NSW Gov funding for services post-Bankstown Metro Opening

 
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The way the government is struggling to bring people back in to the city it may not even matter going forward.
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/bring-people-back-to-town-government-considers-free-public-transport-to-boost-cbd-20210422-p57lim.html?fbclid=IwAR21gA3NSlINdP9LP0JGIrqMCriRLbisMFkS08CriSKeK5onn3Us9VfGfTk

Outer T2 is completely fudged. With every service having to be all stops that means 1 hour and 15 minute journeys from Liverpool to the Sydney CBD. This is why I think the metro should be extended around the existing T3 to Liverpool instead of building an expensive creation that will be tunneling from bankstown to liverpool via the milperra road corridor. The all stops metro is 10 minutes faster then the all stops ST service to bankstown and it goes to reason that it could be another 5-10 minutes faster from bankstown to Liverpool. This should work out to a 45 minute service.

My problem with the bankstown metro has always been that it ended at Bankstown with maybe a future project to extend it to Liverpool along the milperra road corridor. I say extend it to Lidcombe or extend it to Liverpool. Preferrably the later at the very least. It's not like there isn't plenty of room to do some extra grade separation to allow Metro, ST and freight along this corridor. It will only need a small tunnel section from Birrong to west of chester hill or maybe leightonfield. From here it can go above ground all the way to Liverpool.

Sponsored advertisement

  simstrain 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.

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

If CCN Intercity doesn't run on the west (mains) then where do they run? There are only 12 CCN services a day (14 on a monday) that run on the shore at the moment. The significant amount of remaining CCN services all run via the mains.

I think the NSW Government made a mistake by ordering 6+4 car D sets and not because they were made in korea. I think that they should have just ordered 4 car sets and extended the platforms to handle 12 car sets for intercity services instead. Run 8 car services from Springwood, Gosford and Wyong that could go up and down the shore and 12 car sets for Wollongong, Newcastle and Lithgow services.
  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.  ...

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

If CCN Intercity doesn't run on the west (mains) then where do they run?
simstrain

Down the (improved) Shore.  

You may have missed it, but 4+4 D sets for Gosford-Chatswood-Strathfield-Gosford, 6+6 D sets from Newcastle/Wyong terminating at Nth Sydney ("temporarily", until the new terminal at Wynyard is built).

I completely agree with your comments about the D sets.  Clearly the decision to go 2+2 came after they gave up trying to get something "off the shelf", and that led to the 10 car sets lest there be a reduction in the number of seats (or a need for more slots that are not available).  240m platforms with 4+4+4 sets would also solve that problem just as well, and they wouldn't be needed many places (assuming the D sets split/combined at say Lawson/Dapto/Gosford).
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

The way the government is struggling to bring people back in to the city it may not even matter going forward.
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/bring-people-back-to-town-government-considers-free-public-transport-to-boost-cbd-20210422-p57lim.html?fbclid=IwAR21gA3NSlINdP9LP0JGIrqMCriRLbisMFkS08CriSKeK5onn3Us9VfGfTk
simstrain

I came to this conclusion last year, and rather lost interest in urban rail matters as a consequence.  Whatever the government things, businesses are going to have to deal with their own risks from COVID.  Centralised offices expose them to industrial manslaughter laws, plus any number of other workplace relations regulations, and they face having their entire operation shut down without warning by a false positive among their staff.  Employers don't have control over the ventilation environment their city office tower tenancies, nor the lifts, nor all the other tenants.  And for what?  $1000pa/m^2 for city office space just so the staff can gas bag around the water cooler?

However, I also think city apartments and flats are on the way out.  Australia will likely have fewer short term residents for some time to come, and no-one by choice will wish to spend a lockdown in studio city shoebox.

So I think the trend will be for more urban and regional sprawl, and working from home will become predominant for white collar staff.  Perhaps people will work one or two days a week in the office, or go in a few weeks a year for training, but I think the preference will be to have staff work from home.  Even if Trump is right (for the only time in his life) and "it just goes away", COVID has forced the required working from home infrastructure on employers, and it's in their financial interest to use it rather that lease office space for their staff who otherwise might supply their own.

