Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Sydney / New South Wales Transport Discussion
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21566
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by boronia »

Press release from David Elliott:
SYDNEY METRO LEADS THE WAY WITH AUSTRALIAN FIRST TECHNOLOGY
Sydney Metro is leading the way after awarding a $41 million contract for new technology, the first of its kind in Australia, which will mechanically fill the gap between train and station platforms.
The multi-million dollar contract will see this new mechanical gap filler technology installed at stations between Marrickville and Bankstown.
Minister for Transport, Veterans and Western Sydney David Elliott said commuters on the Bankstown line were a step closer to safer, more accessible platforms after the awarding of the contract.
“Hyundai Movex has been awarded the contract to design, supply and install 150 mechanical gap fillers at eight existing stations between Marrickville and Bankstown, which are currently being upgraded to Sydney Metro standards,” Mr Elliott said.
“The contract also includes 360 platform screen doors for the stations between Marrickville and Bankstown, designed to keep people and objects like prams safe from the gaps between trains and platforms and allow trains to get in and out of stations much faster.
“When a train arrives at a station, the mechanical gap fillers will automatically extend quickly from the platform to the train before the platform screen doors open, allowing safe and easy access for all customers.
“Sydney Metro is Australia’s only fully accessible railway with level access between platforms and trains and lifts at all stations.”
Sydney Metro Chief Executive Peter Regan said the new technology, designed with the curved platforms of the T3 Bankstown line in mind, marked another major milestone on the Sydney Metro City & Southwest project.
“The platform screen doors and mechanical gap fillers have undergone a stringent year-long testing program in a variety of Sydney weather conditions,” Mr Regan said.
“Following a tender process, Hyundai Movex mechanical gap fillers and platform screen doors were selected based on their performance, reliability and safety. The company’s gap filler technology is also used on metro systems in South Korea.”
Hyundai Movex will work with its partners in Australia, including Ricardo Rail to deliver the mechanical gap fillers and platform screen doors this year.
The upgrade of the Bankstown Line to metro standards also means all 10 stations between Marrickville and Bankstown will have lifts – including Punchbowl, Wiley Park, Canterbury, Hurlstone Park and Dulwich Hill which will be made fully accessible for the first time.
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
Randomness
Posts: 205
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2021 3:17 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Anything with an Zf Ecomat
Location: Around the 920

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by Randomness »

“Designed with the curved platforms[…] in mind”

- Does this mean the metro stock can work with the curved platforms? To my knowledge, the lines’ platforms were/are being straightened in preparation.

“Automatically extend before PSDs open”

- Not sure of the failure rate now, but sometimes a train can come in too quickly or slowly and miss the PSDs, requiring loads of time for the train to decide whether to reverse or pull forward (there’s some videos circulating online about this). Can’t imagine anything good happening if there isn’t a system in place to prevent a train moving while the fillers are out.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21566
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by boronia »

It was announced some time ago that the platforms wouldn't be straightened.
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by Transtopic »

Randomness wrote: Fri Jan 13, 2023 6:24 pm “Designed with the curved platforms[…] in mind”

- Does this mean the metro stock can work with the curved platforms? To my knowledge, the lines’ platforms were/are being straightened in preparation.

“Automatically extend before PSDs open”

- Not sure of the failure rate now, but sometimes a train can come in too quickly or slowly and miss the PSDs, requiring loads of time for the train to decide whether to reverse or pull forward (there’s some videos circulating online about this). Can’t imagine anything good happening if there isn’t a system in place to prevent a train moving while the fillers are out.
They abandoned the idea of straightening the platforms on the Bankstown Line long ago, because it just wasn't feasible at some stations where the rail corridor was too constricted. There's nothing to stop the metro trains using curved platforms, which is why they're installing the gap fillers in combination with the PSDs. I'm not sure if every station will have level access from platform to train though, particularly on concave platforms where the track elevation will lift the train up at the platform face. The gap at the centre train doors will be wider on these platforms and the gap fillers will help in alleviating this problem, even if there is no level access.

Not an ideal situation though for a new metro, which is one of the compromises which have to be made when converting existing legacy lines and why I've been against it. Converting the ECRL wasn't much of a problem because it was a new line with straight platforms, although some modifications to the platforms still had to be carried out. The same would go for the SWRL if it is converted to metro. A completely segregated new metro line, which I support, would start with a clean sheet and these compromises wouldn't have to be made.

If a metro train overshoots or undershoots the PSDs (I'll take your word for it that it does happen), then there has obviously been a failure of the ATO, which should allow for consistent operational speeds. I'm sure that there would be adequate safeguards built into the system to ensure that the train doors or PSDs don't open until they are correctly aligned and the gap fillers extended.

