Sydney Metro

[somebody]

It was always going to happen this way.  This is just formalising the inevitable.

[Stillwater]

Well, Queensland could turn the situation quickly to its advantage, by dusting off the Sunshine Coast Line duplication working drawings and submitting them to IA.  The EIS is complete, and it has the Coordinator-General's final sign-off; much of the land has been bought already.  While contemplating the CRR situation, and without prejudicing the case for federal funding of that project, Queensland could take advantage of NSW's dilemma by laying claim to some of the money freed up due to IA's refusal to fund the North-West rail link.  We will have to wait and see whether NSW will back down and opt to build Epping-Parramatta anyway.

[#Metro]

You can't make a proposal for project X and then switch it for a totally different project, and circumvent the assessment process. We are talking BILLIONS AND BILLIONS of dollars here. Why are they so capricious with the funding proposals?

[justanotheruser]

yep once again political games. state govt says people voted for this proposal. Well then let the state govt deliver on its promise and build the NW link. They knew at the time they did not have IA approval. the state election was held after the federal elction where the promise was made to fund epp-p'matta link. if it is about keeping promises then federal has to keep money for what they promised. just typical NSW pollies trying to change the rules again!

[somebody]

Shane, the connection via North Strathfield is not in the current plans.  This doesn't really matter though - you can send the upper northern line trains that way if you can send them somewhere after Redfern.  T4NSW preferred plans are to send them to Sydney Terminal.  Alternate option is truncate half of the NWRL trains (8tph) at Chatswood.  Either way you still need to cull a couple of via Gordon trains.

I dispute the merits of this project for other reasons too.  I crapped on about it here: http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=4245.0

[#Metro]

These state governments need to learn how to COMMIT to their words!

[somebody]

These state governments need to learn how to COMMIT to their words!

I wouldn't have any fear in this case.

[O_128]

While I personally thing the NW rail link is utter waste of money ( your own fault for not buying in an area with PT, similar to springfield) and that 8billion would be much better spent on a solution for the northern beaches/military road. you can't argue that its what people want. Chances are most people will be using it to get to chatswood anyway.

[somebody]

While I personally thing the NW rail link is utter waste of money ( your own fault for not buying in an area with PT, similar to springfield) and that 8billion would be much better spent on a solution for the northern beaches/military road. you can't argue that its what people want. Chances are most people will be using it to get to chatswood anyway.

That may be but I do not think the people understand the net loss in PT use which is sure to result from this project proceeding.

[somebody]

Barry re-affirms commitment to the line.

Interesting that the Bullet Bus is considering adding services.  That is an unsubsidised service ($8/trip) which guarantees a seat and is more comfortable.

[somebody]

Here is what IA said:

Press Release: North West Rail Link—Infrastructure Australia Stands by its Analysis
7 May 2012

National Infrastructure Coordinator, Michael Deegan, has confirmed that the NSW Government's analysis of the North West Rail Link is still being considered for Infrastructure Australia to recommend the project join the national infrastructure priority list.

Mr Deegan said, Infrastructure Australia is an independent advisory body to governments, industry and the community. It is supported by both sides of politics.

Our role is to provide independent advice on projects in order to protect taxpayers' money.

It is up to governments to then decide which projects to fund.

I acknowledge that the NSW Government has undertaken some good work in developing the proposal for the North West Rail Link, said Mr Deegan.

Whilst that work is worthwhile, it has not yet made a compelling case for this project.

A further meeting to progress this matter had been proposed for today by Infrastructure Australia, though the NSW Government has at the last minute declined to attend.

Mr Deegan said, We have to remember that we are talking about a project estimated to cost $8.5 billion. It is not a small amount of money.

The NSW Government submission provided only preliminary economic analysis and that analysis shows that on the Government's own figures the project is of marginal economic benefit.

Mr Deegan said, In addition, the submission has left unanswered the question as to how rail network capacity problems from Chatswood into the CBD are to be addressed. There may be interim solutions, for example terminating some trains on the lower north shore, but these have not been presented to us.

At a deeper level, we also have a question about whether this project is obviously the highest priority project in Sydney.

If this project goes ahead, what other projects do not go ahead? Mr Deegan said.

Unless we look at different ways of funding transport projects, the harsh reality is that government budgets probably only have enough capacity over the next 25 years to build two new rail projects in Sydney.

We want to make sure that, before governments commit significant funding to these sorts of projects, we are absolutely sure they represent the best way of meeting Sydney's long term needs.

Mr Deegan said, With Sydney growing to a population of between 6–7 million in the next 30 years, and much of that growth occurring in western Sydney, we might be better served by a north west link that can build up Parramatta as a second CBD.

I stress that I'm not talking about the Parramatta-Epping rail link. That project is not on Infrastructure Australia's priority list.

Mr Deegan concluded, Compared to the level of analysis we have seen from some other governments, on similarly large projects, the analysis to date from the NSW Government on the North West Rail Link is quite limited.

Those other submissions have provided detailed economic analysis, rigorous assessment of project risks and complete environmental impact statements.

That work has not yet been undertaken for the North West Rail line.

Media Contact
Stephen Alchin
0408 668 614

Doesn't show the NSW govt in a good light!

[Stillwater]

It shows CRR in a good light.

[somebody]

Nine news:

ABC:

Basically all the same, but 10 include that Bullet bus are thinking of adding services.  ABC have a greater emphasis on the lack of capacity to run trains into the CBD.