Hence, I think we will see a big pause on new residential towers, and a big pause on developers asking for nearby metro stations.  There will be a big demand for land releases though, for more cottages - even with a back yard - in lower density estates on the fringes of outside the cities.  

I think the demand profile will shift: fewer overall trips, but more longer distance trips.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
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.

CNN Intercity doesn't run on the West (or at least, not as much).
djf01
I was referring to the busiest part of the Western Line corridor between Strathfield and the CBD where the different lines merge, including CCN Intercity which currently run at 4tph via Strathfield in the peak and will only increase further.  I can't see extra CCN services, let alone the existing ones, continuing to run via the North Shore Line with the mixed stopping pattern.  Nor can I see an all stops pattern for the Intercity sets.
  AheadMatthewawsome Junior Train Controller

Location: Opening Train Lines
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.

CNN Intercity doesn't run on the West (or at least, not as much).
djf01
CCN Trains that run via the North Shore terminate at Blacktown. This only happens during the peak one way. AM into the City, PM out of the City.

These trains stop at Blacktown, Parramatta, Strathfield, Redfern, Central, Town Hall, Wynyard, Milsons Point, North Sydney, Waverton, Wollstonecraft, St Leonards, Artarmon, Chatswood, Gordon, Hornsby, Berowra, then split into...

1: Cowan, Hawksbury River, Wondabyne, Woy Woy, Gosford, Narara, Ourimbah, Tuggerah, Wyong.

2: Woy Woy, Koolewong, Tascott, Point Clare, Gosford.

These services are so popular, you can compare them to the L1 Dulwich Hill Line! And Waverton, Wollstonecraft, and Artarmon don't really need these trains to stop. Probably the Lindfield trains would do better. And there is a whole list of things they could fix on this line! Eh, I live on this line. I better have my UNO Reverse Card ready...
  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.

CNN Intercity doesn't run on the West (or at least, not as much).
I was referring to the busiest part of the Western Line corridor between Strathfield and the CBD where the different lines merge, including CCN Intercity which currently run at 4tph via Strathfield in the peak and will only increase further.  I can't see extra CCN services, let alone the existing ones, continuing to run via the North Shore Line with the mixed stopping pattern.  Nor can I see an all stops pattern for the Intercity sets.
Transtopic
Sorry, I'll rephrase: CNN wouldn't run on the West, a design requirement (and indeed the purpose) of my suggested North Shore amplificiation.

And I agree about mixed stopping patterns on the current North Shore.  Again, the amplification is to facilitate that.

What I have in mind is tripling, probably with another road north of the current alignment, Chatswood to Hornsby and St Leonards to Chatswood, with a quad and turnback capability at St Leonards and option(s) for a 1500m tunnel from south of St Leonards into the platform 2/3 stub at North Sydney (expensive overkill IMHO).  The current UP road and the new road engineered for a 10min transit from St Leonards to Hornsby (including a stop at Chatswood).  That would make Hornsby to Nth Sydney 16 minutes, Hornsby to Wynard 23min (vs 37min and  45min currently via the shore).  Central to Hornsby via the Shore becomes 29minutes vs 35min via Strathfield, making it the preferred route.

It's not perfect nor without problems, nothing is, but that's the idea.

Both this, and an upgraded West operating out of ST are about boosting speed and capacity on the major outer suburban/interurban routes, (enabled) with support from metro interchanges at Chatswood and Central.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
In any event, neither option is able to increase frequency and hence capacity, ...

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.
djf01
Granted, longer B's increase capacity per train, but not to the extent of increasing frequencies with the existing 8 car sets.  However, that's not possible without further amplification, as the current Western Main from Parramatta to Homebush is already maxed out at 20tph.  I still don't think that increasing the length of the B's (or A's) is viable, as it would require even more stations to be extended.  For the D's it's a different matter, as they will be running the equivalent of an 8 car V-set servicing a limited number of stations in the suburban area, most of which have already been extended.

There is ample capacity on the 2 track pairs west of Parramatta to run more services.  At present, it's 22tph (excluding the T2 Parramatta services), when it has a potential capacity of 40tph with current signalling or 48tph with the ATP/ATO upgrade.  The problem is that without further amplification, such as completing the sextup east of Parramatta, that capacity is wasted.  Suggestions that extra services could terminate at Westmead or Parramatta, forcing interchange to the metro, are just wishful thinking.  That's assuming of course that's it's actually feasible to terminate more trains.