If the gap fillers prove to be successful without any major glitches, then there's no reason why this technology couldn't be rolled out across the much larger Sydney Trains' network as it is upgraded with ETCS- Level 2 and ATO and in combination with PSDs at the major stations. Trials with cheaper rigid rubber gap fillers have been carried out at Circular Quay Station, which could be an acceptable alternative. It won't necessarily guarantee level platform access, even on straight platforms, but would reduce the risk if not eliminate passengers falling through the gap. Whether that upgrade ever happens is by no means certain, or is the ST network forever destined to remain the poor cousin with limited funding compared with its flashier metro counterpart?
Glen
Posts: 3364
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 10:54 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by Glen »

Transtopic wrote: Fri Jan 13, 2023 8:45 pm Trials with cheaper rigid rubber gap fillers have been carried out at Circular Quay Station, which could be an acceptable alternative.
Is that the same as at Town Hall on the Down ESR ?
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by Transtopic »

Glen wrote: Fri Jan 13, 2023 10:28 pm
Transtopic wrote: Fri Jan 13, 2023 8:45 pm Trials with cheaper rigid rubber gap fillers have been carried out at Circular Quay Station, which could be an acceptable alternative.
Is that the same as at Town Hall on the Down ESR ?
I presume so. From recollection, Town Hall and Circular Quay have straight platforms. Not sure how the rubber gap fillers would work on curved platforms.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by Transtopic »

"Transport Minister David Elliott, who is departing state politics at the March election, said the rail project was a “modern engineering feat in every sense”. “When the new metro railway starts through the city next year, we will have 45 trains sets and be able to move 40,000 people an hour – that’s an increase of up to 60 per cent capacity across Sydney’s railway network,” he said."

Another example of biased misinformation to boost the metro.

It all depends on whether he means 40,000 people per hour per direction at the lines claimed ultimate capacity of 30tph per direction or 20,000 people in each direction when it opens. Metro Northwest is only designed to operate at 20tph per direction, although no doubt it could be increased in the future if the demand warranted it, which I doubt. Assuming that it will continue to operate 6 car metro trains initially, that latter figure is even wrong. A 6 car metro train has the capacity of 975 passengers and at the initial proposed 15tph in each direction, that equates to 14,625 passengers per direction or 29,250 passengers in total. The option is there to extend the trains to 8 cars in the future to increase capacity, but I am sceptical of whether it will ever warrant 30tph per direction without branching, which appears to be off the agenda.

The current Sydney Trains' network (excluding Intercity) has 6 lines through the CBD, which equates to 144,000 passengers per hour at a frequency of 20tph per direction and a conservative estimate of 1,200 passengers per train, which is frequently surpassed on some lines in the morning peak. The proposed digital signalling and ATO upgrades will increase this capacity by another 20% (24tph) to 172,800 passengers per hour, which of course is not mentioned.

Assuming Elliott means 40,000 passengers per hour in total initially (which is incorrect), that would represent an increase of 28% on the current rail capacity, or 23% on an upgraded ST network. At the actual initial capacity on the metro of 29,250, with 6 car trains at 15tph per direction, that would represent an increase of 20% on the current rail capacity, or 17% on the upgraded network.

Even if you compare the alleged optimum capacity of 80,000 passengers per hour in total on the metro, that is a 55% increase on the current ST capacity, or 46% on an upgraded ST network. They just keep on fudging the figures as they have from the very beginning.
Merc1107
Posts: 2243
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 6:38 pm
Favourite Vehicle: MAN 18.310, MB O405NH, L94
Location: A Coastal City

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by Merc1107 »

Transtopic wrote: Sat Jan 14, 2023 12:59 am A 6 car metro train has the capacity of 975 passengers
While I only conducted a quick Google search, I can find no reference to this being the capacity. Railjournal, for example, quotes the capacity as 378 seated, and a total of 1100.

Wikipedia cites the capacity of Sydney Trains' A & B sets as 1200 "nominal peak" and up to 2150 in "special event mode", the latter I'd assume to be literally shoving people in to get the doors shut. I'd be interested to know what the Metro's capacity would be in such a situation, although it's hardly a realistic operating scenario, regardless of whether you're talking about the Metro or not.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by tonyp »

Merc1107 wrote: Sat Jan 14, 2023 1:26 am While I only conducted a quick Google search, I can find no reference to this being the capacity. Railjournal, for example, quotes the capacity as 378 seated, and a total of 1100.