[somebody]

Infrastructure chief blasts lack of detail over $8.5b rail link
Jacob Saulwick, Sean Nicholls
May 8, 2012

.

Third option ... the Parramatta lord mayor, Lorraine Wearne, proposes a light rail system across western Sydney. Photo: Ben Rushton

THE state government has still not explained how it plans to incorporate trains from the north west rail link into the rest of the network, in the wake of criticism of the line by the federal infrastructure adviser.

Infrastructure Australia, the federal government's adviser, wrote to the state government two months ago questioning whether it was worth spending $8.5 billion on the line to Sydney's north west suburbs, and lamenting a lack of detail about the plan.

The criticism, released yesterday by the state government, mirrors arguments made internally by Barry O'Farrell's advisory body, Infrastructure NSW.
Advertisement: Story continues below

The chief executive of Infrastructure Australia, Michael Deegan, said he was not convinced the long-promised rail link to Rouse Hill was the top transport priority, and it was based on little economic analysis.

Mr Deegan instead expressed support for focusing on transport links around Parramatta. He added he had been given no information on how the state government planned to bring trains to the city from the north west when train paths into the city were almost full.

''We can't see what happens at Chatswood,'' Mr Deegan told the Herald. ''The capacity between Chatswood and Wynyard is limited on current arrangements.''

''What happens when you bring those extra trains into Chatswood? Do you unload them and then everybody changes? What do you do with those trains already loaded from Hornsby on the North Shore line? It is all those rail issues - all we've asked is that they work with us on trying to find a solution.''

The Transport Minister, Gladys Berejiklian, however, rejected Mr Deegan's criticism. She said the government had put together a 2200-page environmental impact statement and a ''detailed'' submission to Infrastructure Australia of more than 70 pages.

As for concerns it had provided only ''limited'' economic analysis, Ms Berejiklian argued the business case for the north west rail link was superior to the federal government's preferred rail project - the Parramatta to Epping link - for which it had earmarked $2.1 billion.

''In terms of the detail and economic analysis, what the federal government has allocated the money for simply does not stack up from a business case perspective,'' she said.

She said the rail line's connection to the rest of the network would be addressed in a new master plan, due to be finished at the end of the year.

Asked if the chairman of Infrastructure NSW, Nick Greiner, believed the north west rail link was the top transport infrastructure priority, the Premier, Barry O'Farrell, said: ''What Nick Greiner believes is the government is delivering this project in line with the commitment that we gave''.

He said the north west rail link was ''a priority that 2.1 million people voted for''.

Mr O'Farrell said discussions with the federal Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, were ongoing.

''Should there be a change of federal government, we are looking towards a fairer share of infrastructure funding,'' he said

The lord mayor of Parramatta, Lorraine Wearne, said the federal government should redirect funding from the Epping to Parramatta line to a light rail network around western Sydney.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/infrastructure-chief-blasts-lack-of-detail-over-85b-rail-link-20120507-1y91d.html#ixzz1uEf8Q2R4

I still can't believe they wouldn't explain what happens between Chatswood and the CBD.  This explanation is in T4NSW documents, at least in part.  It isn't pretty but it is there.

[#Metro]

I still can't believe they wouldn't explain what happens between Chatswood and the CBD.  This explanation is in T4NSW documents, at least in part.  It isn't pretty but it is there.

It must disappear into a magic portal to pop out at central!

SERIOUSLY how can you pitch an $8 BILLION dollar project and overlook the geometry.

[somebody]

I still can't believe they wouldn't explain what happens between Chatswood and the CBD.  This explanation is in T4NSW documents, at least in part.  It isn't pretty but it is there.

It must disappear into a magic portal to pop out at central!

SERIOUSLY how can you pitch an $8 BILLION dollar project and overlook the geometry.

Probably wasn't overlooked.  Just too ugly to mention.

[colinw]

I still can't believe they wouldn't explain what happens between Chatswood and the CBD.  This explanation is in T4NSW documents, at least in part.  It isn't pretty but it is there.

It must disappear into a magic portal to pop out at central!

SERIOUSLY how can you pitch an $8 BILLION dollar project and overlook the geometry.

One word which has more influence on the shape of Australia's railway system than any other: POLITICS

[ozbob]

http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/media-releases/submissions-closing-soon-north-west-rail-link-eis

Submissions closing soon on North West Rail Link EIS

Submissions closing soon on North West Rail Link EIS

Minister for Transport Gladys Berejiklian today reminded the community to have their
say on the first Environmental Impact Statement for the North West Rail Link – with
public submissions due to close soon.

"We've already seen strong interest in the Environmental Impact Statement public
consultation process – but it is also important that people follow that through and
make a formal submission," Ms Berejiklian said.

"This is the chance to have your say on the North West Rail Link, with the first of the
two environmental impact statements covering major construction works, tunnelling,
building the Skytrain structure and railway station excavation."

The Environmental Impact Statement is on public display until Monday, 21 May, after
48 days of exhibition.

Ms Berejiklian said more than 500 people attended five public information sessions
across the North West for the first Environmental Impact Statement.

Latest figures reveal more than 3100 people have been to the North West Rail Link's
Community Information Centre at Castle Hill since it opened last July.

The North West Rail Link website – www.northwestrail.com.au – is proving to be
enormously popular with the community.