I don't understand why you are so against the sextuplication, as it's the bleedingly obvious solution to increase capacity on the Western Line corridor, Metro West notwithstanding. The government has already flagged that under the More Trains, More Services Program, there will be further track amplifications to separate express from all stations services and increase overall capacity.  Hopefully, the next stage will be for the T1 Western Line.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney

Outer T2 is completely fudged. With every service having to be all stops that means 1 hour and 15 minute journeys from Liverpool to the Sydney CBD. This is why I think the metro should be extended around the existing T3 to Liverpool instead of building an expensive creation that will be tunneling from bankstown to liverpool via the milperra road corridor. The all stops metro is 10 minutes faster then the all stops ST service to bankstown and it goes to reason that it could be another 5-10 minutes faster from bankstown to Liverpool. This should work out to a 45 minute service.

My problem with the bankstown metro has always been that it ended at Bankstown with maybe a future project to extend it to Liverpool along the milperra road corridor. I say extend it to Lidcombe or extend it to Liverpool. Preferrably the later at the very least. It's not like there isn't plenty of room to do some extra grade separation to allow Metro, ST and freight along this corridor. It will only need a small tunnel section from Birrong to west of chester hill or maybe leightonfield. From here it can go above ground all the way to Liverpool.
simstrain
I think any prospect of extending the metro from Bankstown to Liverpool along the existing rail corridor is dead in the water.  It was dismissed long ago and subsequent decisions in restoring the Liverpool via Regents Park service makes it even less likely.  At best, the metro could be extended to Regents Park or on the direct route to Liverpool, assuming it's feasible.  However, Liverpool commuters would probably be less inclined to interchange to the metro at Regent's Park as much as they would be at Bankstown, which has already been clearly demonstrated.  They prefer a direct journey to the CBD rather than being forced to interchange.  This has lessons for the future operation of Western Line services in forcing interchange to Metro West.

I understand your frustration with the slow all stops service from Liverpool to the CBD, when it previously had a similar express service as the Western and Northern Lines from Strathfield to the CBD.  However, to some degree, sectorisation has contributed to its diversion to the slower T2 Inner West Line and it's unlikely that the previous express pattern could be restored without further amplification from Strathfield to the CBD which I previously alluded to.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney

What I have in mind is tripling, probably with another road north of the current alignment, Chatswood to Hornsby and St Leonards to Chatswood, with a quad and turnback capability at St Leonards and option(s) for a 1500m tunnel from south of St Leonards into the platform 2/3 stub at North Sydney (expensive overkill IMHO).  The current UP road and the new road engineered for a 10min transit from St Leonards to Hornsby (including a stop at Chatswood).  That would make Hornsby to Nth Sydney 16 minutes, Hornsby to Wynard 23min (vs 37min and  45min currently via the shore).  Central to Hornsby via the Shore becomes 29minutes vs 35min via Strathfield, making it the preferred route.


djf01
I honestly can't see the need for it after Metro Northwest is extended from Chatswood into the CBD.  The whole operational pattern on the North Shore Line will change and it won't require the same level of frequency from Chatswood on the existing line, even though it could potentially provide more paths for the CC Intercity services.  

My take on it is that with the limited number of Intercity services only operating in peak hours, it hardly warrants triplication, let alone quadruplication.  It would be more advantageous to have a single all stops pattern for T1 suburban services, with the Intercity services being diverted to Sydney Terminal from Hornsby via the Northern Line, which will soon be triplicated from Hornsby to Epping and quadruplicated from Epping to Strathfield.  CC passengers bound for North Shore Line destinations can change at Hornsby to T1 or at Epping to the metro.