Wikipedia cites the capacity of Sydney Trains' A & B sets as 1200 "nominal peak" and up to 2150 in "special event mode", the latter I'd assume to be literally shoving people in to get the doors shut. I'd be interested to know what the Metro's capacity would be in such a situation, although it's hardly a realistic operating scenario, regardless of whether you're talking about the Metro or not.
You're correct. The capacity of a six car metro train is 1,100, an eight car train 1,500. As with any public transport vehicle, there is a difference between how many people you can physically jam inside and practicable functionality, the latter being influenced by the number of doors, the stopping pattern and whether single or double deck. You can't have dwell times yawning into infinity.

The metro lines have no trouble running 30 trains per hour. This is where Elliott's figure of (actually over) 40,000 passengers per hour per direction comes from - but he's talking about design capacity with eight car trains. With the present six car trains, they could run 30 trains per hour (assuming sufficient rolling stock), but the hourly capacity per direction would be 33,000.
moa999
Posts: 2923
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 3:12 pm

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by moa999 »


Transtopic wrote: If the gap fillers prove to be successful without any major glitches, then there's no reason why this technology couldn't be rolled out across the much larger Sydney Trains' network as it is upgraded with ETCS- Level 2 and ATO and in combination with PSDs at the major stations. Trials with cheaper rigid rubber gap fillers have been carried out at Circular Quay Station, which could be an acceptable alternative. It won't necessarily guarantee level platform access, even on straight platforms, but would reduce the risk if not eliminate passengers falling through the gap. Whether that upgrade ever happens is by no means certain, or is the ST network forever destined to remain the poor cousin with limited funding compared with its flashier metro counterpart?
I think people tend to forget the billions poured into accessibility projects
($100+ m for the Redfern bridge, suspect multiples of that for Central Walk and Central concourse and the significant recent upgrades to Wynyard and Town Hall, let alone hundreds of other stations.

As well as signalling and track upgrades - none of which is cheap.

For PSDs on the existing network as well as ETCS/ATO (which will probably prompt another Union fight, and is not a simple project on older trains) you also need common door position (which itself needs retirement or isolation of the Tangaras and older)
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21566
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by boronia »

I gather the "gap fillers" at CQ are fixed rubber blocks attached to the platforms; fairly simple solution with a straight platform, and mismatched levels.

The devices proposed for the metro appear to be a mechanical plate which extends when the gates are opened and retracts when the gates close, much like electric wheelchair ramps on buses. Will the trackbeds on the converted sections be adjusted to ensure the car floors match the platform levels?
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by tonyp »

boronia wrote: Sat Jan 14, 2023 12:04 pm I gather the "gap fillers" at CQ are fixed rubber blocks attached to the platforms; fairly simple solution with a straight platform, and mismatched levels.

The devices proposed for the metro appear to be a mechanical plate which extends when the gates are opened and retracts when the gates close, much like electric wheelchair ramps on buses. Will the trackbeds on the converted sections be adjusted to ensure the car floors match the platform levels?
You've nailed the point that's being overlooked. There's a world of difference between a simple fixed resilient rubber gap filler that crudely stops people falling down the horizontal gap between the train and the platform and a movable gap filler that's intended to, not only bridge the horizontal gap, but has to ensure that there's not a vertical gap either, in order to meet DDA standards that are measured in millimetres. The trackbed has to be maintained at a constant level, without possibility of movement or settlement, in relation to the platform. For this reason, a concrete pad is typically laid to support the tracks at stations.

At legacy suburban stations, it would be almost impossible to achieve such a standard across the whole system without major modification to both infrastructure and fleet. If you sit on the lower deck of a double deck train, you can see how much variation there is between platform heights across the system. In terms of DDA compliant access, the suburban system is always going to fall down on that last metre to the train, no matter how much level access you can achieve across the rest of a station complex. So what gets the system by compliance for that last metre is the portable ramp and for that you need staff, whether on the train or the station. Even if automation was introduced, it couldn't be higher than GoA2 - the train might not need a driver, but there would have to be an attendant on board to deal with doors and a disabled access ramp which would have to be stowed on the train. There would be no point in having movable gap fillers on the suburban system because the vertical gap would be variable across the system, not constant and it needs to be exactly level for DDA compliance.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by Transtopic »

tonyp wrote: Sat Jan 14, 2023 8:08 am
Merc1107 wrote: Sat Jan 14, 2023 1:26 am While I only conducted a quick Google search, I can find no reference to this being the capacity. Railjournal, for example, quotes the capacity as 378 seated, and a total of 1100.

Wikipedia cites the capacity of Sydney Trains' A & B sets as 1200 "nominal peak" and up to 2150 in "special event mode", the latter I'd assume to be literally shoving people in to get the doors shut. I'd be interested to know what the Metro's capacity would be in such a situation, although it's hardly a realistic operating scenario, regardless of whether you're talking about the Metro or not.
You're correct. The capacity of a six car metro train is 1,100, an eight car train 1,500. As with any public transport vehicle, there is a difference between how many people you can physically jam inside and practicable functionality, the latter being influenced by the number of doors, the stopping pattern and whether single or double deck. You can't have dwell times yawning into infinity.

The metro lines have no trouble running 30 trains per hour. This is where Elliott's figure of (actually over) 40,000 passengers per hour per direction comes from - but he's talking about design capacity with eight car trains. With the present six car trains, they could run 30 trains per hour (assuming sufficient rolling stock), but the hourly capacity per direction would be 33,000.
You see, the capacity of the metro trains just keeps going up. It has always been promoted as having a peak capacity per 8 car train of 1,300 passengers and at 30tph per direction, that equates to roughly 40,000 pph. The business case cites a 'design' capacity for an 8 car Metropolis metro train of 1,539 passengers and at 30tph per direction, a line capacity of 46,170 pph, but what does that mean? Is it the maximum theoretical design capacity, which is unrealistic in a real world operating environment, or government spin to inflate the numbers? The Waratah A and B sets have a theoretical 'design' capacity of 2,150 passengers, but in trials previously carried out by Railcorp, the maximum practical carrying capacity was estimated to be 1,750 passengers, which could only be achieved for Special Events' services such as major sporting fixtures and the Royal Easter Show at Sydney Olympic Park. The figures promoted for the metro should be interpreted in the same light.

The frequently stated peak capacity of the Waratah sets of 1,200 passengers, or 133% of the nominal seated capacity of 900, is nothing more than an arbitrary measure imported from British Rail, which has no relevance to real world operating conditions on Sydney's DD network. Pre-pandemic passenger load statistics regularly exceeded this on most lines. Can you seriously tell me that a Waratah set would only be capable of achieving just over half of its maximum "design' capacity? It's ludicrous. A report by Douglas Economics commissioned by TfNSW showed that passenger loads on the Western (Suburban) Line tracks approaching Redfern in the peak, including T1 and the now T9, were in the order of 1,400 passengers per train load. The following chart from the Douglas Economics report paints a more realistic assessment of the relative carrying capacities of the two modes.

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

The question of overall line capacity having regard to the relative frequencies is another matter, but it would have been more honest if they had also included comparisons with the actual patronage and the proposed upgrades to the existing network. It's all a con, not that I'm dismissing the metro concept, but the manner in which it has been represented.

Whether the demand on the current metro line and its extension to Bankstown, or even Liverpool, warrants 30tph per direction without branching remains to be seen. Unfortunately, I won't be here to see it, as I will be long gone.
Last edited by Transtopic on Sun Jan 15, 2023 8:10 pm, edited 3 times in total.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by tonyp »

The passenger capacity of the Alstom trains has been known since the beginning of the project, the figures don't change. It's easy enough to work out the approximate capacities of various-length consists by dividing/multiplying by the number of carriages. All carriages have the same capacity because there are no driver's cabs.

As I said in my earlier post, calculating capacity is not just a simple matter of considering floor area, it's also influenced by functionality. If you've set a standard of dwell times not exceeding, say, 30 seconds and the vehicle is all-stopping, you next look at the number and width of doors and their distribution along the vehicle. Then you consider whether and how much the vehicle has stairs, because these cause a filtering effect that disrupts both external passenger exchange and internal movements. After considering all this, then you choose your optimum passengers per square metre figure and then you look at the floor area and get out the calculator.

To cut a long story short, if you have a flat floor and double-leaf doors fairly evenly distributed every five to six or so linear metres, then for this type of operation you're pretty safe to settle on 6 persons per square metre. If the door ratio is not so good, but you still have a flat floor and no caves at the ends, then you would settle for a comfortable 4 ppsm. From what I've discovered, the Alstom trains and the Alstom trams in Sydney are rated at 6 ppsm. The CAF trams, with their limited door ratio, should be rated at 4 ppsm. Sydney's typical anachronistic buses with two doors, front-only entry, a cave and stairs I know are rated at 2.5 ppsm. The three door artics, even with stairs and a cave right up the back, could justifiably be rated at 4 ppsm I believe, if all doors were used for entry and exit.

Leaving the bad news till last, the poor old double deck trains have everything in their design against them for this type of commuter operation and the passenger density is limited accordingly, about 2.5 ppsm in NSW. These calculations are made on the above functionality factors, not out of a whimsical bias in favour of one mode or the other. Having said that, there is of course a second figure for double deckers in event mode where the train isn't stopping in between the two termini. I've been on a couple of those during the Olympic Games and I'm not sure I'd want to repeat the experience! Finally, there is a type of service that double deckers function better in (and we can say the same about double deck buses) - longer distance, semi-express services with limited or widely-spaced stops. This is how double deck trains are typically used around the world.

Like you, no doubt, I've followed the history of the double deckers from the beginning and there was a naive optimism at the outset. At that time, the 8 car standard suburban sets were rated at about 1,500 passengers (which I think was rather optimistic, especially after the fast food outlets and backpacks came on the scene) and there was a gee whiz factor when the double deckers came, with the manufacturers telling the railways that they could carry 2,000 passengers. Of course they could in theory, but nobody was going to be getting on and off in a hurry and, in any case, the loading would stall before the train was full (nobody wants to be too far from a door when the train is packed, so they just plant themselves and move no further). At the same time, suburban train patronage went flat for thirty years, so the deckers were never truly tested until the patronage explosion hit after the early 2000s, then panic set in, judging by the various little ideas that started floating out of the railways as to how they could be made to work better.

The metro, on the other hand, is going to work in a real world operating environment, assuming the stations have been designed to handle the largest possible, two-minute headway crowds, which they look as though they have.
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by Transtopic »

moa999 wrote: Sat Jan 14, 2023 11:19 am
Transtopic wrote: If the gap fillers prove to be successful without any major glitches, then there's no reason why this technology couldn't be rolled out across the much larger Sydney Trains' network as it is upgraded with ETCS- Level 2 and ATO and in combination with PSDs at the major stations. Trials with cheaper rigid rubber gap fillers have been carried out at Circular Quay Station, which could be an acceptable alternative. It won't necessarily guarantee level platform access, even on straight platforms, but would reduce the risk if not eliminate passengers falling through the gap. Whether that upgrade ever happens is by no means certain, or is the ST network forever destined to remain the poor cousin with limited funding compared with its flashier metro counterpart?
I think people tend to forget the billions poured into accessibility projects
($100+ m for the Redfern bridge, suspect multiples of that for Central Walk and Central concourse and the significant recent upgrades to Wynyard and Town Hall, let alone hundreds of other stations.

As well as signalling and track upgrades - none of which is cheap.

For PSDs on the existing network as well as ETCS/ATO (which will probably prompt another Union fight, and is not a simple project on older trains) you also need common door position (which itself needs retirement or isolation of the Tangaras and older)
Yes, I acknowledge that the government has invested funding into accessibility projects, but the point I was making is that they have invested little in expanding the capacity and efficiency of the existing network with infrastructure upgrades such as track amplification and junction remodelling with grade separations, compared with the billions they're spending on the metro projects. The More Trains, More Services program was supposed to address this, but that seems to have been pushed back into the never never. The trials for the digital signalling upgrade and ATO on T4 to increase frequencies to 24tph were supposed to be completed this year, but I can see no evidence that it is likely to be achieved. Perhaps it might be, but they're just not publising it. Further projects under the More Trains, More Services program are nowhere to be seen. It's all about the metro.

With regard to the Central Walk and Central Concourse projects, which are certainly welcome, you have to ask the question whether it would ever have happened without the metro, which seems to take all the credit from the publicity that's been given to it. It should have been done regardless.

I can't see how the proposed ETCS/ATO upgrade, whenever it's rolled out, will prompt a fight with the unions, as the Waratah, Oscar and Tangara suburban train sets, which can be upgraded, will continue to be able to operate under ATO until such time as guards are phased out, which is inevitable. It will require further upgrades to station infrastructure to enable this to happen. I don't expect that PSDs on the Sydney Trains network would be installed on every station, but just the major stations such as in the CBD and the main suburban centres. I don't see any problem with common door positions for PSDs to accommodate the different spacing of doors on the Tangaras compared with the later suburban stock, if in fact there is any significant difference. You simply widen the door spacing on the PSDs to accommodate both types. You could also allow for selective opening of additional PSDs at the limited number of major suburban stations where Regional trains with doors at the end of the carriages stop. Strathfield, Parramatta, Penrith, Hornsby, Campbelltown for example. It would all be computerised, so what's the problem?
Transtopic
Posts: 1490
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:10 pm

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by Transtopic »

tonyp wrote: Sat Jan 14, 2023 11:29 pm The passenger capacity of the Alstom trains has been known since the beginning of the project, the figures don't change. It's easy enough to work out the approximate capacities of various-length consists by dividing/multiplying by the number of carriages. All carriages have the same capacity because there are no driver's cabs.