As of this week, 43,858 people have visited the site a total of 118,497 times. In just the
past week there have been more than 3000 visits. And 18,549 people have
downloaded 61,796 documents from the site.

"We're moving full steam ahead with a total of 15 major tenders and 25 contracts
awarded for a wide variety of works on the North West Rail Link," Ms Berejiklian said.

"The NSW Government has held more than 40 sessions with organisations including
tunnel contractors, civil contractors, financial institutions, railway and systems
specialists.

"The interest from international firms shows this is a world class infrastructure project,
and reflects the NSW Government's determination to deliver the best outcome for the
local community."

[ozbob]

From Hills News click here!

Driverless trains touted for Sydney link

Driverless trains touted for Sydney link
MICHAELA WHITBOURN
08 Jun, 2012 03:24 PM

The NSW government has investigated running driverless trains on the $8.5 billion North-West Rail Link, in a move that could spark tensions with transport unions over potential job cuts­.

Documents obtained by The Australian Financial Review under freedom of information laws show the Coalition told the private sector last year that trains on the 23 kilometre line to Sydney's growing Hills District could be run automatically.

It comes as London Mayor Boris Johnson pushes for driverless trains on the city's underground rail network to cut fares and smash the city's powerful transport unions.

A report prepared for cabinet by the government department, Transport for NSW, reveals the O'Farrell government met last year with companies behind the driverless Dubai Metro and Canada Line trains, which are run remotely from a central control room.

In briefing notes for market soundings between July and September last year, Transport for NSW lists, among draft initial requirements for the rail link, the "potential for automatic train ­operations".

The ability to automate trains on the line extending Sydney's CityRail network from Epping to Rouse Hill was one of the factors that would "enable rail services to operate cost effectively", the notes say. Automatic train operations, including driverless trains, are already used in dozens of cities such as Dubai, Vancouver, Singapore, Tokyo and London. Rio Tinto plans to run driverless trains on its private iron ore railway in the Pilbara region of Western ­Australia.

Asked if the government would rule out using driverless trains on the North-West Rail Link, NSW Transport Minister Gladys Berejiklian said Monday: "We are planning for the trains on this important rail link to have drivers."

The line is not expected to be completed until about 2019-20. In London, the Docklands light railway, which services parts of east and south London including the Canary Wharf business district, is run without drivers but a train ­captain can take over in emergencies.

[somebody]

You also have Nth line trains starting from Epping. Are these full by Straithfield?

Very much so.  Have a look at Cityrail's website, which has stats.

[ozbob]

From the Telegraph click here!

North West Rail Link an all out insult to those in the Hills

North West Rail Link an all out insult to those in the Hills

    Andrew Clennell and Henry Budd
    The Daily Telegraph
    June 21, 2012 12:00AM

THE North West Rail Link will now end at Chatswood - where passengers will have to change from a single-deck train to a double-deck train to get into the city.

The shock announcement was made by Premier Barry O'Farrell and Transport Minister Gladys Berejiklian yesterday, as they presented a "20-year rail plan" for Sydney, involving the "metrofication" of the city's rail network.

Under the plan, the government said the $8.5 billion North West Rail Link - which will now be a Rouse Hill to Chatswood line - would be privately built and operated.

Single-deck trains for North West

Trains on the current Epping to Chatswood line would change to single deck.

The pair also announced the government would eventually build a second Sydney Harbour rail crossing, allowing single deck rapid-transit "metro" services from Chatswood to Redfern and then out to Hurstville and Cabramatta.

The rest of the carriages on the rail network would remain double decker.

But the Transport Minister admitted she could not put a price on the second Harbour crossing, which some have said could cost up to $10 billion.

"If I stand accused of not giving a figure on that, I'm quite happy to stand accused on that point," she said.

"When I have done sufficient homework on what it will cost, I will tell you."

The second Harbour crossing announcement was immediately undermined by Infrastructure NSW tsar Nick Greiner: "A second Harbour crossing is very, very expensive and might well not be necessary and will be a very, very long time in the future."

Mr Greiner confirmed, however, that Infrastructure NSW had lobbied hard for the change from double-decker trains into the city to a single deck northwest private line which ends at Chatswood.

"We think the government has made fantastic progress in coming from its original plan to that one," Mr Greiner said.

"It's far and away the best thing for the rail network."

Opposition Leader John Robertson accused the government of its biggest broken promise since the election - not providing direct services from Rouse Hill to the city.

"What the people of the northwest are going to get is a shuttle service," Mr Robertson said.

Ms Berejiklian said the decision to build an independent metro service was influenced by submissions from industry experts and the community.

"I assumed when I became Transport Minister that double decks were the way to go but expert advice, community input, industry input ... and also looking at what happens around the world (changed my mind)," she said.

"We are the only major city in the world that has solely double deckers. If you want to increase services ... and get more people catching transport ... you have to make this huge change."

Quizzed on whether commuters would be left stranded at Chatswood because of overcrowded trains, Ms Berejiklian said a timetable rewrite would increase services between Chatswood and the CBD from 16 to 20 an hour.

The Premier said a new "rapid transit" metro system - in which northwest trains would run every three to five minutes - was what commuters wanted and they would be able to simply "walk across the platform" to the city-bound train.

Former premier Morris Iemma, who proposed a $12 billion northwest metro line in 2008, yesterday predicted that, when the government went to tender, the private sector would suggest a direct metro line to run from the northwest to the city.

[SurfRail]

Shock announcement?  I'm sure most of us could see this coming from miles away...

[somebody]

Shock announcement?  I'm sure most of us could see this coming from miles away...

I didn't expect the bit about connecting the NW to Bankstown and Hurstville coming.  That makes no sense at all - positively stupid.

[SurfRail]

Shock announcement?  I'm sure most of us could see this coming from miles away...

I didn't expect the bit about connecting the NW to Bankstown and Hurstville coming.  That makes no sense at all - positively stupid.

But it's not really.  (Still stupid, I agree, but at least Chatswood to Bankstown appears to be operationally discrete.)

I'm really perplexed why places like Villawood and Regents Park need metro-level services.

[ozbob]

From Hills News click here!

Commuters outraged by government north west rail link backflip

Commuters outraged by government north west rail link backflip
BY SALLY WILLOUGHBY
26 Jun, 2012 12:00 AM

RESIDENTS are outraged the state government has backflipped on its promise to deliver a direct train service to the city.

But Transport Minister Gladys Berejikilian has tried to soften the blow saying the North West Rail Link will be the first in Sydney to deliver "world class rail technology" on the network.

The link will now be a single-deck network, meaning trains will terminate at Chatswood because they can't travel into the city on Sydney's existing double deck network.

There will be no timetable with a new train running every five minutes during peak hour.

More trains — one every three minutes — will be put on the North Shore line.

But residents have labelled the announcement another "broken promise" from the government because they are being "financially penalised" because of where they live.

The Hills Transport Working Group chairman James Fiander said the North West Rail Link was no longer a "strategic corridor" to accommodate future growth.

"[Now] it is a north-west shuttle service to Chatswood, an expensive compromise that doesn't fix any of the issues encountered by residents and commuters in north-western Sydney every single day," Mr Fiander said.

Hills councillor Ray Harty said commuters wanted convenience.

"If anyone believes catching a train to Chatswood and then being packed in like sardines to the city is going to encourage people to get out of their cars — it simply won't," Cr Harty said.

But Ms Berejiklian said the North West Rail Link was a new generation system that would eventually be rolled out across other parts of the network.

"Let's define convenience," Ms Berejiklian told the News last week. "Convenience is getting to your destination in the quickest time possible.

"I'd rather save time getting somewhere, and if I have to cross a platform and wait for a train for three minutes I'd much rather do that than sit in traffic for an hour and a half."

A train trip from Rouse Hill into the city is expected to take less than an hour, including the changeover at Chatswood.

[SurfRail]

But Ms Berejiklian said the North West Rail Link was a new generation system that would eventually be rolled out across other parts of the network.

"Let's define convenience," Ms Berejiklian told the News last week. "Convenience is getting to your destination in the quickest time possible.

"I'd rather save time getting somewhere, and if I have to cross a platform and wait for a train for three minutes I'd much rather do that than sit in traffic for an hour and a half."

Get up here quick Gladys, we need you!

Apart from the various faults with what is being proposed, her mindset is very much in the right place, unlike that of a certain large metropolitan council...

[somebody]

To be honest, I expect that they will be deservedly punished in the polls.  The question is whether or not it will be enough to turf them out of office?

Either they knew that there was no capacity between Chatswood and the CBD for these trains and were silent on what they would do about it, which would be dishonest, or they didn't know (unlikely) which would be incompetent.

I didn't expect the bit about connecting the NW to Bankstown and Hurstville coming.  That makes no sense at all - positively stupid.

But it's not really.  (Still stupid, I agree, but at least Chatswood to Bankstown appears to be operationally discrete.)

I don't know what you mean by this.

I'm really perplexed why places like Villawood and Regents Park need metro-level services.

Conversely, these places do NOT need double deck services either.

[justanotheruser]

if they wanted the convienence they wouldn't have moved there.

What is the big deal simon? and not knowing would not always mean incompeteance either.

You don't seem sure of things. Why is chatswood to bankstown stupid yet chatswood to blacktown so clever?

[somebody]

if they wanted the convienence they wouldn't have moved there.

What is the big deal simon? and not knowing would not always mean incompeteance either.

You don't seem sure of things. Why is chatswood to bankstown stupid yet chatswood to blacktown so clever?

Do you have a knowledge of the Cityrail system to mix it with mine?  Obviously not!!

To answer your specific questions: What is urgently needed infrastructure wise is increased paths for the Western Line.  There is no need for more infrastructure to increase services to the Bankstown line, or the Illawarra line.  The proposal to push over two tracks of the Illawarra line to metro effectively blocks paths through the ESR/Illawarra line.  I suggest you read my blog, I can't be bothered typing any more.

[somebody]

Oh and I would also add that the ALP didn't point out these limitations loudly enough, which was political incompetence.

[somebody]

As opposed to just another grand plan like the previous govt.

Err, NO

The phase two aspects of this plan are exactly the sorts of things the Carr/Iemma/Rees governments were doing.

There are 3 proposed Metro routes on south side that will share the traffic coming down from the Chatswood, currently and in future for many years, none will probably need a 3-5min service, but all three combined make could use of the 3-5min frequency from Chatswood. ie 15min on south line, 10min on Bankstowns line with half going one way and half the other way. All three of these routes as far as I know don't share with freight or long haul pax and can run seperate to the rest of network due to quads etc, so it was an obvious choice. The southern line option basically means that Cityrail trains can run near express from Hurtsville as you have a frequent metro running parrellel most of the way.

No, there is freight on the Illawarra western track pair.  Otherwise how would it reach Chullora from the South Coast?  Maldon-Dombarton would have been an alternative, but it doesn't look like that is happening.

These comments apply to you as well as JAU:

What is urgently needed infrastructure wise is increased paths for the Western Line.  There is no need for more infrastructure to increase services to the Bankstown line, or the Illawarra line.  The proposal to push over two tracks of the Illawarra line to metro effectively blocks paths through the ESR/Illawarra line.  I suggest you read my blog

[justanotheruser]

if they wanted the convienence they wouldn't have moved there.

What is the big deal simon? and not knowing would not always mean incompeteance either.

You don't seem sure of things. Why is chatswood to bankstown stupid yet chatswood to blacktown so clever?

Do you have a knowledge of the Cityrail system to mix it with mine?  Obviously not!!

To answer your specific questions: What is urgently needed infrastructure wise is increased paths for the Western Line.  There is no need for more infrastructure to increase services to the Bankstown line, or the Illawarra line.  The proposal to push over two tracks of the Illawarra line to metro effectively blocks paths through the ESR/Illawarra line.  I suggest you read my blog, I can't be bothered typing any more.

ok same question but hornsby via main line going to hornsby via north shore. makes little sense. there is no need for it other than it is a place for the trains to go. That is all this is. Bankstown is a place to go. So they aren't doing anything different there. For that reason I disagree on it being silly. Is it the best thing to do? maybe not.

I will happily admit I no longer have the best knowledge of anyone here when it comes to city rail network. Too long out of the loop.

One other thing I don't understand unless you were being sarcastic but there isnothing about your post to suggest that. Why does something the ALP failed to do mean the coalition is incompetant?

[somebody]

There is no need to remove the Bankstown trains from the city circle to accommodate extra Western Line trains.  The Bankstown line could easily be accommodated on the Museum leg of the city circle, however some AM trains attach to the Town Hall leg, I think to increase capacity between Central and Town Hall for people interchanging off interurbans, and I guess off Musuem leg trains.  The issue is what happens between Granville and Macdonaldtown on the locals.  Throwing more trains into this mix can only serve to slow down the existing services, to nearer the speed of the all stop services.  Also speed restrictions are slower on the locals.  You didn't see them do it this way pre-ECRL.  They preferred running additional trains into Sydney Terminal.  What does that tell you about the merit of this plan?

As for this plan happening; only phase one of this plan is going to happen.  Phase two will never happen in anything like the form proposed.  When governments put up a plan which requires them to survive 2-3 elections you can bet your bottom dollar that the plan will change even if the government doesn't.

[somebody]

I counted 13 trains on the local according to timetable between 7:50 and 8:50 unless I missed something.

With a mix of all stopping and express services.

How will the Metro help?

Trains from Macurthur to go East Hills
Trains from SW Link to go via Granville, all to Straithfeild (ex Clyde and Auburn), then express to city via middle tracks
Trains from Emu Plains all to Straithfield (ex Toon - WW, H Park, Clyde, Auburn), then express to city via middle tracks
Trains starting from Seven Hills/Richmond will be all to city via locals, but cross platform change available to express at Blacktown or Paramatta etc.

Liverpool via RP would obviously cease.

Express trains that could otherwise connect with Carlingford services would stop at Clyde.

- SW Link trains feed Macurthur via City Circle
- Blacktown/Richmond feed to Revesby (could continue if required) via City Circle

- Hornbsy via Epping to Berowa via bridge
- Emu Plains to Hornsby via bridge

- Y link to be reinstated off peak to increase services on that route and provide easier cross line connections

None of this is enabled by the Metro plan.  It also means the worlds most expensive junction (AIUI) at Glenfield is wasted.

Hornsby via Epping to Berowra?  That would make it pretty challenging to get the Central Coast/Newy trains through.

[somebody]

This should never been allowed to happen.

Absolutely.  Why are you arguing for moves to entrench it? 

Where the local start I don't care, I originally said Parramatta, but the current timetables have them starting Blacktown.

Parramatta isn't a logical origin for city trains.  That would only serve Harris Park, Auburn, Clyde and Flemington (+major stations).  Also a number of people have Parramatta as their destination.

So some trains will speed up and some will slow down.

No, none will speed up.

but no blind Fredding can see that there won't be 3min at Blacktown.

There is already 18tph through Blacktown including Blue Mountains and Richmond trains, so I'm not sure what you mean here.  These trains are already approximately at reasonable capacity so there is little room for growth.

The alt as I believe you suggest is that you want another pair of tracks on Inner Western Main (so we have 3-4 pairs of under used capacity?)

The alt is Western Express Eveleigh-Bangaroo tunnel aka CBD enhancement project, with provision to go under the harbour in the future.  The major limitation of this is that any access of Sydney Terminal will mask a path on the CBD through routes, but that would be OK IMO.  Erskenville-Sydenham sextup will fix this issue for the south when it becomes cost effective.  An alternate fix is adding a double crossover between Erskenville and Redfern.

The Western Express would see the mains being fully utilised between Parramatta and Eveleigh, which is a real positive to the project if you ask me.

Transport for NSW under the present government have acknowledged the need for this previously, the last government said it was needed.  It's pretty brave of the current Minister (and you) to say that her own bureaucrats are wrong.

And you know full well this is a multi multi Billion problem that is going to have a list of MAJOR NIMBY issues as long as the route if above ground and below ground it may actually be cheaper, but its a long way so not free. Does nothing to resolve city capacity or capacity on lower nth shore line which unlike the inner west local is near capacity and does not expand the network.

Refer to the above.  Although the NIMBY element around Eveleigh/Newtown merely needs to be told where to go.  It is that simple.

- The lower Nth shore needs duplicating within 10-20 years

Only because of the NWRL.  No NWRL, no amplification needed.

[somebody]

18 trains per hour on 4 tracks is hardly busy. When there is 30-35 trains, get back to me.

That's like saying that Eastwood should have 30tph because it has a quad.

Running past Granville 3 & 4 violates Clearways, and even if you say that should be done you cannot reach the CBD without stealing paths from some other line.

So its Blacktown all to City on local

Let's just clarify what you are saying here.  You are saying that the trains which serve Wentworthville should stop at 21 stations before they reach Central.  That will also slow the South Line significantly.  Hope you have a big chequebook to pay for the rolling stock, and a bigger one to pay for the roads to cater for the deterred patronage. 

The NW line is needed, it will be done. To say the with or without the NW line upgarde the southern Nth shore Line doesn't need to to be upgraded when its runnin 18+ trains per hour on 2 tracks as opposed the lighter density western corridore is incorrect.

No it isn't!  There is an easy swing player in the upper northern line which could go back to via Strathfield or terminate at Chatswood/St Leonards.  Indeed the former is what will be happening with the NWRL.

The Western Line's usable paths are much higher density than the North Shore line's.  The Western Line has more patronage at 18465 than the entire North Shore line (including the upper Northern line) compared to 16780 for the North Shore.  The former shares paths with the lower Northern Line at 5365. 

Is 5365 + 18465 < 16780 in Dubai?

Source: http://cityrail.info/about/our_performance/service_capacity.jsp

[Gazza]

http://rtbu-nsw.asn.au/news/6301.html

Lololololol

NSW RTBU Secretary Alex Claassens said commuters would be very alarmed to learn of the
Government's plan to make them catch a train without a competent person at the helm.

Oooh, you can just tell the union is a bit scared.
Commuters "Alarmed" eh? Guess all those people in Vancouver, Singapore, Dubai, London Docklands etc spend their commutes riding in fear.
I think the Qld syndrome is now leaking into NSW...They can't do what the rest of the world does because "We're different".

[somebody]

Reverting to running selected Western Line trains into Sydney Terminal is a more reasonable plan, but that would be very politically unpopular so they aren't going to say that.

[somebody]

Shane, clearly you have some sort of bias, but I'll try not to get too worked up.

Simon,
Pls lets keep Apples with Apples, Eastwood is a passing loop. There are a min of four tracks from St Mary's to Central. Previous comment stands, 4 tracks is not congested until you start talking more than 30t/hr. Please go back and read CRR threads in Qld section.

Umm, unless you are prepared to run past Granville 3 & 4 it is a passing loop also, just a longer one.

Let's assume that you are.  That pushes Richmond into sector 2 (city circle) also.  I'll go on with the limitations of that below (as I have above).

21 stations from Bewora to City (Also ipswich to city), not pretty but with both you have the option of travelling to a major station and swapping to an express, more so on the western corridore. I suspect most people travelling to city from Mt Kuringai do all 20 stations. With Wentworthville there is the Emu Parks trains which I previously explained was all to B'town and limited express to S'field including all major stations and from there express. The local is just that with option to transfer or ride it the whole way.

Emu Plains.  And it's suburbans from Flemington to St Marys

At the moment the South Line isn't so inconveniently slow to make it worthwhile for very many to use a Western Line train to Granville, but on your plan it is most certain that there would be a significant take up of that option.  So assuming that happens, then exactly where does the capacity improvement from this plan come about?  I think your (and Gladys') entire argument hangs on this not occurring in any great amount.

Would you lose people to road if you ran more trains, had more seats? Mains has a consistent stopping pattern, local has a consistent stopping pattern both with more trains than now. How the customer chooses to use either is up to them.

A consistent stopping pattern?  I imagine that pattern would be Red/Str/Gran/Para/Wmead/7Hills/Black.  Slower than Red/Para/Black which is the most popular pattern by far.  Not ideal, but perhaps you are going to argue one can live with it, although it does need more rolling stock.

The need for more rolling stock is like this, as network expands phsyically you need to buy more trains. As patronage grows you need to buy more trains. So what were you going to run on your Western express tracks? Yes you need to buy more trains regarless what you do, but $100m buys alot of trains, it buys F_all underground track.

So you have ~18,000 on western line + 6,000 on Nth Main which has 4 tracks + 2 more from Straithfield for IMU and ~16,000 on Nth shore line and you want to build more infrastructure on the west? Yes even in Dubai this doesn't make sense.

There is only two tracks (one per direction) Redfern-North Sydney.  Arguing that there are 6 tracks is just disingenuous.  Why not measure it at Doonside, Marayong and Eastwood?  That would give you 10.