I concede that there is some merit in utilising the spare platforms at St Leonards to construct a turnback, although the tracks would have to be realigned so that the centre platforms would form the terminating roads.  Triplicating the line north of St Leonards would be problematic, with the difficulty of interfacing with the metro line dive and Chatswood Station itself.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

There is ample capacity on the 2 track pairs west of Parramatta to run more services.  At present, it's 22tph (excluding the T2 Parramatta services), when it has a potential capacity of 40tph with current signalling or 48tph with the ATP/ATO upgrade.  The problem is that without further amplification, such as completing the sextup east of Parramatta, that capacity is wasted.  Suggestions that extra services could terminate at Westmead or Parramatta, forcing interchange to the metro, are just wishful thinking.  That's assuming of course that's it's actually feasible to terminate more trains.
Transtopic

Here you show your complete lack of understanding of the Sydney system. 40-48tph is only possible if there were 2 dedicated tracks in to Sydney for the T1. The system has to take in to account where it is sharing with other lines and you aren't doing this with your there is ample capacity statement.

23tph T1/BM/T2 Parramatta services an hour from what I can see on anytrip. You forgot that you have to add 8 x T2 via granville services because they share between Strathfield and Granville and 4 x cumberland line services which takes the line capacity up to 35 trains per hour. When you consider the multiple stopping patterns and routes that isn't quite so bad.

I haven't included T9 / CCN because that is catered for by the extra track pair between Strathfield and Redfern. In the future with the D sets you also have to take in to account the south coast services coming in to Central and how that will affect everything as well. Not to mention the via regent park services in the future. Your simple math of 2 track pair = 40tph doesn't calculate in the real world.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE

What I have in mind is tripling, probably with another road north of the current alignment, Chatswood to Hornsby and St Leonards to Chatswood, with a quad and turnback capability at St Leonards and option(s) for a 1500m tunnel from south of St Leonards into the platform 2/3 stub at North Sydney (expensive overkill IMHO).  The current UP road and the new road engineered for a 10min transit from St Leonards to Hornsby (including a stop at Chatswood).  That would make Hornsby to Nth Sydney 16 minutes, Hornsby to Wynard 23min (vs 37min and  45min currently via the shore).  Central to Hornsby via the Shore becomes 29minutes vs 35min via Strathfield, making it the preferred route.

I honestly can't see the need for it after Metro Northwest is extended from Chatswood into the CBD.  The whole operational pattern on the North Shore Line will change and it won't require the same level of frequency from Chatswood on the existing line, even though it could potentially provide more paths for the CC Intercity services.  

My take on it is that with the limited number of Intercity services only operating in peak hours, it hardly warrants triplication, let alone quadruplication.  It would be more advantageous to have a single all stops pattern for T1 suburban services, with the Intercity services being diverted to Sydney Terminal from Hornsby via the Northern Line, which will soon be triplicated from Hornsby to Epping and quadruplicated from Epping to Strathfield.  CC passengers bound for North Shore Line destinations can change at Hornsby to T1 or at Epping to the metro.

I concede that there is some merit in utilising the spare platforms at St Leonards to construct a turnback, although the tracks would have to be realigned so that the centre platforms would form the terminating roads.  Triplicating the line north of St Leonards would be problematic, with the difficulty of interfacing with the metro line dive and Chatswood Station itself.
Transtopic
The direct tunnel from Nth Syd to St Leonard's is needed regardless of the Metro as there is significant cost and time saving.

I agree there will be less NSL services, but not that much less, you will be lucky to drop below 15 t/h in AM peak. The Quad south of St Leonards also forms an effective passing loop such that if Central Coast services will continue to use the NSL, then running express along the NSL is more practical as they are able to pass all stoppers on the quad.  

The 6-9min time saving is also significant and supports greater use. Do not expect a mass switch of users across the plats at Chatswood especially if the Metro trains are well used.

Sendling most of the NSL services via the proposed tunnel also saves on noise for the locals in the area which is an issue. Basically the number of services via W & W would be reduced to 9-12 min in peak, 15min in off-peak. The rest sent via the tunnel.

YEs the tunnel would have to be aligned to come to the outer platforms and the straight section south of the station the tracks need to be moved across one track, not an issue if building a tunnel from scratch and then merge to the main about 400m or so north of the station to Ella St Bridge to enable suitable space for a shunt neck as terminating trains need to stop at St Leonard's, then move forward and come back in the city bound platform. Also beyond the shunt next there should be sufficient space to store spare trains. Based on above comments, potential to store 3-4 sets, but could be expanded to more as well as existing tunnels which is four tracks which will be reduced to two tracks.

