Gov't Inquiry - Western Sydney Public Transport

[Transtopic]

Would this extension be of the NW metro, or the Airport metro? Bearing in mind there can't be through running due to different loading gauges.

I believe Nw Metro and Airport metro would meet at Schofields

That's the current proposal, but I think that the interchange point between the incompatible metro systems, which in itself is a questionable decision, should be at Marsden Park. There is likely to be far more travel demand to Macquarie Park, the North Shore and the CBD. If the interchange point is at Schofields, then commuters from Marsden Park heading east will have to change trains, which is absurd.

[Transtopic]

In your usual form, you're making comparisons between the metro and Sydney Trains based on the current timetable for the latter, without acknowledging the improvements in journey times which will be made with the proposed digital signalling and ATO upgrades.

How do you define the Sydney CBD? Is it Central, Town Hall, Wynyard, Hunter Street or Martin Place? Town Hall actually has the highest patronage and with upgrades to the existing network, that is more likely to be where the journey times balance out. Ultimately, the choice of using either system will depend upon your destination. There will still be a need for Richmond Line commuters south of Schofields to travel through to the CBD and depending on their destination, there will be no incentive to interchange to Metro West. Express journey times between Parramatta and the CBD can also be reduced with the upgrades to match if not better the metro.

With regard to duplication of the Richmond Line, I agree that Mulgrave is probably the limit, before the line crosses South Creek. From there, there is an existing crossing loop at Clarendon Station, with only Windsor and East Richmond Stations in between Mulgrave and Richmond potentially being single track. I would think that could facilitate a 15 minute service.

[tonyp]

In your usual form, you're making comparisons between the metro and Sydney Trains based on the current timetable for the latter, without acknowledging the improvements in journey times which will be made with the proposed digital signalling and ATO upgrades.

Well of course, because that's the status at present and for the foreseeable future. We can't conjecture about what Sydney Trains journey times will be in the future, but even if there's an increase in commercial speeds as a result of new signalling and ATO, there's the issue of the functional constraints of double deck trains. If they progressively convert lines to single deck, then we might see some meaningful reduction of journey time discrepancies. At the same time, however, the suburban services still have the issue of skipping stops which is counter to the decentralisation and precinct activation objective. The thing is that the metro serves both objectives - stopping at every station and quicker journey times.

Can't agree that the NW and WSA metros should interchange at Marsden Park. Schofields has connecting train services in three directions and is a logical point for interchange.

[Randomness]

The way I see it, it’s the physical constraints of the suburban network holding it back.

When the Main West was built, we were in the age of steam where it didn’t really matter that a line wasn’t straight because trains were never going to get to that speed. You’d need alignment changes more than signalling changes (though that can go a long way too) to get faster services along the corridor.

It’s slightly hard to buy up the land and shift the line with how slow we do infrastructure projects and how NIMBY people in Sydney are.

The reason metro will be faster is partially automation, but also partially because it’s in new build tunnels where we consider speed based on alignment. If metro were built as a suburban extension, I’d have no doubt the timings would be about the same - considering the 2 had the fair ground of similar alignments and ATO/CBTC.

It would have been difficult, but I think Metro West should have been built with 4 tracks, outer being for suburban (running express), and inner being for metro (stopping). That way, capacity on the Main West could be freed, and services west of Parramatta could benefit from the speed of a new alignment.

Anyways, this probably doesn’t relate to the inquiry and it’s too late for changes but here’s my take.

[tonyp]

The way I see it, it’s the physical constraints of the suburban network holding it back.

When the Main West was built, we were in the age of steam where it didn’t really matter that a line wasn’t straight because trains were never going to get to that speed. You’d need alignment changes more than signalling changes (though that can go a long way too) to get faster services along the corridor.

It’s slightly hard to buy up the land and shift the line with how slow we do infrastructure projects and how NIMBY people in Sydney are.

The reason metro will be faster is partially automation, but also partially because it’s in new build tunnels where we consider speed based on alignment. If metro were built as a suburban extension, I’d have no doubt the timings would be about the same - considering the 2 had the fair ground of similar alignments and ATO/CBTC.

It would have been difficult, but I think Metro West should have been built with 4 tracks, outer being for suburban (running express), and inner being for metro (stopping). That way, capacity on the Main West could be freed, and services west of Parramatta could benefit from the speed of a new alignment.

