Sydney Metro - Tallawong to Bankstown

[boronia]

Starting to complain? It has been running for almost 4 years.

[tonyp]

People on social media are starting to complain about the fact that the metro fleet has longitude seating which limits seating capacity to 378. Guessing that people are use to the 3+2 seating layout that has been a the default train seating layout in Sydney since the red rattlers

I don't think it changes seating capacity (the Melbourne HCMTs, with their considerable cross-seating, have about the same capacity per length), it just makes it more efficient in order to enable more standing capacity. I haven't seen any adverse social media comment on seating in all the years the metro has been running. Indeed, the customer satisfaction surveys show a fraction more satisfaction with the seating availability, comfort and general personal space on the metro than on the suburban trains - the last survey showing an even 94% satisfaction with the metro comfort, compared to 91-93% with the suburbans' comfort.

[Merc1107]

People could always take a fold-up camping chair if they're so desperate for a seat

Jokes aside, I remember watching videos about how New York and/or London had spent decades tweaking with the seating density and seating layouts to maximise passenger capacity relative to comfort and dwell time. On the other end of the spectrum, Perth had a "mixed" seating configuration in the A & B series trains originally. All the As were converted to longitudinal, and the later B deliveries were exclusively longitudinal too. The upcoming C series will revert to a mixed configuration (where there will be sections of 2 abreast seating with longitudinal seats facing them, which seems to me a rather awkward configuration to endure).

Is it conceivable the seating configuration of the Sydney Metro fleet will undergo tweaking over their lives, or as new rolling stock is delivered?

[alleve]

They need to up the amount of time the doors are open on the Metro. I experienced it first hand yesterday - at Epping there was a rush of people on one half of the metro because one of the escalator banks at Epping was closed. Only half of the people trying to get on the Metro could actually get on, the other half had to wait for the next train, despite there clearly being room for more people on the train. The station staff seemed powerless to do anything about it. I appreciate that these circumstances were unusual, but Metro loading times can be pretty tight anyway, especially for the elderly when it is busy. The rush of people wasn't massive, everyone could have fit on the train. Another ten to fifteen seconds for the doors at major stations would do wonders for preparing for future demand.

I struggle to understand how anyone could say a Metro train is more comfortable than a suburban train. It's louder, less smooth, the seats face inwards and they're hard and there's less of them, in every single comfort aspect the Metro loses out. The only thing the Metro has over suburban trains in comfort is accessibility.

Melbourne's approach to me seems like the worst of both worlds. You get less floor space than a double decker, and less standing room than a Metro. What's the point? Either go high seating capacity or high standing capacity. Granted they're a carriage longer but the Waratahs have a much higher crush capacity than the HCMTs.

Trackwork alerts say the Metro will be operating at a reduced frequency - do we think this is related to testing the new line? I saw workers installing overhead wiring at Sydenham platforms 1 and 2, to my knowledge the only part of the line left without overhead.

[tonyp]

They need to up the amount of time the doors are open on the Metro. I experienced it first hand yesterday - at Epping there was a rush of people on one half of the metro because one of the escalator banks at Epping was closed. Only half of the people trying to get on the Metro could actually get on, the other half had to wait for the next train, despite there clearly being room for more people on the train. The station staff seemed powerless to do anything about it. I appreciate that these circumstances were unusual, but Metro loading times can be pretty tight anyway, especially for the elderly when it is busy. The rush of people wasn't massive, everyone could have fit on the train. Another ten to fifteen seconds for the doors at major stations would do wonders for preparing for future demand.

I struggle to understand how anyone could say a Metro train is more comfortable than a suburban train. It's louder, less smooth, the seats face inwards and they're hard and there's less of them, in every single comfort aspect the Metro loses out. The only thing the Metro has over suburban trains in comfort is accessibility.

Melbourne's approach to me seems like the worst of both worlds. You get less floor space than a double decker, and less standing room than a Metro. What's the point? Either go high seating capacity or high standing capacity. Granted they're a carriage longer but the Waratahs have a much higher crush capacity than the HCMTs.

Trackwork alerts say the Metro will be operating at a reduced frequency - do we think this is related to testing the new line? I saw workers installing overhead wiring at Sydenham platforms 1 and 2, to my knowledge the only part of the line left without overhead.

Yes, well everything should be working on the station, but, even so, people could have the sense to spread out. 25 seconds is a very generous dwell time when everything is functioning. To extend it would blow out the journey time.

Obviously metro riders, as surveyed, have a different opinion on the comfort level and I'm not surprised. It's quieter and the steady ride inherent in a single decker is much superior to the jelly-like rock n' roll of a double decker. On functionality and accessibility, the metro beats the double deckers in spades. The stairs and having only two doors destroy the effectiveness of a double decker except on long routes with fairly low passenger turnover en route (like interurbans). The stairs themselves are also a barrier to even passenger distribution. No serious city commuter vehicle should have stairs of any sort inside, but we're slow to (re)learn the lesson in Australia. Modern trams are fine, buses here are a circus.

The capacity of a 160 metre Sydney metro train is about 1,500, about the same as the same-length HCMT. A 160 metre Sydney double deck train is said to have a crush capacity of 2,000 people (I think I experienced that during the Olympic Games), but only if nobody is getting on or off and you can convince them to fill the carriages to the centre, upstairs and downstairs, easier said than done. That would be a non-stop service like between Olympic Park and Central. For regular daily service, they've determined that a regular, functional (important word that) maximum capacity is 1,200, but heaven forbid if you want to take a pram, luggage or wheelchair aboard at that capacity.

I think they got all the equations dead right with the metro trains and, what's more, the passengers are happy with that. You can't get better than that.

[alleve]

people could have the sense to spread out

They tried but there isn't that much time to interchange. Credit to the station staff, who were trying to get people to move down as much as they could.

To extend it would blow out the journey time

Adding ten seconds at major stations (ie Epping, Chatswood, North Sydney, Waterloo and the city stations) is going to slow your average commuter's travel time by 30-40 seconds from the north and 10-20 seconds from the south. It's hardly a "blow out", I think it'd be perfectly reasonable given the benefits.

It's quieter and the steady ride inherent in a single decker is much superior to the jelly-like rock n' roll of a double decker

Except it's not, trust me I ride it twice a day, twice a week. Some of the corners can be really loud and the metro's acceleration and braking is a lot jerkier than suburban trains. It must have something to do with the programming because I've ridden equally fast metro trains overseas that don't do the same. I'd take the jelly-like roll any day over the metro's habit of sending elderly people stumbling on the approach into stations. When I catch the metro with a mate, I have to talk a lot louder than I would on a suburban just for him to hear me. I've also noticed my noise cancelling headphones block out suburban trains completely but not the metro.

That's not to say the metro is throwing people around or is blowing out people's eardrums, but it certainly isn't quieter or smoother than a suburban train. Catching one after the other, the metro is very noticeably worse in those respects.

Good points about capacity and stairs, but I don't get why they'd go for a suburban like seating layout if they're trying to make a high capacity metro train. Longitudinal seems much better and the HCMT layout seems like a compromise between suburban and metro that captures neither benefit.

[Campbelltown busboy]

The metro was a decision that was made because the state libs and federal labor where having a disagreement over who should of gone 50/50 with funding when it came to the battle between the state promised NWRL v the federally promised Epping-Parramatta link that was canceled by NSW labor about 5 or 6 years earlier

[tonyp]

The metro was a decision that was made because the state libs and federal labor where having a disagreement over who should of gone 50/50 with funding when it came to the battle between the state promised NWRL v the federally promised Epping-Parramatta link that was canceled by NSW labor about 5 or 6 years earlier

The metro evolved through from late in the previous Labor government (which then couldn't work out how to pay for it) and the subsequent Coalition as a solution, backed by the State's planners, that offered major advantages, including higher capacity, quicker journey times with all stops, increased reliability and substantially lower operating costs. It's pretty bipartisan. The Epping-Parramatta link didn't fit into the state's planning vision at that time, so it wasn't much point the Feds pushing it and stubborn of them not to place the funding where the state wanted it instead. The NW growth area was far more urgent than what was happening (not much) between Epping and Parramatta.

[Transtopic]

There wasn't bipartisan support for the NW metro prior to the 2011 state election. Both Labor and the LNP went to that election with a commitment to build the NWRL as an extension of the then CityRail network, connecting with the ECRL. Shortly after gaining office, the LNP started the community consultation process which proposed the NWRL as a DD line integrated with the existing network. There was no mention of metro.

It was proposed to upgrade signalling on the North Shore Line (since completed) to allow more services from the NWRL to run through Chatswood to the CBD without the need to interchange, as well as continuing the existing services from Hornsby on the Upper Northern Line. Frequency on the NWRL was to be increased with the additional services terminating at Chatswood as they do now, until a new cross harbour CBD link was built. A through service would also still be maintained.

The NSW government made a submission to Infrastructure Australia to jointly fund the NWRL as part of the existing DD network, but IA rejected it because the submission was incomplete and lacked adequate financial detail. There was no doubt some politicking going on here, as the Gillard Federal Labor government had proposed resurrection of the defunct Parramatta to Epping Rail Link (PERL) instead to shore up their support in the federal seats of Parramatta and Bennelong, which wasn't even on IA's Priority List.

In a fit of rage, the O'Farrell LNP government decided to take their bat and ball and go their own way and that's when the alternative metro proposal emerged out of the blue. No further consultation was entered into. It was presented as a fait accompli, without any discussion on how it impacted on the existing network in taking over the ECRL.

From the Labor perspective prior to the 2011 election, they abandoned the previous NW metro and Central to Rozelle metro after Premier Nathan Rees was rolled in favour of Kristina Keneally. They went to the election of promising to build the NWRL as part of the existing network as originally planned and also flagged the intention to reconsider the proposal to branch the NWRL from the Northern Line at Beecroft instead of the long steep tunnel connecting directly with the ECRL at Epping. There was certainly no bipartisan support for the metro option.

But that's all ancient history now and for better or worse, we have what we have. Time to move on.

[tonyp]

There wasn't bipartisan support for the NW metro prior to the 2011 state election.

Bipartisan support of metro lines and metro as a technology, not the NW metro specifically, is what I meant. This started with Labor - as you know, first the Anzac line (West Ryde to Malabar) in 2007, the NW metro to Rouse Hill via Gladesville in 2008 and the shortened part of that to Rozelle in 2008. Then the NW reverted to a heavy rail proposal, still under Labor, which was arguing with itself about how to fund these projects and froze. This didn't happen in a vacuum. The state's planners were already headed in this direction and rail planners had already recognised the limitations of the suburban system and were eying metro as an alternative technology from as early as Christie in 2001.

Secondly, the Coalition most definitely didn't impulsively embark on metro in a fit of rage. Berejiklian, a very academic person, was already researching and taking to planners since she became shadow Minister for Transport in 2006 and from 2009, for the next two years, was working up a transport plan for Sydney that she could hit the ground running with and take to Cabinet when the Coalition won an election. In 2009 a thirty-year plan was prepared by her main planning advisor which, apart from all the other transport projects that we're now familiar with like light rail and new bus routes, included the beginnings of a metro system - a west metro from Sydney to Parramatta, a Warringah metro in stages, a SE metro from Central to Malabar in stages and a NW metro in stages on both converted existing lines and new line from Sydney to Rouse Hill.

So this was in 2009 and this was what she took to Cabinet in 2011, modified obviously by subsequent work with TfNSW and Planning once in government. The thirty year plan with more detail should be archived at UTS where it was prepared.

So I've now filled you in on the development of the transport achievements of both Coalition governments of 1965-1976 and 2011-2023, now perhaps we can put some of the glib fairy tales to rest.

Edit: I should add that there were quite a few people in Transport already board with metro by 2011 too - just waiting for a government competent to run with it again.

[Linto63]

So I've now filled you in on the development of the transport achievements of both Coalition governments of 1965-1976 and 2011-2023, now perhaps we can put some of the glib fairy tales to rest.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. It is you that despite all of the evidence to the contrary, continues to peddle myths such as that the Askin government was the architect of much what the far more progressive Wran government did.

[tonyp]

I'm not going to argue with somebody who ignores historical facts. Any good transport investment needs proper foundations and those foundations were laid during the Askin/Willis government - the planning scheme (SROP 1967), the transport plan (SATS 1974), the coordinating agency (PTC 1972) - and the investment in infrastructure and vehicles/vessels (ESR, fleet renewals) were commenced before they lost the 1976 election. Much of what the subsequent Wran government achieved was not more progressive, but merely implementation of what was already on the plan, like the East Hills-Glenfield link and the electrification. Anybody without political blinkers can toddle down to the relevant libraries and archives to confirm this for themselves.

[Linto63]

Any government can commission studies and shuffle the deckchairs, progressive governments are ones that actually do things not just talk about them. The record shows the Wran government did far more than its predecessor.

[tonyp]

This running argument with these two board members reminds me of the old saying - "history is written by the victors", or maybe also by the one who shouts the loudest or is the most abusive. The victors in this case being the political side that has most often been in power in NSW. I've been researching and writing NSW transport history for some 50 years and, while that's been of necessity apolitical, what I unearthed certainly played a personal role in opening my eyes to changing my political preference from one side to the other. It does annoy me intensely though when people are so politically biased that they completely deny facts, or they're overly simplistic about them - e.g. rolling stock purchases on their own don't tell the story about a government's effectiveness or lack of effectiveness in the area of transport.

The Wran government's works and purchases built on the foundations laid by SROP and SATS and with the professional support of the coordinated agency (PTC) that the previous government had set up. The previous government also started some of those works and purchases but it's pretty obvious that losing office in 1976 precluded them from continuing with them, so the Wran government took that on. That Labor government also made a very poor move in dismantling the unified agency (basically the predecessor to TfNSW which, likewise, another Coalition government created after 2011), thus destroying much of the coordination that Milton Morris tried to achieve.

There are many tempting analogies about the 1965+ period with the modern period from 1995 onwards, but while that previous Coalition government took a little time to get up to speed (plus there wasn't the same money to do things back then), the recent Coalition government hit the ground running in 2011. Now it remains to be seen what the present government will do - for which reason I'm transferring this discussion to the NSW election thread.

[Fleet Lists]

We have a thread on political discussion - so keep this to the Light Rail and not political discussions which have nothing to do with it and one post deleted. That was why the post above was continued elsewhere.

[Fleet Lists]

Another post has been moved to the election thread. Please keep political posts away from this thread.

[tonyp]

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/ ... eb32a08024

Proposal to shut part of T3 train line for a year considered by NSW government

A proposal to transform a key section of Sydney’s rail line into a Metro link — which could leave tens of thousands of commuters without trains for over a year— is being weighed up by the Minns government.
Lachlan Leeming
William Tyson
and Bella Scampone

April 13, 2023 - 5:00AMhttps://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/prop ... eb32a08024

Train passengers from Bankstown to Sydenham would be left stranded for up to 15 months while part of the heavy rail line is upgraded to Metro standards, in a proposal which could hit commuters from next year.

Briefing notes to the new Labor government reveal transforming the existing rail to a Metro line would force passengers from stations between Bankstown and Sydenham to catch buses for more than a year.

The forecasted budget for the project has also blown out by another $2 billion according to the most recent update, $8b above earlier projections.

Documents seen by The Telegraph state an option for completing the Metro was shutting down the rail from west of Sydenham from July 2024, with buses to replace trains along the line for up to 15 months.

Labor has not confirmed whether it would absorb the major new cost to complete the Metro, or enforce the 15 month closure of the T3 line.

Heavy rail would still operate at stations between Bankstown and Liverpool.

The former government was last year presented a proposal to shut down the rail for up to a year, but that has since blown out by an extra three months.

The T3 Bankstown Line is one of the busiest in the country, with more than 1.6 million trips taken on that rail in February alone.

The 15-month delay exceeds initial forecasts for how long the section of train line would have to be closed down for.

A November 2020 update by Sydney Metro on the South West segment stated the line would only have to be closed for up to six months to finish the conversion.

“To complete the Southwest Metro works, a final closure of between three to six months will be required for work that can only be done once Sydney Trains services have stopped operating on the line,” the document said.

The 13-kilometre Bankstown-Sydenham stage of the Metro was already facing delays of up to a year after being hit with industrial action, bad weather and supply chain disruptions.

A Minns Government spokeswoman said: “It appears the former Liberal Government kept hidden the true cost of Sydney Metro City and Southwest and the potential impact on passengers”.

“From an initial price tag of around $12 billion, we now know the cost of building the line is upwards of $20 billion.”

Documents show the entire City and South West line is now forecast to cost $20.11b, but that could come back down to $18.48b if the government successfully sells of $1.6b in land around stations and the line.

The Telegraph understands Labor is still receiving briefings on the South West Metro and other Metro projects.

“Every day, we are asking more about the Sydney Metro and discovering more key details the former government did not reveal to the public,” the spokeswoman said.

“We are being upfront and honest about the challenges we are inheriting. We’re not interested in assigning blame, we’re interested in finding solutions.

“The best way to do that is to be upfront and honest with the people of NSW about the true cost of these projects.”

NSW Labor earlier this week released findings that the Metro West would cost more than $25b, the first time a figure for the project has been revealed.

Commuters who travel from the western end of the T3 line to the CBD said its closure would drastically impact them.

Azmath Mirza, who catches the train from his home at Lakemba to the city, said it would force him to drive.

“I jump off at Lakemba so it would affect me. I would be forced to drive my car to work if it shutdown which would be an inconvenience with petrol and parking costs,” he said.

Justine Pipers catches the train daily to her place of work.

“This train line is how I get to and from work. If it shutdown I would have to get the bus and that would be annoying and make things a lot harder,” she said.

