the T4 Illawarra/South Coast corridor, the 10 car D-sets are proposed to run a limited stop service from Wollongong to ST via Sydenham.  Wollongong and Waterfall are being extended to at least 200m, but I'm not sure about Thirroul, Sutherland, Hurstville and Sydenham.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

You will no doubt recall that DD trains were introduced to the Sydney rail network in the 1960s to increase capacity as an alternative to extending every suburban platform to allow for running longer trains, as it was considered to be more cost effective. Extending the platforms on the underground wasn't considered to be feasible. That same consideration prevails to this day, except in the case of limited platform extensions for the longer V-sets and proposed 10 car D-sets operating on Intercity routes. I therefore think that it is unlikely that suburban Waratah sets will be extended to 10 or 12 cars.
Transtopic


*If* we are going to run suburban services out of ST, then extending/replacing the UG platforms is not longer an issue. It's only a matter of extending surface platforms, and not that many in the case of the Western Line.

However, I can see a future for a Western Express style service on T1 utilising the 10 car D-sets from Penrith to Sydney Terminal via the Western Main as a segment of the BM Intercity service, stopping only at St Marys, Blacktown, Parramatta and Strathfield.
Transtopic


There are 2 issue here that I see:
- there are not enough D sets
- 10 car trains are used to improve customer experience (2+2 seating) rather than increase capacity.
Hence my proposal for an extension of the B set order for mid train sections, rather than just more D sets.

It will be much faster with the ATP/ATO upgrade. Looking into the future, it could operate at up to 6tph in conjunction with 6tph BM and up to 12tph CCN if the latter's North Shore services are diverted to ST via Strathfield.
Transtopic


I'd prefer to be a bit less prescriptive in how performance upgrades are achieved. ATM the contributing elements are upgraded piecemeal, and often only to the minimum standard to retain the status quo. Improved signalling can't change the maximum speed traversing a redundant crossover for example.


The Suburban tracks from Strathfield to the CBD and North Shore Line could be shared with semi-express T1 services from Penrith and Richmond, terminating at North Sydney/Lindfield/Gordon.
Transtopic

I was thinking Liverpool.


I can't see the need to amplify the North Shore Line any further now that Metro Northwest is being extended into the CBD.
Transtopic

There is no need for it capacity wise, at least not on the North Shore. It's entirely about performance, and the about using the North Shore route to increase available capacity on the main west without building anything (there). The North Shore is shorter, much of the earth works and bridge works already done in anticipation of future quadding. The somewhat paradoxical idea is to deliver capacity to the west by diverting more Central Coast services via the Shore, rather than less.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney

However, I can see a future for a Western Express style service on T1 utilising the 10 car D-sets from Penrith to Sydney Terminal via the Western Main as a segment of the BM Intercity service, stopping only at St Marys, Blacktown, Parramatta and Strathfield.


There are 2 issue here that I see:
- there are not enough D sets
- 10 car trains are used to improve customer experience (2+2 seating) rather than increase capacity.
Hence my proposal for an extension of the B set order for mid train sections, rather than just more D sets.
djf01
It doesn't preclude more D-sets being ordered, just as it wouldn't in ordering B-set mid sections, although I would prefer the former.  In any event, neither option is able to increase frequency and hence capacity, without sextuplication from Granville to Homebush, as that corridor will be running to capacity with the reinstatement of the Liverpool via Regents Park services.  The ATP/ATO upgrade will offer temporary relief.

My reasoning for preferring the D-sets for a Western Express service as an extension of the BM Intercity service to Sydney Terminal, is that it would be an attractive alternative for suburban users even though it would terminate at Central.  It would also provide more seating on the existing BM services, particularly on the outbound journeys.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney

I was thinking Liverpool.
djf01
That was also my initial preference, but it wouldn't be possible without the sextuplication AND an express tunnel extension to a City Relief Line.  The existing Suburban and Main tracks from Strathfield to the CBD wouldn't be able to cope with the demand for express services from the T1 Western/Richmond Line, the T2 Liverpool via Regents Park/Granville Line, the T9 Northern Line and the BM/CCN Intercity Lines, even with the ATP/ATO upgrade.  The likely future demand for all of these services would be up to 70tph.  Even with the signalling upgrade, the existing Main and Suburban tracks would only be capable of 48tph.  An express tunnel extension to a City Relief Line would bring the potential capacity up to 72tph.

The T2 Inner West Local is more likely to become an all stations service @ 24tph, including the Liverpool services, until further amplification to the CBD takes place.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
There is no need for it capacity wise, at least not on the North Shore. It's entirely about performance, and the about using the North Shore route to increase available capacity on the main west without building anything (there). The North Shore is shorter, much of the earth works and bridge works already done in anticipation of future quadding. The somewhat paradoxical idea is to deliver capacity to the west by diverting more Central Coast services via the Shore, rather than less.



Performance on the North Shore Line will be improved after the Metro extension from Chatswood to the CBD and the ATP/ATO upgrade.  It won't need any further amplification.  As I stated earlier, the operating pattern could be simplified by making it all stations and diverting the Central Coast services via the Shore to Central via Strathfield.

I don't get your point about increasing capacity on the Western Line by diverting more CC services via the North Shore.  The demand from T1, T2, T9 and BM and CCN Intercity on the Western  Line corridor would overwhelm whatever extra capacity could be sqeezed out of the North Shore Line.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

I don't get your point about increasing capacity on the Western Line by diverting more CC services via the North Shore.  The demand from T1, T2, T9 and BM and CCN Intercity on the Western  Line corridor would overwhelm whatever extra capacity could be sqeezed out of the North Shore Line.
Transtopic

CNN Intercity doesn't run on the West (or at least, not as much).
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

In any event, neither option is able to increase frequency and hence capacity, ...
Transtopic

Longer B's increase capacity by 20% *without* ATO and without amplification.  Ds offer what the Bs do, just with greater comfort and access to a toilet.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: