Linto63 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 23, 2020 4:37 pm
gilberations wrote: ↑That’s a benefit of it, not a cause for it. Again though, if you were to turn the Inner West, possibly all the way to Parramatta, into Metro, it would allow for Western/BMT trains to have more paths to run into the city, and again open the city circle for T4.
But for what benefit? In an ideal world each line would be separate from all others, much like how many metro systems operate. Sydney doesn't have that luxury, but the T4 is as close as we have. Running T4 trains from the Illawarra via the City Circle again would mean they have to interact with T2 and T8 trains again, effectively putting it back as it was in the 1970s.
Yes, it would be a backward step and isn't going to happen anyway. The government has already committed to its plan to begin upgrading of T4 to ATO standard with the new Hurstville and Erskineville Crossovers and the ESR will be an integral part of that. Once the T3 Bankstown Line is converted to metro and separated from the existing network, SCO Intercity trains will run on the Illawarra Local from Hurstville to Sydney Terminal and discontinue operating to Bondi Junction. This will free up more paths for Waterfall, Cronulla and Hurstville T4 services on the ESR. ATO will also allow faster services and an increase in frequency to 24tph. That's up from the current 16tph (excluding SCO) - a 50% increase. There's no need to convert the ESR to metro.
The major justification for the Bankstown Line metro conversion was to remove it from the City Circle, freeing up more paths for T2 and T8. When ATO is also rolled out on T2, T8 and the CC, which is planned within the next decade, there will be a total of 48tph paths available on the CC for T2 and T8, compared with the current 30tph (excluding T3 @ 10tph) - a 60% increase.
This will effectively create a further separate line for the Sydney Trains' network with T2 feeding into T8 via the CC (and vice versa), although there will be some cross over via the Central flying junctions. SCO and SHL Intercity and Regional services will also share the express Illawarra Local tracks with T8 between Wolli Creek and the Illawarra Dive at Erskineville/Eveleigh to Sydney Terminal. If increasing demand warranted additional track capacity between Wolli Creek and the Illawarra Dive in the future, particularly if and when the SHL is electrified, then a modified Sydenham to Erskineville sextup could be constructed to allow T8 services exclusive use of the new tracks from Wolli Creek direct to the CC and the existing Illawarra Local from Wolli Creek to the Illawarra Dive to Sydney Terminal would be for the exclusive use of SCO and SHL Intercity and Regional services. It would be expensive though, with an underground link needed between Wolli Creek and the existing sextup track reservation beyond Sydenham. Unfortunately, this is one of the negative consequences of the Bankstown metro line taking over the existing T3 surface platforms 1 and 2 at Sydenham, whereas if they had shown a little more foresight, it's the metro platforms which should have been constructed underground. All T4 services will be separated on the Illawarra Main from Wolli Creek to Bondi Junction and any extension thereof.
On the other side of the ledger, i.e. T2, forming a separate integrated sector with T8, it would be split between Lidcombe and Cabramatta, just as T8 is between Turrella and Central. In its recent community consultation for the operation of the remnants of T3 from Liverpool to Bankstown/Lidcombe after the metro conversion, TfNSW's preferred option was for the Liverpool via Regents Park service to be reinstated, operating in tandem with the Liverpool via Granville service, with a shuttle service between Lidcombe and Bankstown feeding into the metro. We shall have to wait to see what the outcome of that consultation process is.
If it is decided to reinstate the Liverpool via Regents Park service, then it brings into question whether the T2 Parramatta terminators are feasible because of the limited track capacity between Homebush and Granville. There doesn't seem to be an overwhelming preference for a Liverpool to Bankstown shuttle service, requiring interchange to reach the city via the metro, and hence TfNSW preferred option. Considering their metro bias, this says something.
Parramatta platforms 3 & 4 are grossly underutilised in the peak, with just 6tph (4xT2 and 2xT5), while platforms 1 & 2 are operating at maximum capacity of 20tph. This is a direct consequence of the limited track capacity of the Western Line between Homebush and Granville and also to the CBD from Strathfield.
The government through its spin has conned everyone into believing that Metro West will resolve this as well as alleviating overcrowding on the T1 Western Line. It won't. While I fully support Metro West as a valuable addition to Sydney's rail network, servicing a new rail corridor between Parramatta and the CBD, it will do bugger all for increasing capacity for the Outer Western and Richmond Lines and also the T2 South Line via both Granville and Regents Park.
It's bleedingly obvious that sextuplication of the Western Line between Homebush and Granville should have greater priority to increase capacity, enabling more services from the Western, Richmond and South Lines to travel directly into the CBD, without the need to interchange to a metro service, if it was at all ever practicable. The location and design of supposed interchange stations for Metro West at Westmead, Parramatta and North Strathfield (with the Northern Line) are hardly conducive to convenient interchange.
Sextuplication will provide some short to medium term breathing space to increase services on the existing network from the outer suburbs to the CBD by utilising the spare capacity on the Western Main Line tracks from Strathfield to Sydney Terminal. However, eventually further amplification will be needed from Strathfield to the CBD by way of an express tunnel for suburban services to a new terminus in the CBD, such as the previously proposed City Relief Line to Wynyard/Barangaroo via the western fringe of the CBD. The government's current strategy of ignoring infrastructure upgrades to the existing network, i.e. track amplifications and extensions, in favour of the 'one size fits all' metro alternative is flawed. By TfNSW own admission, the existing Sydney Trains' network will continue to provide 80% of rail services, so it can hardly be ignored and will require continuing investment. There is a place for both however, particularly for new segregated metro lines servicing inner and middle ring suburbs, which don't have a rail service. The Northern Beaches and South Eastern suburbs, as well as cross regional links come to mind.
Too many commentators continue to proffer the unrealistic suggestion that much of the existing suburban rail network should be "metrofied". It's neither warranted nor affordable, as well as the disruption caused by closing down existing lines for conversion for extended periods. After the Bankstown Line metro conversion, I don't think there will be too much appetite for further metro conversions in view of the compromises which have to be made in converting a legacy network, compared with a completely segregated greenfield metro.