As I said in my earlier post, calculating capacity is not just a simple matter of considering floor area, it's also influenced by functionality. If you've set a standard of dwell times not exceeding, say, 30 seconds and the vehicle is all-stopping, you next look at the number and width of doors and their distribution along the vehicle. Then you consider whether and how much the vehicle has stairs, because these cause a filtering effect that disrupts both external passenger exchange and internal movements. After considering all this, then you choose your optimum passengers per square metre figure and then you look at the floor area and get out the calculator.

To cut a long story short, if you have a flat floor and double-leaf doors fairly evenly distributed every five to six or so linear metres, then for this type of operation you're pretty safe to settle on 6 persons per square metre. If the door ratio is not so good, but you still have a flat floor and no caves at the ends, then you would settle for a comfortable 4 ppsm. From what I've discovered, the Alstom trains and the Alstom trams in Sydney are rated at 6 ppsm. The CAF trams, with their limited door ratio, should be rated at 4 ppsm. Sydney's typical anachronistic buses with two doors, front-only entry, a cave and stairs I know are rated at 2.5 ppsm. The three door artics, even with stairs and a cave right up the back, could justifiably be rated at 4 ppsm I believe, if all doors were used for entry and exit.

Leaving the bad news till last, the poor old double deck trains have everything in their design against them for this type of commuter operation and the passenger density is limited accordingly, about 2.5 ppsm in NSW. These calculations are made on the above functionality factors, not out of a whimsical bias in favour of one mode or the other. Having said that, there is of course a second figure for double deckers in event mode where the train isn't stopping in between the two termini. I've been on a couple of those during the Olympic Games and I'm not sure I'd want to repeat the experience! Finally, there is a type of service that double deckers function better in (and we can say the same about double deck buses) - longer distance, semi-express services with limited or widely-spaced stops. This is how double deck trains are typically used around the world.

Like you, no doubt, I've followed the history of the double deckers from the beginning and there was a naive optimism at the outset. At that time, the 8 car standard suburban sets were rated at about 1,500 passengers (which I think was rather optimistic, especially after the fast food outlets and backpacks came on the scene) and there was a gee whiz factor when the double deckers came, with the manufacturers telling the railways that they could carry 2,000 passengers. Of course they could in theory, but nobody was going to be getting on and off in a hurry and, in any case, the loading would stall before the train was full (nobody wants to be too far from a door when the train is packed, so they just plant themselves and move no further). At the same time, suburban train patronage went flat for thirty years, so the deckers were never truly tested until the patronage explosion hit after the early 2000s, then panic set in, judging by the various little ideas that started floating out of the railways as to how they could be made to work better.

The metro, on the other hand, is going to work in a real world operating environment, assuming the stations have been designed to handle the largest possible, two-minute headway crowds, which they look as though they have.
With respect Tony, since when has the practical capacity of the Alstom Metropolis trains on the Sydney Metro been determined at 1,539? It's always been claimed to be 1,300, and even that's generous, which has equated to the longstanding claimed capacity of 40,000 passengers per hour per line (rounded off from 39,000) at 30tph. Don't give me any BS about your biased opinion, when there are more knowledgeable experts who beg to differ. Don't just take my word for it.

My point is that the claimed capacity of the DD trains of 1,200 has been understated, when in fact it is in reality higher. This distorts the comparison between the claimed relative capacities of the DD trains and SD metro trains. Line frequency is an entirely different matter, when the lesser frequency of the DD network of 20tph (to be upgraded to 24tph) reflects the greater dwell times at the CBD stations compared with a SD metro at 30tph. Assuming the Douglas Economics more realistic assessment of 1,400 passenger per train for DD in the peak, that equates to 28,000 pph at 20tph, or 33,600 pph with the upgrades at 24tph. In the latter case, there is not a huge difference, and that's assuming that the metro as a single line will ever reach 30tph. More likely without branching, it will achieve 20,000 pph per direction at 15tph. which means that the inherent capacity of 30tph will be wasted for decades.

