Should only take about 20 seconds if well handled by all involved and the passengers stay out of the way - preferably by going to the next door as soon as they see ramp.Liamena wrote: An incident causing an extra minute dwell time ( like loading a wheelchair }
I was referring to any initial delay on the North Shore Line, whether it be 10 mins or half an hour. In the meantime, the metro will be disgorging a train load of passengers at Chatswood every 4 mins in the peak and with the added volume of local passengers boarding at Chatswood, it presents a serious safety issue through overcrowding on the platform. I hope they have a contingency plan for such an eventuality, because it's bound to happen at some stage.Liamena wrote:This is a bit of a misconception in my opinion.Transtopic wrote:...particularly if there are delays on the North Shore Line, which can happen with such a tight schedule.
Customer only care about "delays" if there is no train to catch.
Suppose there is a "sick passenger" somewhere, which stops the trains for half an hour. That is definitely a problem while there is no actual train for half an hour.
Now suppose that delay makes every train for the rest of the day run technically half an hour late. Customer probably won't even notice. Customer walks down the steps at platform 3 at Town Hall at 5:18 to catch the 5:20 train to Turramurra, they probably won't even notice that the train which comes at 5:20 is actually the 4:40 which is actually running 40 minutes late. They won't know or care that there were no trains at all for 40 minutes, three hours earlier.
All the trains running half an hour late might be a problem at the terminus, or for returning services, or traindrivers shifts getting disrupted. For the customers, not so much.
A breakdown or obstructin of some kind will cause delays whether there is a high volume of trains, or not. "Tight schedules" tend to cause delays only if there are conflicting movements. An incident causing an extra minute dwell time ( like loading a wheelchair } can have a flow-on effect where all the following trains have to slow down for signals. This often happens towards the end of peak hour. This is not really a big deal for customers as long as the trains keep running. If the key performance indicators are making it a big deal, then perhaps they are measuring the wrong thing.
The NSW Auditor-General's report into passenger rail punctuality actually made this recommendation to move to a customer outcome measure which would shift the focus to minimising customer delays, rather than maximising train punctuality statistics. This is based on the London system which measures Excess Journey Time and Lost Customer Hours.Liamena wrote:If the key performance indicators are making it a big deal, then perhaps they are measuring the wrong thing.
This exact scenario happens often in the morning peak when full Central Coast trains are running a couple of minutes late at Hornsby and are then delayed further, as priority is given to empty suburban trains exiting the yard on time. The fully loaded Central Coast train then ends up 15 minutes late, but only 1 train is late. What's better, 3 trains running 4 minutes late, or 1 train running 15 minutes late?One train has many passengers but is running late. Another train has a handful of passengers but is on time. Giving priority to the train with a handful of passengers would maximise punctuality results, but result in longer customer delay.
Apart from Epping, you can add Eastwood to that as well. It's the elephant in the room. It's a late starter, but there's already around 1,000 apartments under construction or in the planning phase and it hasn't scratched the surface yet. Further upgrading of the Town Centre planning controls will result in significantly more development. The same could be said for West Ryde.swtt wrote:After reading the latest Rhodes East Precinct plans last night, I suspect a Rhodes Turnback might be needed to start trains fresh from there, instead of Platform 3. Trains ex Epping will be of no use by that time as Meadowbank will have been filled to the brim with new apartments, as well as Rhodes!
That's because if my speculations are about these terminators are correct, that would kick in as ECRL is shut down, not in this 2017 TTandy_centralcoast wrote:Interestingly I couldn't see any Rhodes or Lindfield terminators/starters in the new timetable and it appears T1 Northern and North Shore stopping patterns are mostly unchanged.
This was discussed at some length in http://www.busaustralia.com/forum/viewt ... =3&t=84922ay7744 wrote:The 170 has been running on weekends frequently quite a bit recently but did the government ever announce the 170 commencing?
A little bit like the M30 TT -- no timing point at Spit Junction for around half of the trips!hornetfig wrote:Why do you think that? It looks like the timetable has removed all the timing points, but I don't think there's any further route changes.
That timetable is so weird. Are they seriously going to have half the trips make a detour via Spit Rd?swtt wrote: A little bit like the M30 TT -- no timing point at Spit Junction for around half of the trips!
Some other changes that were not heralded:ay7744 wrote:The 170 has been running on weekends frequently quite a bit recently but did the government ever announce the 170 commencing?
Liamena wrote:I saw some grumbling today online, I think from "The Australian", commuters from Fairfield complaining about journey time to the city increasing from 40 to 50 minutes.
It's an improvement, said the government spokesperson, they now have frequent services to Leppington.
Usual bias from the government. Blatant disregard of the fact that many Fairfielders actually commute to the city. A close friend of mine is one of many of those Fairfielders that has to ride from Smithfield then ride into the CBD.