Comments

Scott
4 minutes ago
Mr Miims - Just get it done FGS - Keep the vision and the faith
Lucy
8 minutes ago
Go for a ride on the North Western Metro and feel / see the difference - a train every 4 minutes, no strikes. The inconvenience is worth the final outcome - travel from Bankstown to Tallawong in clean modern metro system. Heavy rail is not the way of the future in Sydney. Again Labor will stumble on Infrastructure like last time - no idea / no vision. the husband
Reid
10 minutes ago
and so the Labor spending starts
Kay Curry
14 minutes ago
Here we go. A couple of weeks in the job and he’s already shown his wokeness! 15 minute cities people…you won’t need rail!
John
19 minutes ago
Go on Minns, you know you want to cancel it! Cancelling rail projects is what the ALP does best. I look forward to seeing the looks on everyone's faces when they realise the visionless hacks they have put into power. Enjoy your late running, overcrowded, strike-susceptible heavy rail. Stand well back from the platform because the Metro won't be stopping at Bankstown.
Anthony
22 minutes ago
Minns was on every possible media opportunity selling his team. On radio at least twice a day talking up his solutions - so where is he now ??
Minns is off on a junket only a few weeks in the role. Typical of Labor
roddy
28 minutes ago
C'mon Minns, think BIG.
Stuart
36 minutes ago
Here we go you got the Government you wanted. No more upgrades or improvements just like the last Labor Government. Metro stopped, no train to new airport. Put up with it and the declining rail system. Have one ride on the new Metro and see the difference.
The whole Sydney system must be upgraded to the metro over time. If this Government does not do it you will suffer eventually for more than 15 months.
Albie
36 minutes ago
Finally we have a government that uses commonsense to assess projects. The Libs had a policy to do away with drivers and guards through expensive Metro conversions, making the lines unable to be used by conventional trains. What an utter waste of money when it should have invested in new lines that support the existing fleet.
Paul
46 minutes ago
I dont understand the ridicule of a government that has barely been in office. This plan was established by the former government. the real question should be, why did the Perrottet government think it a good idea to dismantle existing heavy rail in a city growing raoidly with inadequate transport? The former government has never provided a true explanation for that crazy decision.
Richard
1 hour ago
"The minister does not need to know" Humphrey
Boofa
1 hour ago
Typical shortsighted Labor. The reality is that we need this infrastructure and there will be disruption during construction. The alternative is what we saw with previous Labor Govt's where our State became paralysed due to a lack of infrastructure. Both State and Federal Labor are committed to more and more immigration and that requires the infrastructure to handle the population growth. This isn't rocket science, it's basic planning and should be a no brainer for any Govt. If Labor don't understand this it just goes to show how ill equipped they are to run our State.
Otter
15 minutes ago
But the rail line is already there. Why does it need to be replaced?
Ken
1 hour ago
Just leave the line alone. Been working great for years. Keep Train Drivers and Guards on them for SAFETY
Andrea
1 hour ago
T3 line is one of the busiest in the country...... and yet the trains run every 25 to 30 mins, sometimes longer. The "service" on our line is dreadful. Overall our public transport is terrible compared to other coutries. sydney is already a hard city to live in and the public transport delays adds to that
Kris
56 minutes ago
The public transport in Sydney is lightyears in front of every other Australian capital city.
Pat pending
1 hour ago
Surely they can bypass the stations but keep the trains running.
Or has some EHS propeller head decided that this scores too high on a risk matrix and they are not smart enough to figure out some engineering controls to reduce risk.
How about close one station and one track at a time and put in barriers so workers are safe.
Kevin
1 hour ago
Welcome to the NSW Government Minns, now your about to find out how it feels being accused of overspending and disruption of transport, let people travel by Buses until the work is completed otherwise your Government will be just like all other Labor governments who break promises and stop funding projects that have already been started, At least the Liberals Finished what they started and NSW is in far better shape thanks to them ,and yes they over spent but as you are finding out also things go up in price not down but at least the Liberals finished ,Welcome to the real World, one term in government will be enough for you lot to destroy all the good work done by the previous government, and yes we can also thank the people who voted you lot in.
Peter
1 hour ago
only 4 months upgrading Chatswood to Epping to Metro why so long?
Pat pending
1 hour ago
(Edited)
Unions and lefty bureaucrats are in total control now ?
Kris
1 hour ago
Standard operating procedure from both sides. Use a change of government to reset expectations.
Mark
2 hours ago
Yes, but it is the beaurocrats who remain that have created these estimates, not the politicians of the day who simply repeat them. Serious questions need to be asked of these beaurocrats and administrators as to why their previous estimates were so incorrect.
roddy
2 hours ago
you've got to break a few eggs to make an omelette
The Joker
2 hours ago
(Edited)
This is Labor we're talking about here. Make that 3 years and $12billion! Yajustgottalaugh
Stephen
1 hour ago
(Edited)
That's Labor for you. Having to fix a decade of ineptitude of the LNP. Yoaustgottacry
Tom
1 hour ago
No this is the truth .
the shutdown was stated at 6 months
1 year plus will completely kill of the area .
Stuart
45 minutes ago
No Tom they are trying to stop the upgrade by saying its to hard. Most of us can see through another do nothing Labor government. Don't have the metro most of us don't care. Do yourself a favour and have a trip on it and you will see how much better it is.

[boronia]

"one of the busiest lines" ? Beaten only by the Inner West line for the wooden spoon as least busy of the city based lines.

[alleve]

Too big to quote in full

Reading the comments is so painful

[boronia]

It is painful, so we don't really want to read them twice.

[tonyp]

Reading the comments is so painful

It certainly would be to a Labor supporter, but a fair counterbalance to the Liberal-hating comments that typically follow transport articles in the Herald. I guess that tells us something about the respective readerships, except that dissenting comments are published by the Telegraph (as one can see here), whereas they're often rejected in the Herald.

[Fleet Lists]

It is painful, so we don't really want to read them twice.

You dont have to anymore.

[Linto63]

Reading the comments is so painful

Are people really that stupid? They must all be sharing the one brain cell. These comments section are usually the domain of vitriolic fools who have no idea about what they are talking about, this one is no different.

[boronia]

Like a print version of Facebook LOL

[boronia]

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/news-a ... -announced