A new DD line, as distinct from the existing network, could work just as well as SD with higher capacity per train, upgraded ATO and modern station design, allowing less platform congestion and dwell times, not to mention double the number of seats, which doesn't seem to register with most of the metro protagonists.
Aurora
Posts: 925
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 10:54 pm
Favourite Vehicle: C set
Location: Sydney Reg 3

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by Aurora »

One question not addressed on here is how is 24 tph is timetabled, do we go into half minutes, because that is the only way it can work, and even then, at least for the past two decades, departure starts 20-30 seconds prior to departure time, all things being equal. That is not wheels moving, but getting everything closed safely when there should be no more boarding.
An asset of NSW. All opinions/comments are strictly my own.
M 5885.
User avatar
Campbelltown busboy
Posts: 2127
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2013 1:23 pm
Location: Ruse/Campbelltown City NSW

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by Campbelltown busboy »

Aurora wrote: Sun Jan 15, 2023 9:15 am One question not addressed on here is how is 24 tph is timetabled, do we go into half minutes, because that is the only way it can work, and even then, at least for the past two decades, departure starts 20-30 seconds prior to departure time, all things being equal. That is not wheels moving, but getting everything closed safely when there should be no more boarding.
That would only work if people don't have that state of mind where they think yelling to hold the train while running downstairs towards the platform would actually delay the departure of the train sitting on the platform so they can catch it if that means the doors crush that passenger because he or she don't want to wait for the next train then that person would risk being crushed by the closing doors because he or she would rather run down to the platform to catch the train sitting on the platform that might be departing at the time over taking their time and wait for the next train
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by tonyp »

Campbelltown busboy wrote: Sun Jan 15, 2023 11:23 am That would only work if people don't have that state of mind where they think yelling to hold the train while running downstairs towards the platform would actually delay the departure of the train sitting on the platform so they can catch it if that means the doors crush that passenger because he or she don't want to wait for the next train then that person would risk being crushed by the closing doors because he or she would rather run down to the platform to catch the train sitting on the platform that might be departing at the time over taking their time and wait for the next train
This:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IhxCBBqUNA

Sydney all over.
Aurora wrote: Sun Jan 15, 2023 9:15 am One question not addressed on here is how is 24 tph is timetabled, do we go into half minutes, because that is the only way it can work, and even then, at least for the past two decades, departure starts 20-30 seconds prior to departure time, all things being equal. That is not wheels moving, but getting everything closed safely when there should be no more boarding.
When I was living in Prague, where trams were running at 30 second headways, the trip planner would show the departures in half minutes! They later rounded the times off, I guess they thought it was too pedantic for the average public.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by tonyp »

Transtopic wrote: Sun Jan 15, 2023 1:36 am With respect Tony, since when has the practical capacity of the Alstom Metropolis trains on the Sydney Metro been determined at 1,539? It's always been claimed to be 1,300, and even that's generous, which has equated to the longstanding claimed capacity of 40,000 passengers per hour per line (rounded off from 39,000) at 30tph. Don't give me any BS about your biased opinion, when there are more knowledgeable experts who beg to differ. Don't just take my word for it.

My point is that the claimed capacity of the DD trains of 1,200 has been understated, when in fact it is in reality higher. This distorts the comparison between the claimed relative capacities of the DD trains and SD metro trains. Line frequency is an entirely different matter, when the lesser frequency of the DD network of 20tph (to be upgraded to 24tph) reflects the greater dwell times at the CBD stations compared with a SD metro at 30tph. Assuming the Douglas Economics more realistic assessment of 1,400 passenger per train for DD in the peak, that equates to 28,000 pph at 20tph, or 33,600 pph with the upgrades at 24tph. In the latter case, there is not a huge difference, and that's assuming that the metro as a single line will ever reach 30tph. More likely without branching, it will achieve 20,000 pph per direction at 15tph. which means that the inherent capacity of 30tph will be wasted for decades.

A new DD line, as distinct from the existing network, could work just as well as SD with higher capacity per train, upgraded ATO and modern station design, allowing less platform congestion and dwell times, not to mention double the number of seats, which doesn't seem to register with most of the metro protagonists.
Fortunately there's some good information now that can answer your guesswork. This lead article references a number of useful papers (including from ATRF and RTSA) that you can click on for background:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Me ... olis_Stock

Another point of verification of capacity is that there are two other very similar single deck metro-type trains with 3 doors per car per side in Australia. The Sydney metro train is a little different in individual car length because they've specified it to match the Sydney suburban consists so that the metro train can be used on existing suburban platforms on converted lines. So, in Sydney, the metro trains, like the suburban trains, have 20 metre carriages, adding up to approx 160 metres in the case of an 8 car set.

The other two Australian metro trains, the Perth C series and the Melbourne HCMT, have 24 metre-long cars. In the Melbourne case, a 7 car set of these adds up to around 160 metres like both types of Sydney train. The capacity of a 160 metre consist of a HCMT is 1,380 standard or 1,800 crush. This compares with 1,500 for a 160 metre Sydney metro train (all longitudinal seating compared with much transverse seating in the HCMT, thus more standing room in the Sydney train) or 1,200 workable standard and about 2,000 crush for a Sydney Waratah. I imagine that, having three doors per car and a single deck, the HCMT at crush capacity would have a greater chance of reasonable passenger exchange along a route than a Waratah with 1,800 passengers on board. On a side note, I consider that the HCMT would be a better and far more efficient train to operate the Sydney suburban system than the double decks. It's worth remembering that, according to John Dunn of Comeng, Melbourne rejected double deck trains because they were holding up the single deck trains with their longer platform dwells. John was in the process of designing a three-door per side per car double decker when the Victorians gave up on pursuing it further.

With the Perth C series, the length of a 6 car consist with 24 metre cars is 144 metres, compared to about 120+ metres for a 6 car Sydney metro consist, so we need to do a bit of division to find the equivalent capacity. A six car C series has a capacity of about 1,200, so reducing that to 120 metres equals about 1,000 pax. However, like the Melbourne trains, the C series reverses an earlier trend in Perth and has a lot of transverse seating, which reduces the standing capacity - so 1,100 would be about right for a 6 car Sydney metro train with its greater standing capacity. A closer comparison would be the Perth A series which, I think now, universally have longitudinal seating, thus almost identical to the Sydney cars except being 24 metres, so six cars coupled together would be 144 metres with a capacity of 1,300 in total (they normally run as 2 to 4 car trains so this is pure maths now). Divided down to the Sydney metro's 6 car set of about 120 metres, that is close to 1,100 passengers.

So, overall, we can see that the capacity figures for the Sydney metro train, in both 6 car (1,100) and 8 car (1,500) consists, is pretty accurate when compared to direct equivalents. And it's been this way from the beginning if you look at the technical papers. It's not my biased opinion, and the more knowledgeable experts appear in fact to beg to differ with you, not me. I'll leave you to run with the argument about the passenger capacity of the double deckers. It's pretty obvious that the operators of these trains have reached firm conclusions about the optimum figures at which a train can remain functional and not jam up like a sardine can. Go and argue with those on the job of running the suburban system.
Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by Linto63 »

Wikipedia...pfff
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21566
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by boronia »

We are getting this metro whether we like it or not.

Continuous debate over relevant capacities of different carriage seems rather pointless now.
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by Linto63 »

Agreed, it has all been said before; same people with the same entrenched positions making the same points.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by tonyp »

boronia wrote: Sun Jan 15, 2023 3:46 pm We are getting this metro whether we like it or not.

Continuous debate over relevant capacities of different carriage seems rather pointless now.
Exactly. Believe me, I'm fed up to the back teeth with regularly having to research and write responses to inaccurate assertions made by the white knight of the double deck system, who believes there is some evil Liberal Party conspiracy to boost up the specs of the metro system and downplay the specs of the suburban system just to justify the former. These specs are developed and measured by engineers and transport professionals who know exactly what they're doing, not in a back room of Parliament House. If he'd accept that, then we wouldn't have to repeat these turgid statistical debates.

All of the figures about the metro are correct. The capabilities of the suburban system are certainly amenable to improvement (starting with freeing up capacity and performance by removing the Bankstown line from it), but the double deck stock, as it stands, has design limits inherent in each and every one of its trains. Those limits may be a bit blurred at the edges, but we know that, past a certain point, the more people you squeeze aboard, the less effectively they work, until they cross a line where they start to disrupt the system because of dwell times. I implore him to go and talk to people in Sydney Trains about it.

As for the repetitive snide remarks about Wikipedia, yes everybody knows that it has to be taken with a pinch of salt, that's sort of bleeding obvious, but far more so in some subjects than others. The astute user will develop an understanding of which subjects it's going to be more reliable about, the critical point being referencing. This particular article has comprehensive referencing through which you can judge the quality of the information. When there's little referencing, or sources are suspect, then obviously the article must be treated with caution.
Merc1107
Posts: 2243
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 6:38 pm
Favourite Vehicle: MAN 18.310, MB O405NH, L94
Location: A Coastal City

Re: Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

Post by Merc1107 »

Linto63 wrote: Sun Jan 15, 2023 3:37 pm Wikipedia...pfff
Get off your high horse, this isn't a doctoral thesis, it's a discussion board. Add to that, see the below, where I've highlighted the relevant point... You may not like Wikipedia, but it provides a useful way to find source material and draw your own conclusions.
tonyp wrote: Sun Jan 15, 2023 12:58 pm This lead article references a number of useful papers (including from ATRF and RTSA) that you can click on for background:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Me ... olis_Stock
Post Reply

Return to “Discussion - Sydney / NSW”