Agree beyond Ella St Bridge, return to dual tracks all the way to Hornsby.

The disruption to normal operations to build this tunnel and connect to the main is minimal and would likely just require a single night or weekend shutdown to do the slewing for the line to Wollstonecraft south of the station and at the same time the line north of the station.

In short the tunnel and yard at St Leonards would enable the Lavender Bay yard and line to be closed which has significant community benefit with the potential for some high end development.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
There is ample capacity on the 2 track pairs west of Parramatta to run more services.  At present, it's 22tph (excluding the T2 Parramatta services), when it has a potential capacity of 40tph with current signalling or 48tph with the ATP/ATO upgrade.  The problem is that without further amplification, such as completing the sextup east of Parramatta, that capacity is wasted.  Suggestions that extra services could terminate at Westmead or Parramatta, forcing interchange to the metro, are just wishful thinking.  That's assuming of course that's it's actually feasible to terminate more trains.

Here you show your complete lack of understanding of the Sydney system. 40-48tph is only possible if there were 2 dedicated tracks in to Sydney for the T1. The system has to take in to account where it is sharing with other lines and you aren't doing this with your there is ample capacity statement.

23tph T1/BM/T2 Parramatta services an hour from what I can see on anytrip. You forgot that you have to add 8 x T2 via granville services because they share between Strathfield and Granville and 4 x cumberland line services which takes the line capacity up to 35 trains per hour. When you consider the multiple stopping patterns and routes that isn't quite so bad.

I haven't included T9 / CCN because that is catered for by the extra track pair between Strathfield and Redfern. In the future with the D sets you also have to take in to account the south coast services coming in to Central and how that will affect everything as well. Not to mention the via regent park services in the future. Your simple math of 2 track pair = 40tph doesn't calculate in the real world.
simstrain
I'm perfectly aware of how the Sydney system works.  In your usual form, you have misconstrued the point I was making.

I said that the 2 track pairs west of Parramatta have a potential capacity of 40 or 48tph.  I didn't say that it would be possible to run that specific number of trains, having regard to the limited track capacity east of Parramatta.  The point I was making is that there is ample spare capacity west of Parramatta to run more trains if amplification, i.e. the sextup between Granville and Homebush, is completed.  Of course the extra number of services, though still substantial, would be limited by T9 and CCN services merging at Strathfield, even with the sextup.  The Main from Strathfield to Central is underutilised at present, with only 12tph.  I have disregarded T2, as it would have its own tracks with the completion of the sextup and I would expect that the T2 Parramatta services would be transferred to the amplified T1 tracks as semi-express services.

If you check the timetable, you will see that there are a maximum of 20tph through Platform 1 at Parramatta in the morning peak (07:30 - 08:30). These services merge from the 2 track pairs at the Westmead underpass.  There are 6tph inbound on Platforms 3/4, which comprise the 4x T2 starters and 2xT5.  A total of 26tph, when the station potentially has room for a significant increase if the track capacity to the east was amplified.

The proposed reconfiguration of the ST yard and tracks through Redfern should significantly increase its terminating capacity.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
In short the tunnel and yard at St Leonards would enable the Lavender Bay yard and line to be closed which has significant community benefit with the potential for some high end development.
RTT_Rules
Good idea.  

The future operation on the NSL after the metro extension will depend on whether the CC Intercity trains continue to operate.  Information posted on this and other forums suggests that the D-sets will only operate in 4, 6 and 10 car sets, not 8 cars.  If that's the case, then it is questionable whether they would run say 6 car sets in the peak period on the NSL.  It's unlikely that they would run 10 car sets.  

My view is that more CC trains will run to ST via Strathfield instead, bearing in mind that there is spare capacity on the Main and the ST yard is being reconfigured to allow an increase in terminating services, including South Coast.  We shall just have to wait and see how it pans out.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
In short the tunnel and yard at St Leonards would enable the Lavender Bay yard and line to be closed which has significant community benefit with the potential for some high end development.
Good idea.  

