CBD & South East Light Rail

Sydney / New South Wales Transport Discussion
lunchbox
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:50 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Bicycle - no waiting - on time
Location: Sydney

Re: CBD & South East Light Rail

Post by lunchbox »

[quote=lunchbox post_id=1090662 time=1655286737 user_id=2517]
MOORE PARK STAIRS - PONDING
After years of complaints, the ponding of rainwater on every one of the stairways has finally been fixed - we hope.
1035942
[/quote]
At some date prior to 15.6.22, the protruding nosing strip on the leading edge of every one of the 150-odd steps and landings was removed and lowered, making it flush with the surface of the step / landing. It hasn't worked - ponding still occurs on more than half the steps/landings. No doubt everyone involved has been paid......Incompetence, indifference, or both?
1037764
User avatar
gilberations
Posts: 870
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 12:36 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by gilberations »

It’s also possible they may do away with the wireless concept with the introduction of stage two and install wires along the currently unwired sections. Also possible for them to do that along George st too.
Jurassic_Joke
Posts: 1138
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:08 pm

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Jurassic_Joke »

While I praise all the infrastructure they’ve given us, on the Light Rail side of things, I really cannot fathom this current governments absolute obsession with wireless technology. Call me old school, but I really don’t see anything wrong with the tried and tested overhead wires. CSELR’s wireless section spanning over a trivial length of track ensures that IWLR trams (the original ones coming back soon, not the borrowed CSELR ones currently running it) can never run up to CQ. Then you have Newcastle Light Rail, whenever the tram stops at each stop, the pantograph has to go up to recharge the tram, sit for a while, and then pantograph down, and finally set off - it is so horribly inefficient.

And Parramatta? What the current plan says, it’ll bounce between wired and wireless power several times over the length of Stage 1.

IWLR might be the oldest, but I praise its consistency as the only Sydney line where the method of power supply is the same across the entire line.
Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Linto63 »

Jurassic_Joke wrote: I really cannot fathom this current governments absolute obsession with wireless technology. Call me old school, but I really don’t see anything wrong with the tried and tested overhead wires.
Overcomes the aesthetics issue, one of the biggest objections to light rail networks is the ugliness of the wires.
Jurassic_Joke wrote: CSELR’s wireless section spanning over a trivial length of track ensures that IWLR trams (the original ones coming back soon, not the borrowed CSELR ones currently running it) can never run up to CQ.
There was never any intention that IWLR services be diverted down George Street, so a moot point.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

Jurassic_Joke wrote: Sat Jul 23, 2022 9:07 am While I praise all the infrastructure they’ve given us, on the Light Rail side of things, I really cannot fathom this current governments absolute obsession with wireless technology. Call me old school, but I really don’t see anything wrong with the tried and tested overhead wires. CSELR’s wireless section spanning over a trivial length of track ensures that IWLR trams (the original ones coming back soon, not the borrowed CSELR ones currently running it) can never run up to CQ. Then you have Newcastle Light Rail, whenever the tram stops at each stop, the pantograph has to go up to recharge the tram, sit for a while, and then pantograph down, and finally set off - it is so horribly inefficient.

And Parramatta? What the current plan says, it’ll bounce between wired and wireless power several times over the length of Stage 1.

IWLR might be the oldest, but I praise its consistency as the only Sydney line where the method of power supply is the same across the entire line.
Constance and Clover Moore were bedazzled by the marketing spin of manufacturers of proprietary technology.
Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Linto63 »

Has wireless technology been an unmitigated disaster? Appears to be working ok on the CSELR.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21566
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by boronia »

Maybe not a "disaster", but there have been numerous weekend closures of that section for unspecified "maintenance".
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

There are very substantial extra costs for wire-free operation of trams, buses and trains. It's a fashion statement that involves foregoing investment on stuff like extra vehicles and facilities. The APS system has been estimated to be three to four times the capital cost of OHW and some 25 times the maintenance cost. In-motion or static charging carries significant extra capital and operational/maintenance costs. The more equipment you have, the more things there are to go wrong. It's typically wealthy countries and cities that go for this stuff. There are many downsides to wire-free operation and few upsides.
User avatar
Swift
Posts: 13247
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:23 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra
Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Swift »

It's usual political indulgent posturing at the expense of pragmatic outcomes. The usual tale of Sydney decision making.
NSW, the state that embraces mediocrity.
moa999
Posts: 2923
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 3:12 pm

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by moa999 »

boronia wrote:Maybe not a "disaster", but there have been numerous weekend closures of that section for unspecified "maintenance".
It costs more and obviously requires more maintenance. But I'm not aware of any unscheduled weekend closures.