Even with your argument that the remaining 7 paths/hour on the Town Hall leg of the City Circle should be utilised, including the paths from the Bankstown line, 4 of these paths are utilised by reverting the upper northern line trains to via Strathfield, so only a 12.5% increase on combined Northern Line and Western Line paths is even possible.  Given this is supposed to be a plan to last well over a decade, it isn't a plan at all!  I really do not understand why you choose not to see that.  And I am convinced it is a matter of choosing to see it.

Let's assume that the upper northern line goes into Sydney Terminal and remove it from the capacity calculations.  That does leave a 35% increase theoretically possible which is a bit more reasonable for the Western Line until perhaps 2020, but I dismiss the notion of 20tph past the Macdonaldtown platform faces.   This also ignores the lower northern line, which I am sure will need increased paths sooner rather than later.  Having the upper northern line trains serve Eastwood and West Ryde again will certainly help, but will it be enough?

Further expansion seems unlikely until the 2030s.  Increasing Sydney Terminal paths seems like it wouldn't provide enough capacity until that time.

Not sure what you mean on the Swing Player? But I think yes you could run the new NW services down the main via Straithfield and terminate at Central Terminal and/or western trains. But to do this you need to improve the stopping pattern to increase number of trains/hr. There is also some work required to improve the Quad sth of the bridge to Straithfield and you probably need to Quad through to nth side of bridge to get the track capacity up to enable Newcastle and freight  trains to run through without being slowed. (needs to be done anyway)

This comment just shows how uninformed you are.  There is going to be no connection between Castle Hill and Strathfield, to the chagrin of some.  I'll try my comment again.  Currently, trains serving Pennant Hills are able to go through North Strathfield or through Macquarie Park.  Therefore it can swing between those two routes.  Not when the ECRL becomes a metro though, of course.

The Western Line is too long to be serviced by one service, it needs two tier approach and realistically multi stages, in that when travelling from city you catch an express and then get off at the main station near the smaller local one. With frequency fast enough on local the whole way through, I'm talking 15 (or better) min off-peak and up to 3-5min during peak, transfers should be relatively quick. The turnback at Granville for Clearways, and having to keep Plat 3&4 clear from through running would only make sense if you didn't have enough trains to continue, but honestly I would discontinue this and focus on turning back further out where you have the platform capacity that doesn't reduce track capacity. Thats what Clearways was all about, turning trains around clear of the through route. Think Beenleigh where you have a high number of trains use the two platform station, but to prevent through traffic being held up, the local moves out to the Y turn back.

Not really sure what you are talking about here.  There is no turnback at Granville.

The lower Nth shore is at or near at capacity, there is no room for growth and this is probably adding more to roads than western line which still has growth options.

Please don't troll.  This is clearly incorrect from the capacity stats which Cityrail put out, and I linked to above.  As for the options to allow for future growth, well the 2 additional paths per hour possible is 2 more than there are for the Western+lower Northern lines through to North Sydney, not to mention the possibility of sending Pennant Hills via Strathfield.

Again, please don't troll.

[somebody]

All change, please ... and change again
June 30, 2012

Radical plans to overhaul Sydney's rail system may come at a cost of comfort and convenience, writes Jacob Saulwick.

Sydney's train system was built for places like Beecroft. It was built to allow people to live many kilometres north, west and south of the city centre and be able to hop onto trains near their homes and hop off where they work.

It was built so people could move from the Depression-era slums of The Rocks, Surry Hills and Paddington, and live where trees still grew and the air was clean.

These were the principles on which John Bradfield built the Harbour Bridge and ripped up the CBD to build the City Circle more than 80 years ago.

The Bridge came to define the look of the city. But the Circle would also define the way people moved through it, allowing commuters from outer suburbs to enter the city on trains that would loop around, and then head to more suburbs.

At Beecroft station, about 35 kilometres north-west of the CBD and one of the suburban stations for which the network was designed, commuters this week told the Herald what they liked about the system.

"You want to be comfortable; it is about 50 minutes on the way in and I'll usually study or look through work emails," said Katie Pearce, a law clerk and student who commutes to either her city job or Sydney University.

"A longer commute than an hour would be quite an annoyance" ... Alex Jones commutes to Alexandria. His trip, which involves changing trains at Epping for an express to Central and then a bus to Alexandria, would not change. Photo: Brendan Esposito

"I'll go earlier if it means I will get a seat, I would rather not stand," she said. "I definitely don't like to change trains."

But this model, according to plans being developed by the state government, could be a thing of the past.

At a press conference last week to unveil the latest design for a rail line to the transport-deficient Hills district, the Premier, Barry O'Farrell, and his Transport Minister, Gladys Berejiklian, discussed changes to Sydney's train system that run deeper than one new line.

"Part of the problem we have today is that we have a clumsy 19th-century-focused double-deck system that keeps trying to have Band-Aid solutions," Berejiklian said.

And so she foreshadowed new operating patterns for Sydney's rail network that would mark a philosophical break with the way it has worked since Bradfield's day.

The changes are designed to accommodate the system's worsening crush of commuters. But if implemented they will also mean a different sort of commute for tens of thousands of Sydney residents.

The promise will be more frequent trains. The downside will be less seating, fewer direct trains to the city, and more need to get off and change.

"I've been to Hong Kong; I haven't been to some of the other cities that have fantastic public transport, but why shouldn't we have that in Sydney?," Berejiklian said. "Unless we take the steps now it will never ever happen."

The plan might be progress. But the risks involved have some wondering if Berejiklian and co really know what they are getting into.

It was only the quirks of NSW Labor history that meant O'Farrell and Berejiklian were the first politicians to announce this sort of overhaul of Sydney's train system.

In late 2007, a former chief executive of state rail, Simon Lane, was brought back into the fold by the then Director-General of Transport, Jim Glasson.

Lane's job was to review CityRail's oft-delayed expansion plans.

The government's then policy was to continue with the traditional CityRail model, but to supplement it with new lines to the south-west and north-west eventually connected by a second harbour rail crossing.

But Labor had an atrocious record of finding and allocating the money to these projects. So Lane, a British-born former rail executive in Singapore, looked for ways to prevent the need for a second harbour crossing.

And, with the backing of the RailCorp boss Rob Mason, he started work on schemes to try to turn Sydney's railway system into something more like Singapore or Hong Kong.

The basic idea of what became known as the "Simon Lane plan" was to stop running heavy double-deck trains that could run only every three minutes over the Harbour Bridge.

Instead, Lane argued in reports for Mason, RailCorp should convert to smaller single-deck that could run every two minutes, frequent enough to not require a timetable.

The new model could push more people over the bridge in peak hour, he argued, meaning the second crossing could be put off for decades.

Lane left, but the concepts took hold to the extent that the day Nathan Rees was deposed as premier in December 2009, he was to have released a transport "blueprint" that included converting about a third of the CityRail network to single-deck trains as recommended under the Lane plan.

Rees's blueprint called them "metro-style" trains. Last week, when O'Farrell and Berejiklian went public with them, they branded them "rapid-transit".

Under Rees's blueprint, as with O'Farrell and Berejiklian's plan, the north-west rail link would be built for single-deck services.

Under Rees's blueprint, as with O'Farrell and Berejiklian's plan, the Illawarra Line to Hurstville and the Bankstown Line to Cabramatta would be converted to single-deck trains running at a higher frequency.

The main difference between the two plans is that O'Farrell and Berejiklian are actually going to build the north-west rail link.

And they have also committed, some day in the future, that there will be a second harbour rail crossing on which to run these single-deck trains.

But all these plans involve more than just replacing double-deck trains with single-deck. They also necessitate unpicking the historical model of Sydney's train system that has allowed commuters to board trains in the suburbs and alight in the city.

Take, for instance, the O'Farrell government's model for the north-west rail link, to be opened in about 2019.

The line will be built as a private shuttle between Rouse Hill and Chatswood, meaning the existing Epping to Chatswood line will be handed over to a new private operator. The concept means everyone on that line wanting to get to the city will have to change at Chatswood to get into town.

But it will also mean residents of suburbs north of Epping, places such as Cheltenham, Thornleigh and Beecroft, will have to catch three trains instead of one to get to the lower north shore and the city.

They will get one train to Epping, another on the new private line to Chatswood and a third train south from Chatswood. Commuters are unlikely to get seats on these last two.

Of course, forcing a few thousand people to change is not a disaster. Particularly when you are building a new rail line to suburbs that have never enjoyed one before. But Berejiklian's department is also drawing up proposals for further interchange at other spots on the network.

Documents obtained by the Herald, and previously reported, reveal plans to force thousands of commuters on the Richmond Line to change at Seven Hills to continue to the city, and thousands of commuters at stations south of Epping to change at Central to continue to the city.

The idea is to require fewer lines to merge. Instead, the lines will run in simpler, shuttle patterns, just like they do in Hong Kong.

Dr Dick Day, a former general manager of planning and timetable development at RailCorp who was responsible for planning and development of the timetable for the Olympics, says the north-west plan might work if the second crossing was eventually built.

But in the meantime, there will be plenty of political heat when passengers are forced to stand up and change onto already crowded trains.

"The adverse impact on the very large number of passengers forced to interchange makes the minister's decision to support the metro alternative without detailed public discussion truly heroic," Day says.

Day is less impressed with the proposals to force passengers to interchange off the Richmond Line and from south of Epping. On his reckoning, these plans would have dubious benefit but could each affect about 4000 passengers an hour.

Dr Paul Mees, a senior lecturer in planning at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, is particularly scathing of attempts to try to make Sydney's train system more like Hong Kong.

He has seen it happen in Melbourne. The operator of Hong Kong's metro, MTR, was appointed in 2009 to run the city's train system. It attempted to simplify Melbourne's train patterns and provoked a furore.

"What happens is that people go to Hong Kong and they say: 'Aren't the people that run the system brilliant'," Mees says.

"But they're not, the way the Hong Kong system was designed was brilliant, which meant that idiots could run it. It is a completely inappropriate model to be using in a city that already has a legacy suburban rail system. What we should be doing is looking at comparable cities that manage to get their trains to run reliably."

Mees nominates Paris, Zurich and Copenhagen as examples.

In the meantime, Berejiklian and her advisers, many of whom are the same people in senior positions under the previous government, continue to pursue the goal of a 21st-century railway for Sydney.

The chairman of Infrastructure NSW, the former premier Nick Greiner, has embraced the new model for the north-west as a victory for common sense.

"There is not and there will not be a god-given right for people to go to the corner of their street and get on something and get off where they work in the city," Greiner said last week.

He does not need to get elected.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/all-change-please-8230-and-change-again-20120629-217t5.html