The future operation on the NSL after the metro extension will depend on whether the CC Intercity trains continue to operate.  Information posted on this and other forums suggests that the D-sets will only operate in 4, 6 and 10 car sets, not 8 cars.  If that's the case, then it is questionable whether they would run say 6 car sets in the peak period on the NSL.  It's unlikely that they would run 10 car sets.  

My view is that more CC trains will run to ST via Strathfield instead, bearing in mind that there is spare capacity on the Main and the ST yard is being reconfigured to allow an increase in terminating services, including South Coast.  We shall just have to wait and see how it pans out.
Transtopic
Hi
I've written on this before, even going as far as closing the W & W bends and using the tunnels to Waverton to replace and expand the Lavender Bay yard with a new underground station in the tunnel to replace W & W.

But, lets ignore that and just focus on a low cost twin tunnel bypass connecting to the Northern Beaches stubs, or simply just cutting into two of the existing tunnels.

The existing route takes 8min, 7min if W & W are non-stop. The more direct route is 2.5km which if averaged at 60km/h takes 2.5min, closer to 2 min if average 80km/h. So lets just leave it at 3min to keep it simple, a 5min saving.

- So heading south assume Central Coast or other express following an all stopper 3min behind.

- The express 3min behind may or may not be stopping at St Leonards (dual platform station so can absorb around 1min of later running by all stopper.

- Express takes 2.5min to 3min to get to North Sydney (stopping), the all stopper is 2min behind but using other platform so no issues here.

- Express doesn't stop at Milson's Point so it gains another 30 sec or so on the all stopper to ensure a nice 3min spacing arriving at Wynyard.

A 2.0 km twin bore tunnel will cost around $500m
Another 1-1.5km of new main lines around St Leonards station + upgrade of St Leonards station to activate the two outer platforms, shunt neck and storage yard probably another few hundred million.

On the cost saving how many trains a day save 5min and 1km in travel per trip?
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney


My view is that more CC trains will run to ST via Strathfield instead, bearing in mind that there is spare capacity on the Main and the ST yard is being reconfigured to allow an increase in terminating services, including South Coast.  We shall just have to wait and see how it pans out.
Transtopic
Following on from my previous comment above, there is another option if it's decided not to run the D-sets on the North Shore Line.  That is to allocate some of the cascaded H-sets, with or without toilets, to run this specific service in 8 car sets during peak hours.  However, I still prefer my earlier suggestion to enable the NSL to operate with a single all stops pattern exclusively for suburban services, as it will be speeded up with the ATP/ATO upgrade anyway.  Intermediate terminals at North Sydney and/or St Leonards and Lindfield and/or Gordon.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
In short the tunnel and yard at St Leonards would enable the Lavender Bay yard and line to be closed which has significant community benefit with the potential for some high end development.
Good idea.  

The future operation on the NSL after the metro extension will depend on whether the CC Intercity trains continue to operate.  Information posted on this and other forums suggests that the D-sets will only operate in 4, 6 and 10 car sets, not 8 cars.  If that's the case, then it is questionable whether they would run say 6 car sets in the peak period on the NSL.  It's unlikely that they would run 10 car sets.  

My view is that more CC trains will run to ST via Strathfield instead, bearing in mind that there is spare capacity on the Main and the ST yard is being reconfigured to allow an increase in terminating services, including South Coast.  We shall just have to wait and see how it pans out.
Transtopic
The govt has said, 4, 6 and 10 car sets.
  Transtopic Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney
In short the tunnel and yard at St Leonards would enable the Lavender Bay yard and line to be closed which has significant community benefit with the potential for some high end development.
Good idea.  

The future operation on the NSL after the metro extension will depend on whether the CC Intercity trains continue to operate.  Information posted on this and other forums suggests that the D-sets will only operate in 4, 6 and 10 car sets, not 8 cars.  If that's the case, then it is questionable whether they would run say 6 car sets in the peak period on the NSL.  It's unlikely that they would run 10 car sets.  