Also wasn't exactly unproven, operating in four French cities and the entire Dubai routes, before Sydney ordered it, and a few more since.
Jurassic_Joke
Posts: 1138
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:08 pm

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Jurassic_Joke »

Linto63 wrote: Sat Jul 23, 2022 9:33 am There was never any intention that IWLR services be diverted down George Street, so a moot point.
There was also never any intention to run CSELR Citadis trams on the IWLR in passenger service, this was outlined at the beginning when they were built to different standards, when no one saw the disaster that was coming with IWLR at the end of last year and the Citadis were only tested for passenger services when turmoil called for it. Lucky the Citadis were still able to be used viably in passenger service on IWLR after all, but I say it was a close shave, if the disparities were any greater regarding wheel profile and clearances/dimensions, it would’ve likely been a definite no and we’d still be travelling on those awful replacement buses today.

It’s wrong to rule something out just for the sake of doing so; you never know what the future will bring.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

Jurassic_Joke wrote: Sat Jul 23, 2022 11:35 pm you never know what the future will bring.
Exactly. Planners are good at short-sightedly closing off potential options. Then the doh moment comes a couple of decades later in the political cycle.
Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Linto63 »

Jurassic_Joke wrote: It’s wrong to rule something out just for the sake of doing so; you never know what the future will bring.
The general consensus appears to be that the CSELR is better engineered that the IWLR, so dumbing down the former to the standard of the latter on the off-chance something may happen makes little sense. The demographics of the inner west, cbd or inner east are unlikely to change sufficiently during the lifespan of the current trams for consideration to be given to divert IWLR services down George Street. If for whatever reason it was deemed necessary, the CAFs could be replaced by more Alstom trams. Yes it would cost, but it could be done.
User avatar
Swift
Posts: 13247
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:23 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra
Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Swift »

What does demographics have to do with it? Why wouldn't there be demand to go down the CBD from the IWLR catchment? I doubt it's clear cut demarcated.
How would it be a dumbing down removing the ground based power for that short stretch and removing a point of failure? Or maybe just scrap the Cafs and replace them with new Althom Citadis units as an overall upgrade to the tram system?
NSW, the state that embraces mediocrity.
moa999
Posts: 2923
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 3:12 pm

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by moa999 »

Don't think demographics has anything to do with it.
But it would be dumb to mix 35m and 70m trams.

And it would be very expensive to run longer trams on the IWLR..

The transfer could be better.
Now that they've closed off the rest of George St, maybe they might decide to shift Chinatown stop a block south and install side platforms as should have been done in the first place
User avatar
Swift
Posts: 13247
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:23 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra
Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by Swift »

moa999 wrote: Sun Jul 24, 2022 3:56 pm Don't think demographics has anything to do with it.
But it would be dumb to mix 35m and 70m trams.
If anything that would be a great way to distinguish IWLR services from CSELR ones. We all know how the basic brains of passengers don't like to read destos. This can appeal to their more rudimentary thinking.
NSW, the state that embraces mediocrity.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21566
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by boronia »

Linto63 wrote: Sun Jul 24, 2022 3:00 pm
Jurassic_Joke wrote: It’s wrong to rule something out just for the sake of doing so; you never know what the future will bring.
The general consensus appears to be that the CSELR is better engineered that the IWLR, so dumbing down the former to the standard of the latter on the off-chance something may happen makes little sense. The demographics of the inner west, cbd or inner east are unlikely to change sufficiently during the lifespan of the current trams for consideration to be given to divert IWLR services down George Street. If for whatever reason it was deemed necessary, the CAFs could be replaced by more Alstom trams. Yes it would cost, but it could be done.
The L1 has its own little "niche market" at Central, with good loadings in both directions for most of the day. Diverting some of those services to Circular Quay could impact on the remaining services, esp in peak periods when they are needed most.

The ability of CQ to handle more services in peak also has to be looked at. There are often 3x L2/3 services there at a time; trying to fit an L1 into the mix could create delays.

The interchange at Chinatown would be no further than the interchange between L1 and suburban train services at Central; that distance is not onerous. Yes, there is no weather protection at Chinatown, but how do people cope when they get off the tram further down George St?
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by tonyp »

boronia wrote: Sun Jul 24, 2022 4:57 pm The ability of CQ to handle more services in peak also has to be looked at. There are often 3x L2/3 services there at a time; trying to fit an L1 into the mix could create delays.
Interesting to hear that they are suffering bunching already. The original design is that two platforms are sufficient to handle 4 minute headways. The additional platform here and at Central is for 2 minute headways. Central's third is already used for events, which was the plan. CQ's shouldn't be needed in regular service for many years. That means there is an operational issue.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21566
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by boronia »

I've got a few pics like this over the last couple of years. Mainly in the AM peaks. Usually 1 leaves straight after the 3rd one arrives.
cse01 DSC09020 (Small).jpeg
cse01 DSC09020 (Small).jpeg (135.55 KiB) Viewed 1503 times
cse01 028 (Small).jpeg
cse01 028 (Small).jpeg (140.99 KiB) Viewed 1503 times
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: CBD & South East Light Rail

Post by Linto63 »

Swift wrote: What does demographics have to do with it? Why wouldn't there be demand to go down the CBD from the IWLR catchment? I doubt it's clear cut demarcated.
Demographics, as in the percentage of students, blue / white collar workers, retirees etc and where they are headed.
Swift wrote: How would it be a dumbing down removing the ground based power for that short stretch and removing a point of failure?
It was done for a reason, i.e. to improve the aesthetics.
moa999 wrote: Now that they've closed off the rest of George St, maybe they might decide to shift Chinatown stop a block south and install side platforms as should have been done in the first place
Problem is if you move one stop then the distance to others gets out of kilter, although there admittedly already are inconsistencies. The interchange is only 100 metres.
tonyp wrote: Interesting to hear that they are suffering bunching already.
With long traffic light phases that don't give absolute priority to trams, that is inevitable.

NB, none of the recent discussion on this thread has been of any relevance to the Parramatta light rail. Can admin please move the relevant posts since 22:44 on 21 July to the more applicable CBD & South East Light Rail thread?
In Transit
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:13 am

Re: Parramatta light rail

Post by In Transit »

tonyp wrote: Sun Jul 24, 2022 5:31 pm
boronia wrote: Sun Jul 24, 2022 4:57 pm The ability of CQ to handle more services in peak also has to be looked at. There are often 3x L2/3 services there at a time; trying to fit an L1 into the mix could create delays.
Interesting to hear that they are suffering bunching already. The original design is that two platforms are sufficient to handle 4 minute headways. The additional platform here and at Central is for 2 minute headways. Central's third is already used for events, which was the plan. CQ's shouldn't be needed in regular service for many years. That means there is an operational issue.
It doesn't seem to help that the design of the track layout/platforms/signalling at CQ is not ideal for slick working, even noting the constraints of the location.
Glen
Posts: 3364
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 10:54 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: CBD & South East Light Rail

Post by Glen »

I think it needs one less platform and the missing half of the loop added instead.

Then the pedestrians can half the rest of the Quay back.
User avatar
Swift
Posts: 13247
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:23 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra
Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.

Re: CBD & South East Light Rail

Post by Swift »

So it's semi circular quay.
NSW, the state that embraces mediocrity.
Jurassic_Joke
Posts: 1138
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:08 pm

Re: CBD & South East Light Rail

Post by Jurassic_Joke »

Went and caught the light rail again after a short hiatus, it looks like in the time since they’ve reverted to opening all doors automatically again (I guess probably to do with the current Covid wave)
User avatar
jpp42
Posts: 1377
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 8:27 pm

Re: CBD & South East Light Rail

Post by jpp42 »

Regarding doors, have they ever stopped opening all doors since Covid started in 2020?
. The demographics of the inner west, cbd or inner east are unlikely to change sufficiently during the lifespan of the current trams for consideration to be given to divert IWLR services down George Street.
Regarding operating IWRL to CQ, I always thought a direct CQ to Darling Harbour service would be of advantage to tourists/visitors, something that has always been missing in the public transport network, outside of the ferries which are expensive and slow (but still popular). I am not clear why visitors are not more important in public transport planning for a city with so much tourism.

The Star is an obvious patronage generator as well and they possibly could be induced to help cover some costs.

Above some poster mentioned "diverting" IWRL services to CQ not justified based on demographics - that shouldn't really be considered - it would be about adding additional services while maintaining existing capacity to Central. After the CAF's are returned to service, I feel a reasonable service could be run with Alstom's - The Star to CQ (turnback at John St Square). I get the point about capacity limitations at CQ though - again how terribly short-sighted it was not to build a loop :(
Post Reply

Return to “Discussion - Sydney / NSW”