Anyways, this probably doesn’t relate to the inquiry and it’s too late for changes but here’s my take.

No, that's not the case and the Western line is pretty straight anyway. The principle reason for curvature in the Sydney basin is gradients and heavier double deck trains need more curvature to get up gradients, or else do it more slowly. The metro also curves in order to gain the alignments it needs to approach and leave the stations it serves.

It's only really an issue on the north shore and is the reason for that long curve out of the Lane Cove River valley to Chatswood, which could have been much shorter if it was designed for metro in the first place. There was going to be the same issue approaching a rail tunnel under the harbour, but they chose metro, so the problem disappeared. Out west - no issues at all till you hit the Blue Mountains. So, no, it's not physical constraints in Sydney.

[Transtopic]

In your usual form, you're making comparisons between the metro and Sydney Trains based on the current timetable for the latter, without acknowledging the improvements in journey times which will be made with the proposed digital signalling and ATO upgrades.

Well of course, because that's the status at present and for the foreseeable future. We can't conjecture about what Sydney Trains journey times will be in the future, but even if there's an increase in commercial speeds as a result of new signalling and ATO, there's the issue of the functional constraints of double deck trains. If they progressively convert lines to single deck, then we might see some meaningful reduction of journey time discrepancies. At the same time, however, the suburban services still have the issue of skipping stops which is counter to the decentralisation and precinct activation objective. The thing is that the metro serves both objectives - stopping at every station and quicker journey times.

Can't agree that the NW and WSA metros should interchange at Marsden Park. Schofields has connecting train services in three directions and is a logical point for interchange.

Yeah, I'm sure that an all stations metro service from Emu Plains to Wynyard, with 34 intermediate stops including the Inner West, would go down well. By your logic, Intercity trains should also run all stops.

With regard to an interchange point between the NW and WSA metros, this could have been avoided if they were compatible. I'm not interested in any contrived excuses why through running isn't necessary. The Marsden Park area is more likely to have a greater travel demand to the east and if the interchange point is at Schofields, then commuters will have a 3/4 car train service for a short distance to Schofields and interchanging to continue their journey. It's not exactly user friendly. For travellers from Metro Northwest heading towards WSA, it's not going to make much difference, as they will have to change anyway, whether at Schofields or Marsden Park. The downside is that interchange with the Richmond Line to WSA would require an extra interchange if at Marsden Park, but the incompatibility means someone is going to be disadvantaged when it need not have been the case.

[tonyp]

The suburban system is pretty-much entrenched as a two-tier operation. I'm just saying that that's problematic, but it's too late to do much about it. For example, it's now a problem that Burwood is bypassed by so many services, but at least we have the metro coming up to relieve that.

I would nominate St Marys as the alternative to Schofields as an interchange between the two metro lines, but too late for that option now.

[Transtopic]

The suburban system is pretty-much entrenched as a two-tier operation. I'm just saying that that's problematic, but it's too late to do much about it. For example, it's now a problem that Burwood is bypassed by so many services, but at least we have the metro coming up to relieve that.

I would nominate St Marys as the alternative to Schofields as an interchange between the two metro lines, but too late for that option now.

And what's wrong with a two-tier suburban system, which caters for both long distance outer suburban and inner city all stations services? It's perfectly logical for outer suburban services to skip the minor inner city destinations on their own express tracks for faster journey times.

I agree that Burwood, as the major strategic centre in the Inner West, should be a mandatory stop for all services, including Intercity. It has 6 platforms. The metro station is nowhere near the Burwood CBD. At least the former Labor government's West Metro proposal had the Burwood Station closer, adjacent to the Westfield Shopping Centre and the Burwood Road shopping strip.

I also agree that St Marys could have been an alternative interchange point between the two metro lines, but unless it's feasible to construct another station box, probably not unfortunately. Could have been avoided if the metro lines were compatible.

[Transtopic]

Further to above with regard to an additional station box at St Marys to allow interchange between the incompatible metro systems, it may have been possible to construct a station cavern for the line to Schofields and an extended Metro Northwest under the existing T1 platforms similar to Epping, with a common concourse linking with the current metro station box if it was constructed deeper underground. Obviously, that's no longer feasible, but just saying.

https://i.imgur.com/iuDIf6b.png