My view is that more CC trains will run to ST via Strathfield instead, bearing in mind that there is spare capacity on the Main and the ST yard is being reconfigured to allow an increase in terminating services, including South Coast.  We shall just have to wait and see how it pans out.
The govt has said, 4, 6 and 10 car sets.
RTT_Rules
That's what I said.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
My view is that more CC trains will run to ST via Strathfield instead, bearing in mind that there is spare capacity on the Main and the ST yard is being reconfigured to allow an increase in terminating services, including South Coast.  We shall just have to wait and see how it pans out.
Following on from my previous comment above, there is another option if it's decided not to run the D-sets on the North Shore Line.  That is to allocate some of the cascaded H-sets, with or without toilets, to run this specific service in 8 car sets during peak hours.  However, I still prefer my earlier suggestion to enable the NSL to operate with a single all stops pattern exclusively for suburban services, as it will be speeded up with the ATP/ATO upgrade anyway.  Intermediate terminals at North Sydney and/or St Leonards and Lindfield and/or Gordon.
Transtopic
With Metro extension to city, either Gordon or Lindfield turn backs will surely be closed.

The single stopping pattern from Hornsby is a no brainer, but from Berowa and Central Coast, no, in both peak and non-peak. The tunnel by-pass of W&W enables these services to save 5-6min.
  tazzer96 Chief Commissioner

What's the point of closing the turnbacks.  A very tiny savings of maintenence?   Better to have them and use them for weekend maintenence or when operational problems requires them.
  nswtrains Chief Commissioner

In short the tunnel and yard at St Leonards would enable the Lavender Bay yard and line to be closed which has significant community benefit with the potential for some high end development.
Good idea.  

The future operation on the NSL after the metro extension will depend on whether the CC Intercity trains continue to operate.  Information posted on this and other forums suggests that the D-sets will only operate in 4, 6 and 10 car sets, not 8 cars.  If that's the case, then it is questionable whether they would run say 6 car sets in the peak period on the NSL.  It's unlikely that they would run 10 car sets.  

My view is that more CC trains will run to ST via Strathfield instead, bearing in mind that there is spare capacity on the Main and the ST yard is being reconfigured to allow an increase in terminating services, including South Coast.  We shall just have to wait and see how it pans out.
The govt has said, 4, 6 and 10 car sets.
That's what I said.
Transtopic
Wrong. 8 car trains will also be run according to D set car markers placed up the mountains line.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

A 2.0 km twin bore tunnel will cost around $500m
RTT_Rules

In which country?

On the cost saving how many trains a day save 5min and 1km in travel per trip?
RTT_Rules

$4/car-km means  $4 x 8 cars x 300 trains per day x 365 days a year = $3.5mil pa  or an ROI of 0.7% (even if you accept $500m capital cost, and ignore $/carkm is grossed up, not the marginal cost of operations)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against this project and can see plenty of merit in it, but like most Sydney Trains projects, it's only worth doing if you take a holistic view and knock down a few of the other bumps in the rug at the same time.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
What's the point of closing the turnbacks.  A very tiny savings of maintenence?   Better to have them and use them for weekend maintenence or when operational problems requires them.
tazzer96
I said turnback! singular, pick one. They are two stations apart, are both needed long-term. I believe Lindfield may have been out of use for a number of years, not sure.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
A 2.0 km twin bore tunnel will cost around $500m

In which country?

On the cost saving how many trains a day save 5min and 1km in travel per trip?

$4/car-km means  $4 x 8 cars x 300 trains per day x 365 days a year = $3.5mil pa  or an ROI of 0.7% (even if you accept $500m capital cost, and ignore $/carkm is grossed up, not the marginal cost of operations)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against this project and can see plenty of merit in it, but like most Sydney Trains projects, it's only worth doing if you take a holistic view and knock down a few of the other bumps in the rug at the same time.
djf01
Cost of building a single bore single tunnel with no stations. Look it up. Inland railway has a couple this long.

+

50,000 or so people who use the train through here save 10min return a day, 50min a week.

We talk about the 30min city, this goes some way in supporting this.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

What's the point of closing the turnbacks.  A very tiny savings of maintenence?   Better to have them and use them for weekend maintenence or when operational problems requires them.
tazzer96
Agreed, especially with Chatswood 2&3 a metro line these passthroughs (not turnbacks) at Lindfield and Gordon will be quite handy to have.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: